Você está na página 1de 18

RRL

Gender-Diverse Workforce: Employer and Employee Views in Pryce Plaza Hotel


Gender differences in access to economic opportunities are frequently
debated in relation to gender differences in labor market participation.
This chapter looks beyond such participation
to focus on productivity and earningsfor two
reasons. First, a focus exclusively on labor force
participation provides only a partial picture of
womens and mens experience in the labor
market. Far from being a simple decision about
whether or not to join the labor force, participation in market work involves reallocating
time across a variety of activitiesa process
that can be difficult and costly, particularly for
women. And a focus solely on participation
masks gender differences in the nature and dynamics of work.
Second, despite significant progress in female
labor force participation over the past 25 years
(see chapter 1 and box 5.1), pervasive and persistent gender differences remain in productivity
and earnings across different sectors and jobs.
Indeed, many women around the world appear
to be caught in a productivity trapone that imposes significant costs on womens welfare and
economic empowerment today and serious disincentives to invest in the women of tomorrow.
Despite lower earnings and productivity,
women are not worse farmers, entrepreneurs,
and workers than men. We argue instead that
gender differences in labor productivity and
earnings are primarily the result of differences
in the economic activities of men and women
although gender differences in human capital
and in the returns to worker and job characteristics also play a role.
Indeed, mens and womens jobs differ
greatly, whether across sectors, industries, occupations, types of jobs, or types of firms. While
these differences evolve with economic development, the resulting changes in the structure
of employment are not enough to eliminate
employment segregation by gender. So, women
all over the world appear to be concentrated in
low-productivity jobs. They work in small farms
and run small firms. They are overrepresented
among unpaid family workers and in the informal sector. And they rarely rise to positions of
power in the labor market.
Three main factors lead to gender segregation in access to economic opportunities among

farmers, entrepreneurs, and wage workers: gender differences in time use (primarily resulting
from differences in care responsibilities), gender
differences in access to productive inputs (particularly land and credit), and gender differences stemming from market and institutional
failures. Because the factors causing segregation
are common across sectors of economic activity, we can integrate the analysis of the farming,
entrepreneurial, and wage sectors within a common framework.
Gender segregation in access to economic
opportunities in turn reinforces gender differences in time use and in access to inputs, and
perpetuates market and institutional failures.
For instance, women are more likely than men
to work in jobs that offer flexible working
arrangements (such as part-time or informal
jobs) so that they can combine work with care
responsibilities. But because part-time and informal jobs often pay lower (hourly) wages than
Over the past quarter century, women have joined the labor market
in increasing numbers, partially closing the gender participation
gap (see chapter 1). Between 1980 and 2009, the global rate of
female labor force participation rose from 50.2 percent to 51.8 percent, while the male rate fell from 82.0 percent to 77.7 percent. Consequently, gender differentials in labor force participation rates
declined from 32 percentage points in 1980 to 26 percentage points
in 2009.a
Female labor force participation is lowest in the Middle East and
North Africa (26 percent) and South Asia (35 percent) and highest in
East Asia and Pacific (64 percent) and Sub-Saharan Africa (61 percent) (box map 5.1.1). Despite large cross-regional differences, participation rates have converged over time as countries and regions
that started with very low rates (primarily Latin America and the
Middle East and North Africa) experienced large increases and
those with higher rates (primarily Europe and Central Asia and East
Asia and Pacific) experienced small declines (box figure 5.1.1).
The combined effect of economic development, rising education among women, and declining fertility goes a long way in
explaining changes in female participation rates over the past 25
years. Globally, economic development has been accompanied by
growing economic opportunities for women (particularly in manufacturing and services). And greater trade openness and economic
integration have, in many countries, led to sig nificant growth of
export-oriented sectors, with some, such as garments and light
manufacturing, employing large numbers of women in recent
decades (see chapter 6). Both developments have translated into
stronger market incentives for womens labor force participation in
the form of rising demand for female labor and, in some cases,
higher absolute and relative wages.
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE
DIVERSITY-PERFORMANCE

RELATIONSHIP
The board of directors is generally believed to have at least
four important functions monitoring and controlling managers, providing information and counsel to managers,
monitoring compliance with applicable laws and regulations, and linking the corporation to the external environment (Mallin 2004; Monks and Minow 2004). A large body of
the theory on boards addresses these functions in one way or
another. One basic proposition is that the composition of the
board affects the way the board performs these functions
that partially determine firm performance.3 This concept
offers the possibility that board composition in general, with
the gender and ethnic minority diversity of the board a
subset of board composition, is linked to firm performance.
No single theory directly predicts the nature of the relationship between board diversity and financial performance
but several theories from various fields provide insight into
the issue.4 We adopt an interdisciplinary approach and draw
from four important theories taken from organization
theory, economics, and social psychology to provide the
theoretical basis for the hypotheses tested.
Resource Dependence Theory
Pfeffer and Salancik (1978) argue that boards serve to link
the corporation to other external organizations in order to
address environmental dependencies. Pfeffer and Salancik
(1978) suggest four primary benefits for the external linkages: (1) provision of resources such as information and
expertise; (2) creation of channels of communication with
constituents of importance to the firm; (3) provision of commitments of support from important organizations or
groups in the external environment; and (4) creation of
legitimacy for the firm in the external environment. Hillman,
Cannella, and Paetzold (2000) expand these four benefits
into a taxonomy of director types that provide various
resources to the firm: insiders, business experts, support
specialists, and community influentials. Hillman et al.s
(2000) extension of resource dependence theory suggests
that different types of directors will provide different beneficial resources to the firm. As a result, a more diverse board
will provide more valuable resources, which should produce
better firm performance.
Furthermore, the type of diversity appears to be important. For example, Booth and Deli (1999) find that the presence of a commercial banker on the board is positively
related to the total debt of the firm and they conclude that
commercial bankers provide expertise on, and links to, the
bank debt market. Agrawal and Knoeber (2001) find that
outside directors with political and legal backgrounds are
more likely to be on the boards of companies that sell to the
government or face government regulation. Similarly,
women directors and ethnic minority directors bring different benefits and resources. Hillman et al. (2002) find that
female African-American directors are less likely to be business experts than male African-American directors and that
both female and male African-American directors are less

