- Email: [email protected]
We are not yet done exploring the hospitality workforce
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
Research note
We are not yet done exploring the hospitality workforce Abbie-Gayle Johnson Nottingham University Business School, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
A R T I C LE I N FO
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Behaviour Culture Employees Foucault Hospitality Human resources Power
With the ongoing notices of labour shortage and need to foster inclusion in the hospitality workplace across time and space, this calls for a mindset that is dynamic and accommodative to changes within the tourism discourse. However, this note proposes that this can only be truly fostered when the discourse in the industry is challenged. Specifically, questions need to be raised regarding the role of discourse in shaping the individual as not only an employee but as a hospitality professional or service worker subject. This opens an avenue for further discussions in human resources, organisational behaviour and culture, areas that seem to have been extensively researched. Through the lens of Foucault’s analysis of power, these proposed questions can be answered, however, its applicability has yet to be extended to the literature. Therefore, as hospitality researchers, for the greater good, we are not yet done exploring the hospitality workforce.
1. Introduction Since the 2000s, there have been ongoing notices regarding labour shortages in Europe (OECD, 2012) and North America (Skift, 2019). The hospitality sector, specifically hotels and restaurants, represented the largest sector of employment that is currently facing labour shortage in the United Kingdom (FT, 2018). Work in the hospitality industry can be seen as sometimes the ‘saviour’ of many who reside in lesser-developed economies and seek economic opportunities to further their personal and professional development. Potential employees of these countries flock the queues of recruitments staged at hotel sites being constructed in developing regions and even job recruitments staged for foreign employment in the hospitality industry in destinations such as the United States of America, Canada and even parts of the Middle East. Both groups of individuals, if successful, must adapt to a new environment that embrace various practices and procedures. Specifically, the latter group of individuals seeking employment overseas must also adjust to the cultural dynamics of the host destination. Furthermore, the United Nations, by way of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) promotes more inclusive and mutually-beneficial workplaces where sustainable human resources management practices are exercised (UN, 2017; Baum, 2018). Robinson et al. (2019) point out that while SDGs advocate for sustainable human resources practices, developments within the hospitality and tourism industry differ. For instance: SDG 8 advocates for a decent workplace for employees, however, within the industry, this proves to be a challenge due to systemic issues that exist within workplace that even overlaps with the phenomenon of modern slavery. Baum and Hai (2019) note that the
application of sustainable practices and policies in the tourism industry may not eradicate employment and human rights challenges but can illuminate the aspects of the tourism work culture and its role in contributing to these problems. Against this background, these issues call for in-depth observations of hospitality environments in order to create workplaces that are open to inclusion and wherein employees, especially management, have a mindset, which is accommodative to cultural, class and gender differences. At first, this call may sound simple and straightforward for practitioners to action. However, it demands that one challenges the practices and ideas that are embedded in the hospitality and tourism industry and in turn contribute to the shaping of hospitality professionals. Salient questions that are yet to be extensively examined in the academic literature but are proposed by this research note are: what are the power mechanisms that play a role in influencing the adoption of organisational culture in the hospitality work environment and how? By reflecting and exploring the practices, which are ordered by the discourse, one can then proceed to make changes that foster inclusion in the industry, across time and place. 2. Conversations on hospitality and tourism human resources Most studies on management of the work environment in the hospitality sector can be categorised under organisational culture (Kusluvan et al., 2010). There is a multiplicity of debates regarding the definition of organisation culture; however, it is not the direct intent of the note to illuminate these conversations. Within this research context, literature tend to focus on organisational culture in conjunction with
E-mail address: [email protected]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102402 Received 26 August 2019; Received in revised form 11 October 2019; Accepted 11 October 2019 0278-4319/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Abbie-Gayle Johnson, International Journal of Hospitality Management, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102402
International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx
A.-G. Johnson
Nonetheless, it must be noted that Foucault’s analysis has been applied in general human resources management (Steyaert and Janssens, 1999) and organisational behaviour studies (Carter et al., 2002). Within the field, it has provided academics with an in-depth understanding of how individual subjectivity is shaped and reinforced by discourse. Clarke and Knights (2015) illustrate how university academics, become subjects, who comply with discourse on career strategies instead of openly resisting these procedures and practices. In addition, Foucault’s analysis also allowed researchers to examine disciplinary power. Discipline speaks to the practices of government, whereby individuals are shaped to perform in favour of the government’s agenda (Foucault, 1980; Burchell et al., 1991). Based on the concept of governmentality, power can be exercised through social institutions and not directly the government or the central source of power (Burchell et al., 1991). Additionally, Foucault’s analysis of power has allowed researchers to further their understanding of control as seen in organisation studies such as Carter et al. (2002) and Knights (2002). In Foucault’s (1991) book on Discipline and Punish, Foucault explores the practice of imprisonment and how control and discipline are achieved in the prison system. He explains this by referring to the panopticon, a power mechanism that acts as a form of control, which influences the behaviour of prisoners. It restricts the movement of prisoners and let them submit to the practices of the prison as if they are being constantly watched from a central tower. The environment, in terms of architectural layout, therefore plays a role in manipulating one’s behaviour.
