Cma Assignment

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www. emeraldinsight. com/0959-6119. htm Job satisfaction and organizational commitment of hotel managers in Turkey Ebru Gunlu Tourism Management Department, Faculty of Business, Dokuz Eylul University, Buca, Turkey Job satisfaction and commitment 693 Received 30 March 2009 Revised 13 August 2009, 23 September 2009, 12 October 2009 Accepted 12 October 2009 Mehmet Aksarayli Econometrics Department, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Dokuz Eylul University, Buca, Turkey, and Nilufer Sahin Percin ? ? Trade and Tourism Education Faculty, Nevsehir University, Nevsehir, Turkey Abstract Purpose – The aim of this paper is to identify the effects of job satisfaction on organizational commitment for managers in large-scale hotels in the Aegean region of Turkey and, in addition, to examine whether there is a signi? cant relationship between the characteristics of the sample, organizational commitment, a nd job satisfaction. Design/methodology/approach – Two structured questionnaires were administered to large-scale hotel managers in the tourism industry.The survey instruments were adopted from the validated Minnesota Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment Questionnaire of Meyer-Allen. The data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 13. 0. Findings – The ? ndings indicate that extrinsic, intrinsic, and general job satisfaction have a signi? cant effect on normative commitment and affective commitment. In addition, the ? ndings suggest that the dimensions of job satisfaction do not have a signi? cant effect on continuance commitment among the managers of arge-scale hotels. When the characteristics of the sample are regarded, age, income level, and education have a signi? cant relationship with extrinsic job satisfaction whereas income level indirectly affect affective commitment. Research limitations/implications – Participant s are limited to the managers of large-scale hotels in Aegean region of Turkey so the results could not be generalized to the whole country; however, the number of respondents is assumed to be suf? cient to provide comprehensive results.Practical implications – Although job satisfaction is found to affect organizational commitment, practitioners should not disregard the fact that there is an interactive relationship between the two factors; otherwise, the organizations might be at risk. In addition, the governmental support is very important in minimizing the effects of seasonality problem in tourism. Originality/value – The previous research studies in Turkey generally have focused on the organizational commitment and job satisfaction correlation among the employees in different sectors of Turkey but usually within one organization.Upper level managers’ views and the tourism sector have sometimes been neglected. This research was conducted to address this de? c it in Turkey in terms of reaching various hotels in a region, trying to measure the viewpoints of the upper level managers, and conducting the research in a labor-intensive sector such as tourism. Keywords Job satisfaction, Turkey, Hotels, Managers, Developing countries Paper type Research paper International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management Vol. 22 No. 5, 2010 pp. 693-717 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0959-6119 DOI 10. 108/09596111011053819 IJCHM 22,5 694 Introduction The need for close interaction and communication in service organizations generally threatens the satisfaction of the consumers, since the production and consumption process cannot be separated. For the accomplishment of guest satisfaction, the satisfaction of employees in the lodging organization is imperative. It should be noted that job satisfaction is a key factor to maintaining high performance and ef? cient service, which will directly increase the productivity of the organization.Researchers have focused on job satisfaction and link this concept to other variables such as organizational commitment, stress and burnout, empowerment, organizational performance, motivation, turnover intention, and sometimes demographic and personal characteristics (Chen, 2006; Fairbrother and Warn, 2003; Furnham et al. , 2002; Gaertner, 1999; Ghiselli et al. , 2001; Jernigan et al. , 2002; Karatepe et al. , 2006; Lam et al. , 2001; Linz, 2003; Silva, 2006; Spence Laschinger et al. , 2002; Tepeci and Bartlett, 2002; Tsigilis et al. , 2004). Most of the research (Chen, 2006; Feinstein and Vondrasek, 2001; Kim et al. 2005; McDonald and Makin, 2000; Silva, 2006) has addressed the satisfaction and commitment level of the employees, but only a few of them (Lau and Chong, 2002; Lok and Crawford, 2004) have considered managers’ viewpoints. However, managers are the core points of the service production; therefore, their impact on the employees is very important. If the managers are not satis ? ed and not committed to the organization, their effectiveness in managing a hotel should be questioned. Thus, this research aims to investigate the satisfaction and commitment level of the managers in the Aegean region, especially those at four- and ? e-star hotels, in Turkey. A main appeal of these hotels is that they enable their guests to experience the effects of seasonality. Consequently, turnover rates are higher. The study analyzes whether the managers working in these seasonal hotels are satis? ed and committed to their organizations and whether their demographic variables have signi? cant effects on their satisfaction and commitment levels. In addition, the study meets the needs of the professionals within the tourism sector and provides feedback concerning the job satisfaction and organizational commitment relationship of the managers.Since the important factors that are associated with satisfaction (compensation, fringe bene? ts, social status, working condition, etc. ) and commitment (normative, continuance, and affective) are addressed, the professionals may try to evaluate their conditions and try to make synthesis why they are satis? ed and committed and/or vice versa. In addition, analysis included both the important characteristics of the tourism sector such as: (1) seasonality; and (2) ownership and the effects of demographic variables such as: . gender; . age; . educational background; . income; . ourism education; . experience in the sector; and . experience in the current organization on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Literature review Job satisfaction phenomenon Job satisfaction in a narrow context might be accepted as: [. . . ] the feelings or a general attitude of the employees in relation with their jobs and the job components such as the working environment, working conditions, equitable rewards, and communication with the colleagues (Glisson and Durick, 1988; Kim et al. , 2005). Job satisfaction and commitment Lock e (1969, p. 317) de? ed job satisfaction and dissatisfaction as â€Å"that job satisfaction is the pleasurable emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job as achieving or facilitating one’s job values (Schwepker, 2001, p. 41)†. Job dissatisfaction is â€Å"the unpleasurable emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job as frustrating or blocking the attainment of one’s values†. Herzberg et al. (1959) de? ned the best known popular â€Å"theory of job satisfaction†. Their two-factor theory suggests that employees have mainly two types of needs, listed as hygiene and motivation.Hygiene factors are the needs that may be very satis? ed by some certain conditions called hygiene factors (dissatis? ers) such as supervision, interpersonal relations, physical working conditions, salary, bene? ts, etc. The theory suggests that job dissatisfaction is probable in the circumstances where hygiene factors do not exist in so menone’s working environment. In contrast, when hygiene needs are supplied, however, it