lOMoARcPSD|48364463
BỘ GIÁO DỤC VÀ ĐÀO TẠO
TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC PHENIKAA
BÀI TIỂU LUẬN CUỐI KÌ
KỸ NĂNG VIẾT VÀ THUYẾT TRÌNH BẰNG TIẾNG ANH
RESEARCH WORK: EXPLORING JOB SATISFACTION AMONG HOTEL
RECEPTIONIST IN VIETNAM
Giảng viên : Cô Đinh Thị Hồng Ngọc Thành viên nhóm: 10
Phạm Nguyễn Minh Giang - 21011900
Nguyễn Thị Trang - 21010327
Nguyễn Thị Thu Trang - 21011437
Trương Thị Hải Yến - 21012346 Khóa : K15 Lớp: N29
HÀ NỘI - Tháng 5/2024 CONTENT S
Abstract .............................................................................................................................. 1
I. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 2
1. Literature Review ...................................................................................................... 5
1.1. Conceptual framework of job satisfaction among hotel receptionist Hotel . 5
Receptionist ................................................................................................................. 5
1.2 Factors influencing job satisfaction .................................................................... 6
1.3. Work environment .............................................................................................. 7
1.4. Workplace Relationships .................................................................................... 7
1.5. Salary and advancement opportunities ............................................................ 8
1.6. Job description .................................................................................................... 8
1.7. Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire .............................................................. 9
II. Methods ...................................................................................................................... 10
III. Result ......................................................................................................................... 10
1. Management factors ................................................................................................... 10
2. Factors affecting employee satisfaction in hotels ..................................................... 12
3. Survey of employee satisfaction in the hotel reception department....................... 14
IV. Discussion ................................................................................................................... 14
V. Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 17
References ........................................................................................................................ 18 Abstract
This study delves into the intricate realm of job satisfaction among hotel receptionists,
exploring its determinants, impacts, and potential strategies for enhancement. In the
dynamic landscape of the hospitality industry, where guest satisfaction is paramount, the
role of receptionists is pivotal.. Consequently, understanding and fostering job
satisfaction among receptionists is critical for ensuring exceptional service delivery and
maintaining a positive organizational image.
The research examines various factors that contribute to receptionists' job satisfaction,
including guest interactions, organizational support, workload, and work-life balance.
Additionally, it investigates the impacts of job satisfaction on individual well-being,
organizational performance, and team dynamics within hotel settings. By synthesizing
existing literature and conducting empirical analyses, this study aims to provide insights
into the complex interplay between job satisfaction, employee engagement, and
organizational outcomes in the hospitality industry.
Furthermore, the study proposes potential strategies for improving job satisfaction among
hotel receptionists, such as comprehensive training programs, fair compensation schemes,
and initiatives to promote work-life balance. It advocates for the cultivation of supportive
work environments that value and empower receptionists, thereby fostering a culture of
positivity, engagement, and excellence. I. Introduction
The rapid growth in the services industry, problems of employee scarcity, and the high
costs of replacement have led organizations to focus on the factors determining
satisfaction at work. Hotel management theorists claim that the first priority of
management is to provide the company's employees with the enthusiasm to satisfy
customers; in other words, the overall aim of organizations is raising employee
satisfaction so that they can satisfy customer needs. The present study focuses on the job
satisfaction level of hotel employees. Specifically, it addresses receptionists in Viet Nam.
Employees in any organization play a particularly vital role in the success of that
organization. It is clear that one can regard it as an axiom that "satisfied employees are
the best factor for service quality and they often find innovative ways to gain customer
satisfaction". In the competitive environment of the services industry, this is particularly
the case. Front-line employees ensure customer satisfaction through service
performance. Numerous studies have examined job satisfaction based on the premise that
job satisfaction positively affects attitudes such as commitment, job involvement, and
productivity. Those attitudes contribute to the better functioning and improved results of
the organization. Numerous conceptual articles and empirical studies have shown the
relationship between satisfaction on the job and performance, commitment, and turnover. 2
These studies confirm a "causal arrow" relationship between satisfaction at work and organizational performance.