performance, whether it be directly or indirectly (Ogbonna and Harris, 2002). While much of the conversations lend towards understanding behaviours of employees and organisation, Ladkin (2011, p. 1152) notes that “the complex societal and cultural factors cannot be ignored”. In agreement with Ladkin (2011), Robinson et al. (2019), while exploring hotel worker retention, concludes that the social aspect of the community plays a role in determining a worker’s feeling of belonging and choice to remain in the establishment. Dimitriou and Ducette (2018) conclude that not only do co-workers’ behaviours influence employees’ behaviours to act ethically but also that of managers. Leaders within the industry are able to determine the attitude and behaviour of employees especially when it is related to stress (Erkutlu and Chafra, 2006). Although these studies have enhanced the human resources discussions regarding workplace culture, employee and organisational behaviour, there is room for further development. Baum et al. (2016) has gone on to acknowledge that the workplace is shaped by numerous factors such as those acknowledged by Ladkin (2011). Baum et al. (2016) also note other causal aspects such as technological and political factors. While this is a step in the right direction for enhancing the workplace conversations, these previously highlighted factors are external to the organisation and neglect the relational aspect that is embedded in micro-relations and structures. Leaders in the sector manage people through organisational culture, resulting in employees’ overtime becoming submissive to the direction and control of their leaders (Ogbonna and Harris, 2002). Subsequently, the workforce acts towards the establishment’s agenda (Baum et al., 2016). To further unravel this, there is need for deeper internal assessments, which may even question the very principles upon which understanding of hospitality human resources is based. Critical perspectives can challenge the findings of the research area, question management control and further aid in the move towards a more inclusive workplace. As academic researchers seek to develop critical discussions for understanding the human resources management practices in the tourism industry (Williamson et al., 2017), this research note proposes that a critical perspective be applied in order to move the discussion on hospitality human resources forward. This can lead to unravelling the relational aspects of the hospitality workplace. In previous times, the research aims were geared towards understanding organisational behaviour in relation to its influencers and effects on performance and practice, however, researchers should now question the consequences of the practices on one’s behaviour. This requires challenging the dominant views that drive the manner in which employees behave in the hospitality industry. By doing this, studies can unravel the processes that contribute to the development of the employee, transitioning from an employee to the hospitality professional or service worker. This form of detangling may be unfavourable to some in the field since it questions the assumptions, which persons have grown to accept. It questions ‘the truths’ that are known and accepted. Michel Foucault promoted this type of critical thinking and investigation.
3.1. Why Foucault? Understanding the happenings of the hospitality workplace By critically analysing the issues within the industry, as researchers, we can contribute to truly creating a decent tourism work environment (Baum, 2018). Therefore, this note advocates for Foucault’s analysis to be included within the context of hospitality human resources and organisational behaviour amidst the background of happenings in the hospitality work environment. Within the hospitality workplace, tourism practices have become embedded in the environment, system and culture. Through Foucault’s (1991) eyes, the environment is under constant control. Organisational theorists have recognised this and have since used the work of Foucault (1991) to offer a more critical reflection of the workplace. Theorists have found that the work environment involves individuals who are scrutinised and regulated based on institutional practices (Knights, 2002). Nevertheless, these work environments are examined in management literature and is yet to be explored in studies on the hospitality and tourism industry. The object of study is considered to the hospitality workplace with its target being employees. Michel Foucault never established specific steps for analysing the discourse for power. Researchers can draw upon the method of discourse analysis in order to examine the concept of power in organisations (Fairclough, 2010). Specific data collection methods that can be drawn upon include participant observation, document analysis and interviews as evident in studies that seek to explore the discourse in the hospitality work environment such as Kingsbury (2011). Within the hospitality and tourism industry, practices have become normalised that some individuals may not be able to imagine what the practices were like in different periods. These acts are specifically rooted in the hospitality sector that persons seemingly do not question their existence and how they came into being. In other words, employees are subject to managerial instructions and managers, whether conspicuously or not. Managers also are subject to these practices. Covaleski et al. (1998, p. 297) states that, “according to Foucault, the normalizing society reaches its zenith when the power of normalization itself becomes normalized: when the judges are judged”. Normalisation has been evident within the hospitality and tourism environment. In some hotels, one may also find that although an
