FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE … · 2018-12-07 · i FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE...
100
FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE IN THE HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY: A CASE STUDY OF SANKARA NAIROBI BY SHARON MULE MUSYOKA UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY AFRICA FALL 2016
Transcript of FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE … · 2018-12-07 · i FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE...
FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE
ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE IN THE
HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY: A CASE STUDY OF
SANKARA NAIROBI
BY
SHARON MULE MUSYOKA
UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY
AFRICA
FALL 2016
i
FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE
ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE IN THE HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY:
A CASE STUDY OF SANKARA NAIROBI
BY
SHARON MULE MUSYOKA
A Project Report Submitted to the Chandaria School of Business in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters in Business
Administration (MBA)
UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY AFRICA
FALL 2016
ii
STUDENT’S DECLARATION
I, the undersigned, declare that this is my original work and has not been submitted to any
other college, institution or university other than the United States International University
in Nairobi for academic credit.
Signed: _______________________ Date: _______________________
Musyoka Sharon Mule (ID: 620561)
This project has been presented for examination with my approval as the appointed
supervisor.
Signed: _______________________ Date: _______________________
Fred O. Newa
Signed: _______________________ Date: _______________________
Dean, Chandaria School of Business
iii
ABSTRACT
The purpose of the study will be to investigate how shared values, skill set of employees
and systems influence organizational performance of Sankara and was guided by the
following research questions: How does shared values affect the performance of Sankara.
The second research question was based on the extent to which the employee skill set
affected performance. The third question was based on how information systems would
affect the performance of Sankara as an organization
The researcher adopted a survey design to facilitate collection of original work and for ease
of comparison of data collected. The population was 300 employees of the entire hotel. The
sample size consisted of 36 respondents. The study stratified the sample into senior
management, line managers, unionized and non –unionized staff. A questionnaire was the
instrument of data collection. The researcher administered the questionnaires to the
respondents and send emails to the top management. The data collected was analyzed by
using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) and excel. It was coded into the SPSS
and the analysis was done by using correlation, linear regression and coefficient of variation
The study found that there were strong relationships between the shared values, employee
skill set and information technology systems and performance. For any company to perform
at optimal, it would be paramount for the organization to check their shared values, skill
set of employees and the systems used in hotels.
The study recommends that further studies should be undertaken on the impact of diversity
and trust on organizational performance since we are now living in a multi-faceted and
multi-cultural world which requires one to accommodate the needs of another. As a
recommendation, hotels put an emphasis on systems that will improve customer service
and allow for both guest customization and staff customization to enable efficiency and
greater productivity.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to acknowledge the Lord God Almighty. I thank him for the strength given to
me during this period and the far He has taken me through and the far that He has taken me
Second, I would like to acknowledge my parents Gladys Musyoka, Ronald Musyoka. To
my siblings Lucy Isavwa and Eric Mutonyi. Thank you for all your support and
encouragement. May God bless you abundantly you.
Thirdly, I would like to acknowledge my lecturers for the knowledge they impacted on me.
I would like to thank Dr. Kaol for his guidance and assistance for me to come up with the
research proposal. My project supervisor, Mr. Fred Newa, you have been a great mentor.
To all the researchers before me whose work has been a source of reference for my study,
thank you for giving me a base on which this research was possible.
Fourthly, I would like to thank all my classmates for their encouragement and support
throughout my MBA. You are all a huge blessings.
Lastly, I would like to acknowledge the respondents in my study from Sankara Nairobi for
taking their time to answer my questionnaires in good time.
v
DEDICATION
This project is dedicated to my parents: Gladys Musyoka and Ronald Musyoka and my
siblings Eric Mutonyi and Lucy Isavwa
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
STUDENT’S DECLARATION ........................................................................................ ii
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................ iv
DEDICATION.................................................................................................................... v
CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................ 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem ........................................................................................ 4
1.3 Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................ 6
1.4 Research Questions .................................................................................................. 6
1.5 Significance of the study .......................................................................................... 6
1.5.1 Sankara Nairobi .................................................................................................. 6
1.5.2 Employees ........................................................................................................... 6
1.5.3 Management from other hotels ........................................................................... 6
1.5.4 Customers ........................................................................................................... 6
1.5.5 Hospitality industry ............................................................................................. 7
1.5.6Academic Researchers ......................................................................................... 7
1.6 Scope of the study......................................................................................................... 7
1.7 Definition of Terms .................................................................................................. 7
1.7.1 Strategy ............................................................................................................... 7
1.7.2 Skills ................................................................................................................... 7
1.7.3 Systems ............................................................................................................... 7
1.7.4 Shared Values ..................................................................................................... 8
1.7.5 Organizational Performance ............................................................................... 8
1.8 Chapter Summary ................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER TWO ............................................................................................................... 9
vii
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................... 9
2.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 9
2.2 Organizational Performance................................................................................... 9
2.2.1 Impact of Shared Values on Organization Performance ................................ 10
2.2.1.1 Trust and Diversity: Shared Values and its Role on Performance of an
organization................................................................................................................ 10
2.2.1.2 Crafting a vision of shared value creation ..................................................... 12
2.2.1.3 Work Values and the transition to work life .................................................. 14
2.3 Impact of Employee Skill Set on Organization Performance ............................ 14
2.3.1 Multivariate Skills and Employee Work Assignment ...................................... 15
2.3.2 Skills, Challenges and Work Enjoyment .......................................................... 17
2.4 Impact of Systems on Organization Performance .............................................. 19
2.4.1 Operational productivity and Information Systems .......................................... 20
2.4.2Information Technology and Employee productivity ........................................ 21
2.4.3 Customer service and Information Systems ..................................................... 21
2.4.4 Information Technology and Commercialization ............................................. 22
2.4.5 IT Enabled customer service systems and Hotel Performance ......................... 23
2.5 Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................... 24
CHAPTER THREE ......................................................................................................... 25
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................................. 25
3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 25
3.2 Research Design ..................................................................................................... 25
3.3 Population and Sampling Design .......................................................................... 25
3.3.1 Population ......................................................................................................... 25
3.3.2 Sampling Design ............................................................................................... 26
3.3.2.1 Sampling Frame ................................................................................................. 26
3.3.2.2 Sampling Technique .......................................................................................... 26
viii
3.3.2.3 Sample Size ........................................................................................................ 27
3.4 Data Collection Method ......................................................................................... 27
3.5 Research Procedures ............................................................................................. 28
3.6 Data Analysis Methods .......................................................................................... 28