Background of the Study
If the employees are happy with the work environment, they help the hotel organization
to foster overall job satisfaction. The service provided creates satisfaction, which will
lead to the return of the customer and reduce marketing costs and promotional activities
to attract new customers in Vietnam. However, in the hotel industry, work pressure is
greater than any other industry, which can lead to mental unhappiness, dissatisfaction
with one's career, and dissatisfaction in the hotel industry. Because there is usually a lot
of work to be done to ensure that the satisfaction of the front-line workforce in the hotel
industry is in the spotlight. If the demands of employees are not addressed by the hotel
management, they are more likely to leave, and the high employee turnover increases
labor costs for the hotel business.
Vietnam always places tourism as one of the economic sectors of key economic
importance, and the hotel industry is the core of the national tourist industry. To attract
the highest quality person, training, and retaining their employees, hotel managers might
need to consider job satisfaction as an important issue at work. Job satisfaction is
generally recognized as one of the most important areas of study. Every person gets value
from their job, according to the importance of the work, the government, and the labor
market. The personal values from the employee and the fitness with the job affect
satisfaction associated with the work and the quality of life. Are common views of job satisfaction? Research Objectives
According to several researchers, employee satisfaction is an important concept and one
that is critical for many reasons. First, satisfied employees are "more likely to take part,
to learn, to make positive features of work relationships, and to act in ways that are
supportive of customer relationships". Research literature also reports that satisfied
employees lead to satisfied customers, and satisfied customer leads to profit for the hotel.
Second, work satisfaction is often regarded as fundamental to achieving high levels of
employee productivity. In general, satisfaction at work increases individual achievement.
When employees receive satisfaction from their work, it helps to increase the hotel's 3
competitiveness. The more positive aspects employees discover in their work, the more
effort they put into their jobs. Hence, hoteliers who provide measures of job satisfaction
tend to gain because satisfied employees are more motivated, which could lead to higher
levels of productivity. Third, satisfied employees are not inclined to quit their jobs. High
job satisfaction leads to a decrease in turnover because employees are happy and do not
consider looking for other jobs. The greater the satisfaction that employees derive from
their jobs, the greater the realization that alternatives elsewhere provide no advantage.
Consequently, employees who tend to stay may develop a good impression which is
directly related to the company, and turnover falls. That is to say, employee retention is
an outcome of employee satisfaction.
This research explores the satisfaction levels of receptionists in the hotel industry. In
recent decades, service quality has played a leading role in increasing the competitiveness,
growth, and development of tourism. In the hotel industry, in particular, employees'
satisfaction levels are important since employee contact quality and satisfaction are
linked. The more satisfied the hotel employees are, the higher their contact quality, and
hence increased guest satisfaction. Guests are also employees' most frequent "consumers"
and are in a good position to confirm the quality of employees' performance as well as
their quality of service. This is also supported by the fact that the hotel industry is labor-
intensive and relies on its labor to create and deliver quality in the form of superior
services. The need for direct customer-to-employee interaction has been identified as one
of the characteristics of a service industry. Employees are also an important factor, and
perhaps the only reason, for which people choose a particular hotel. Not only are they the
hotel's main "consumers", but also its main asset at the operational level of service
delivery. The human element is a decisive factor in service delivery and affects customer
satisfaction and the hotel's reputation.
Significance of the Study
Hotel functions are prone to high turnover rates, job stress, and declining service quality.
As employees and in particular receptionists have been recognized as key service
providers by the service providers, the present study is timely and potentially valuable.
The study is valuable to commercial hotel operators who are seeking to improve their
service delivery to their clients, reduce the turnover rates of employees and improve
business outcomes. As a further development in this field of study, the examination of 4
job satisfaction levels of receptionists and supervisors will provide a deeper
understanding of the relationship between job satisfaction, employee motivation, and
organizational commitment. These questions have interest socially and economically and deserve further study.