likely to be business experts than Caucasian female directors. Caucasian male directors are much more likely to be
business experts than either African-American or female
directors.5
Gender and ethnicity appear to be separate
dimensions under resource dependence theory because
women and ethnic minorities have different backgrounds
and different human capital which results in the ability to
address different environmental dependencies.6
Resource dependence theory provides the basis for some
of the most convincing theoretical arguments for a business
case for board diversity. Diversity holds the potential to
improve the information provided by the board to managers
due to the unique information held by diverse directors.
Differences in gender and ethnicity will very likely produce
unique information sets that are available to management for
better decision making. Diverse directors provide access to
important constituencies in the external environment. The
creation of this important link is crucial because over half of
the pool of human capital available to the firm is composed
of women and ethnic minorities. As a result, diverse organizations have access to more talent. Board diversity sends
important positive signals to the labor market and product
market, although Caucasian women directors send a different signal to these markets than ethnic minorities. Diverse
directors may bring diverse perspectives and nontraditional
approaches to problems as they are less likely to be insiders
or business experts. The ability of an ethnically diverse
board to provide legitimacy for the corporation with both
external and internal constituencies is particularly important
in countries like the US because of increasing growth in the
proportion of ethnic minority groups.
It should be noted that the type of diversity that will be
important in a particular country or culture may vary widely.
We observe that gender diversity is emphasized in Scandinavian countries and some other countries in Europe such as
Spain, possibly because of greater ethnic homogeneity.
However, some European countries are experiencing
increasing ethnic diversity as well. Other types of demographic diversity, including religion and age, may have
more importance in different national and cultural settings.
Human Capital Theory
Terjesen, Sealy, and Singh (2009) indicate that human capital
theory is derived from the work of Becker (1964) that
addresses the role of a persons stock of education, experience, and skills that can be used to the benefit of an organization. Furthermore, differences in gender results in
directors having unique human capital (Terjesen et al., 2009).
If human capital of corporate directors is influenced by
gender, it is reasonable to hypothesize that the human
capital of ethnic minorities would be unique relative to both
Caucasian men and women. Human capital theory complements some of the concepts associated with board diversity
derived from resource dependence theory.
One question raised by the fact that women and ethnic

minorities have unique human capital is, the claim that


women lack the right human capital for directorships.
(Terjesen et al., 2009:325). The evidence on the human capital
of women suggests that women are just as well qualified as
men in terms of several important qualities including level
of education but women are less likely to have experience as
business experts (Terjesen et al., 2009).7 Peterson et al. (2007)
find that African-American directors assume different roles
on the board relative to Caucasian directors which is possibly tied to their unique human capital. This appears to be the
same for women directors as well (Hillman et al., 2002;
Peterson, Philpot, & OShaughnessy 2007). The net result is
that human capital theory predicts that the performance of
the board will be affected by board diversity as a result of
diverse and unique human capital but the effect could be
either positive or negative from a financial performance perspective. Contingency theory (Fiedler, 1967; Lawrence &
Lorsch, 1967) is relevant as well in that human capital that
may be useful in one organization at some point in time but
may not be useful under different internal and external
circumstances.
Agency Theory
The board function of monitoring and controlling managers
is a fundamental concept from agency theory (Jensen &
Meckling, 1976). Carter, Simkins, and Simpson (2003)
suggest that a more diverse board may be a better monitor of
managers because board diversity increases board independence but they go on to say that agency theory does not
provide a clear prediction of the link between board diversity and financial performance. Diverse directors are less
likely to be beholden to managers according to this view, for
example TIAA-CREF adopts this proposition in their policy
statements (Carleton, Nelson, & Weisbach, 1998). Furthermore, factors such as ownership position in the firm may
have a more powerful influence on board monitoring than
independence. Jensen (1993) and Monks Minow (2004)
argue that high equity ownership by directors is a more
important factor in increasing the willingness of directors to
monitor than independence. In general, agency theory does
not provide as strong support for the financial benefits of
board diversity as does a resource dependence perspective
but agency theory does not rule out the possibility that
board diversity is beneficial.
Social Psychological Theory
Westphal and Milton (2000) address the opposing views that
the presence of demographic minorities on boards is often
viewed favorably by corporate stakeholders but the academic literature is more pessimistic about the extent to
which demographic minority directors can successfully
influence group decisions. They further suggest that a
central finding of the literature is that demographic differences lower social cohesion between groups and that the
social barriers reduce the probability that minority viewpoints will influence group decisions (Westphal & Milton,