3.7 Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................... 29
CHAPTER FOUR ............................................................................................................ 30
4.0 RESULTS AND FINDINGS ..................................................................................... 30
4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 30
4.2 Demographic Information..................................................................................... 30
4.2.1 Gender ............................................................................................................... 30
4.2.2 Age Bracket ...................................................................................................... 31
4.2.3 Highest Level of Education .............................................................................. 32
4.2.4 Work Experience .............................................................................................. 32
4.2.5 Department of Work ......................................................................................... 33
4.2.6 Level of Management. ...................................................................................... 33
4.3 Impact of Shared Values on Organizational Performance ................................ 34
4.3.1. Correlation of Shared Values and Organizational Performance ...................... 34
4.3.2 Regression Model of Shared Values and Organization Performance ............... 35
4.3.3 Trust and Diversity: Shared Values and Organizational Performance ............. 39
4.4 Impact ofthe Skill Set of Employees on Organizational Performance .............. 46
4.4.1 Correlation of Employee Skill Set and Organizational Performance ............... 46
4.4.2 Regression Model of Skill Set and Organizational Performance ..................... 47
4.4.3 Multivariate Skills and Employee Work Assignment ...................................... 51
4.5 Impact of systems on Organizational Performance ............................................ 58
4.5.1 Correlation between Systems and Organizational Performance ....................... 58
4.5.1 Regression Model of Systems and Organization Performance......................... 60
4.5.1.1 Operational Productivity and Information Systems ....................................... 63
ix
4.6 Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................... 69
CHAPTER FIVE ............................................................................................................. 70
5.0 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................... 70
5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 70
5.2 Summary ................................................................................................................. 70
5.3 Discussion................................................................................................................ 71
5.3.1 How Shared Values Impact The Performance Of An Organization. ................ 72
5.3.2 How Employee Skill Set Impacts Organizational Performance ....................... 73
5.3.3 Impact of Systems on Organizational Performance. ......................................... 74
5.4 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 76
5.4.1 Impact of shared value on Organizational Performance ................................... 76
5.4.2 Impact of skill sets of employees on Organizational Performance ................... 76
5.4.3 Impact of systems on Organizational performance .......................................... 76
5.5 Recommendations .................................................................................................. 77
5.5.2 Recommendation for further Studies ................................................................ 77
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 79
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................. 82
APPENDIX 1: COVER LETTER .............................................................................. 82
APPENDIX II: RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................... 83
x
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1: Target population. ............................................................................................ 26
Table 3.2: Sample Size... ................................................................................................. 27
Table 4.1 Correlation: Shared Values and Organizational Performance. ........................ 35
Table 4.2 Model Summary. ............................................................................................. 36
Table 4.3: Coefficient Results ............................................................................................ 37
Table 4.4: Impact of Shared Values on Organizational Performance. .............................. 38
Table 4.5: The Company encourages diversity in the workplace. ..................................... 39
Table 4.6: Organization invests heavily on the values that were there in the 2010 ........... 40
Table 4.7: Communication is done using the bottom up approach................................... 40
Table 4.8: The organization shares the vision of the company every financial year. ........ 41
Table 4.9: Working together as a team improves performance. ........................................ 42
Table 4.10: The organization creates an environment that the staff enjoy their work ....... 42
Table 4.11: I know the shared values of the company. ...................................................... 43
Table 4.12: The objectives of our organization are seen in our shared values. ............... 443
Table 4.13: Values instilled during training affect the financial performance of Sankara 44
Table 4.14: Trust between staff affect the overall performance of the organization. ........ 44
Table 4.15: The organization's performance measures are shared regularly with the staff
............................................................................................................................................ 45
Table 4.16: Shared values improve the performance of the organization ........................ 46
Table 4.17: Correlation: Employee Skill Sets and Organizational Performance............... 47
Table 4.18 Model Summary .............................................................................................. 48
Table 4.19: Coefficients ..................................................................................................... 49
Table 4.20 Impact of the Skill Set of Employees on Organizational Performance ........... 50
Table 4.21: Multi-skilled employees enhance the performance of my organization. ........ 51
Table 4.22: Promotions in the hotel are done based on the skill set of employees ......... 52
xi
Table 4.23: The skill set of my department is a competitive advantage ............................ 52
Table 4.24 Staff are involved in achieving mission and vision of the company. .............. 53
Table 4.25: The organization places high value on staff training and development. ........ 53
Table 4.26: Training given to staff is based on the core competencies of the organization.54
Table 4.27: Staff are committed to the organization……………………………………..55
Table 4.28: Employees are encouraged to develop their knowledge and skills. ............... 55
Table 4.29: Employees know that their opinion counts. .................................................... 56
Table 4.30: Staff feels that they have opportunity to grow. ............................................... 57
Table 4.31: I plan to work for the company for the next six months. ................................ 57
Table 4.32: Skill sets and training positively affects Organizational Performance .......... 58
Table 4.33: Correlation between Systems and Organizational Performance .................. 59
Table 4.34: Model Summary ............................................................................................. 60
Table 4.35: Coefficients. .................................................................................................... 61
Table 4.36 Impact of systems on Organizational Performance. ........................................ 62
Table 4.37: The productivity of the organization is enhanced by the IT systems
available…………………………………………………………………………………63
Table 4.38: The operating systems e.g. Opera, reduce transactions processing times. ..... 64
Table 4.39: IT Systems have helped reduce the time used to process transactions. ......... 64
Table 4.40: Systems have helped in processing financial details of the company. ........... 65
Table 4.41: Hotels information systems enhance operational productivity ....................... 65
Table 4.42: The IT Systems in the hotel make it easy for clients to do bookings. ............ 66
Table 4.43: The information systems in the hotel are user friendly to the staff ................ 67
Table 4.44: Guests can make bookings through online channels. .................................... 67
Table 4.45 Guests Book the hotel through email. ............................................................ 68
Table 4.46: IT Systems have improved the performance of the organization. .................. 68
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1 Gender of Respondents..................................................................................... 31
Figure 4.2 Age Bracket of Respondents. ........................................................................... 31
Figure 4.3 Highest Level of Education. ............................................................................. 32
Figure 4.4 Work Experience. ............................................................................................. 33
Figure 4.5 Department of Work ......................................................................................... 33
Figure 4.6 Level of Management ....................................................................................... 34
1
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Problem
Greilling (2010) defines the concept of organizational performance is common in the academic
literature; its definition is difficult because of its many meanings. Organizational performance
has continually become an important field of management study. It was developed as a
strategic orientation to overcome the external adaptation problems faced by firms, which have
been looking for sustainable competitive advantage in global competition in the last thirty
years. Researchers and practitioners have been interested in the concept since the early of
1980s because of its profitable effect on firms’ performance. The French and the Canadians
were the first to use the Balance Score Card in a different form. The French began using a
measure called “the tableau de board”, or the dashboard of measure, which included both
financial and non-financial measures. The emphasis on quality in the American continent
during the 1980s made Canadian companies to include non-financial measures also in evolving
their business strategy. This was the initial conception of the balanced scorecard (Stewart &
Hubin, 2001).