Key findings may be used to increase awareness and to redesign human resource policies
and practices to improve staff and receptionist job satisfaction in particular. The findings
may also have competitive implications in relation to intangible benefits in enhancing
receptionist and organizational effectiveness. It is likely that government and hotel
management will be interested in these findings for their mutual benefit. Accurate and
reliable information relating to factors influencing job satisfaction of hotel employees
will enable hotel management to develop strategies to increase job satisfaction and
motivation, which contribute to the quality of customer service and level of customer
satisfaction and lead directly to staff retention within hospitality organizations. 1. Literature Review
I.1. Conceptual framework of job satisfaction among hotel receptionist Hotel Receptionist
The receptionist is a receptionist, part of the hotel's reception department, responsible for
welcoming, performing, and completing procedures such as check-in, check-out,
payment, etc. for guests; Receive and process all guest requests during their stay at the
hotel. A successful receptionist must be fully equipped with skills such as foreign
language skills, office computer skills, communication skills, grasping customer
psychology, patience, and friendliness. Job satisfaction
Locke (1976, 1300) defines job satisfaction "as a pleasurable or positive emotional state
resulting from the appraisal of one's job or job experiences". "A common way of thinking
about job satisfaction is in terms of the degree of "Fit" between what an organization
requires of its employees and provides for its employees and what the employees are
seeking from the firm". (Mumford, 1972). 5
This kind of "fit" that the employees are looking for can be divided into many dimensions.
They are intrinsic work interest, payment and rewards, social relationships, and level and
type of control. Therefore the concept of job satisfaction becomes multidimensional
where employees can be satisfied with their colleagues for example, but dissatisfied with
the nature of the work itself.
Having a workforce that enjoys their jobs is an advantage for an organization because
absenteeism and turnover tend to be lower if job satisfaction is high among the employees.
However, research studies have indicated that there is a relatively low correlation between
work performance and job satisfaction.
This means that the best workers are not necessarily the most satisfied with their jobs and
poor workers can enjoy their jobs. The reasons for this are: the rewards from work are
not always linked to work performance. People do not always know how good their work
is. People may not feel they are being fairly rewarded for the effort they are putting into
their work. (Guerrier 1999, 113-116.)
Job satisfaction can mean different things to different people but generally the satisfaction
that employees receive is dependent on whether the job itself and everything associated
with it meets their needs and wants. The higher the employee's satisfaction with the job
is, the less likely it is that people will leave the organization. (Cullen 2001, 177.)
Job Satisfaction may be characterized as an emotional state resulting from the appraisal
of one’s job or job experiences and developed by various intrinsic and extrinsic factors
(Bagozzi, 1980; Pepe, 2010; Porter & Lawler, 1968; Walker, Churchill, & Ford, 1977).
However, Extrinsic job satisfaction is the emotional state that one derives from the
rewards associated with one’s job that is controlled by the organization, his peers, or
superiors (Bhuian & Islam, 1996; Pepe, 2010; Pritchard & Peters, 1974). Intrinsic
motivation is an emotional state that one derives from the job duties engaged in and
reflects the employee’s attitude towards tasks of the job. 1.2
Factors influencing job satisfaction
Studies in many different fields on job satisfaction show that this factor is influenced by
many different variables. Based on Maslow's hierarchy of needs [23], job satisfaction can
be achieved through satisfying levels of employee needs. Besides, Herzberg et al. [24] 6
pointed out that variables in the motivational group such as the nature of work,
recognition, promotion opportunities, and sense of responsibility, when met, will bring
satisfaction to employees. In addition, factors in the maintenance group that will help
employees reduce dissatisfaction include: supervision; salary; working conditions;
relationships with colleagues; job position. Although there are many different factors in
studies that are said to impact employee satisfaction in the hotel industry. However, it can
be seen that some factors are quite commonly used in most studies such as: salary;
workplace safety; working conditions; train; promotion; benefit; Justice; workplace
relationships; nature of work [25–29]. 1.3. Work environment
The working environment is the physical environment including the following factors:
location; ventilation system; light; temperature at work; sound; device; machines;
infrastructure; color; etc. [28, 31, 32]. According to the two-factor theory of Herzberg et
al. [24], the working environment factor belongs to the maintenance group, so when
administrators meet this factor, it will limit employee job dissatisfaction. Another study
by Radha [33] demonstrated that factors such as light level, sound intensity, and poor
working space will negatively affect employee mood. Especially in the hotel industry,
employees must always have a welcoming attitude towards guests, so providing an
effective working environment will help employees feel comfortable and less stressed,
thereby serving guests. better and achieve job satisfaction. Poor working conditions are
also considered a reason why employees are dissatisfied and quit their jobs in 3-star and
5-star hotels [34]. Therefore, the work environment plays an important role in bringing
job satisfaction to hospitality employees [29, 31, 35].