2000). Westphal and Milton (2000) indicate that this social


psychological concept of minority status is derived from
social impact theory. This theory predicts that individuals
who have majority status have the potential to exert a
disproportionate amount of influence in group decisions
(Westphal & Milton, 2000). Thus it may be that diverse directors will not influence the board as a result of the internal
group dynamics of the board.8
Some research has suggested that minority group
members may encourage divergent thinking in the decisionmaking process (Westphal & Milton, 2000). However,
Campbell and Minguez-Vera (2008) draw from the work of
Lau and Murnighan (1998) to argue that greater gender
diversity among board members generates more diverse
opinions and critical thinking that makes decision-making
more time-consuming and less effective. Williams and
OReilly (1998) conclude that the evidence suggests that
diversity may produce more conflict and employee turnover
as well as creativity and innovation. Forbes and Milliken
(1999) conclude from a review of the evidence that board
effectiveness probably depends significantly on socialpsychological processes and they argue that each facet of
board demography is likely to have many complex and conflicting effects on the processes that affect board performance. Kim, Burns, and Prescott (2009) argue that board
diversity is positively related to the breadth and speed of top
management team strategic action capability in their theoretical analysis of the strategic role of the board of directors.
In summary, the theory and evidence on group dynamics
suggests that board diversity may have both positive and
negative e effects on firm performance.

Smoking Ban in Restaurant Patronage


Regulations that restrict smoking in bars and restaurants have sparked heated
debates across many communities in the US. Hundreds of cities and counties, as
well as a few states, have banned smoking with the majority of these laws being
passed in the last five years. Internationally, bans exist on six continents.
Therefore, it is important to evaluate the economic impact of such smoking
prohibitions. In this paper, we compare changes in industry employment in US
counties where smoking was banned with changes in US counties without bans.
Changes in employment are a good gauge of the economic impact on bars and
restaurants as staffing decisions reflect patronage.
Empirical analysis of the economic impacts of smoking bans is necessary

because theoretical predictions are ambiguous. Standard theory does suggest that
in efficient markets operating with perfect information and no externalities any
regulation that restricts an owners operating choices would at best have no effect
on profitability. Yet, where there exists imperfect information or externalities, the
implementation of regulations could lead to even greater profits for firms. The
latter may more accurately apply to an environment where smoking is allowed in
restaurants and bars.
Interest groups on both sides of the debate appeal to anecdotal evidence of
successes or failures frequently, therefore more objective, data-driven analyses
are needed. Several existing studies that have gone through an academic peer
review process are heavily dependent on surveys of managers expectations or
predictions of economic impacts (e.g., Dunham and Marlow, 2000a and 2000b).
A few studies that analyze the actual economic impact of laws on establishments
focus on select narrow geographic areas (e.g., Hyland and Cummings, 1999) and
the earlier bans.
We add to the understanding of the economic impact of smoking bans by
performing the first national difference-in-difference study of the impact of these
laws. Given that communities have banned smoking in every region of the
country, we use data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Quarterly Census
of Employment and Wages (QCEW). Moreover, since nearly three-quarters of
the laws banning smoking have been passed in the last five years, we use recent
releases of the QCEW..

In the early 1990s, several communities in California passed laws prohibiting


smoking within bars and restaurants. The health of patrons and employees was
cited as the primary motivation. Aided by a strong national anti-smoking
movement, the popularity of smoking bans has grown significantly over the last
decade. According to Americans for Nonsmokers Rights, about 42% of the

nations population lives in communities that have banned smoking in restaurants


(about 33% in bars).1
Early on, these laws were exclusively enacted at the
municipal level (either county or city), but as of 2005, nine states (California,
Utah, Delaware, Florida, New York, Connecticut, Maine, Idaho, and
Massachusetts) had enacted smoking bans in restaurants and/or bars. Although
the prevalence of these laws is higher in urban areas, statewide bans have resulted
in many rural restaurants and bars being smoke-free.

In the early 1990s, several communities in California passed laws prohibiting


smoking within bars and restaurants. The health of patrons and employees was
cited as the primary motivation. Aided by a strong national anti-smoking
movement, the popularity of smoking bans has grown significantly over the last
decade. According to Americans for Nonsmokers Rights, about 42% of the
nations population lives in communities that have banned smoking in restaurants
(about 33% in bars).1
Early on, these laws were exclusively enacted at the
municipal level (either county or city), but as of 2005, nine states (California,
Utah, Delaware, Florida, New York, Connecticut, Maine, Idaho, and
Massachusetts) had enacted smoking bans in restaurants and/or bars. Although
the prevalence of these laws is higher in urban areas, statewide bans have resulted
in many rural restaurants and bars being smoke-free..

Diversity and Inclusion: Fringe or Fundamental

Employee Satisfaction against Retention


The competition to retain key employees is intense. Top-level executives and HR departments spend
large amounts of time, effort, and money trying to figure out how to keep their people from leaving.