does not necessarily result in full satisfaction. Only the dissatisfaction level is decreased (Furnham et al. , 2002).In this research, the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) Short Form is used as the survey instrument. According to the scale, job satisfaction is considered as an attitude as mentioned above and there are three employee attitude’s facets of job satisfaction. These are classi? ed as intrinsic, extrinsic, and general reinforcement factors (20 factors). In order to evaluate intrinsic job satisfaction, there should be some important key factors to be addressed such as ability utilization, activity, achievement, authority, independence, moral values, responsibility, ecurity, creativity, social service, social status, and variety. For extrinsic job satisfaction, these factors are advancement, company policy, compensation, recognition, supervision-human relations, a nd supervision-technical. In addition to extrinsic and intrinsic factors, there is a general job satisfaction facet in which there are two more factors such as working conditions and co-workers. When intrinsic, extrinsic and these two factors are summed up then general job satisfaction is formed (Feinstein and Vondrasek, 2001). De? ing organizational commitment There have been various studies in the literature addressing the concept of organizational commitment. Mowday et al. (1979) underlined a concept named as attitudinal commitment, whereas Price and Mueller (1986) de? ned it as behavioral commitment. Another approach was that of Meyer and Allen (1991). This is one of the most widely recognized approaches in organizational commitment literature. They suggested that organizational commitment was a multidimensional three-component model where: (1) affective attachment to the organization is de? ed as affective commitment; (2) perceived cost associated with leaving the organization is de? ned as continuance commitment; and 695 IJCHM 22,5 (3) an obligation to remain with the organization is de? ned as normative commitment (Buchko et al. , 1998; Lok and Crawford, 2001; Meyer and Allen, 1991; Meyer et al. , 1993). To conduct this research, Meyer and Allen’s multidimensional three-component model is regarded as a starting point. Organizational commitment is de? ned as: [. . . ] the relative strength of an individual’s identi? cation with and involvement in a particular organization.Conceptually, it can be characterized by at least three factors: (a) a strong belief in and acceptance of the organization’s goals and values; (b) a willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf of the organization; and (c) a strong desire to maintain membership in the organization (Mowday et al. , 1979, p. 226; Mowday et al. , 1982, p. 27). 696 According to Mowday et al. (1979), organizational commitment is an attitude, which exists between the individual and the organization. That is why, it is considered as a relative strength of the individual’s psychological identi? ation and involvement with the organization (Jaramillo et al. , 2005). Hence, this psychological conceptualization addresses affective commitment where it includes three factors: identi? cation, involvement, and loyalty (Banai et al. , 2004). In addition to this earliest construct, some researchers such as Angle and Perry (1981), Hrebiniak and Alutto (1972) and McGee and Ford (1987) underlined another important dimension labeled as â€Å"continuance† commitment where an individual is committed to the organization not because of a general positive feeling but because of extraneous interests such as pensions, family concerns, etc. Shaw et al. , 2003). This two-dimensional construct has been revised by Meyer and Allen in 1991. They have developed a three-component model of affective, continuance, and normative commitment as mentioned above (Jernigan et al. , 20 02; Lok and Crawford, 2001; Meyer and Allen, 1991; Meyer et al. , 1993). According to Meyer and Allen (1997, p. 11): [. . . ] individuals who have strong affective commitment remain in the organization because they feel they want to, some with a stronger normative commitment remain because they ought to and those with strong continuance commitment remain because they need to.In addition, some researchers address that the individual is in? uenced by society’s norms, which is the sign of â€Å"social exchange theory† (Jernigan et al. , 2002, p. 565; Lok and Crawford, 2001, p. 594; McDonald and Makin, 2000, p. 86; Spence Laschinger et al. , 2002, p. 65). At this point, the impact of culture on organizational commitment (Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001; Randall, 1993) should be addressed. National cultures’ in? uences on individual behaviors are well established and the differences between cultures are quite signi? cant in Hofstede’s (1980) research. Individualism and collectivism† cultural dimension seems to be one of the related with organizational commitment since Hofstede (1980) claims when a person is alienated from individualism, he/she needs to be a part of a group where sometimes the organization they work for is one of these groups. When Turkish culture is analyzed, Hofstede’s ? ndings imply Turkish culture as the 28th country (1 – most individualistic and 40 – most collectivist) where it is closer to being a collectivist society (Tastan, 2006). In that frame, Turkish managers are ? upposed to be the member of a collectivist society and consequently this tendency should increase the organizational commitment level of Turkish managers. When Hofstede’s (1980) â€Å"Masculinity and Femininity† dimension is analyzed, the ? ndings prove that feminine values are stronger in Turkish culture. Since relationships, self-sacri? ce and emotions are important characteristics of feminine societies (Karakas, ? 2006), therefore Turkish managers are supposed to have higher affective and normative commitment. Are job satisfaction and organizational commitment related?Most of the research has treated job satisfaction as an independent and organizational commitment as a dependent variable (Gaertner, 1999; Jernigan et al. , 2002; Lok and Crawford, 2001; Mowday et al. , 1982). As Mowday et al. (1982) suggest, commitment and job satisfaction may be seen in several ways. Job satisfaction is a kind of response to a speci? c job or job-related issues; whereas, commitment is a more global response to an organization. Therefore, commitment should be more consistent than job satisfaction over time and takes longer after one is satis? d with his/her job (Feinstein and Vondrasek, 2001, p. 6). Feinstein and Vondrasek (2001) analyzed the effects of job satisfaction on organizational commitment among the restaurant employees and the ? ndings proved that satisfaction level would predict their commitment t o the organization. Gaertner (1999, p. 491) also analyzed the determinants (pay workload, distributive justice, promotional chances, supervisory support, etc. ) of job satisfaction and organizational commitment. The ? ndings showed that job satisfaction is a cause of organizational commitment. Jernigan et al. (2002, p. 67) examined the role that speci? c aspects of work satisfaction play as predictors of organizational commitment type. The researcher found out that affective commitment varied with one’s satisfaction with aspects of the work context. In that frame, the role of the managers cannot be denied since they are the key people in the management level responsible for carrying the organization toward success. Maxwell and Steele (2003) conducted their research among hotel managers and identi? ed some key issues that would increase the commitment level such as: . high levels of equal pay; . employer’s interest in them; . o-operation and trust between the employees as well as between the other managers in the hotel; and . opportunities to engage in social activities. Payment strategy (compensation) is accepted as extrinsic job satisfaction variable; employer’s