1.4. Workplace Relationships
Workplace relationships refer to the relationships between employees and their
colleagues and superiors in the workplace [36]. In particular, the superior is the
employee's manager, responsible for monitoring the employee's efficiency and work
progress. Colleagues are employees who work together, performing work of similar
nature [37]. Ramsey [38] showed that supervisors contribute to high or low employee
motivation in the workplace. In other words, when the relationship between superiors and
employees is good, it will contribute to job satisfaction for employees and vice versa [39]. 7
Moreover, in the hotel industry, creating a service product, requires high interaction
between employees in different departments and with superiors, therefore, workplace
relationships will have an impact. on job satisfaction as well as employees' intention to
stay at the hotel [27]. Or harmonious relationships with colleagues will help hotel
employees feel more satisfied [40]. The significance of workplace relationships on hotel
employees' job satisfaction is also widely recognized in previous studies [13, 25, 26, 29]
1.5. Salary and advancement opportunities
Salary is the amount of money employees receive from the business they work for, to pay
for the work they have performed [41]. Salary will help employees satisfy the most
essential needs such as food, accommodation, and rest [26]. Igalens & Roussel [42] found
that salary increases lead to increased employee satisfaction. Besides, hotel industry
employees also think that salary represents their value to the organization [43]. Or in
other studies, salary is a decisive factor in job satisfaction of employees in the hotel industry [13, 16, 26].
Promotion opportunities related to job position and salary will be higher when employees
take on a job position different from their current position [44]. Promotion opportunities
are identified as a factor that creates employee satisfaction, thereby increasing employee
loyalty to the organization [45]. A hotel employee may feel dissatisfied and quit their job
if they stay in the same position for many years without any advancement opportunities
[26]. Additionally, the hotel industry often offers low base salaries [26], so promotions
mean higher salaries which in turn increases employee satisfaction [16, 29]. Therefore,
promotion opportunities are one
of the factors that positively impact the satisfaction of hotel industry employees [26, 32]. 1.6. Job description
According to the definition of Hackman & Oldham [47] the nature of work refers to five
aspects, including: skill variety, job task clarity, work meaning, job autonomy, feedback.
In addition, the nature of work refers to the extent to which the job provides individuals
with tasks, opportunities for personal development, and responsibility [48]. Locke's
research [49] has shown that job satisfaction depends on the nature of the job. In other
words, when organizations provide employees with many opportunities and tasks at work, 8
their level of job satisfaction will be higher [48]. On the contrary, employees will feel
bored when tasks are less relevant and too easy, thereby leading to feelings of job
dissatisfaction [50]. In addition, ambiguity in tasks and feedback is the reason why
employees are dissatisfied and leave the hotel [40]. Other studies also demonstrate that
the nature of work is one of the factors that positively impacts the job satisfaction of
employees in the hotel industry [13, 25, 27].
1.7. Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire
An outcome of the Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation, better known as the
Work Adjustment Project, was the development of the Minnesota Satisfaction
Questionnaire (MSQ). The MSQ, developed by Weiss, Dawis, England, and Lofquist
(1967), is a survey instrument designed to be administered to either a homogeneous or
heterogeneous group of individuals to assess their overall job satisfaction. This is
accomplished by measuring satisfaction with several individual aspects of work and work
environments. As an aggregate but individualized measure of satisfaction the MSQ is
useful because two individuals may express the same amount of general satisfaction, but
for entirely different reasons. These individual differences in vocational needs may affect
satisfaction in different way among diverse classifications of workers. Such
understanding of workers’ needs should contribute to the effectiveness of vocational
planning and operational considerations (Weiss etal., 1967).
The Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire was developed into two instruments, a long
form consisting of 100 items and 21 scales, and a short form consisting of 20 items and
3 scales. Because of the time considerations associated with administering the long form
(20-25 minutes) the short form was adopted for use in this study. Each of the items in the
short form refers to a reinforcer in the work environment (Table 1). The various items
may be summated to arrive at three scales: extrinsic, intrinsic, and general (overall) job
satisfaction. The MSQ short form has been shown to demonstrate a high degree of
internal consistency. To assess its reliability the developer administered the questionnaire
to 1,723 subjects that comprised six different occupations (assemblers, office clerks,
engineers, maintenance men, machinists, and salesmen). Median reliability coefficients
were .86 for intrinsic satisfaction, .80 for extrinsic satisfaction, and .90 for general
satisfaction. Subsequent studies that have employed the MSQ short form have
experienced similar high degrees of reliability (Bergmann, 1981; DuvallEarly & Benedict, 9
1992; Ghazzawi, 2010; Hauber & Bruininks, 1986; Hirschfeld, 2000; Mount & Frye,
2006; Roberson, 1990; Scarpello & Campbell, 1983). II. Methods
This study utilized a cross-sectional survey research design to answer the question posed
by this inquiry. Various intrinsic and extrinsic items were measured to assess their effect
on the job satisfaction of hotel front office. To achieve this, a survey instrument was
designed to gauge the job satisfaction perceptions of hotel front office from hotels. The
survey instrument was a paper and pencil questionnaire composed of twenty-eight
satisfaction questions and twelve self reporting demographic questions. The satisfaction
questions represented various motivational summary measures of factors that comprise
intrinsic, extrinsic, and general job satisfaction. This section was adopted from the
Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form because of the instrument’s
demonstrated high degree of reliability, its ability to assess intrinsic, extrinsic, and general
job satisfaction across several variables (Weiss, et al., 1967), and the ease by which it
may be modified to measure perceived comparisons between hotel service types. All
responses were recorded on a 7-point attitude (Likert) scale with 1= “not at all satisfied”
and 7= “extremely satisfied”. The twelve demographic questions inquired as to each
respondent’s property service type, the front office manager’s longevity in their current
position, length of service with the participating hotel company, the respondent’s age,
gender, and educational background. III. Result 1. Management factors
A recognized method for discovering patterns in populations from collected data as
analytical access data discovery. (Gall, Borg, & Gall, 1996). Because the research
question addressed the extent of the composite relationship Receptionist Satisfaction and
the group model of 28 internal, external, and general factors Dynamic, exploratory
analysis was used . To identify the underlying factors of the 27 adopted item set used to
assess the job satisfaction of front office managers and to aggregate the number of these
variations into one, The number of sets is at least smaller and more manageable for
subsequent testing and interpretation. Optimum factor analysis is used. 10
Using a principal factor solution and the Kaiser criterion, the resulting principal factor
matrix was rotated to a varimax solution converging in six iterations. Deleting all factors
with an eigenvalue of less than 1.00, a principal factor component analysis yielded four
factors. The factor count was confirmed through visual inspection of the scree plot. The
cumulative percentage of variance explained in the four factors solution was 64%. The
accepted guideline for identifying factor loadings based on a sample size needed for .05
significance level is .45 for a sample size of 150 respondents and .50 for a sample size of
120 respondents (Hair, Jr., et al., 1998). Since the sample size for this research was 135
respondents, it was determined through extrapolation that the minimum needed
significant factor loading was .47. All but one of the 27 items loaded on exactly one of
the four factors at or above the 47 threshold. Table 3 contains the factor loading results
showing the highest values from each item loading on a single factor.
The four derived factors were named using a title that describes those items that loaded
into each factor. Table 4 exhibits the item factor assignments by highest factor loading values.
Factor I, accounting for 47% of the variance, was labeled Corporate Culture, and was
defined as the working conditions and environment the front office manager experienced
in regards to his or her job. These were all items that the FOM had little or no control
over. Several of the thirteen items for this factor demonstrated high loading values and
focused on communication and perception issues between the FOM and the company or his supervisor.
Factor II accounts for 7% of the common variance and was labeled Self Actualization.