3. Michel Foucault’s analysis It is difficult to conclude what Michel Foucault’s job title or role is as to some he was considered to be a historian, to others, a critic and even a philosopher. Despite this uncertainty, Michel Foucault, provoked thinking with his own analysis of control. Unlike power in the form of classes that Marx’s thinking proposed, Foucault claimed that power is omni-present, productive and embedded in networks of social relations (Foucault, 1980; Cheong and Miller, 2000). He was focused on understanding how the subject was formed as well as how the subject and populations were disciplined (Knights, 2002). His work has been applied to tourism studies but limited to aspects such as tourism planning and development (Cheong and Miller, 2000). It is yet to be applied in the area of hospitality human resources. 2
International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx
A.-G. Johnson
exist in discourses alongside power mechanisms that are embedded in the hospitality sector. Throughout the years, this has formed the identity of the hospitality professional or service worker. Nonetheless, where there is power, this is also resistance. Some practitioners may then argue that in light of the need for professional and personal development any potential or new employee especially those from lesserdeveloped economies can choose to either sink or swim by conforming to existing workplace cultures in some hospitality organisations. With findings based on Foucault’s analysis, government officials and tourism practitioners can realise how difficult it may be to remove what Baum (2015, p. 2010) calls the “stubborn stain” or alter the ideas that surround the reputation of the industry’s workforce. In light of this, as hospitality researchers, our job is far from finished. For the greater good, we are not yet done exploring the hospitality workforce.
employee’s contract allows the award of overtime, there have been cases where it is hardly ever rewarded as the act of doing overtime is the norm for both employees and management (The Caterer, 2016). This scenario can be seen in hotel properties in the Caribbean submit to a six-day workweek. A historical examination of discourse will reveal that this was not always the case in the sector but has become the norm in the 21st century. Various ideas within the hospitality discourse also guide how individuals present and conduct themselves. For instance, over ten years ago, a person with dreadlocks may not be considered as the perfect fit for the role of a hotel front office agent in Jamaica, a country that embraces the Rastafarian dreadlocks movement but also adopts practices from its British and Spanish colonial past. The act of wearing dreadlocks was not regarded as the accepted look of the hospitality professional until recent times. At a global level, one may also notice the normalised practice of wearing black and white uniforms to symbolise service workers. In this instance, uniforms have shaped the identity of who persons acknowledge as hospitality employees. Tourism places, practices and processes can also play a role in the composition of individuals and their establishment as ‘hospitality professionals’ or ‘service workers’. At some hotel properties, staff may use different entrances and exits from tourists and management when on duty. This can be seen as a power mechanism to facilitate order. Arguably, this can also be a security measure or the separation of the back of house from the front of house to allow workers to disguise themselves before their ‘performance’. However, these entrances are security posts where the security guards not only exercise their inspection duties but also act on behalf of management, as this is sometimes where the time sheets for employees are placed and monitored. These areas lead to the back of house, which may include signs that guide employees’ behaviours in relation to each other and guests. The discourse on hospitality entities also involve other power mechanisms. There have been cases in developed economies such as those in the Middle East. For instance, newly-employed workers have had their passports removed from them upon entry to the destination for the duration of their contractual period (Independent, 2009). This acts as a form of social control and results in a subservient behaviour by employees of certain backgrounds to management. Hospitality organisations have a role in managing employees in order to fulfil the vision of the establishment. These establishments are concerned with the formation of the subject and its identity using discursive strategies. This subject can be an employee, or the prisoner that Foucault (1991) speaks about. “The need is for actively wanting, thinking, feeling and doing beings who do not need to be controlled and regulated by bureaucratic rules and management hierarchies, but who see the realisation of their personal objectives as synonymous or congruent with the objectives of the organisation and who therefore regulate themselves accordingly in what could be described as self-surveillance” (Usher and Solomon, 1999, p. 157). Based on the 24/7 demands of the hospitality personnel, the management of the subject in this manner is also highly possible.