interest in terms of independence, security is intrinsic job satisfaction variable where recognition is an extrinsic variable; co-operation and trust in terms of moral values are intrinsic whereas in terms of working conditions they are general job satisfaction variables; opportunities to engage in social activities re? ect the activity side of intrinsic job satisfaction.On the other hand, some researchers have admitted that organizational commitment may be an independent variable with job satisfaction as an outcome (Bateman and Strasser, 1984; Vandenberg and Lance, 1992). Although most of the research studies claim just the opposite, Bateman and Strasser (1984) suggest that organizational commitment has an effect on job satisfaction, which in turn will affect the turnover intenti on. These research studies argue that the managers who are highly committed to the organizations may experience higher levels of job satisfaction (Lau and Chong, 2002).Job satisfaction and commitment 697 IJCHM 22,5 698 According to the research of Lau and Chong (2002), highly committed managers strive for the organizational goals and interests. This attitude would affect the budget emphasis and managers’ behavior. Therefore, satisfaction is suggested as an outcome rather than an antecedent. In this study, as in the vast majority of research, the model suggests that job satisfaction is an antecedent of organizational commitment where the dimensions of job satisfaction have a signi? cant effect on the dimensions of organizational commitment.Job satisfaction and organizational commitment research: the tourism sector Aksu and Aktas (2005) investigated job satisfaction of middle and upper level ? managers in ? ve-star hotels and ? rst-class holiday villages. The ? ndings indicate that the working conditions should be improved in order to increase general job satisfaction (working conditions, extrinsic job satisfaction, and intrinsic job satisfaction) of the managers since promotion, morale conditions, ? nancial rewards, compensation and fringe bene? ts, working hours are important factors that affect the satisfaction level of the managers. Lam et al. 2001) suggest in their research that training and development programs for newcomers and well-educated employees in service industry might help improving job satisfaction. In the following years, Lam et al. (2003) conducted their research and focused on the socialization process of the newcomers. The ? ndings showed that if some people who are assumed as important ones by the respondents think that they should feel themselves satis? ed then the intention to leave the organization decreases. These ? ndings should prove that the mentors or seniors in an organization and the supervisors are likely to encourage the newcomer employees, in? ence job satisfaction, and behavioral intentions. Kim et al. (2005, p. 171) examined the relationship between employee service orientation (customer focus, organizational support, and service under pressure) and employees’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and employees’ intention of leaving. The sample consisted of restaurant employees and the ? ndings are as the followings: . customer focus of service providers are negatively associated with job satisfaction but positively related with organizational commitment; . organizational support is positively associated with job satisfaction; and . rganizational commitment is negatively associated with intention of leaving the organization. Karatepe et al. (2006) examined the effects of individual characteristics (self-ef? cacy, effort, and competitiveness) on frontline employee performance and satisfaction. What is a practical implication for a manager in this research is that unless a mana ger is not committed to provision of service quality, he/she should market a career rather than a job only and attract competitive and self-ef? cacious employees. In addition, the manager should maintain a healthy environment for minimizing con? cts arising from competition. Tepeci and Bartlett (2002) also conducted a research among frontline employees. They suggest that employee satisfaction is based on individual values as well as organizational factors (organizational culture). Consequently, the satis? ed employees will satisfy the customers and eventual, ongoing pro? tability will be the result. Gonzalez and Garazo (2006, p. 23) suggest that the managers of hotels should put great emphasis on front line employees to stimulate job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior.Therefore, service communicative leadership and service encounter practices in? uence employee organizational citizenship behavior and improve job satisfaction of the employees. Ghiselli et al. (2001) focused on food service employees, which included managerial levels. The respondents indicated that salary; bene? t packages, working hours, family, and quality of life were the reasons for satisfaction and/or dissatisfaction. The assistant managers were more likely to tell of their intent to leave than are higher level managers.Research hypotheses In an attempt to achieve the research goals, ? ve hypotheses are developed. Two possible antecedents of job satisfaction and organizational commitment, which remain free of research so far, are the demographic variables: activity duration and hotel ownership. Therefore, the ? rst two hypotheses of this research focus on these so-called variables. It is sometimes argued whether the activity duration of the hotel (for example, a city hotel open for 365 days each year, and a resort hotel, which has a seasonal characteristic) affects the mood of the current employees.It is apparent and usually indicated in the literature that â€Å"seasonal ity† is an operating challenge. This challenge affects the attraction, training, and retention of competent employees (Angelo and Vladimir, 199; Ninemeier and Perdue, 2005). Therefore, the ? rst hypothesis in the study is: H1. Hotel activity duration has an effect on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Employees working in an independent hotel are considered to have limited career possibilities and to seek better opportunities in chain or franchise hotels. Such employees are usually considered to have lower organizational commitment.Since it is believed that there are fewer career opportunities in independent hotels, employees might be expected to experience lower satisfaction when compared to employees working in chains. An independent hotel, however, is usually a family-owned business that struggles in a competitive environment where the giant brands are stronger (International Labour Organization, 2001). On the other hand, managers working in independent hotels experience more involvement because they often have signi? cant contact with the individual or family who owns these hotels.Bonds of trust and friendship form which results in greater affectivity and normative commitment towards their organization. While owner-managers strive for the ? nancial success of their businesses, they also have many opportunities to develop their technical, operational, and interpersonal skills. Thus, the second hypothesis is: H2. Hotel ownership has an effect on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Most of the researchers have claimed that organizational commitment and job satisfaction are interrelated (Chen, 2006; Mowday et al. , 1982; Spence Laschinger et al. 2002). This would imply a relationship between the dimensions of each variable as well and leads to the third hypothesis: H3. There is a relationship between the dimensions of managers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Job satisfaction and commitment 699 Many researc hers have discussed job satisfaction as an antecedent of organizational commitment (Bartol, 1979; Feinstein and Vondrasek, 2001; Gaertner, 1999; Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972; Mowday et al. , 