This article describes some new research and its implications for managing turnover and retention.
These ideas challenge the conventional wisdom that dissatisfied people leave and money makes them
stay. People often leave for reasons unrelated to their jobs. In many cases, unexpected events or
shocks are the cause. Employees also often stay because of attachments and their sense of fit, both on
the job and in their community.
The variation of individual employment characteristics may influence how employees feel about their
work environment. This study intended to identify employment characteristics that influenced
employee satisfaction with work environments related to employment retention. Factors played
different roles in measuring job satisfaction and employee retention according to individual
employment characteristics, while factors related to the work environment (location, communication,
accomplishment, and department) should be addressed regardless of employment characteristics. It is
recommended that hoteliers provide a customized improvement agenda directed to and focused on
individual groups according to that group's employment characteristics.
In this study, we investigate the transferability of TQM practices to offshore manufacturing firms by
validating direct and indirect relationships among top management commitment, HR-focused TQM
practices, employee satisfaction, and employee loyalty. Our research objective is to isolate critical
TQM practices that would enhance employee satisfaction and loyalty among maquiladora workers.
On-site surveys were conducted at two leading maquiladora firms that have long implemented TQM.
The statistical results indicate that employee empowerment, teamwork, and employee compensation
have a significant and positive influence on employee satisfaction. The improved employee
satisfaction leads to a higher level of employee loyalty. In addition, the results indicate that the effects
of top management commitment on employee empowerment and teamwork are significantly mediated
by employee training, implying that the success of employee empowerment and quality teams can be
dependent upon the level of employee training.
Abstract:
The rate at which an employer gains and losses its staff is called employee turnover.
If an employer is said to have a high turnover, it most often means that employees of
that company have a shorter tenure than those of other companies in
that same industry. A certain amount of turnover is necessary and healthy for an
institution; too much staff turnover can lead to excessive costs. Turnover is a
major problem for many organizations because it is extremely costly
for the employer, particularly in jobs which offer higher education and extensive
on the job training. Worldwide researches have suggested that employee turnover
is among the highest in the hospitality industry.
INTRODUCTION
The rate at which an employer gains and losses its staff is called employee
turnover. If an employer is said to have a high turnover, it most often means that
employees of that company have a shorter tenure than those of other
companies in that same industry. When employees leave, valuable knowledge is
lost and even guests may follow the departing employee. Hireling a new employee
ramped up to performance levels similar to the one youve lost takes time and money.
Hoteliers who actively find ways to retain employees gain a sustainable competitive
advantage. A certain amount of turnover is necessary and healthy for an institution; too
much staff turnover can lead to excessive costs. Turnover is a major problem for many
organizations because it is extremely costly for the employer, particularly in jobs which
offer higher education and extensive on the job training.
The turnover is frequently calculated as the ratio of the number of employees
separation during a month to the number of employees on the payroll at the middle of
the month. High turnover is part of broader set of problems including lowered

production and quality higher costs, low satisfaction with superiors, work
anxiety, absenteeism and accidents. The major factors that cause the employee turnover are the
demographic factors (such as age, gender, education, income level, job
category etc.), perceived alternative employment opportunity (PAEO), job hopping,
pay, nature of work, supervision, organizational commitment etc.
Managing employees behavior, work schedules, performance reports,employees training,
motivational activities, the right person at the right place, hiring and firing are common practices
by the department of human resources management of any developed organizations. Worldwide
organizations have realized that skilled labor and technocrat people exploit the organization for better
pay incentives at least amount of workload because they know human resources is a big competitive
advantage for theorganizations.
How employees turnover intention can be reduced is a big challenge for the directors of human
resource management. The objective of this project is to analyze the impact of job satisfaction, job
involvement, job stress and organizational commitment on employees turnover intention. This project
is an endeavor to formulate strategies for behavioral intention of the employees towards job turnover
to cope with the current pace of the world.
Experience shows the following to be major causes of high staff turnover:
1. Below average rates of pay. Every industry has organizations that pay well and
some others that pay badly.
2. Poor training. Asking someone to do a job but not giving them adequate
training is demotivating.
3. Weak leadership. In the majority of organizations people do teamwork
alongside colleagues performing complementary roles.
4. Unreasonable expectations. Some managers expect too much from their staff,
often because they dont know how to do the job themselves and because they
dont understand why it takes longer than they think it should.
5. A history of high turnover. It can be difficult to break the cycle of high turnover.
When new employees join an organization they soon become aware of the culture and they quickly
pick up on expectations about length of service.
Employee turnover can often be attributed to poor managerial performance, low emotional
intelligence and ineffective leadership. Poorly selected or improperly trained managers can be
expensive.
The key for a long-term and productive relationship between employer and employee is providing a
stimulating workplace environment, which fosters happy, motivated and empowered individuals.
A top reason for the high turnover rate of hospitality staff is the fact that many hospitality jobs do not
pay well. Employees usually begin at a minimum wage rate or below which does not attract top
quality long-term employees because these employees
are always looking for a better paying position. Adding this to the fact that many hospitality positions
are seasonal and it is not hard to see why hospitality staff turnover can reach high rates quickly.
Other reasons for high rates of hospitality staff turnover include lack of substantial benefits such as
company provided health insurance, retirement benefits, vacation pay, sick leave, additional schooling
or training programs and other fringebenefits which are so often perks of other industries. Lack of
employers interest in providing substantial benefits drives career oriented individuals elsewhere.
Many people who enter the hospitality industry are simply not suited to the work. The stress of
dealing with the public on a daily basis is among the list of top reasons reported from exiting
employees even from the higher paying end of hospitality sector positions. People pleasing are an art
form that can be very demanding on a persons integrity. The physical and mental stress associated
with hospitality positions can overwhelm even the hardest working, career minded employee.
High turnover can lead to more issues in the workplace, such as understaffing, low morale, and poor
customer service. Without strong retention strategies, companies will spend more on hiring and
training costs.
LITERATURE REVIEW EMPLOYEE TURNOVER STUDIES
"Employee turnover is a ratio comparison of the number of employees a company must replace in a
given time period to the average number of total employees.