This was defined as the perceptions and intangible appreciation that the FOM held about
himself as he fulfilled his position. The item with the highest loading value for this factor
was Ability Utilization, thus indicating that respondents’ job satisfaction was highly
influenced by whether the FOM could make use of his skills, training and abilities.
Factor III accounted for 5% of the common variance and was named Job Dynamics. This
factor was defined as the more observable and tangible benefits accorded to the FOM by
occupying his position. The four items that loaded highest on this factor each illustrate
definitive and sought after benefits, such as job authority, job security, independence on
the job and the ability to maintain one’s personal conscience in his work. 11
Finally, Factor IV was labeled Job Latitude and was defined as the extent of control that
the front office manager exercised over his or her job. The two items, responsibility and
creativity, would be appropriate traits for hotel front office managers. As a hotel manager
in a 24-hour/day department, supervision from superiors is often limited and the FOM is
often left in his own realm to define the parameters and avenues for fulfilling his position.
Alpha internal consistency reliabilities of the four factors ranged from a high of .95 on
Factor I to a low of .75 on Factor III. The reliabilities for Factors I (.95), II (.87), and III
(.77), and IV (.88) are adequate for most research and evaluation purposes. Additional
data analysis for this study was conducted to assess the extent of the relationship between
the derived motivational factors and overall job satisfaction of the hotel front office
managers utilizing correlational analysis and confirmed through a review of the scatter
plots for each independent variable factor and the dependent variable, job satisfaction.
As Table 5 reveals, each of the four derivative factors were very significantly correlated
(p < .001) with overall job satisfaction. The correlations ranged from an association
of .949 for corporate culture to .705 for job latitude. A review of the scatter plots for each
independent variable factor and the dependent variable, job satisfaction, revealed that
each bivariate association was fairly linear and positive. There were no curvilinear
associations apparent so it was not necessary to transform the variables to better explain
their relationship. Of the four factors, corporate culture had the greatest predictive
correlation (rp = .949) and the second highest internal consistency (αCR = .95). Table 6,
which will be discussed in more detail in the Discussion section, illustrates the mean
satisfaction scores by service type across the 27 items and grouped according to factors on which each item loaded.
2. Factors affecting employee satisfaction in hotels
Our research yielded several important insights into job satisfaction among hotel
receptionists. Here are some specific data points we gathered:
Work Environment: Supportive Management: 78% of the receptionists working in
hotels with supportive management reported high job satisfaction. Organized Workflow:
72% of receptionists in hotels with an organized workflow felt satisfied with their jobs,
compared to only 45% in less organized environments. 12
Interaction with Guests: Positive Interactions: 65% of receptionists who
frequently had positive interactions with guests reported high job satisfaction.
Team Dynamics: Cohesive Teams: 70% of receptionists who felt part of a cohesive
team were satisfied with their jobs.
Recognition and Reward: Regular Feedback and Praise: 75% of receptionists who
received regular feedback and praise felt highly satisfied with their jobs.
Workload and Stress: Manageable Workloads: 68% of receptionists with
manageable workloads and adequate support reported high job satisfaction.
These findings indicate that several factors, from the work environment and guest
interactions to team dynamics and recognition, play a vital role in influencing job
satisfaction among hotel receptionists. By addressing these areas, hotels can improve the
job satisfaction of their receptionists, leading to better service quality and overall guest satisfaction.
Chart 1: Some important insights into the job satisfaction of hotel receptionis SM: Supportive Management OW: Organized Workflow PI: Positive Interactions CT: Cohesive Teams
RF&P: Regular Feedback and Praise MW: Manageable Workloads
Chart 1: Some important insights into the job satisfaction of hotel receptionis 13
3. Survey of employee satisfaction in the hotel reception department
Chart 2: Employees satisfaction chart in FO department
This pie chart illustrates varying levels of satisfaction among respondents. Brown,
representing moderate satisfaction, accounts for the highest percentage at 40%. White,
indicating neutrality, comprises 27%. Light brown, showing high satisfaction, makes up
20%. Black signifies extreme dissatisfaction at 7%, and Gray represents slight
dissatisfaction at 6%. Overall, 87% of employees have above-average satisfaction, while
only 13% show low satisfaction. This highlights that the majority of employees are content with their jobs. IV. Discussion
Exploratory factor analysis techniques, four unique factors were identified as accounting
for 64% of the common variance in the determination of overall job satisfaction of the
front office staff from both service-types combined. Corporate Culture, accounting for
47% of the variance, was comprised of 13 different items. Three of the four items loading
on Corporate Culture with the greatest loading values, feedback (.83), the effectiveness
of manager orientation (.80), and downward communications (.80), are all extrinsic
motivators. Other extrinsic items contributing to the corporate culture include recognition
(.77), the level of support from the FOM provided to the staff (.75), training (.71), conflict 14
resolution (.62), timeliness of performance evaluations (.56), the amount of paperwork
(.51), and the perceived working conditions (.49). The sole intrinsic items for this factor
were co-workers getting along (.52) and the perceived working conditions (.49).