1982; Yousef, 1998). This research is conducted to explore this premise further. The fourth hypothesis is: H4.Job satisfaction affects organizational commitment. There have been many researchers who examined the relationship between demographic variables – for example, age, gender, education, experience in the ? eld, experience in the organization, etc. to name a few – and organizational commitment and/or job satisfaction (Mowday et al. , 1979; Sarker et al. , 2003; Steers, 1977). Regarding the previous researches, this study also examines the relationship between the demographic variables, organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Therefore, last hypothesis is: H5. There is signi? ant relationship between the characteristics of the sample, job satisfaction and organizational c ommitment. Methodology The sample consisted of the managers of four- and ? ve-star hotels in Aegean region of Turkey. What might be considered as a limitation was that the research was conducted in only one region, and could not, therefore, be generalized to the whole country. The sample size and the number of the respondents were assumed to be suf? cient in providing comprehensive results. Two different scales were used in conducting the study: Meyer-Allen Organizational Commitment Scale and Minnesota Job Satisfaction Scale.Measures Organizational commitment scale. In this study, Meyer and Allen’s (1997, pp. 118-19) three component model of organizational commitment was used to determine hotel managers’ commitment level. According to Meyer and Allen research, these three mentioned components showed in time that affective, normative, and continuance commitment are very different and represent different aspects of commitment. Affective commitment is how individuals feel themselves to be involved within the organization; they believe in the organization’s values and objectives and desire to be loyal members (Banai et al. 2004, p. 378). In normative commitment, people feel obliged Job satisfaction scale. The widely accepted and used â€Å"MSQ† was developed by Weiss, Dawis, England, and Lofquist in 1967. The MSQ is a ? ve-point Likert type scale where the respondents were requested to state their perceptions of different items on the scale using the following ? ve categories: 5 – totally satis? ed, 4 – satis? ed, 3 – neither satis? ed nor dissatis? ed, 2 – dissatis? ed, 1 – totally dissatis? ed. The MSQ measures intrinsic satisfaction, extrinsic satisfaction and general satisfaction. The questionnaire consists of 20 items.In the intrinsic satisfaction category, the items include activity, independence, variety, social status, moral values, job security, social service, responsibility, ability utilizat ion, creativity, authority, and achievement dimensions. In the extrinsic satisfaction category, the items include supervision-human relations, supervision-technical, company policy, compensation, career progress, and recognition dimensions. General satisfaction is the sum of the intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction dimensions and two additional dimensions including working conditions and co-workers (Feinstein and Vondrasek, 2001, p. ). MSQ is a widely recognized and trusted scale that highlights important components that form job satisfaction and has been used to measure job satisfaction with three dimensions by several researchers (Chen, 2006; Feinstein and Vondrasek, 2001; Hancer ? and George, 2003; Lau and Chong, 2002) and demonstrated satisfactory results and reliability values. Data collection and analysis. The research was conducted during the high season in 2006. The total number of four- and ? ve-star hotels in Turkey in 2006 is 632 (Culture and Tourism Ministry of Turkey, 2 009). In this year, the number of four- and ? e-star hotels in the Aegean region was 108. Of the total, 48 were four-star, and the remaining 60 were ? ve-star hotels (Ekin Group and TUROFED, 2006). The population was selected randomly with a sampling ratio of 25 percent. A total of 48 managers in four-star hotels and 75 managers in ? ve-star hotels were reached for a total sample of 123 managers. A total of 43 managers were middle level; whereas, 80 were lower level managers such as supervisors. The reasons why these two levels were included in the research vary as the following: . The top-level managers were not reached because they were reluctant to ? l in the questionnaires due to their busy schedule. . Middle level managers such as department heads have a high span of control in their organization and their authority is high when they make the decisions and they have the responsibility to carry the departments to the organizational goals. . On the other hand, there was a huge po pulation of supervisors because they have a large work load and heavy responsibilities. The returned 123 surveys were included for the statistical analysis. The pro? le of the research sample is shown on Table I. This number of 123 managers was presumed to be suf? cient for statistical analysis (Cochran, 1977).The Statistical Package for Social Sciences Version 13 was used to explore the data. The analysis included reliability testing and factor analysis. Consequently, hypotheses are tested; frequency test, t-test, ANOVA, regression and correlation analyses are conducted. Assessing organizational commitment. The organizational commitment scale was ? rst subjected to reliability testing. It was realized that of the 18 items, ? ve had negative effect on measuring general attitude. When they were removed from the analysis, the Cronbach’s alpha on the remaining 13 items was 0. 75. In order to see whether the Job satisfaction and commitment 01 IJCHM 22,5 Gender Male Female Educati on High school Undergraduate Graduate Post graduate Tourism education bacground Yes No Class of the hotel Four stars Five stars Managers’ distribution according to the class of the hotels Four stars Five stars Income level ($) 375 and below 375-565 565-752 752-940 940-1,228 1,228 and above Hotel type City Resort Hotel status Independent Chain Management levels Middle Low Descriptive statistics Age Working period in the tourism sector Working period in the current organization n 78 45 21 26 56 20 88 35 12 15 48 75 4 17 24 37 15 26 90 33 71 52 43 80 Mean 31. 49 9. 09 3. 79 % 63. 36. 6 17. 1 21. 1 45. 5 16. 3 71. 5 28. 5 44. 4 55. 6 39. 0 61. 0 3. 3 13. 8 19. 5 30. 1 12. 2 21. 1 73. 2 26. 8 57. 7 42. 3 34. 9 65. 1 SD 5. 607 4. 867 2. 581 702 Table I. Pro? le of research sample distribution of the values was adequate for conducting analysis, the Kaiser-Meyen-Olkin (KMO) measure was used with a result of 0. 647 (. 0. 50). In addition, Bartlett’s test of sphericity measure i ndicated that the multivariate normality of the set of distributions was normal, showing a signi? cant value, p ? 0. 000 (, 0. 05). Therefore, the data were feasible for conducting the factor analysis (Hair et al. , 1998).In observing the commonalities, it was found that the values were not smaller than 0. 40. This indicated a strong association among the variables. In addition the eigenvalue criterion was assessed. Factors having eigenvalues greater than 1 were assumed to be the new factors of the research, which should be retained. The eigenvalues of factors were 3. 372 explaining 26 percent, 2. 274 explaining 18 percent, and 1. 580 explaining 12 percent of cumulative variance. The three factors explain 56 percent of cumulative variance. To determine which items were loaded on which factor, rotated component matrix was inspected (Table II).The ? ndings suggest that there are three factors related to organizational commitment, which are listed, respectively, as normative, affective , and continuance. Items two to six loaded on the affective commitment factor; items one, 14, 16, 17, and 18 loaded on the normative commitment factor; items seven to ten loaded on continuance commitment. The reliability level of affective commitment was 0. 