The balance score card gets its name from the need to balance the financial objectives with
the non-financial objectives. Performance can be viewed as dynamic and therefore it requires
understanding from management and line staff so that a decision can be made in the end as a
result of interpretation of the subject. Performance may be illustrated by using a causal model
that describes how current actions may affect future results. Performance may be understood
differently depending on the person involved in the assessment of the organizational. To define
the concept of performance is necessary to know its elements characteristic to each area of
responsibility. To report an organization's performance level, it is necessary to be able to
quantify the results (Lynch 2009). For any organization to achieve its objectives, there are key
performance indicators in making sure that the organization is either meeting their goals or
performing well by all standards.
In the hospitality industry it is important that when a hotel is setting their goals for the year,
they should be achievable, measurable, specific, and realistic and most importantly time bound.
When they base their decisions on these two factors, they fall short of examining their internal
2
environment therefore missing the mark on the vital components that helps their hotel function
better and even reach their optimum by trying to meet and exceed guest expectations.
Organizational performance is defined as the ability of an organization to have proper
governance and have managers who are objective in achieving the goals of the organization
and being persistent in achieving the mission and vision of the organization (Richard, 2013).
Organization performance is measured in the goals or objectives that have been set out by the
management of any company. The performance is measured by the organization’s financial
performance, market performance and the shareholders performance (Jones & Charles, 2010).
The stakeholders that are taken into account are internal (employees, executive officer,
managers and board members) and external stakeholders. In 2013, there was a survey
conducted by a company, Mercer, in 53 countries globally was determine the internal and
external factors that affect the performance of any organization had over 10,000 respondents.
It found that the respondents were working in 1056 companies (non-profit, profit and
government institutions). It also found that 51 percent of the respondents thought that the
planning process needed improvement, 42 percent stated that an organization would perform
better if their compensation and reward systems were revised and 41 per cent thought that the
approach used by their management needs work. Out of the survey, one third of the respondents
thought that with the change of the Chief Executive Officers in organizations, there is bound
to be a lot of change in the styles of management and this affects how a company performs at
local and international level in the case of a multi-national company. This is because the way
the incumbent thinks and mode of operation is different from the outgoing. As a result, the
organizational culture changes to suit the incumbent way of implementing the same strategy
communicated by the Board of the companies that were studied.
In the United States of America, performance of organizations is done by the top management
to ensure that the non-financial measures are looked into to steer the organization to success.
The top level management ensures that they are setting up their employees for success by
having personal development plans. The Hilton Hotel and Accor brand give their staff a
management code of conduct that controls their behavior. This impacts their culture such that
all Accor and Hilton hotels have a specific culture that is developed. Consequently, they have
a culture that is hard to change (Hilton, 2013). This has helped these brands develop a corporate
identity and values which stem from how they do their things. The implementation system of
3
the career development of their staff is deeply entrenched in their value system (Travel courier,
2010).
In the developing countries, hospitality firms check their performance by having regular
strategy meetings to plan on their way forward in relation to their competition and make sure
that they have proper strategies in place to beat their competition. As a result, they do a lot of
market research to make sure that they are in first place at all times in terms of revenue
generation and customer satisfaction. Hotels in Singapore and Malaysia gain their competitive
advantage in low-cost leadership through discounting of their products and providing quality
services to their customers to achieve customer loyalty. Having low cost strategy in the Asian
market and other developing countries may have a positive effect on gaining market share in
the short term, but has a negative impact on the profitability of a hotel in the long term. Studies
done on the Malaysian market show that competition gives pressure to the managers in the
hospitality firms to make sure that they push down their costs in a labor intensive environment
(Molina &Azori, 2008). Punniyamoorthy and Morali (2008) suggested the balance score card
as a benchmarking tool for organizations, therefore a measure of performance. In a dynamic
environment like the hospitality industry, managers do not have the time to respond to the
current trends. As a result, they measure their performance based on the financial goals that
they set and the customer satisfaction.
Kwada (2010) describes how growth of the organization gives rise to an analysis of an
organization’s performance since the organization compares the non-financial factors with the
financial aspects. In Ghana, there was a study done by William Phanuel Kobi Darbi to
determine how high-performing organizations managed their performance and the findings
were that organizations with an open-door policy one that had the employees tie in the mission
and vision statement tied to their personal goals and career growth were found to perform better
than those that had a mission statement that was their staff would relate to. In Kenya, Wadongo,
Odhuno, Kambona & Othuon (2010) and other authors discuss in depth how organizational
performance has in the past relied solely on financial measures. Due to limitations on financial
measures and the impact of global and increasing competition in the hotel industry, hotels
should rethink their current performance measurement, which is more focused on financial
aspects, to a more balanced measurement which has both financial and non-financial
dimensions. Measuring performance plays an important role in planning and decision- making
4
and makes the link between strategy intent, competitive environment and revenue. In the
current dynamic environment, it is becoming ever more challenging for hospitality
organizations to actively manage and maintain their performance and competitive advantage.
Sankara is a luxury five-star hotel in Kenya that opened its doors to the public in August twenty
ten and is situated in the Westlands area in Nairobi. The hotel has 156 rooms, three restaurants
and a bar that services the clientele that are in the Westlands area of the city center. It has 300
employees who serve both their domestic and international guests. It has four departments,
rooms division which comprises of Housekeeping and the Front Office department;
Engineering department; Administration department and Food and beverage department. It
boasts of getting awards from Booking.com, Condenast traveler and Taste awards, just to
mention but a few, for offering top notch service. In an annual newsletter in 2013, the General
Manager stated that the hotel will stand to be counted as one of the hotels that is safe and was
in a position to deal with crisis the best way they knew how by providing systems that would
help the hotel deal with crises with the ever-growing terror threats in the hospitality sector. In
January 2014, the hotel received accreditation from Safe hotels for its excellence in safety and
Crisis Management which was a result of change in the strategy. In the recent past, the hotel
has had issues with their shared values and the systems in place which has had a huge impact
on how the organization performs in the past two years. (Sankara, 2016).
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Kuada (2015) shows that there is need to study organizational performance in East Africa since
the only research available is for large multinational corporations and not the hospitality
industry. This study focused on the perceptions of hoteliers on how performance of an
organization is measured. In the African continent, the hospitality industry is deemed as one
which has employees that are lowly paid and thus their motivation towards getting a specific
task done is an issue.