References Baum, T., 2015. Human resources in tourism: still waiting for change? - A 2015 reprise. Tour. Manag. 50 (2015), 204–212. Baum, T., Kralj, A., Robinson, R., Solnet, D., 2016. Tourism workforce research: a review, taxonomy and agenda. Ann. Tour. Res. 60 (2016), 1–22. Baum, T., 2018. Sustainable human resource management as a driver in tourism policy and planning: a serious sin of omission? J. Sustain. Tour. 26 (6), 873–889. Baum, T., Hai, N., 2019. Applying sustainable employment principles in the tourism industry: righting human rights wrongs? Tour. Recreat. Res. 44 (3), 371–381. Burchell, G., Gordon, C., Miller, P., 1991. The Foucault Effect, Studies in Governmentality with Two Lectures by and an Interview with Michel Foucault. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Carter, C., McKinlay, A., Rowlinson, M., 2002. Introduction: foucault, management and history. Organization 9 (4), 515–526. Cheong, S., Miller, M., 2000. Power and tourism - a Foucauldian observation. Ann. Tour. Res. 27 (2), 371–390. Clarke, C., Knights, D., 2015. Careering through academia: securing identities or engaging ethical subjectivities? Hum. Relat. 68 (12), 1865–1888. Covaleski, M., Dirsmith, M., Helan, J., Samuel, S., 1998. The calculated and the avowed: techniques of discipline and struggles over identity in the big six public accounting firms. Adm. Sci. Q. 43 (2), 293–327. Dimitriou, C., Ducette, J., 2018. An analysis of the key determinants of hotel employees’ ethical behaviour. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 34 (2018), 66–74. Erkutlu, H., Chafra, J., 2006. Relationship between leadership power bases and job stress of subordinates: example from boutique hotels. Manag. Res. News 29 (5), 285–297. Fairclough, N., 2010. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language, 2nd ed. Longman, Harlow. Foucault, M., 1980. Questions of methodology. In: Faubion, J.D. (Ed.), Michel Foucault: Power. The New Press, New York. Foucault, M., 1991. Discipline and Punish, the Birth of the Prison. Penguin Books, London. FT, 2018. Financial Times [online]. Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/36baacceddd0-11e8-9f04-38d397e6661c (Accessed 19 August 2019). Independent, 2009. Independent [online]. Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/ voices/commentators/johann-hari/the-dark-side-of-dubai-1664368.html (Accessed 19 August 2019). Kingsbury, P., 2011. Sociospatial sublimation: the human resources love in Sandals Resorts International, Jamaica. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 101 (3), 650–669. Knights, D., 2002. Writing organizational analysis in Foucault. Organization 9 (4), 575–593. Kusluvan, S., Kusluvan, Z., Ilhan, I., Buyruk, L., 2010. The human dimension - a review of human resources management issues in the tourism and hospitality industry. Cornell Hosp. Q. 51 (2), 171–214. Ladkin, A., 2011. Exploring tourism labor. Ann. Tour. Res. 38 (3), 1135–1155. OECD, 2012. OECD [online]. Available at: www.oecd.org/trade/icite (Accessed 19 August 2019). Ogbonna, E., Harris, L., 2002. Managing organisational culture: insights from the hospitality industry. Hum. Resour. Manage. 12 (1), 33–53. Robinson, R., Martins, A., Solnet, D., Baum, T., 2019. Sustaining precarity: critically examining tourism and employment. J. Sustain. Tour. 27 (7), 1008–1025. Skift, 2019. Skift [online]. Available at: https://skift.com/2019/02/25/travelmegatrends-2019-labor-shortages-force-a-wake-up-call/ (Accessed 19 August 2019). Steyaert, C., Janssens, M., 1999. Human and inhuman resource management: saving the subject of HRM. Organization 6 (2), 181–198. The Caterer, 2016. The Caterer [online]. Available at: https://www.thecaterer.com/ articles/366779/around-half-of-hospitality-workers-are-not-paid-overtime (Accessed 19 August 2019). UN, 2017. UN [online]. Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu= 1300 (Accessed 19 August 2019). Usher, R., Solomon, N., 1999. Experiential learning and the shaping of subjectivity in the workplace. Stud. Educ. Adults 31 (2), 155–163. Williamson, D., Rasmussen, E., Ravenswood, K., 2017. Power in the darkness: taking a historical and critical employment relations approach in hospitality. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 33, 134–141.
