leadership and motivation in hospitality

Construct^ Item^ Standardised factor loading estimates

ML EPA JP DSB

Motivational

Leadership

ML1 0.904 (^)
ML2 0.953 (^)
ML3 0.878 (^)
Employee Positive
Attitudes
JS1 (^) 0.74 (^0)
AOC2 0.763 (^)
ME1 0.881 (^)
ME3 0.859 (^)
ME6 0.793 (^)
Job Performance
JP1 0.873 (^)
JP2 0.8 (^53)
JP4 0.457 (^)
Discretionary
Service Behaviour
DSB1 0.946
DSB2 0.686
Average variance
extracted (AVE) 0.768^ 0.698^ 0.618^ 0.732^
Construct
reliability (CR) 0.908^ 0.920^ 0.819^ 0.842^
Model fit statistics
χ^2 = 50.131; d.f. = 59; sig = 0.788
RMSEA = 0.000 (0.029; 0.000; pclose = 0.999)
CFI = 1.000
SRMR = 0.0336
CN (0.05) = 330

Table 7-19 Estimates for CFA 3b:8

Importantly, the model now has adequate discriminant validity – Table 7 - 20
shows that the largest squared correlation estimate (ML  EPA r = 0.325) is
lower than the smallest AVE value of 0.618 for the JP construct.

ML EA JP DSB

ML (^) 0.768 - - -
EA 0.325 0.698 - -
JP 0.168 0.174 0.618 -
DSB 0.142 0.141 0 .102 0.732
AVE values on the diagonal and squared correlation estimates below the diagonal

Table 7-20 Discriminant validity estimates for CFA3b:8

With a satisfactory measurement model, it is now possible to estimate and test
the structural model using the new factor structure from Table 7 - 19 and the
structural specification illustrated in Figure 7 - 11. Firstly, however, it is necessary
to interpret the meaning of the new construct and, subsequently, to articulate the
related hypotheses H 21 and H 22.