A huge concern to most companies, employee turnover is a costly expense especially in lower paying
job roles, for which the employee turnover rate is highest. Many factors play a role in the employee
turnover rate of any company, and these can stem from both the employer and the employees. Wages,
company benefits, employee attendance, and job performance are all factors that play a significant
role in employee turnover.Companies take a deep interest in their employee turnover rate because it is
a costlypart of doing business." (Beam, 2009)Companies incur direct and indirect expenses, which
include the cost ofadvertising, headhunting fees, human resource costs, loss of productivity, new
hiretraining, and customer retention, every time they have to replace an employee. Theseexpenses can
add up to anywhere from 30 to 200 percent of a single employee's annualwages or salary, depending
on the industry and the job role being filled. (Beam, 2009)Potential negative consequences of
employee turnover include operationaldisruption, demoralization, negative public relations,
personnel costs, strategicopportunity costs, and decreased social integration. (Colema, 1987)
The most common reason for employee turnover rate being so high is the salaryscale because
employees are usually in the search of well-paid jobs. Those who aredesperate for a job may take the
first one that comes along to carry them through whilesearching for better paying employment. Also,
employees tend to leave a companybecause of the unsatisfactory performance appraisals. Low pay
represents a goodreason for which an employee may be lacking in performance. (Rampur,
2009)Unequal or substandard wage structures fall under this category as well. "Whentwo or more
employees perform similar work and have similar responsibilities,differences in pay rate can drive
lower paid employees to quit. In a like vein, if you payless than other employers for similar work,
employees are likely to jump ship for higherpay, if other factors are relatively equal." (Handelsman,
2009)
Turnover research
Worldwide researches have suggested that employee turnover is among thehighest in the hospitality
industry. Studies have shown that the average turnover levelamong non-management hotel employees
in the US is about 50%, and about 25% formanagement staff. Estimates of average annual employee
turnover range from around60 to 300 percent, according to the research conducted by the American
Hotel andMotel Association.Staff turnover is high in the hospitality industry, and anyone considering
amanagement position within this segment should understand the reasons people leave
their jobs.Five reasons for high turnover:
1. Seasonality. Many hospitality positions are seasonal in nature which has anegative impact on
employee morale.
2. 2. Organizational Culture & Leadership. Lack of positive culture, are makingthe work environment
to be unpleasant.
3. Labor Pool. The labor pool for the hospitality industry is often untrained,unskilled workers. Many
employees are young, students, or using hospitality
jobs as a fallback or stepping stone to other careers. This increases the chances
of turnover.
4. Customer Service Issues. Employees and managers walk a fine line betweenkeeping their
customers happy and supporting their employees. A good leaderwill be able to judge between
customer service and abusive customers.
5. Pay rates and hours. Pay rates are often around the minimum wage, making itdifficult for
employees to support themselves with one job.
High turnover in the hospitality industry occurs for many reasons. Largecontributors are seasonality,
pay and hours, lack of leadership, customer service issues,labor pool, and training. Some factors
cannot be helped, but awareness of the issues canlead to better solutions.
While many leading companies place more effort in employee retention, mostare clueless. They
accept employee turnover as a normal part of doing business. Highturnover organizations spend
disproportionate amounts of resources on recruiting andreplacing their workforce, while smart
organizations invest in employee retention.employees quit for many reasons but, in general, there are
five important areasthat motivate people to leave their jobs.
1. Poor match between the person and the job
2. Poor fit with the organizational climate and culture
3. Poor alignment between pay and performance
4. Poor connections between the individual, their coworkers, and the supervisor

5. Poor opportunities for growth and advancement


When looking at the most common causes for high employee turnover, hoteliers
wont need magic to lower it. Every hotelier has the opportunity to increase their
employees satisfaction to create and maintain sound teams that inspire creative ideas
and work willingly towards a common goal of delivering the best customer service
possible.
Hospitality workers often work long, labor some hours in poor working
environments and they feel that they are unappreciated by either the company they
work for or the patrons they serve leading them to exit the industry to look for more
personally fulfilling work.
Another emotional aspect which influences an employees willingness to leave
or stay is the companys prestige and philosophy. Too many discrepancies in regard to
these factors cause dissatisfaction and consequently high employee turnover.
There are studies that support the fact that employees leave an organization for
many reasons, but two common causes are the quality of the selection system and the
quality of leadership.
Employee turnover analysis
In order to apply the most appropriate turnover reduction strategies,
management must first determine the cause of turnover behavior. To facilitate this, the
management needs to establish appropriate turnover categories. For example, turnover
can be classified as involuntary or voluntary. Involuntary turnover occurs when an
employee is discharged or terminated, often for just cause. Voluntary turnover occurs
when an employee leaves by the employee's own choice, and can be caused by a
number of factors. These may include poor job feedback, job dissatisfaction, unmet job
expectations, performance problems, situational constraints, socialization difficulties,
greater degrees of job stress, and a lack of career advancement opportunities.
After computing appropriate turnover rates, an organization frequently can
determine the reasons for employee separations by compiling and comparing the results
of exit interviews by employee group, department, division, etc.
Attitude surveys may also be used to study turnover by including sections on
current employees' intention to quit and on employees' future plans with the
organization. To obtain data on employees' intentions, the organization may ask: "How
often have you seriously considered quitting your present job?"
a. Never
b. Seldom
c. Occasionally
d. Often
e. All the time
To obtain data pertaining to employees' future plans, the organization may ask:
"What are your future plans regarding staying with our organization?"
1. Definitely do not intend to stay
2. Plan to stay until I find a better job
3. Plan to stay unless personal situation changes
4. Plan to stay indefinitely
These employee responses can be further examined to determine if they are
correlated with performance, pay, tenure with the organization, and/or job satisfaction.
The Job Description Index (work and supervisory satisfaction scales) and the General
Satisfaction Scale (from the Job Diagnostic Survey) are commonly used instruments
designed to measure a job-related satisfaction.
Turnover on a specific job may be explored via employee task-related selfesteem to determine whether employees leave because they perceive themselves as
being incompetent. To do this, an organization can use organizational position or job
description to identify activities considered critical to a given job.