4. Conclusion This research note calls the application of critical perspectives, specifically Foucault’s analysis of power in the area of hospitality human resources and organisational behaviour in light of the current and future workplace challenges in the tourism industry. Subsequent studies can offer new perspectives to previously examined research questions (Williamson et al., 2017) as they will possibly extend the conversation on power relationships within the workforce based on a lens that is yet to be applied in the hospitality context. Baum, 2015; 2016) welcome these studies in the tourism literature as they create an avenue to generate theoretical conversations. Power relations illuminate the notion of how challenging the task of achieving equality and inclusion truly is as certain ‘truths’ continue to 3
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
International Journal of Hospitality Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhm
Research note
We are not yet done exploring the hospitality workforce Abbie-Gayle Johnson Nottingham University Business School, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
A R T I C LE I N FO
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Behaviour Culture Employees Foucault Hospitality Human resources Power
With the ongoing notices of labour shortage and need to foster inclusion in the hospitality workplace across time and space, this calls for a mindset that is dynamic and accommodative to changes within the tourism discourse. However, this note proposes that this can only be truly fostered when the discourse in the industry is challenged. Specifically, questions need to be raised regarding the role of discourse in shaping the individual as not only an employee but as a hospitality professional or service worker subject. This opens an avenue for further discussions in human resources, organisational behaviour and culture, areas that seem to have been extensively researched. Through the lens of Foucault’s analysis of power, these proposed questions can be answered, however, its applicability has yet to be extended to the literature. Therefore, as hospitality researchers, for the greater good, we are not yet done exploring the hospitality workforce.
1. Introduction Since the 2000s, there have been ongoing notices regarding labour shortages in Europe (OECD, 2012) and North America (Skift, 2019). The hospitality sector, specifically hotels and restaurants, represented the largest sector of employment that is currently facing labour shortage in the United Kingdom (FT, 2018). Work in the hospitality industry can be seen as sometimes the ‘saviour’ of many who reside in lesser-developed economies and seek economic opportunities to further their personal and professional development. Potential employees of these countries flock the queues of recruitments staged at hotel sites being constructed in developing regions and even job recruitments staged for foreign employment in the hospitality industry in destinations such as the United States of America, Canada and even parts of the Middle East. Both groups of individuals, if successful, must adapt to a new environment that embrace various practices and procedures. Specifically, the latter group of individuals seeking employment overseas must also adjust to the cultural dynamics of the host destination. Furthermore, the United Nations, by way of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) promotes more inclusive and mutually-beneficial workplaces where sustainable human resources management practices are exercised (UN, 2017; Baum, 2018). Robinson et al. (2019) point out that while SDGs advocate for sustainable human resources practices, developments within the hospitality and tourism industry differ. For instance: SDG 8 advocates for a decent workplace for employees, however, within the industry, this proves to be a challenge due to systemic issues that exist within workplace that even overlaps with the phenomenon of modern slavery. Baum and Hai (2019) note that the
application of sustainable practices and policies in the tourism industry may not eradicate employment and human rights challenges but can illuminate the aspects of the tourism work culture and its role in contributing to these problems. Against this background, these issues call for in-depth observations of hospitality environments in order to create workplaces that are open to inclusion and wherein employees, especially management, have a mindset, which is accommodative to cultural, class and gender differences. At first, this call may sound simple and straightforward for practitioners to action. However, it demands that one challenges the practices and ideas that are embedded in the hospitality and tourism industry and in turn contribute to the shaping of hospitality professionals. Salient questions that are yet to be extensively examined in the academic literature but are proposed by this research note are: what are the power mechanisms that play a role in influencing the adoption of organisational culture in the hospitality work environment and how? By reflecting and exploring the practices, which are ordered by the discourse, one can then proceed to make changes that foster inclusion in the industry, across time and place. 2. Conversations on hospitality and tourism human resources Most studies on management of the work environment in the hospitality sector can be categorised under organisational culture (Kusluvan et al., 2010). There is a multiplicity of debates regarding the definition of organisation culture; however, it is not the direct intent of the note to illuminate these conversations. Within this research context, literature tend to focus on organisational culture in conjunction with
E-mail address: [email protected]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102402 Received 26 August 2019; Received in revised form 11 October 2019; Accepted 11 October 2019 0278-4319/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Abbie-Gayle Johnson, International Journal of Hospitality Management, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102402
International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx
A.-G. Johnson
Nonetheless, it must be noted that Foucault’s analysis has been applied in general human resources management (Steyaert and Janssens, 1999) and organisational behaviour studies (Carter et al., 2002). Within the field, it has provided academics with an in-depth understanding of how individual subjectivity is shaped and reinforced by discourse. Clarke and Knights (2015) illustrate how university academics, become subjects, who comply with discourse on career strategies instead of openly resisting these procedures and practices. In addition, Foucault’s analysis also allowed researchers to examine disciplinary power. Discipline speaks to the practices of government, whereby individuals are shaped to perform in favour of the government’s agenda (Foucault, 1980; Burchell et al., 1991). Based on the concept of governmentality, power can be exercised through social institutions and not directly the government or the central source of power (Burchell et al., 1991). Additionally, Foucault’s analysis of power has allowed researchers to further their understanding of control as seen in organisation studies such as Carter et al. (2002) and Knights (2002). In Foucault’s (1991) book on Discipline and Punish, Foucault explores the practice of imprisonment and how control and discipline are achieved in the prison system. He explains this by referring to the panopticon, a power mechanism that acts as a form of control, which influences the behaviour of prisoners. It restricts the movement of prisoners and let them submit to the practices of the prison as if they are being constantly watched from a central tower. The environment, in terms of architectural layout, therefore plays a role in manipulating one’s behaviour.