The shared values of any organization are considered the backbone of how an organization
performs. Companies that are grounded in values, practices and behavioral norms that match
the organizations’ strategy are seen to perform better than those organizations that do not have
a value system that is in line with their strategy (Achua& Lussiers, 2008). In Sankara the shared
values that exist come up as a result in change of management and this affects how the
5
company performs over time. When the belief system is not tied to the mission and vison of a
hotel, a challenge often comes up since the management in place will develop a culture that is
not in line with the strategic objectives. There was a need to align the vision and mission of
Sankara to the shared values that were there when the hotel first opened its doors to the public
with what is happening currently. There was need to evaluate the norms of the hotel since that
has affected the performance of the organization as a whole. Ko (2011) argues that
organizations that have a strong set of beliefs gain a competitive advantage since their staff’s
behavior is aligned to the customers’ needs, commitment to doing business according to
established traditions and unwavering commitment from the organizations stakeholders.
Gavrea, Ilies & Stegeran (2011) suggest that with the increase Enterprise Planning Systems
attention are getting towards the service industry linked to performance, it would be important
for hoteliers to study a Customer Relationship Management system that would work well to
help in getting customer loyalty since what the staff use in Sankara is a google sheet which is
not updated every so often for the data base of the guests to offer better service quality. For a
company to be successful there is need to have the systems that the hotel uses fully interfaced
so that the end users are software and hardware in place. It is therefore paramount for hotels in
Kenya to have their systems well aligned. Khan (2014) argues that an organization can use
operational excellence which decreases operational time and cycle that are used to provide a
certain service to their clients. The systems in place are therefore important in assessing how
the organization performs.
Njoroge (2013) suggested managers in the East African region ignored the fact that they would
perform better as an organization if the skill set of the employees in different hotels are looked
into because they are part of the key competencies of a hotel. The policies and guidelines that
are available in different accommodation providers in Kenya affect the performance of both
the employee and an organizations performance. In the hospitality industry, training is key as
this gives the staff the ability to understand and offer quality service to their guest. It is
therefore vital that the staff undergo some sort of training both in the job and also off site. This
is because it provides different perspectives from different mavens and professionals. In villas
and smaller motels personalized service is preferred as since the properties are small and they
do not get a lot of traffic in comparison to Global chains and local chains. The training could
be the same but the policies in the accommodation providers are different because of their size
6
or their management as well. Management practices and style are used to make sure that there
is some form of efficiency in enforcing the policies and guidelines set out by the top
management in hotels and this varies from individual managers. It is possible to find one line
manager operating differently from another one based on their past experience and this has an
impact on how an organization performs.
1.3 Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the study was to investigate how shared values, skill set of employees and
systems influence organizational performance of Sankara
1.4 Research Questions
The study was guided by the following research questions:
1.4.1 How do shared values impact the performance of an organization?
1.4.2To what extent does the skill set of employees affect Organization Performance?
1.4.3 To what extent do systems impact the performance of an organization?
1.5 Significance of the study
1.5.1 Sankara Nairobi
The company will gain valuable information and feedback from the research. The management
will be able to understand better the factors affecting their performance as an organization .This
information will enable the company to better their performance in the hotel sector.
1.5.2 Employees
The employees will get to understand their impact of the performance of a hotel.
1.5.3 Management from other hotels
This research will help employers in the hospitality industry help their staff align the hotels
strategy to their own mission in an organization.
1.5.4 Customers
This research will help customers choose where to stay based on what drives performance in
the hospitality sector. In the hospitality industry performance is not only based on the financials
7
of a company but also the reviews that customers give and customer relationship management
systems.
1.5.5 Hospitality industry
The corporate strategy makers which are the top management of hotels in Kenya that are of
the school of thought those for an organization to operate optimally, other factors, that are not
necessarily measured in financial terms are.
1.5.6Academic Researchers
The research will contribute to the body of knowledge to academicians and researchers who
would want to further their studies in understanding the factors that affect how organizational
performance. This paper will help other researchers and academicians understand how the
balance score card works in the hospitality industry.
1.6 Scope of the study
The scope of the study was Sankara Nairobi which is a five star hotel and focused on the line
staff, line managers and the head of the rooms’ division department since the hotel operates in
shifts. The researcher collected data in the month of November data during office hours.
1.7 Definition of Terms
1.7.1 Strategy
Strategy comes from the word strategos which is a game plan that an organization has to
achieve its goals (Lewa, 2016)
1.7.2 Skills
Skills are defined as the abilities that firm’s employees perform very well. They also include
capabilities and competences (Jooste & Furrie, 2009)
1.7.3 Systems
Systems are the processes and procedures of the company, which reveal business’ daily
activities and how decisions are made. Systems are the area of the firm that determines how
business is done and it should be the main focus (Griffin & Moorhead, 2010)
8
1.7.4 Shared Values
Shared values are the implicit fundamental beliefs, concepts and principles that guides the
decisions and behavior of its employees, management and members (Giles, 2015)
1.7.5 Organizational Performance
Organizational performance is described as the ability to effectively implement strategies and
achieve institutional goals (Randeree& Al Youha, 2009)
1.8 Chapter Summary
The chapter was an introduction and the basis on the factors that affect the organizational
performance of firms. It gives a summary of the background of the problem, briefly states what
the research will be about and gives the scope of the study. The literature review will give
overview of all the literature that has been written on the topic of study and considers how to
an organization will work optimally. Chapter three will focus on data collection methods and
how data will be analyzed. Chapter four will focus on the results and findings of the study.
Chapter five, the researcher will provide a discussion, conclusion and recommendations.
9
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
This chapter examines literature on the factors such as shared values, skill set and the systems
in place and how they affect organizational performance. The first section of the literature
review will examine how the shared values influence organizational performance. The second
section of the literature review will investigate how the skill set of the employees affects the
performance of an organization. The third section will examine the extent to which systems
impact the performance of an organization.
2.2 Organizational Performance
Organizations have significant role in our everyday lives and therefore, successful
organizations represent a key element for developing countries. A number of economists
consider organizations and institutions similar to an engine in defining the political,
economic and social progress. Precisely for this reason, in the last 22 years, there were 6
Nobel awards given to scholars who have concentrated their study on the analysis of
organizations and institutions(Corina, Liviu, & Roxana Stegerean, 2011).
Performance and its continuity is the focus of any organization because only through
performance can organizations be able to grow and progress. Organizational performance is
one of the most important variables in the management studies and arguably the most
significant pointer of organization performance(Corina et al., 2011).