If a company follows these steps and shows a genuine concern for the well-being of its employees, it
may not have to pay the highest wages in town to have thelowest employee turnover rate.
Solicit feedback. Evaluating each position in your practice can help spot problemareas you need to
work on. But to get the full picture of how staff members see yourpractice and their position in it,
you'll need to hear directly from them. It's important toregularly solicit feedback from your entire staff
in one-on-one meetings and staffmeetings.
Exit interview. A staff member will almost always offer some reason for leaving
up front, such as he or she was looking for a new challenge, wanted a job closer to home
or wanted higher pay. These things may be true, but there are probably some other
underlying reasons for his or her departure as well.
Measuring labor turnover
The simplest measure involves calculating the number of leavers in a period of
time (usually a year) as a percentage of the number employed during the same period.
This is known as the "separation rate" or "crude wastage rate" and is calculated as
follows:
Number of leavers / average no employed x 100
For example, if a business has 150 leavers during the year and, on average, it
employed 2,000 people during the year, the labor turnover figure would be 7.5%
An alternative calculation of labor turnover is known as the "Stability Index.
This illustrates the extent to which the experienced workforce is being retained and is
calculated as follows:
Number of employees with one or more years service now / Number employed one
year ago x 100
Labor turnover will vary between different groups of employees and
measurement is more useful if broken down by department or section or according to
such factors as length of service, age or occupation.
Nine variables employees turnover intension, managerial attitude, job
satisfaction, job involvement, communication levels, flexible work environment,
training consistency, employee priorities and organizational outcomes are considered to
measure employees turnover intension and its impact on organizational outcomes.
382
HOSPITALITY EMPLOYEE TURNOVER RESEARCH IN TIMISOARA
The West University of Timisoara started to do a research by analyzing the hotel
market from Timisoara city. This pilot study was developed in May-July 2011 in hotel
industry from Timisoara city, Romania. There were approached 29 three and four star
hotels, which represent 60% of the existing hotels on Timisoaras hotel market. They
were asked to fill up a questionnaire and the response rate was 51,72%, because only 15
hotels accepted to respond. 168 employees answered, 35 of which working in four star
hotels and 133 in three star hotels.
The majority of employees that participated to the study have 18-35 years
(66,07%), and the rest have between 36-60 years (33,93%). 57% of employees
interviewed are males and 43% are females. They have been working in the hotels from
under a year to more than 10 and many of them finished a high school or a faculty.
The main goal of the research was to analyze the climate for innovation as an
indicator of the hotels ability to become innovative and also to analyze the manageremployee relationship and how it is perceived by the employees. The most important
topic was the following question: What is the most used leadership style perceived by
the employees?
According to this study, regarding to the climate offered by the manager
employees consider that the activities they do at work are routine activities (51,79%)
but they also agree that they have been offered the possibility of being creative and
taking initiative (48,21%). Employees admit that teamwork is pleasant (69%) and
motivates them to be part of this industry. However, only 30% admit that their tasks are
well individualized.
In order to see if managers consult their employees in problems identification

there were monitored the following aspects: organizing regular meetings to identify the
problems in order to improve the tourist product and the frequency with which
employees are consulted in the decision-making process. Employees from Timisoara
consider important that the manager gives them the opportunity to make suggestions
regarding service innovation and tourist product development. Even if the manager
appreciates their ideas, employees observe that these are not always implemented.
The attributes taken into account regarding the relationship with the manager
were the following: interaction and communication, performances reward, trainings,
mistake tolerance and personal implication.
Based on employees answer there was estimated a separate score for each
attribute. The score was calculated based on the weighted average by according each
appreciation a certain value such as: 5 if the appreciation was considered very
important, 4 if it was important, 3 if indifferent, 2 if less important and 1 if it was
considered being without importance.
The most important attribute in the relationship with manager was interaction
and communication that obtained 4,39 points. It is followed by performances reward
and personal implication, attributes that are important enough for many employees and
that obtained 4,32 and 4,14. Employees dont give too much importance for mistakes
tolerance and trainings, almost 11% of them considering these aspects to be indifferent.
Based on these scores, it was estimated the average or the final score, 4,214
points. From this analysis it can be observed that the most important attribute in
manager-employee relationship is interaction and communication.
Most of employees would want this from their managers. They also would want
their performance to be rewarded, but this is a financial aspect and it wont be given too
much attention in this study.
The frequently practiced leadership styles were another important aspect the
study aim at. In order to answer this question employees could choose between the
following leadership styles: autocratic, participative, consultative and permissive.
37,5% think their boss is consultative and 50% that it was either autocratic (25%) or
participative (25%). The rest of the employees, 12,5% said that their boss was
permissive. Adopting only one of these styles it is not recommended. A good leader
knows that these elements should be combined in order to be efficient.
The attributes taken into account regarding employees motivation were the
following: salary, possibility of professional development, tourist unit prestige and
possibility of acquiring new skills.
After analyzing the obtained scores, it can be observed that the most important
motivator is the salary with 4.55 points. 67.86% of the employees considered it as being
very important. This factor is followed by tourist units prestige with a score of 4.30.
51.79% considered it as being very important and 33.93% as important. Therefore, this
factor is considered to be more than important for most of the interviewed employees.
Tourist units prestige is closely followed by the possibility of professional development
that obtained 4.29 points, which means that this motivator is important for employees.
The lowest score, 4.25 points was given to the possibility of acquiring new skills.
The study on employees motivation came out with not such an unexpected
result: the most important motivator is the salary. This fact is not that surprising
according to the actual economic instability the country confronts with.
CONCLUSIONS
The relationship between job satisfaction and job turnover has been considered, if
we try to increasing job satisfaction, then we will reduce job turnover somehow
partly.
Managers should lead the employees to improve service quality, to be client oriented
and not to give too much importance to financial rewards and orient them to
appreciate other rewards, such as diplomas coupons, free holidays or free trainings.
They could also organize team-buildings in order to consolidate the employee-