performance, whether it be directly or indirectly (Ogbonna and Harris, 2002). While much of the conversations lend towards understanding behaviours of employees and organisation, Ladkin (2011, p. 1152) notes that “the complex societal and cultural factors cannot be ignored”. In agreement with Ladkin (2011), Robinson et al. (2019), while exploring hotel worker retention, concludes that the social aspect of the community plays a role in determining a worker’s feeling of belonging and choice to remain in the establishment. Dimitriou and Ducette (2018) conclude that not only do co-workers’ behaviours influence employees’ behaviours to act ethically but also that of managers. Leaders within the industry are able to determine the attitude and behaviour of employees especially when it is related to stress (Erkutlu and Chafra, 2006). Although these studies have enhanced the human resources discussions regarding workplace culture, employee and organisational behaviour, there is room for further development. Baum et al. (2016) has gone on to acknowledge that the workplace is shaped by numerous factors such as those acknowledged by Ladkin (2011). Baum et al. (2016) also note other causal aspects such as technological and political factors. While this is a step in the right direction for enhancing the workplace conversations, these previously highlighted factors are external to the organisation and neglect the relational aspect that is embedded in micro-relations and structures. Leaders in the sector manage people through organisational culture, resulting in employees’ overtime becoming submissive to the direction and control of their leaders (Ogbonna and Harris, 2002). Subsequently, the workforce acts towards the establishment’s agenda (Baum et al., 2016). To further unravel this, there is need for deeper internal assessments, which may even question the very principles upon which understanding of hospitality human resources is based. Critical perspectives can challenge the findings of the research area, question management control and further aid in the move towards a more inclusive workplace. As academic researchers seek to develop critical discussions for understanding the human resources management practices in the tourism industry (Williamson et al., 2017), this research note proposes that a critical perspective be applied in order to move the discussion on hospitality human resources forward. This can lead to unravelling the relational aspects of the hospitality workplace. In previous times, the research aims were geared towards understanding organisational behaviour in relation to its influencers and effects on performance and practice, however, researchers should now question the consequences of the practices on one’s behaviour. This requires challenging the dominant views that drive the manner in which employees behave in the hospitality industry. By doing this, studies can unravel the processes that contribute to the development of the employee, transitioning from an employee to the hospitality professional or service worker. This form of detangling may be unfavourable to some in the field since it questions the assumptions, which persons have grown to accept. It questions ‘the truths’ that are known and accepted. Michel Foucault promoted this type of critical thinking and investigation.
3.1. Why Foucault? Understanding the happenings of the hospitality workplace By critically analysing the issues within the industry, as researchers, we can contribute to truly creating a decent tourism work environment (Baum, 2018). Therefore, this note advocates for Foucault’s analysis to be included within the context of hospitality human resources and organisational behaviour amidst the background of happenings in the hospitality work environment. Within the hospitality workplace, tourism practices have become embedded in the environment, system and culture. Through Foucault’s (1991) eyes, the environment is under constant control. Organisational theorists have recognised this and have since used the work of Foucault (1991) to offer a more critical reflection of the workplace. Theorists have found that the work environment involves individuals who are scrutinised and regulated based on institutional practices (Knights, 2002). Nevertheless, these work environments are examined in management literature and is yet to be explored in studies on the hospitality and tourism industry. The object of study is considered to the hospitality workplace with its target being employees. Michel Foucault never established specific steps for analysing the discourse for power. Researchers can draw upon the method of discourse analysis in order to examine the concept of power in organisations (Fairclough, 2010). Specific data collection methods that can be drawn upon include participant observation, document analysis and interviews as evident in studies that seek to explore the discourse in the hospitality work environment such as Kingsbury (2011). Within the hospitality and tourism industry, practices have become normalised that some individuals may not be able to imagine what the practices were like in different periods. These acts are specifically rooted in the hospitality sector that persons seemingly do not question their existence and how they came into being. In other words, employees are subject to managerial instructions and managers, whether conspicuously or not. Managers also are subject to these practices. Covaleski et al. (1998, p. 297) states that, “according to Foucault, the normalizing society reaches its zenith when the power of normalization itself becomes normalized: when the judges are judged”. Normalisation has been evident within the hospitality and tourism environment. In some hotels, one may also find that although an