Organizational performance has been seen to improve over time as a result of the shared values
in the company. The value systems of hotels are developed by either the management or even
the staff themselves as a result of having to deal with the same scenarios every so often. A
general definition of organizational performance by Lo and Fu (2016), noted that it is the
product of interactions of different parts or units in the organization. Organizational
performance denotes the outcomes of various organizational practices and procedures which
occur in the course of its day to day operations. It is proposed that organizational performance
is impacted by various factors such as skill set of employees, shared values and organizational
systems.
10
The viability of the organization will be determined by whether or not profits are economically
sustainable and clients are satisfied. The major areas of study on organizational performance
to date have concentrated on aspects of growth of companies (Bavik, 2016). However, the
significance of Organizational performance in the hospitality industry has received
considerably little attention. Human involvement is known to be an inherent and integral
characteristic of the hospitality industry and therefore the relationships between guests and the
hosts are looked at as being more fragile than interactions in other organizations (Bavik, 2016).
2.2.1 Impact of Shared Values on Organization Performance
Shared values are organizational ideals that are typically developed by the organization's
leadership and then adopted by other members of the group(Jung & Yoon, 2016). The
standards are shared and followed by all members of the organization when acting on behalf
of the group. They can sometimes also be referred to as core values. Shared values can
positively impact an organizations performance (Buonocore, 2010).
Adherence by an organization to its shared values has a direct correlation to its performance.
Examples of shared values common to organizations include; Social Justice, respect for
tradition, loyalty, equality, health, independence, creativity, social recognition, trust,
responsibility and preserving one’s public image (Dyląg, Jaworek, Karwowski, Kożusznik, &
Marek, 2013).
2.2.1.1 Trust and Diversity: Shared Values and its Role on Performance of an
organization
Social diversity has been associated to an assortment of economic, social and political
outcomes, generally showing that greater diversity is linked to worse socio-economic
performance. Most research has focused on the extent to which important human ideals and
principles are shared in humanity, which captures dimensions of diversity rarely
discussed(Beugelsdijk & Klasing, 2016). The importance of value diversity is assessed by
focusing on its role in fostering generalized trust within societies. Value diversity, in particular,
referencing political and philosophical values with regard to income redistribution and the part
played by the government in controlling markets, is important for understanding the
international variation in trust, with greater diversity being linked with lower trust levels. This
associations significantly strong and controls for several other determining factors of trust,
11
together with other scopes of diversity, and remains valid at various levels of
aggregation(Beugelsdijk & Klasing, 2016). The hospitality industry which includes the hotel
and tourism sectors have diversity in not only the type of visitors they receive but also the type
of staff employed at the organization. These organizations therefore have high value diversity
and hence require high levels of trust to run operations smoothly and be successful in their
overall objective.
Majority of the arguments on social cohesion revolves around trust in the hotel sector, a reliable
indicator of social cohesion (Freitag & Buhlmann, 2009) and a concept widely recognized in
the existing broader social sciences literature. Trust has been said to be subject to numerous
different influences; for example, the presence of strong formal institutions (Alesina & La
Ferrara, 2002). Most importantly, trust formation has been linked with social identity theory,
suggesting that familiarity breeds trust (Putnam, 2000). There are strong cognitive and
emotional bases for trust, and familiarity breeds trust specifically because it reinforces both
these bases (Nooteboom, 2002). Familiarity comes from perceived familiarity and feelings of
shared purpose among people. Thus, when diversity is low in the general public and people
have a sense of being close to their fellow citizens. They can identify with one another and are
therefore more likely to trust each another, therefore, work together to achieve organizational
success. In the hospitality industry trust is an essential requirement for staff to work in harmony
thus affecting how hotels perform in the long run.
While trust has been associated with diversity, academics have up to now taken diversity by
measures of ethno linguistic and religious fractionalization (Hooghe, Reeskens, Stolle, &
Trappers, 2009), segregation (Alesina & Zhuravskaya, 2011), and genetic diversity. Though
intuitive, none of the current studies have unequivocally considered the human value
dimension of diversity – that is, the degree to which significant values are shared in the general
public. This is an important dimension of diversity, though, and theoretically thought-
provoking, as it can hypothetically cross ethnic or genetic group lines. For example, value
diversity may be found even among culturally identical groups, while at the same time
members of different ethnic groups may share significant values. Also, value diversity is
possibly determined to a lesser extent by the frequency of social interactions between different
groups and largely more flexible over shorter durations, while culturally-linguistic or genetic
diversity are by designation invariant to the former and possibly more insistent. In total, the
12
notion of value diversity in hotels arrests understated nuances of diversity that go past what is
mirrored in current facets of diversity. It is a facet of social diversity that is fascinating and
possibly significant and that has thus far not been researched on in the trust literature (Ashraf
& Galor, 2013). Once the hotels realize that the two go hand in hand with team work, they can
operate optimally and achieve their objectives.
2.2.1.2 Crafting a vision of shared value creation
Organizations should focus on creating shared value to enhance their performance, including
economic and societal value, or on improving economic and social conditions in the
communities in which they operate (Porter & Kramer, 2011). Porter and Kramer underline that
creation of shared value requires many actions such as re-conceptualizing products and
markets, redefining productivity and enabling local cluster development thus focusing on the
creation of strong inter-organizational relationships. In addition, research into social
entrepreneurship has investigated similar questions and concluded that different institutional
logics (Greenwood , Raynard, Kodeih, Micelotta, & Lounsbury, 2011), such as market logic
which is based on growth and profitability and community-based logic which is concerned
with social issues, can co-exist in an organization. They often do so through a process called
organizational hybridization (Battilana & Dorado, 2010).
Shared value is a way to go beyond traditional philanthropy. However, understanding of the
mechanisms to implement shared value paradigms remains limited in the hotel industry. Before
venturing into empirical research, one needs to concentrate on past knowledge on inter-
organizational collaboration, which is a clear necessity for shared value creation. Increased
inter-organizational collaboration has been seen as a necessity for improving corporate
sustainability and performance of organizations in the hotel industry (Peloza & Falkenberg,
2009; Seuring & Gold, 2013). In addition, creation of shared value requires profound
collaboration and even the development of industrial clusters (Porter & Kramer, 2011).
Modern organizations very rarely urge any actions alone but utilize the knowledge of vast
networks of actors, including other companies and hotels in Africa (Peloza & Falkenberg,
2009).