employee and manager-employee relationships.


To be competitive in today's labor market, most of the hotels find it necessary to
offer a standard benefit package, including health and life insurance, vacation and
leave policies, and investment and retirement plans.
Other factors, such as competitive compensation and creating an employee-friendly
work environment also play a role in decreasing staff turnover.
Providing career advancement opportunities is critical for retention employees.
A mentoring program can help decrease the employee turnover of the small- andmedium sized hotels.
Pay and welfare also indicate significant position in Human Resource Management
in the hospitality industry.
The results of the research show that adopting only one of the leadership styles
studied (autocratic, consultative, participative and permissive) it is not
recommended. Managers should adapt their leadership style to the situations they
confront with and they must be always aware of their predominant leadership style.
A manager has to recognize and acknowledge the skills and abilities that the
employee has gained since joining the organization which may make them eligible
for the next advancement.
A mentoring program can help decrease the employee turnover.
Managers need to promote from within if possible. They have to avoid bringing new
people on board at a higher rate than current employees.
Ambitious hoteliers can thus have only one goal: improve employee satisfaction by
creating exemplary working conditions, an atmosphere of growth as well as
ensuring fair compensation. A continuous improvement of satisfaction will affect
employee commitment and loyalty and will have a positive impact on organizational
performance

Fresh or Frozen Fruits and Vegetables- Good Menus Reducing Food Wastage in Restaurant
The Facts on Frozen
Frozen Fresh
Frozen foods offer inherent advantages for todays health and eco-conscious consumers. The
freezing process essentially preserves nutrients and quality when food is frozen at its peak. It
also reduces the growth of micro-organisms that cause spoilage and food-borne illness, and because
you use only what you need when you need it, food lasts longer, creating less waste to be sent to
landfill.
The benefits of frozen food:
Frozen food can be nutritious:
One of the most important facts about frozen foods is that commercial freezing effectively locks in
nutritional value. In 1998 the U.S. Federal Department of Agriculture wrote in the Federal Register:
The nutrient profiles of selected raw fruits and vegetables and frozen, single ingredient versions of
the same fruits and vegetables revealed relatively equivalent nutrient profiles In fact, some data
showed that the nutrient content level for certain nutrients was higher in the frozen version of the
food than in the raw version of the food.

Frozen food is often more affordable:


Frozen products are often lower in cost per serving and have a much greater shelf-life than
refrigerated foods. They can also be more easily portioned and stored for use at a later time, which
reduces spoilage and food waste.
Frozen food is generally safer:
Frozen has the least number of food safety incidents, behind chilled, fresh and organic foods. The
freezing and canning processes inhibit the growth of some pathogens and therefore reduce the
likelihood of serving contaminated products.
Frozen food can reduce waste:
The global food crisis isnt just about skyrocketing prices. WhileAmericans waste 27 per cent of the
food available for consumption, with two-thirds of this waste deriving from fresh produce (milk,
grain products and sweeteners), the British toss away a third of the food they purchase. In addition
to the food waste, rotting food that ends up in landfills produces methane a major source of
greenhouse gas. The United States Department of Agriculture estimates that recovering just five per
cent of the food that is wasted would feed four million people a day.
Women Impact on Hotel Management in MCC Hotel
2. Theoretical considerations and earlier findings
There are a number of arguments in favour of diversity of board members to be found
in the previous literature, see for instance Bantel and Jackson (1989) and Murray (1989).
Carter et al. (2003) list 5 positive arguments from a business case perspective and also
discuss diversity management in a principal agent framework. Among the arguments pro
diversity management is that a more diverse board of directors (or executive board) is able to
make decisions based on the evaluation of more alternatives compared to a more
homogenous board. A heterogenous board compared to a homogenous board is able to have a
better understanding of the market place of the firm, and furthermore diversity increases
creativity and innovation. Diversity management may also improve the image of the firm and
in this way have positive effects on firm performance and shareholder value if the positive
image has positive effects on customers behaviour. Beside the arguments listed in Carter et
al. (2003), another argument for aiming at a more diverse composition of board members is
that if only male individuals are potential candidates for the boards, the selection of board
members will take place from only this selected distribution of qualifications, and on average
this implies a much lower quality than if the candidates are selected among the best from the
distribution of both men and women (or include minority groups).
However, there may also be arguments against diversity management. If a
heterogenous board produces more opinions and more critical questions, this may be timeconsuming and may not be as effective as a more homogenous board of directors, especially
if the firm is operating in a highly competitive environment where the ability to react quickly
to market shocks is an important issue. A culturally, ethnically or gender diverse board may
experience more conflicts, and even though the decisions may have a better quality in the
end, this may not balance the negative effects of a more slow decision-making process if the
market place of the firm demands quick responses, see Hambrick et al. (1996). Thus, based
on theory, the answer concerning the financial effects of diversity management and women
on boards is undetermined a priori. Predictions from the previous empirical evidence are
ambiguous. Most of the empirical studies have been based on US data and most of the
studies include only the largest firms. Shrader et al. (1997) analyse the 200 largest US firms
and they are unable to find any significantly positive relationship between the percentage of
female board members and firm performance (measured by ROA and ROE). They even find
significantly negative relations in some cases. Kochan et al. (2003) also find no positive
relations between gender diversity in management and firm performance for US companies.