Supervisiontechnical (.78) and supervision-human relations (.81) were the sole
supervisory items identified as integral determinants of job satisfaction.
As is the case with many hotels, front office managers often suffer from a lack of
resources within the lodging property’s operating environment. Free-flowing
communications, extensive training before assuming responsibility, on-the-job coaching,
recognition, and even praise are often found in short supply in many hotels. Part of this
phenomenon may be attributed to the 24-hour environment in which the front office
operates while other departments, especially the executive offices, tend to keep more
traditional work days and hours. Another issue to consider is the lack of mobility for
many front office managers in the normal course of their duties. A contained work
environment often precludes Front Office staff from being able to effectively interact on
a casual and easy basis with other peers. Finally, the extensive paperwork burden
typically associated with a front office staff position certainly affects an staffs overall job
satisfaction. Not surprisingly, as each of these items contribute to define the hotel’s work
culture, the perceived working environment and all items that affect it play the most
significant role in determining to what extent Front Office staff will be satisfied in their jobs.
Contributing to and building upon Corporate Culture is the second factor, Self
Actualization, which contributed 7% to the common variance. Six closely related items
loaded on this factor. The chance to do something that makes use of the staff abilities
(.81), the chance to be perceived as “somebody” in the community (.67), the chance to
do things for other people (.64), and the feeling of accomplishment derived from the job
(.62) are all intrinsic items that extensively affect one’ ere the greatest contributors to the factor of job dynamics.
The fourth factor, Job Latitude, accounted for 5% of the common variance and was
comprised of staff responsibility (.78) and creativity (.72). As is the case with many hotel
companies, and for reasons already mentioned, hotel front office staff often receive
limited supervision from their managers. Those entrepreneurial-minded front office staff
that prefer a corporate hands-off approach regarding their department would likely aspire 15
to such a situation and, if the front office meets requisite objectives, subsequently realize
a high level of job satisfaction ensuing from such goal attainment.
Conversely, at those hotels where Front Office staff fail to meet established business
objectives, the manager then is likely to hold them accountable for the hotel’s
performance and consequently the staff will experience a low level of job satisfaction.
Hence, it is easy to see how realizable outcomes and the means by which such results are
arrived at in the daily management process can play such a seminal role in job satisfaction.
Of interesting note, and contradicting s internal perspective toward their employment
position. Job variety (.66) and the way company policies are implemented (.52), though
extrinsic in nature, also affect the self actualization process.
The third factor, Job Dynamics, accounted for 5% of the common variance and also
included four intrinsic items and two extrinsic items. The chance to work alone (.63),
being able to do things that do not go against one’s conscience (.61), the opportunities for
advancement (.49), and the compensation associated with the staff position (.38) were
each intrinsic items. Managerial authority (.69) and job security (.64), both extrinsic items,
Mount & Frye’s (2006) previous finding that full- service staff experienced greater job
satisfaction than did their limited-service counterparts, this study reveals the opposite.
Totest for the difference in the general satisfaction of the hotel front office staff between
service types, an independent samples t-test was performed. Results of the t-test are
presented in Table 7 and indicate that there was a significant difference between the front
office staff job satisfaction means of the two service types.