76, normative commitment was 0. 78, and continuance commitment was 0. 55. Since the reliability of continuance commitment was low, this factor was excluded from the analysis.In order to examine the relationships between the variables, descriptive Job satisfaction and commitment 703 Item no. Keyword Normative 16 To deserve 18 Career development 17 Responsibility 1 Career 14 Accuracy Affective 4 Affective commitment 6 State of belonging 5 Special meaning 2 Problems of management Continuance 9 Necessity 10 Alternative 8 Negativeness 7 Desire Extrinsic 19 Appreciation 12 Policy of organization 5 Management style 17 Working conditions 20 Feeling of Success 13 Wage 15 Decision 11 Skill 16 Method Intrinsic 10 Leading 9 Help 3 Differeren t behavior style 4 Prestige 8 Position General Intrinsic JB ? xtrinsic JB Factor loads 0. 791 0. 751 0. 750 0. 631 0. 582 0. 831 0. 738 0. 724 0. 650 0. 685 0. 679 0. 605 0. 519 0. 774 0. 743 0. 694 0. 688 0. 652 0. 651 0. 561 0. 491 0. 491 0. 766 0. 735 0. 670 0. 636 0. 635 Mean SD Reliability Eigenvalue 0. 78 3. 372 Variance (%) 25. 937 3. 358 0. 8807 3. 462 0. 8243 0. 76 2. 274 17. 495 0. 55 1. 580 12. 152 3. 821 0. 6745 0. 76 5. 014 35. 815 3. 492 0. 7315 0. 85 1. 983 14. 167 0. 5809 0. 83 Notes: Extraction method: principal component analysis; rotation method: equamax with Kaiser normalization; rotation converged in ? ve iterationsTable II. Rotated component matrix of organizational commitment and job satisfaction scale IJCHM 22,5 704 statistics were used. Normative organizational commitment level was determined to be greater than was affective organizational commitment. Assessing job satisfaction. The data gained from the application were subjected to reliability analysis. Sin ce 20 of the items showed a negative effect on the scale, they were excluded and only 14 items were retained. Cronbach’s alpha for the remaining 14 items was 0. 83. The KMO measure was conducted, and the result was 0. 826 (. 0. 50).In addition, Bartlett’s test of sphericity measure, showing that the multivariate normality of the set of distributions was normal, indicated a signi? cant value, p ? 0. 000 (, 0. 05). Therefore, the data were feasible for use in conducting the factor analysis (Hair et al. , 1998). Before performing the factor analysis, commonalities were inspected. Since there were no values smaller than 0. 40, factor analysis was applied. The eigenvalue of the ? rst factor was 5. 01, which explains 36 percent of the cumulative variance. For the job satisfaction scale, the two-factor structure was accepted.Job satisfaction dimensions have been classi? ed as extrinsic and intrinsic by some researchers (Furnham et al. , 2002; Graham and Messner, 1998; Lam et al. , 2001); thus, the items were loaded into two factors, and the factor analysis was limited to only two factors. With regard to the eigenvalue of 1. 983, the second factor represented 14 percent of the cumulative variance. In short, it can be stated that both of the factors together explained 50 percent of the cumulative variance. Based on the factor analysis, it was determined that there was a two-factor structure.Items three, four, eight, nine, and ten were loaded on intrinsic job satisfaction; and items ? ve, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20 were loaded on extrinsic job satisfaction. The reliability level of intrinsic job satisfaction was 0. 85, and the reliability level of extrinsic job satisfaction was 0. 76. In the factor analysis, it was observed that the items loaded to factors similar to those in the original scale. Therefore, the total of the factors were considered as the overall (general) satisfaction, which had a Cronbach’s alpha value of 0. 83.Table II shows th e rotated component matrix of the job satisfaction scale where component 1 represents extrinsic and component 2 represents intrinsic dimensions. In order to examine the relationships between the variables, descriptive statistics were used. As seen in Table II, reliability of the intrinsic job satisfaction level of the managers was greater than was extrinsic or general job satisfaction. Results A total of ? ve hypotheses were tested. For the ? rst two hypotheses, t-tests were conducted to determine the differences in organizational commitment and job satisfaction within the subcategories related to: . otel activity duration; and . hotel ownership. Signi? cant differences that were found are presented and discussed in the following paragraphs: H1. Hotel activity duration has an effect on organizational commitment and job satisfaction. H1 suggested that the activity duration of a hotel has an effect on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. The activity duration re? ects the r esort hotels’ and city hotels’ serving periods. The results of the analysis for the H1 are shown in Figure 1. 4. 2 3. 9 95% CI 3. 6 3. 3 3. 0 2. 7 4. 2 3,552 3,396 3,727 City 3,586 3,359 Independent 3. 95% CI 3. 6 3. 3 3. 0 2. 7 GeneralJSl AffectiveOC NormativeOC IntJS t = 2,122 p = 0. 036 t = –1,805 p = 0. 074 t = 1,438 p = 0. 153 t = 0. 232 p = 0. 818 3,794 3,642 Resort 3,57 3,33 3,083 3,648 3,356 3,292 3,873 Chain Job satisfaction and commitment 3,314 705 3,739 3,458 3,831 3,783 3,623 ExtJS t = 0. 498 p = 0. 137 AffectiveOC GeneralJS NormativeOC t = 0. 021 p = 0. 983 t = 1,895 p = 0. 061 t = 0. 741 p = 0. 460 ExtJS IntJS t = –0. 729 p = 0. 467 t = 2,270 p = 0. 026 Figure 1. 95 percent con? dence interval of the variables according to the hotel’s activity duration and hotel ownershipIt can be observed that affective commitment as well as general, intrinsic, and extrinsic job satisfaction of the city hotel managers was greater than that of the res ort hotel managers, but normative commitment was smaller. Based on the t-test results, using a con? dence interval of 95 percent, there was determined to be a signi? cant relationship between affective commitment of managers and the activity duration of the hotel in which they were employed. Managers working in city hotels had more affective commitment than the resort hotel managers did.This result may be explained by the seasonal characteristics of the tourism sector. Since the managers work for 12 months in a city hotel, they may experience security, social services, advancement, recognition, when compared to resort hotel managers. These obtained job satisfaction components may then increase the managers’ commitment to the organization. Since the turnover rate is lower and managers work for longer periods in city hotels, it may be claimed that the managers can form a state of belonging and a special meaning since they work for an organization for long periods.Therefore, the y may have higher affective commitment than the managers who need to leave the organization at the end of the season: H2. Hotel ownership has an effect on organizational commitment and job satisfaction. The H2 was tested to determine whether there was a signi? cant difference in organizational commitment and job satisfaction of managers working in independent hotels versus those working in hotel chains. Figure 1 shows the results of the analysis using a con? dence interval of 95 percent. As seen in the ? ure, independent hotel managers’ affective and normative commitment and their general and extrinsic job satisfaction were higher than the commitment and satisfaction of chain hotel managers. However, in analyzing the results of the t-test, ownership of the hotel was only signi? cant in relation to extrinsic job satisfaction. Managers working in independent hotels had greater extrinsic job satisfaction than did managers of chain hotels. In terms of extrinsic job satisfaction, this result supports the fact that, managers working for independent hotels experience more involvement because independent IJCHM 22,5 706 otels are usually family-owned enterprises and usually the managers are the owners themselves where company policy does not create any obstacle or strict rules for the free movement