5.5 Summary of Chapters 4 and 5..................................................
Chapter 4 set out to develop a framework to accommodate and organise the
latent variables (Figure 4 - 2 ) and to assist (alongside the findings from the reviews
of the generic and hospitality leadership literature) in theoretically informing the
development of the hypotheses for the design of the survey instrument and
analytical framework (Figure 4 - 3 and Figure 4 - 5 ).
The work described in Section 4.1 revealed that the work motivation literature is
somewhat fragmented, meaning that it was necessary (in Section 4.2) to shift the
focus of the analysis to the broader industrial and organisational psychology level
to develop this framework. That it was necessary to draw upon the overarching
domain of industrial and organisational psychology reflects the fact that this
research contains elements of leadership and work motivation studies, both of
which are sub-areas of industrial and organisational psychology (see e.g. Alliger
1992).
Section 4.3 reviews the applied hospitality motivation literature and identifies
Discretionary Service Behaviour (DSB) (Blancero and Johnson 1997, 2001;
Simons and Roberson 2003) as a construct of interest and also finds support for
the inclusion of the Social Support construct. A significant finding from Section
4.3 is that, like hospitality leadership studies, hospitality motivation studies
remain at an early stage where researchers are utilising a range of available
theoretical approaches and applying these to a number of specific organisational
foci.
Chapter 5 elaborates the rationale for the inclusion of each of the latent factors
and, with reference to the published research, describes and justifies the
development of the indicator variables for each of the latent factors.
A common theme in developing the indicators for the factors has been the
adaption of existing scales for use in this work. In some cases this has been
undertaken to truncate a very large scale (e.g. Smith et al.’s Job Description
Index [for the Job Satisfaction factor] at 73 items and Wollack et al.’s Survey of
Work Values) and in others to focus on one or more sub-scales of interest from
within a larger measurement instrument (as with Allen and Meyer’s (1993)
Organisational Commitment scale and Hancer and George’s (2003) Empowerment
scale). Restricting the length of the survey form is important for (a) minimising