3. Michel Foucault’s analysis It is difficult to conclude what Michel Foucault’s job title or role is as to some he was considered to be a historian, to others, a critic and even a philosopher. Despite this uncertainty, Michel Foucault, provoked thinking with his own analysis of control. Unlike power in the form of classes that Marx’s thinking proposed, Foucault claimed that power is omni-present, productive and embedded in networks of social relations (Foucault, 1980; Cheong and Miller, 2000). He was focused on understanding how the subject was formed as well as how the subject and populations were disciplined (Knights, 2002). His work has been applied to tourism studies but limited to aspects such as tourism planning and development (Cheong and Miller, 2000). It is yet to be applied in the area of hospitality human resources. 2
International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx
A.-G. Johnson
exist in discourses alongside power mechanisms that are embedded in the hospitality sector. Throughout the years, this has formed the identity of the hospitality professional or service worker. Nonetheless, where there is power, this is also resistance. Some practitioners may then argue that in light of the need for professional and personal development any potential or new employee especially those from lesserdeveloped economies can choose to either sink or swim by conforming to existing workplace cultures in some hospitality organisations. With findings based on Foucault’s analysis, government officials and tourism practitioners can realise how difficult it may be to remove what Baum (2015, p. 2010) calls the “stubborn stain” or alter the ideas that surround the reputation of the industry’s workforce. In light of this, as hospitality researchers, our job is far from finished. For the greater good, we are not yet done exploring the hospitality workforce.
employee’s contract allows the award of overtime, there have been cases where it is hardly ever rewarded as the act of doing overtime is the norm for both employees and management (The Caterer, 2016). This scenario can be seen in hotel properties in the Caribbean submit to a six-day workweek. A historical examination of discourse will reveal that this was not always the case in the sector but has become the norm in the 21st century. Various ideas within the hospitality discourse also guide how individuals present and conduct themselves. For instance, over ten years ago, a person with dreadlocks may not be considered as the perfect fit for the role of a hotel front office agent in Jamaica, a country that embraces the Rastafarian dreadlocks movement but also adopts practices from its British and Spanish colonial past. The act of wearing dreadlocks was not regarded as the accepted look of the hospitality professional until recent times. At a global level, one may also notice the normalised practice of wearing black and white uniforms to symbolise service workers. In this instance, uniforms have shaped the identity of who persons acknowledge as hospitality employees. Tourism places, practices and processes can also play a role in the composition of individuals and their establishment as ‘hospitality professionals’ or ‘service workers’. At some hotel properties, staff may use different entrances and exits from tourists and management when on duty. This can be seen as a power mechanism to facilitate order. Arguably, this can also be a security measure or the separation of the back of house from the front of house to allow workers to disguise themselves before their ‘performance’. However, these entrances are security posts where the security guards not only exercise their inspection duties but also act on behalf of management, as this is sometimes where the time sheets for employees are placed and monitored. These areas lead to the back of house, which may include signs that guide employees’ behaviours in relation to each other and guests. The discourse on hospitality entities also involve other power mechanisms. There have been cases in developed economies such as those in the Middle East. For instance, newly-employed workers have had their passports removed from them upon entry to the destination for the duration of their contractual period (Independent, 2009). This acts as a form of social control and results in a subservient behaviour by employees of certain backgrounds to management. Hospitality organisations have a role in managing employees in order to fulfil the vision of the establishment. These establishments are concerned with the formation of the subject and its identity using discursive strategies. This subject can be an employee, or the prisoner that Foucault (1991) speaks about. “The need is for actively wanting, thinking, feeling and doing beings who do not need to be controlled and regulated by bureaucratic rules and management hierarchies, but who see the realisation of their personal objectives as synonymous or congruent with the objectives of the organisation and who therefore regulate themselves accordingly in what could be described as self-surveillance” (Usher and Solomon, 1999, p. 157). Based on the 24/7 demands of the hospitality personnel, the management of the subject in this manner is also highly possible.