of the managers. Managers have the opportunity to advance in shorter time intervals and may have the opportunity to develop themselves whether in technical or human relations issues because they are very much involved with most of the departments’ ongoing activities since specialization is less in these smaller hotels when compared to chains. In addition, the results indicate managers in independent hotels show higher affective and normative commitment.This is due to the fact that because organizational climate, company policies are smoother in independent hotels and the managers develop affectivity and feel themselves a very important piece of the organization . On the other hand, since the employers trust in them and these managers themselves are somehow like the owners of the hotel, they learn everything within the organization, spend most of their time to achieve the goals of the organization because achievement is identi? ed with their personal success and the owners of the hotel have con? ence in them; the managers feel a kind of obligation to stay and they may feel that they should not leave since they have loyalty. If the manager is the owner of the hotel at the same time then the affectivity level and normative commitment level is supposed to be the highest because their personal goals are the organizational goals and because prestige and the brand also represent the owner’s reputation: H3. There is a relationship between the dimensions of managers’ organizational commitment and job satisfaction. In order to test H3, correlation analysis was performed.According to the correlation matrix, there was a positive and sign i? cant relationship between general job satisfaction and affective (sig. (two-tailed) 0. 001; Pearson correlation: 0. 309) and normative commitment (sig. (two-tailed) 0. 000; Pearson correlation: 0. 439) of managers. In addition, there was a positive and signi? cant relationship between: (1) intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction (sig. (two-tailed) 0. 000; Pearson correlation: 0. 403); (2) extrinsic job satisfaction and affective (sig. (two-tailed) 0. 000; Pearson correlation: 0. 349) and normative commitment (sig. (two-tailed) 0. 00; Pearson correlation: 0. 464); and (3) affective and normative commitment (sig. (two-tailed) 0. 020 signi? cant at the 0. 05 level; Pearson correlation: 0. 210). H4. Job satisfaction affects organizational commitment. H4 was tested using regression analysis. Organizational commitment was considered as a function of job satisfaction and served as the dependent variable in the regression analysis. The results of the analysis indicated that affective an d normative commitment dimensions were functions of general and extrinsic job satisfaction. As seen in Table III, the regression coef? ients had positive values indicating that as job satisfaction levels increased, organizational commitment increased as well. This result supports the model of the research and previous researches (Bartol, 1979; Gaertner, 1999; Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972; Mowday et al. , 1982; O’Reilly and Caldwell, 1980; Stumpf and Hartman, 1984): Model AffectiveOC ? f(GeneralJS) AffectiveOC ? f(IntJS) AffectiveOC ? f(ExtJS i ) NormativeOC ? f(GeneralJS) NormativeOC ? f(IntJS) NormativeOC ? f(ExtJS) R 0. 31 0. 137 0. 349 0. 439 0. 172 0. 464 R2 0. 095 0. 019 0. 122 0. 193 0. 029 0. 215 F 12. 773 2. 31 16. 805 28. 847 3. 671 33. 177 Sig. 0. 01 0. 131 0. 000 0. 000 0. 058 0. 000 Coef? cient Value 1. 627 0. 309 2. 675 0. 137 1. 889 0. 349 1. 162 0. 439 2. 660 0. 172 1. 636 0. 523 t-test 3. 320 3. 574 5. 863 1. 52 5. 164 4. 099 2. 682 5. 371 6. 266 1. 916 5. 055 5 . 76 Sig. 0. 001 * 0. 001 * 0. 000 * 0. 131 0. 000 * 0. 000 * 0. 008 * 0. 000 * 0. 000 * 0. 058 0. 000 * 0. 000 * Job satisfaction and commitment b0 b1 b0 b1 b0 b1 b0 b1 b0 b1 b0 b1 707 Note: Coef? cient is signi? cant at: *0. 01 level (two-tailed) Table III. Regression analysis H5. There is signi? cant relationship between the characteristics of the sample and organizational commitment and job satisfaction. -test, ANOVA, and correlation analysis were conducted to determine the differences in organizational commitment and job satisfaction within the characteristics of the sample. For the variables â€Å"gender† and â€Å"tourism education background† t-test was applied and for the variables â€Å"education† and â€Å"income level† ANOVA was applied. â€Å"Age†, â€Å"experience in the sector†, â€Å"experience in the current organization† were subject to correlation analysis. Signi? cant differences that were found are presented and d iscussed in the following paragraphs and on Table IV. Most of the researchers have found a signi? ant relationship between age and job satisfaction (Hulin and Smith, 1965; O’Brien and Dowling, 1981; Rhodes, 1983). Savery (1996) in his research, claimed that as people grew older their intrinsic job satisfaction level became less important although age, income level and job satisfaction have a direct relationship. This is a similar result that was found in this research. It is clearly seen that extrinsic job satisfaction increases due to the increases in age and income level whereas intrinsic job satisfaction is not affected. Sarker et al. (2003) found in their research that job satisfaction has a signi? ant relationship with tenure. In relation tenure seemed to be a predictor of extrinsic job satisfaction rather than intrinsic job satisfaction of hotel employees. The employees remaining in the organization have increased extrinsic rewards while the dissatis? ed ones choose to leave the organization. When gender is regarded, in this research no signi? cant relationship is deducted. This is supported by some of the previous researches (Garcia-Bernal et al. , 2005; Ghiselli et al. , 2001; Karatepe et al. , 2006). Education has a direct relationship with job satisfaction supporting the previous researches (Kavanaugh et al. 2006; Lam et al. , 2001; Linz, 2003). Since the education level goes further, it results with increases in expectations for extrinsic rewards. If the expectations are ful? lled, then job satisfaction increases. Income level is the other demographic variable that has been examined through studies and positive relationship between extrinsic job satisfaction and income has been deducted (Clark and Oswald, 1996; Shaffer, 1987). This is an expected result since people with higher level of income ful? lls their extrinsic rewards and feel more 708 IJCHM 22,5 Gender tist p Tourism education tist p Education Fist p 20. 35 0. 352 20. 335 0. 739 0. 2 91 0. 832 0. 904 0. 442 2. 484 0. 064 2 0. 881 0. 380 0. 333 0. 739 0. 632 0. 528 2 1. 604 0. 111 0. 484 0. 629 1. 606 0. 111 Income Fist 3. 218 p 0. 009 * * AOC ($375 and below) ? 3. 5446 AOC ($375-$565) ? 3. 5344 AOC ($565-$752) ? 3. 5841 AOC ($752-$940) ? 3. 5893 AOC ($940-$1,228) ? 3. 3088 AOC ($1,228 and above) ? 3. 1300 Age Correlation 0. 098 p 0. 285 Experience in the sector Correlation 0. 290 p 0. 752 Experience in the current organization Correlation 20. 006 p 0. 946 0. 833 0. 529 1. 588 0. 169 0. 082 0. 370 2 0. 048 0. 601 0. 065 0. 477 0. 165 0. 070 0. 013 0. 886 0. 009 0. 922Note: Correlation is signi? cance at: *0. 05 and * *0. 01 levels (two-tailed) Table IV. The relationship between the characteristics of the sample and organizational commitment/job satisfaction AffectiveOC NormativeOC GeneralJS IntJS ExtJS 2 0. 641 0. 523 0. 184 0. 854 3. 074 0. 030 * 0. 704 0. 551 ExtJS (high school) ? 3. 2152 ExtJS (under graduate) ? 3. 3647 ExtJS (graduate) ? 3. 5021 ExtJS (post g raduate) ? 3. 5589 0. 591 0. 707 ExtJS ($375 and below) ? 3. 2588 ExtJS ($375-$565) ? 3. 2969 ExtJS ($565-$752) ? 3. 4477 ExtJS ($752-$940) ? 3. 5357 ExtJS ($940-$1,228) ? 3. 7647 ExtJS ($1,228 and above) ? 3. 7239 0. 055 0. 48 2 0. 009 0. 925 2 0. 047 0. 603 3. 529 0. 005 * * 0. 223 0. 014 * 0. 037 0. 681 0. 085 0. 