13
According to the shared value paradigm, for value creation in inter-organizational systems, the
focal organization has the responsibility to align its operations so that it advances its own
economic well-being but also creates value to the community. By basing the business on such
a sustainable foundation, short-term profit-seeking should be replaced by the pursuit of long-
term benefits for many, as is the case in a community-based institutional logic (Thornton,
Ocasio, & Lounsbury, 2012). This requires the shared vision and sense making among
stakeholders using a bottom-up approach from local representatives and not the typical top-
down measures.
Therefore, shared vision and common objectives are the most important prerequisite for the
creation of shared value (Rudd, 2000). Previous research on inter-organizational networks
links the shared vision to the cognitive dimension of value-creating networks (Tsai & Ghoshal,
1988). The cognitive dimension of a network comprises the factors that influence shared
understanding among the actors in the network. For example, Wasko, Faraj and Johnson
(Wasko, Faraj, & Johnson, 2006) show that construction of mutual understanding and shared
vision among actors in a network requires shared culture and goals. Inter-organizational
collaboration among heterogeneous actors, aiming to realize a common goal has become the
focus of various business ecosystems, including service industry, health care, construction, and
disaster management.
The quality of inter-organizational interaction in a business ecosystem influences the actors’
identification with the system (Boardman & Sauser, 2008). This then has it that interaction
influences how the participants feel and define themselves as members of a specific group
(Klandermans, 2002). Actor’s subjective evaluation on the similarity between actor’s and
ecosystem’s goals defines the strength of the membership. Forming a consensus about the
sustainability objectives among actors requires knowledge-sharing about the individual
perceptions of the goals, as the participants attribute different meanings to the goals (Stubbart,
1989). Furthermore, research on eco-industrial parks as business ecosystems, demonstrates
that continuous communication and information sharing are required to create and maintain
common goals (Veleva, Todorova, Lowitt, Angus, & Neely, 2015). In addition, eco-industrial
parks tenants must see that they belong to a system that creates mutual benefits. Such systems
are often outcomes of a long process of holistic interaction and goal alignment among the
members (Lowitt, 2008). Sometimes this requires altering the prevailing institutions, in which
14
the inter-organizational networking can give leverage (Thompson, Hermann, & Hekkert,
2014). Organizations in the Hospitality industry need to inculcate a strong vision not only for
the management level employees but also for the mid-level and subordinate staff such that the
entire workforce works towards a common goal that will not only benefit the organization but
ultimately improve its performance.
2.2.1.3 Work Values and the transition to work life
One may consider young adults' work values as a potential personal resource that could shape
individuals' career paths and access to work across the transition from school to work. Work
values refer to what individuals consider important in their jobs (Jin & Rounds, 2012).
Research on career development in the hospitality industry has shown that work values play a
key motivational role in work selection and vocational growth and improvement (Balsamo,
Lauriola, & Saggino, 2013). Work values are associated with indicators of fruitful changeover
to employment (for example being employed) and quality of job (such as the degree of
individual –job fit) is not properly-established in the research literature.
A well fit job provides a good match for employees' personal ideals and inclinations, and
likewise for their knowledge, abilities, skills and talents (Vogel & Feldman, 2009).
Longitudinal studies on work value results have revealed that both extrinsic and intrinsic work
values forecasted the type of rewards persons consequently received in their jobs (Johnson &
Monserud, 2010). In the hospitality industry intrinsic work values forecasted higher intrinsic
job rewards, such as employment in fascinating jobs, relishing greater independence and
having educational prospects at work. Extrinsic work values were linked to rewards that were
extrinsic, such as employment security and higher income (Johnson & Monserud, 2010).
However, the link between extrinsic employment values and greater salary seemed to be
explained largely by the number of work hours (Johnson & Mortimer , 2011).
2.3 Impact of Employee Skill Set on Organization Performance
Researchers have emphasized the importance of the ability to identify skills, knowledge factors
and competencies required by personnel as they attempt to ensure their firm’s competitiveness
and success in today’s fast-changing business environment (Chung-Herrera, Enz, & Lankau,
2003; Kay &Moncarz, 2004). Personnel employed in the hospitality sector, due to the nature
of the industry have to possess a variety of skills. They also tend to be more inclined to value
15
work enjoyment (Brauer & Leischning , 2016). In today’s global economic setting of dynamic
changes and increased competition, it is important for hospitality students, educators and
managers to understand the competencies needed for success by tomorrow’s industry leaders
(Tomatzky & Klein, 1982).
2.3.1 Multivariate Skills and Employee Work Assignment
Organizations should find efficient ways to assign workers to jobs (Brilon, 2015). In most
organizations, the performance of a worker depends on many things, such as one’s expertise
level, one’s concentration and organizational capacity, as well as one’s analytical and
communication skills. As workers move up in the pecking order or switch jobs, the relative
importance of each of these skills changes. Yet, organizations frequently can only detect a
collective performance measure on which to base their decisions when deciding on promotions
or allocating tasks. Therefore, presented with such a scenario, only specific workers should get
reassigned or promoted and performance in one job may act as an indicator for performance in
another job (Brilon, 2015).
In order to allocate tasks or decide on promotions, organizations need to concentrate on
learning the skill portfolio of its employees. Organizations also need to abstract from any
considerations concerning wage costs or workers' incentives and instead, focus on the task
assignment problem when workers vary in their skill levels where different tasks require
different combinations of skills (Gathmann & Schonberg, 2010). This allows the organization
to focus optimal assignment rules for workers and how different jobs should be categorized
within a job hierarchy or rotation scheme.
Waldman (1984) and Bernhardt (1995) assume that the ability of a worker is observed only by
his present employer, but not by potential competitors. As Waldman (1984) has revealed,
competition for highly skilled employees then may lead to an inefficient assignment of workers
to jobs since firms will be unwilling to disclose confidential details about the worker's ability
by promoting them. As discussed in Bernhardt (1995), this may assist in giving an explanation
on a given number of observations typically made in the labor market. Overall, organizations'
unwillingness to promote will intensify the greater the discrepancy between their private and
the publicly available data on an employee, as shown by his schooling and past promotion
path.
16
Similar to Waldman and Bernhardt (Waldman, 1984; Bernhardt, 1995), most research on job
assignment assume that workers' abilities vary along a unitary dimension (“universal ability”)
but do not contemplate that employees may possess many skills that matter for their
performance. Others note that employees may have relative advantage in one task. By
considering several skills, organizations can capitalize on the concept of task-specific skills
introduced by Gibbons & Waldman (2004; 2006). Lazear (2009) proposes a prototype with
two abilities that are utilized with varying intensity in different organizations, thus reassessing
the denotation of firm-specific skills. Gathmann and Schonberg (2010) analyze empirically to
what extent skills are transferable across jobs, the fundamental idea being that different
professions combine tasks and thus task-specific skills in different ways. They utilize the
notion that workers have numerous skills and that their skill profile matters for their
performance in different tasks. They then derive conditions under which employers prefer to
recruit workers within the same organization and this can either work in favor or against the
performance of a hotel.