References Baum, T., 2015. Human resources in tourism: still waiting for change? - A 2015 reprise. Tour. Manag. 50 (2015), 204–212. Baum, T., Kralj, A., Robinson, R., Solnet, D., 2016. Tourism workforce research: a review, taxonomy and agenda. Ann. Tour. Res. 60 (2016), 1–22. Baum, T., 2018. Sustainable human resource management as a driver in tourism policy and planning: a serious sin of omission? J. Sustain. Tour. 26 (6), 873–889. Baum, T., Hai, N., 2019. Applying sustainable employment principles in the tourism industry: righting human rights wrongs? Tour. Recreat. Res. 44 (3), 371–381. Burchell, G., Gordon, C., Miller, P., 1991. The Foucault Effect, Studies in Governmentality with Two Lectures by and an Interview with Michel Foucault. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Carter, C., McKinlay, A., Rowlinson, M., 2002. Introduction: foucault, management and history. Organization 9 (4), 515–526. Cheong, S., Miller, M., 2000. Power and tourism - a Foucauldian observation. Ann. Tour. Res. 27 (2), 371–390. Clarke, C., Knights, D., 2015. Careering through academia: securing identities or engaging ethical subjectivities? Hum. Relat. 68 (12), 1865–1888. Covaleski, M., Dirsmith, M., Helan, J., Samuel, S., 1998. The calculated and the avowed: techniques of discipline and struggles over identity in the big six public accounting firms. Adm. Sci. Q. 43 (2), 293–327. Dimitriou, C., Ducette, J., 2018. An analysis of the key determinants of hotel employees’ ethical behaviour. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 34 (2018), 66–74. Erkutlu, H., Chafra, J., 2006. Relationship between leadership power bases and job stress of subordinates: example from boutique hotels. Manag. Res. News 29 (5), 285–297. Fairclough, N., 2010. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language, 2nd ed. Longman, Harlow. Foucault, M., 1980. Questions of methodology. In: Faubion, J.D. (Ed.), Michel Foucault: Power. The New Press, New York. Foucault, M., 1991. Discipline and Punish, the Birth of the Prison. Penguin Books, London. FT, 2018. Financial Times [online]. Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/36baacceddd0-11e8-9f04-38d397e6661c (Accessed 19 August 2019). Independent, 2009. Independent [online]. Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/ voices/commentators/johann-hari/the-dark-side-of-dubai-1664368.html (Accessed 19 August 2019). Kingsbury, P., 2011. Sociospatial sublimation: the human resources love in Sandals Resorts International, Jamaica. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 101 (3), 650–669. Knights, D., 2002. Writing organizational analysis in Foucault. Organization 9 (4), 575–593. Kusluvan, S., Kusluvan, Z., Ilhan, I., Buyruk, L., 2010. The human dimension - a review of human resources management issues in the tourism and hospitality industry. Cornell Hosp. Q. 51 (2), 171–214. Ladkin, A., 2011. Exploring tourism labor. Ann. Tour. Res. 38 (3), 1135–1155. OECD, 2012. OECD [online]. Available at: www.oecd.org/trade/icite (Accessed 19 August 2019). Ogbonna, E., Harris, L., 2002. Managing organisational culture: insights from the hospitality industry. Hum. Resour. Manage. 12 (1), 33–53. Robinson, R., Martins, A., Solnet, D., Baum, T., 2019. Sustaining precarity: critically examining tourism and employment. J. Sustain. Tour. 27 (7), 1008–1025. Skift, 2019. Skift [online]. Available at: https://skift.com/2019/02/25/travelmegatrends-2019-labor-shortages-force-a-wake-up-call/ (Accessed 19 August 2019). Steyaert, C., Janssens, M., 1999. Human and inhuman resource management: saving the subject of HRM. Organization 6 (2), 181–198. The Caterer, 2016. The Caterer [online]. Available at: https://www.thecaterer.com/ articles/366779/around-half-of-hospitality-workers-are-not-paid-overtime (Accessed 19 August 2019). UN, 2017. UN [online]. Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu= 1300 (Accessed 19 August 2019). Usher, R., Solomon, N., 1999. Experiential learning and the shaping of subjectivity in the workplace. Stud. Educ. Adults 31 (2), 155–163. Williamson, D., Rasmussen, E., Ravenswood, K., 2017. Power in the darkness: taking a historical and critical employment relations approach in hospitality. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 33, 134–141.
4. Conclusion This research note calls the application of critical perspectives, specifically Foucault’s analysis of power in the area of hospitality human resources and organisational behaviour in light of the current and future workplace challenges in the tourism industry. Subsequent studies can offer new perspectives to previously examined research questions (Williamson et al., 2017) as they will possibly extend the conversation on power relationships within the workforce based on a lens that is yet to be applied in the hospitality context. Baum, 2015; 2016) welcome these studies in the tourism literature as they create an avenue to generate theoretical conversations. Power relations illuminate the notion of how challenging the task of achieving equality and inclusion truly is as certain ‘truths’ continue to 3