353 satis? ed due to the increases in the total income. When the relationship between income level and affective commitment is regarded, it is evident that income level is mostly related with continuance and normative commitment (Iverson and Buttigieg, 1998; Morrow, 1983) rather than affective commitment because if the need for higher income is met, the person begins to feel that he or she should stay in the organization. The affective commitment is usually linked to moral issues whereas pay is considered as a tangible tool that satis? s a person and fastens the individual to the organization because of obligance not because of affectivity. Discussion and conclusions Acc ording to the research ? ndings, the continuance commitment component was not particularly relevant for top level managers in the study. This result is congruent with the mobility characteristics of the tourism industry. Whereas, persons exhibiting continuance commitment remain in their organizations because they need to stay (Meyer and Allen, 1997). Since tourism consists of accommodation, food and beverage, travel, entertainment components, employees can decide to work in many different organizations.In order to measure continuance commitment in future research, it is necessary to adapt the scale to the needs of the tourism industry. When the job satisfaction levels of these managers were evaluated, the intrinsic job satisfaction level of the managers was higher than were general and extrinsic job satisfaction levels. The tourism industry provides a very dynamic working environment where employees including the managerial levels as well may utilize their abilities and achieve thei r career plans.On the other hand, wages are often lower than they are in other industries; the industry is not highly respected, company policies vary, and working conditions are challenging and tiring because of long working hours. This can result in lower levels of extrinsic and general job satisfaction. In addition, when the organizational commitment components were compared, the normative commitment level of the managers was higher than their affective commitment. This result can be explained by the working conditions in the tourism industry, as seasonality is the most important characteristic.Consistently, the result of the t-tests (Figure 1) suggests that managers working in city hotels have more affective commitment than resort hotel managers do since they are employed during a whole year, and they feel more committed to the culture and moral values of the organization when compared to the seasonally employed managers (Angelo and Vladimir, 1994; Ninemeier and Perdue, 2005). I n relation with hotel ownership, managers working in independent hotels had a higher level of extrinsic job satisfaction than did managers working in chain hotels. Managers who begin in smaller independent organizations ? d it easier to grasp the scope of the entire organization. This is a signi? cant challenge for managers in major multi-national organizations where many aspects of the business are compartmentalized. In addition, generally managers working in independent hotels are usually the owners and/or relatives of the owners. They have independence, authority, advancement opportunities, better income levels, they set the rules and company policies, they are very much involved with operation within the hotel therefore their technical, human and operational competency increase.In independent hotels, the climate is a family style; there is trust and con? dence between the owner and the managers. That is why the manager feels usually free in movement, his Job satisfaction and com mitment 709 IJCHM 22,5 710 organizational goals represent his success therefore he tries to do the best and takes them as personal goals. Since there is trust in him, he feels himself responsible for achieving these organizational goals. The other important demographic variables that were tested in order to ? d out their relationship with organizational commitment and job satisfaction were age, income level, tourism education background, education level, experience in the sector, experience in the current organization, gender. It was seen that as the educational level, age and income level of the managers increase their extrinsic job satisfaction increase; whereas, their income level increase their affective commitment decrease. These results support the previous researches (Garcia-Bernal et al. , 2005; Ghiselli et al. , 2001; Karatepe et al. , 2006; Linz, 2003; Shaffer, 1987).It is evident that the improvement in the education level results with increases in expectations for extrin sic rewards. When the expectations are ful? lled then job satisfaction increases. Education level is also tied to income level because as indicated before since the quali? cation of manager increases then the salary and related bene? ts will be higher when compared to lower level educated individuals. This will result with a more extrinsically satis? ed manager. The results showed that there is a negative relationship between the income level and affective commitment.Income level is mostly related with continuance and normative commitment (Iverson and Buttigieg, 1998; Morrow, 1983) rather than affective commitment. Age is the last important variable that has a signi? cant relationship because people staying in the organization will demand more extrinsic rewards as related with tenure. Since the age and tenure increases, managers are more satis? ed with the increases in their total income and might be accepted as extrinsically satis? ed. When the model was tested, the analysis of job satisfaction and organizational commitment indicated the following (Figure 2): . There is a positive and signi? ant relationship between general job satisfaction and normative and affective commitment. . There is a positive signi? cant relationship between extrinsic job satisfaction and affective and normative organizational commitment. Job satisfaction Intrinsic Extrinsic 9 General ? 1= 0. 43 ? 1 = 3 52 0. Figure 2. The ? ndings of tested model Normative ?1 = 0. 349 = ? 1 0. 3 09 Affective Organizational commitment Continuance . . There is a positive signi? cant relationship between intrinsic job satisfaction and extrinsic job satisfaction. There is a positive signi? cant relationship between affective and normative commitment.Job satisfaction and commitment The regression analysis results suggest that the job satisfaction components; intrinsic, extrinsic and general; have a signi? cant relationship with normative and affective organizational commitment. What should be underlined is that extrinsic job satisfaction had a higher signi? cant relationship with normative and affective organizational commitment. Therefore, it may be suggested that extrinsic job satisfaction is more effective in increasing organizational commitment of the employees when compared with intrinsic and general job satisfaction factors. The ? ndings and the results of H3 and H4 support the ? dings of the previous researchers (Bartol, 1979; Feinstein and Vondrasek, 2001; Gaertner, 1999; Mowday et al. , 1982; O’Reilly and Caldwell, 1980; Stumpf and Hartman, 1984) indicating that job satisfaction has an effect on organizational commitment. Since the commitment levels of the managers are higher in city and independent hotels. This is due to the fact that tourism sector is a seasonal structured sector. Organization owners and shareholders should, therefore, minimize the seasonal effects in order to increase managers’ commitment levels and should ? nd the tools to increase their job satisfaction.The results of this study have indicated that extrinsic job satisfaction should be increased for hotel managers. Extrinsic job satisfaction levels can increase when managers satisfy their esteem needs, work permanently, are independent, show initiative, and can lead their subordinates. This will result in increased affective and normative commitment levels. If the owners and the