There are numerous empirical proofs that organizations indeed tend to hire internally, as
shown by Agrawal et al., (2006), DeVaro and Morita (2009), and Lauterbach et al., (1999).
Theoretical literature has proposed several justifications for this occurrence. For example,
Chan (1996)emphasizes the enticements generated through promotions as a cause for
restraining external hiring which would reduce the chances of promotion of current employees.
Another explanation is provided by Greenwald (1986), who recommends a model where
employers prefer internal hiring since they are conversant with the skill of workers they have
employed for one period. Demougin and Siow (1994)demonstrate that, with mounting hiring
expenses, organizations may opt to train and screen workers themselves. However it is
sufficient that the company has marginally better data about current employees compared to
new ones. Employer learning is also considered in Meyer (1991) who proposes bias
competitions amongst workers in order to have more understanding about their respective
abilities. The author mentions the possibility of producing a bias through task differentiation.
But the notion is selected by Carrillo (2003) who evaluates how work assignment can be used
as a screening device.
In Fairburn & Malcomson (2001), rewarding workers for good achievement is deputized to
managers who are bound to yield and be influenced by activities of employees. The use of
17
promotions instead of bonus payments assists in mitigating this problem. However, if workers
are without any risk, promotion choices may be distorted and result in inefficient assignments.
In particular, the performance magnitude for promotion may be reduced and too many
employees will be promoted. Koch & Nafziger (2012) have a similar result. In their model, the
chances that little effort leads to greater output decreases as employees move up in the
hierarchy. Higher level jobs are more enlightening about employees' effort, thus decreasing the
cost of incentives. This may outweigh the cost of a lesser success chance that a wrong
assignment of the agent could have. As a result, the principal lowers the promotion threshold.
Lazear (2004), conversely, expounds on the Peter Principle as the outcome of a statistical
process that displays regression to the mean: A worker benefiting from a high temporary
productivity shock will have higher yield and be more likely to become promoted.
Nevertheless, over time, his productivity will return to its average value, therefore giving the
impression that the employee's output fell after promotion which will be tied to how the
organization performs as whole.
Mounting competition amongst regions and cities in an information economy has turned skills
and creativity into a much sought-after strategy for progression in tourism and hospitality.
Increasingly inventive content has made its way into hospitality and tourism products,
consequently transforming tourism and hospitality into an innovative arena(Richards, 2011).
Most notably, creativity and skills have given providers of hospitality and operators in the
tourism sector with a business antidote to deal with intense competition coming up from mass
tourism, a type of tourism that encompasses the transport of large groups of people in a short
period of time to places of leisure interest. Multivariate Skills and Employee Work Assignment
have a positive association with organization performance. Personnel in the hospitality
industry are usually required to have customer relation skills together with work related skills
in order to do their duties effectively(Suh, West, & Shin, 2012).
2.3.2 Skills, Challenges and Work Enjoyment
Happy employees are a major source of competitive advantage. Brauer and Leischning
(2016)tested whether a balance of challenges and abilities at advanced levels of underlying
components is essential and/or sufficient for work enjoyment in hotels in America. The results
of this fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis indicated an asymmetrical causal
18
relationship between balance of challenges and abilities at advanced levels and work
satisfaction. Furthermore, post hoc analyses reveal complex configurations of job demands and
resources that lead to work enjoyment.
Companies need talented and engaged people to achieve performance goals and create
competitive gain (Crook, Todd, Combs, Woehr, & Ketchen, 2011). According to a Gallup
(2013) study, only 13% of workers universally are engaged at work, 63% are not, and 24%
even feel actively disengaged, signifying that they are unhappy at their place of employment
and liable to spread negativity to co-workers. Employee well-being embraces a new
perspective that considers necessary and sufficient conditions of work enjoyment. Work
enjoyment refers to employees' assessments of work-life quality (Peters, Poutsma, Van der
Heijden, Bakker, & de Bruijn, 2014) and describes the degree to which workers experience
their job as intrinsically interesting or pleasurable (Graves, Ruderman, Ohlott, & Weber, 2012).
Prior research in various academic disciplines indicate several beneficial effects of positive
emotions, such as a broadening of thought–action repertoires (Fredrickson & Joiner, 2002),
more creative thinking and problem solving (Estrada, Isen, & Young , 1994), heightened
likability and cooperation (Barsade, Ward, Turner, & Sonnenfeld, 2000), increased pro-social
behavior (George, 1991), high work performance (Hsiao, Jaw, Huan, & Woodside, 2015), and
better physical well-being and coping strategies (Diener, 2009). These effects have important
implications for companies because they relate to employee, group, and firm-level outcomes
and encompass a spectrum of managerial actions, as well as management of human resource
(e.g., teamwork), sales management (e.g., personal selling), and innovation management (e.g.,
ideas for new product development).
Regarding requirements of work enjoyment, studies indicate that characteristics of workers,
work environment and employment tasks can affect employees' level of work enjoyment
(Bakker, 2008; Ng, Sorensen, & Feldman, 2007). Studies in the hospitality sector,
(Csikszentmihalyi, 1990), self-determination (Gagne & Deci, 2005), and job characteristics
(Bakker & Demerouti, 2007)underline the role of challenges and abilities as antecedents of
enjoyment. Three primary theoretical perspectives provide acumens into the effects of
challenges and abilities on employment enjoyment: self-determination theory (Gagne & Deci,
2005), flow theory (Csikszentmihalyi, Flow: The psychology of optimal experience, 1990),
and the job demands-resources (JD-R) model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). Self-determination
19
theory contends that three needs are essential for optimal psychological growth and well-being
(Gagne & Deci, 2005). One of these requirements involves competency, which denotes
capability of achieving internal and external outcomes (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan,
1991). Persons experience competence when they have the appropriate skills to master the
challenges they come across. Therefore, a balance of challenges and skills should positively
influence work enjoyment.
2.4 Impact of Systems on Organization Performance
Organizations are more efficient and have a significantly greater output when they are in
possession of systems that not only make work easier but also faster. These systems are usually
various types of management systems. They include ISM (information security management
systems), IMS (Information Management Systems), EMS (Energy Management Systems)
QEMS (Quality Management Systems), OHSMS systems (Occupational Health and Safety
Management System), CSS (Customer Service Systems), and CRMS (customer relationship
management systems). This study will focus mainly on the Customer Service Systems,
Information Management and Information Technology (IT) Systems utilized in the hospitality
industry.