Contrary to these findings, Catalyst (2004) and Adler (2001) find positive correlations
between female-friendly US Fortune 500 firms and the performance of these firms. Carter
et al. (2003) also find a significantly positive effect of the percentage of women and
minorities on boards of directors and firm value after controlling for a number of other
factors which may affect firm value. The study by Carter et al. (2003) also controls for the
direction of causality by estimating an IV-model, see below. A recent study by Bell (2005)
based on a large sample of US firms find that women in top management (female top CEO or
board members) have a positive effect on the payment of the executives of the firms, and
further, these firms also tend to have a higher proportion of women at lower management
levels
Customer Service Satisfaction in MCC Hotel
Customer satisfaction
Customer satisfaction has been a popular topic in marketing practice and academic research since
Cardozo's (1965) initial study of customer effort, expectations and satisfaction. Despite many attempts
to measure and explain customer satisfaction, there still does not appear to be a consensus regarding
its definition (Giese and Cote, 2000). Customer satisfaction is typically defined as a post consumption
evaluative judgement concerning a specific product or service (Gundersen, Heide and Olsson, 1996).
It is the result of an evaluative process that contrasts prepurchase expectations with perceptions of
performance during and after the consumption experience (Oliver, 1980).
The most widely accepted conceptualization of the customer satisfaction concept is the expectancy
disconfirmation theory (Barsky, 1992; Oh and Parks, 1997; McQuitty, Finn and Wiley, 2000). The
theory was developed by Oliver (1980), who proposed that satisfaction level is a result of the
difference between expected and perceived performance. Satisfaction (positive disconfirmation)
occures when product or service is better than expected. On the other hand, a performance worse than
expected results with dissatisfaction (negative disconfirmation). Studies show that customer
satisfaction may have direct and indirect impact on business results. Anderson et al. (1994), Yeung et
al. (2002), and Luo and Homburg (2007) concluded that customer satisfaction positively affects
business profitability. The majority of studies have investigated the relationship with customer
behaviour patterns (Sderlund, 1998; Kandampully and Suhartanto, 2000; Dimitriades, 2006;
Olorunniwo et al., 2006; Chi and Qu, 2008; Faullant et al., 2008). According to these findings,
customer satisfaction increases customer loyalty, influences repurchase intentions and leads to
positive word-of-mouth. Given the vital role of customer satisfaction, it is not surprising that a variety
of research has been devoted to investigating the determinants of satisfaction (Churchill and
Surprenant, 1982; Oliver, 1980; Barsky, 1995; Zeithaml and Bitner, 2003). Satisfaction can be
determined by subjective (e. g. customer needs, emotions) and objective factors (e. g. product and
service features). Applying to the hospitality industry, there have been numerous studies that examine
attributes that travellers may find important regarding customer satisfaction. Atkinson (1988) found
out that cleanliness, security, value for money and courtesy of staff determine customer satisfaction.
Knutson (1988) revealed that room cleanliness and comfort, convenience of location, prompt service,
safety and security, and friendliness of employees are important. Barsky and Labagh (1992) stated
that employee attitude, location and rooms are likely to influence travellers' satisfaction. A study
conducted by Akan (1995) showed that the main determinants of hotel guest satisfaction are the
behaviour of employees, cleanliness and timeliness. Choi and Chu (2001) concluded that staff quality,
room qualities and value are the top three hotel factors that determine travellers' satisfaction.
Providing services those customers prefer is a starting point for providing customer satisfaction. A

relatively easy way to determine what services customer prefers is simply to ask them. According to
Gilbert and Horsnell (1998), and Su (2004), guest comment cards (GCCs) are most commonly used
for determining hotel guest satisfaction. GCCs are usually distributed in hotel rooms, at the reception
desk or in some other visible place. However, studies reveal that numerous hotel chains use guest
satisfaction evaluating methods based on inadequate practices to make important and complex
managerial decisions (Barsky, 1992; Barsky and Huxley, 1992; Jones and Ioannou, 1993, Gilbert and
Horsnell, 1998; Su, 2004). The most commonly made faults can be divided into three main areas,
namely, quality of the sample, design of the GCCs, and data collection and analysis (Gilbert and
Horsnell, 1998). In order to improve the validity of hotel guest satisfaction measurement practice,
Barsky and Huxley (1992) proposed a new sampling procedure that is a quality sample. It reduces
nonresponse bias by offering incentives for completing the questionnaires. The components of their
questionnaire are based on disconfirmation paradigm and expectancy-value theory. In this manner,
guests can indicate whether service was above or below their expectations and whether they
considered a particular service important or not. Furthermore, Gilbert and Horsnell (1998) developed
a list of criteria for GCC content analysis, which is adopted in this study as well. Schall (2003)
discusses the issues of question clarity, scaling, validity, survey timing, question order and sample
size.