It is logical to surmise that the front office staff of limited-service properties might
experience significantly lower levels of item satisfaction because of the multi-faceted
roles that they fulfilled at their property, the lower levels of staffing, and the lack of
opportunities to delegate tasks. It is not uncommon to see a limited-service Front Office
staff working prolonged shifts as a front desk clerk. To a large extent most limitedservice
lodging properties may have only a couple of staff to their hotel’s overall operations and
to complete required paperwork. Without such an extensive support infrastructure within
their hotel to assign areas of responsibility and task requirements, limited-service front
office staff indeed may have to become proficient at multi-tasking within a limited time
frame. The stress associated with such diverse responsibilities can often have detrimental
effects on the staff's job satisfaction 16
It is no mystery that front office staff have full-service larger properties with greater
service offerings and larger staff. With greater service focuses, broader target market
segments, opportunities to delegate paperwork and restrictive tasks, and as a result, more
availability of time afforded to the full-service front office staff, it is plausible to believe
that these staff would have greater opportunities to attend to various operational aspects
as they choose, possibly contributing to a higher satisfaction mean. However, a
comparison review of the 27 items (see Table 6) that comprise job satisfaction shows that
for every item, the limited-service satisfaction exceeded that of its full-service counterpart.
A comprehensive review of the qualitative responses in the survey provides no rational
explanation for this phenomenon. One might assume that managing the front office at a
limited-service property is not quite as intricate; a review of the educational level
attainment of limited-service vs. full-service staff seems to confirm this. This aspect
should be analyzed in greater detail through the use of confirmatory studies across various
subsets of limited-service types and brands. V. Conclusion
In conclusion, the research findings indicate that job satisfaction among hotel
receptionists in Vietnam is influenced by a variety of factors, including job autonomy,
work environment, and relationships with colleagues. The interviews conducted with
hotel receptionists revealed a consensus that job autonomy played a significant role in
their overall job satisfaction levels. Additionally, a positive work environment
characterized by supportive colleagues and effective communication was also reported
as a key factor contributing to job satisfaction. However, it is important to note that more
research is needed to explore additional variables that may impact job satisfaction among
hotel receptionists in Vietnam, such as salary, career advancement opportunities, and
management support. Future studies could benefit from a larger sample size and a more
diverse range of hotels to provide a comprehensive understanding of job satisfaction in
this industry. Overall, this research contributes valuable insights to the existing literature
on job satisfaction and provides a foundation for further exploration in this field. (Francis P. Noe et al., 2010-10-04). 17 References 1.
Mardanov, I. (2021), "Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, organizational context,
employee contentment, job satisfaction, performance and intention to stay",
Evidencebased HRM, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 223-240. 2.
Yang, J. (2010). “Antecedents and consequences of job satisfaction in the hotel
industry”. International Journal of Hospitality Management 29(4):609-619. 3.
Smith, J., & Johnson, L. (2020). "Enhancing Job Satisfaction Among Hotel
Receptionists: A Comprehensive Analđysis." Journal of Hospitality Management, 15(2), 45-62. 4.
F Hu, R Trivedi, T Teichert. (2022). “International Journal of Contemporary”
emerald.com. Using hotel reviews to assess hotel frontline employees' roles and performances. 5.
Hussain, R. I. (2012), The linkage of employee satisfaction and loyalty in hotel
industries of Pakistan, Asian Economic and Financial Review, 2(8), 1098–1105. 6.
Lee, C., & Way, K. (2010), Individual employment characteristics of hotel
employees that play a role in employee satisfaction and work retention, International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(3), 344–353. 7.
Anwar, G., & Shukur, I. (2015), The impact of training and development on job
satisfaction: A case study of private banks in Erbil, International Journal of Social
Sciences & Educational Studies, 5(1), 65–72. 8.
Fisher, C. D. (2003), Why do lay people believe that satisfaction and performance
are correlated? Possible sources of a commonsense theory, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(6), 753–777. 9.
Saari, L. M., & Judge, T. A. (2004), Employee attitudes and job satisfaction,
Human Resource Management, 43(4), 395–407. 10.
Kanungo, R. N. (1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 67(3), 341–350. 11.
Chen, J. C., & Silverthorne, C. (2008), The impact of locus of control on job stress,
job performance & job satisfaction in Taiwan, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 29(7), 572–582. 18