shareholders focus on these underlying issues, this may provide opportunities to increase the extrinsic job satisfaction levels of the top and/or middle managers especially in resort hotels. This result is supported by Ghiselli et al. (2001).They indicate that since the managers ? nd their job intrinsically satisfactory and rewarded in the longer period they have more extrinsic needs. According to the ? ndings, normative commitment obviates affective commitment by the effect of seasonality. Managers working in city and/or independent hotels feel affective commitment more when compared with t he others. Therefore, managers working in resorts must feel that being a member of their current organization is privileged for themselves especially for their career. In addition, they should feel that developing their careers in the current organization is much more possible and important.When the responsibilities are supported by authority and the effort expended by the organization increases, a commensurate increase in level of organizational commitment is possible. That is why owners of the hotels should focus on these issues related to the organizational commitment and job satisfaction levels of the hotel managers and should show interest in knowing the managers’ ideas, opinions and suggestions. The owners also should: . give the managers necessary freedom to take decisions in order to reach personal and organizational goals; . provide them opportunities to improve themselves by additional training programs; 11 IJCHM 22,5 . . . . 712 . . . provide counseling and career development support; reward them by incentive programs, fringe bene? ts; empower them and encourage their participation in some top-level discussions as in the board of directors; encourage them to develop some projects and form their own team; give more ergonomic and convenient working conditions; provide them necessary budget to socialize the employees and enable them to participate in social activities; and enable them to put some goals according to their own evaluations and give them more initiative.The seasonality problem exceeds the attempts of the owners; it additionally depends on governmental policies. The suggestions to purify the negative impacts of seasonality to be carried by Culture and Tourism Ministry of Turkey might be as follows: . to increase the tourism products; . to increase promotional and marketing efforts by; explaining the economical, social, political importance of the sector to the locals, private organizations and public sector; to maintain a consistent social, political, economical system in order to improve the image of the country; . o improve the infrastructure of the regions that play importance in the off-season periods; . to adopt trend and changes in world tourism to Turkish tourism sector in terms of culture, technology, management, social life; . to provide sources for the sector to improve the country image; . domestic tourism should not be only a demand source in the off-season but should be developed and encouraged to be consistent during a whole year. For this purpose the average income level of the national tourists should be improved and increased as well and some incentives for holiday should be provided such as credit offers; and . upply should be diversi? ed and new alternative tourism types should be developed (for example, golf, thermal-health, incentive, meeting and convention, yachting, winter tourism, etc. ). To enable this diversi? cation, the private enterprises should be supported and encouraged by invest ment opportunities. Further research recommendations For future research being conducted in the tourism industry, it is desirable to adapt Meyer and Allen’s Three Component Model of Organizational Commitment and Minnesota Job Satisfaction Questionnaire to the characteristics of the tourism industry. Since continuance organizational commitment was not signi? ant in the result of this research, speci? c researches analyzing the reasons below this result can be questioned and analyzed. However, this kind of a research can also be conducted in the other components of the tourism industry such as travel agencies, entertainment organizations and/or food and beverage establishments. In addition, cross-cultural researches comparing job satisfaction and organizational commitment of managers in different tourism destinations should be encouraged. References Aksu, A. and Aktas, A. (2005), â€Å"Job satisfaction of managers in tourism: cases in the Antalya ? egion of Turkey†, Mana gerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 479-88. Angelo, R. M. and Vladimir, A. N. (1994), An Introduction to Hospitality Today, Educational Institution of the American Hotel and Motel Association, Orlando, FL. Angle, H. L. and Perry, J. L. (1981), â€Å"An empirical assessment of organizational commitment and organizational effectiveness†, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 26, pp. 1-13. Banai, M. , Reisel, W. D. and Probst, T. (2004), â€Å"A managerial and personal control model: predictions of work alienation and organizational commitment in Hungary†, Journal of International Management, Vol. 10, pp. 75-92. Bartol, K. M. (1979), â€Å"Professionalism as a predictor of organizational commitment, role stress and turnover: a multidimensional approach†, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 22, pp. 815-21. Bateman, T. S. and Strasser, S. (1984), â€Å"A longitudinal analysis of the antecedents of organizational commitment†, Academy of Management Jour nal, Vol. 27, pp. 95-112. Buchko, A. A. , Weinzimmer, L. G. and Sergeyev, A. V. (1998), â€Å"Effects of cultural context on the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment: a study of russian workers†, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 43, pp. 109-16. Chen, C. F. 2006), â€Å"Short report: job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and ? ight attendants’ turnover ? ntentions: a note†, Journal of Air Transport Management, Vol. 12, pp. 274-6. Cheng, Y. and Stockdale, M. S. (2003), â€Å"The validity of the three-component model of organizational commitment in a Chinese context†, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 62, pp. 465-89. Clark, A. and Oswald, A. (1996), â€Å"Satisfaction and comparison income†, Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 61, pp. 359-81. Cochran, W. G. (1977), Sampling Techniques, Wiley, New York, NY, p. 75. Culture and Tourism Ministry of Turkey (2009), Statistical Reports, available at: www. ultur. go v. tr (accessed August 25, 2009). Ekin Group and TUROFED (2006), Pocket Hotel Guide, Ekin, ? stanbul. I Fairbrother, K. and Warn, J. (2003), â€Å"Workplace dimensions, stress and job satisfaction†, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 18 No. 10, pp. 8-21. Feinstein, A. H. and Vondrasek, D. (2001), â€Å"A study of relationships between job satisfaction and organizational commitment among restaurant employees†, Journal of Hospitality, Tourism, and Leisure Science, available at: http://hotel. unlv. edu/pdf/jobSatisfaction. pdf (accessed April 15, 2007). Furnham, A. , Petrides, K. V. , Jackson, C.J. and Cotter, T. (2002), â€Å"Do personality factors predict job satisfaction? †, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 33, pp. 1325-42. Gaertner, S. (1999), â€Å"Structural determinants of job satisfaction and organizational commitment ? n turnover models†, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 479-93. Job satisfaction and commitment 713 IJCHM 22,5 714 Garcia-Bernal, J. , Gargallo-Castel, A. , Marzo-Navarro, M. and Rivera-Torres, P. (2005), â€Å"Job satisfaction: emprical evidence of gender differences†, Women in Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 279-88. Ghiselli, R. F. , La Lopa, J. nd Bai, B. (2001), â€Å"Job satisfaction, life satisfaction and turnover ? ntend among food service managers†, Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Adminis