Information systems have been acknowledged as one of the greatest forces causing change in
the hotel industry (Law, Leung, Au, & Lee, 2013). Many organizations involved in hospitality
have turned to IT as a way to cope with an environment characterized by competition, high
client turnover, globalization and rising guest expectations.IT investments are considerable in
the sector of hospitality, but those inputs do not always guarantee suitable returns; therefore,
research that explains in detail how IT can enhance organizational performance is required
(Cohen & Olsen, 2013). Although there is a lack of an all-inclusive prototype of the association
between organizational performance and IT investments in the hospitality industry, there is
indication from the professional and academic literature about how specific IT may impact
some drivers of the relationship.
Organizational performance is a multidimensional and complex construct (Avci, Madanoglu,
& Okumus, 2011). Economic results represent the final objective of most companies
(Chandler, DeTienne, McKelvie, & Mumford, 2011), and so the economic aspect stands out.
Within the hospitality industry, Cohen and Olsen (2013) used profitability, revenue per
20
available room and sales growth, and the non-financial performance facet focuses on a firm's
long-term success, with measures such as productivity and customer satisfaction (Van Veen-
Dirks & Wijn, 2002). The sequence from economic to non-economic performance is presumed
by diverse authors. In particular, it has been considered that client-related productivity and
performance results in economic performance (Cohen & Olsen, 2013; Combs, Crook, &
Shook, 2005; Heskett & Schlesinger, 1994). Hence, any effort to define how IT can improve
hotel performance should consider at the bare minimum the client, economic dimensions and
productivity of organizational performance. This is consistent with the more current
investigations on hotel performance measurement (Sainaghi, 2010).
It is stated by Bannister and Remenyi (2000) that the course through which IT improves firm
results is more sophisticated than delivering services at lower costs. IT should be connected
with other non-IT company factors like services, clients, and strategy according to the analysis
of diverse global proposals about how IT can improve hotel organizational performance (Law
et al., 2013). The general process involves acting upon the following organizational
performance drivers: employee productivity, operational productivity, customer service, and
commercialization.
2.4.1 Operational productivity and Information Systems
Productivity can be defined as the relationship of output to input (Tangen, 2005). In hotels,
there are both pertinent outputs (such as revenue and the number of clients), and relevant inputs
(such as energy, raw materials, and employees). Employee productivity is considered
separately because employees are a very important resource for hotels. (Perez-Lombard, Ortiz,
& Pout, 2008). Additionally, apart from the cost interest, the environmental impact and
consumption of energy also add to hotel social responsibility (Holcomb, Upchurch, & Okumus,
2007), and they involve international acknowledgement (e.g., EMAS awards). Consequently,
both types of non-personnel activities should be optimized through IT so as to, in one way,
shrink costs and in another way, improve the hotel organizational image associated with social
responsibility of the hotel. Examples of interesting IT options in relation to these goals are
energy management systems and kitchen control systems (Doukas, Patlitzianas, Iatropoulos,
& Psarras, 2007).
21
2.4.2Information Technology and Employee productivity
Evidence suggests that hospitality firms can succeed in using technological resources to
improve staff productivity. One option of increasing productivity of personnel encompasses
reducing staff costs without affecting performance outputs. In this manner, staff productivity
consequences are similar to those of operational productivity: higher profitability. Thus, guest
registration IT options like kiosks and online check-in allow firms to check in guests faster
with fewer staff (Kim, Kim, Park, Lee, & Jee, 2012).
Other than decreasing staff costs, employee productivity, can be achieved through higher
output while at the same time containing employee costs. In this manner, since Information
Technology Systems releases employees from manual labor, they have the opportunity to
concentrate on meeting clients’ particular wants and needs and also providing service
(Chathoth, 2007). This staff productivity facet can influence client satisfaction through better
customer service which, as has been explained, is considered as an antecedent of firm incomes.
2.4.3 Customer service and Information Systems
In hotels, there are two main kinds of services: IT-based services or self-service technologies
(SSTs) and employee-based services. Both employee-based services and SSTs are briefly
addressed. Quality of service is the major criterion deliberated on in evaluating services that
depends on personnel actions (Lee, Barker, & Kandampully, 2003). Brady and Cronin (2001)
model is one of the most comprehensive influence in the quality service evaluation field
(Martinez Garcia & Martinez Caro, 2010). This prototype expounds on service quality with
three primary dimensions and nine corresponding sub-dimensions: interaction value (expertise,
behavior, and attitude), physical environment quality (ambient conditions, social factors, and
design), and outcome value (tangibles, waiting time and valence).
In relation to interaction value, attitude refers to a willingness to assist customers thus affecting
their performance; behavior refers to personnel taking actions to discourse customers' desires;
and expertise is in reference to the understanding of workers about the service. These features
of service quality can be influenced by IT, since they can be used by contact workers to enhance
service encounters by providing for customization, spontaneously delighting guests and
improving service recovery (Bitner, Brown, & Meuter, 2000).
22
Regarding physical environment value standard, ambient conditions refer to non-visual
features, such as temperature, scent, and music; facility design denotes the architecture or
layout of the surrounding; and social factors denote the number and type of people in the
service environment. IT can also influence the ambient sub-dimension, since IT can alter a
room's physical attributions like smell, sound and color (Hosteltur, 2014). IT also impacts
facility design, because mobile technologies allow employees to wait on guests in more relaxed
setups than the classical reception desk.
The last dimension of quality of service is quality of outcome. Waiting time is the amount of
time it takes to provide a service; IT applications help hotels to deliver services quicker
(Chathoth, 2007). That which is termed as Tangible relays the physical evidence of the facility;
which, in the event of IT, can be influenced by updated technologies (Schmidt, Cantallops,
& dos Santos, 2008). Valence denotes whether, at their stay’s end, customers believe that the
service outcome is good or bad; an instance of this may be the situation of unrestricted or
unrestricted Wi-Fi (Bulchand-Gidumal, Melian-Gonzalez, &Gonzalez Lopez Valcarcel,
2011). Concerning the second services’ type, penetration of IT has allowed hotels to provide
SSTs (e.g., kiosks for self-check-in). There are two major results that hotels should anticipate
from SSTs: first, reducing queues (Kokkinou & Cranage, 2013), and second, shunning
circumstances characterized by a possibly negative rapport experience (Giebelhausen,
Robinson, Sirianni, & Brady, 2014).
2.4.4Information Technology and Commercialization
A number of IT options can be used to increase hotel revenues and a result improve
performance. IT has been involved in the following: client behavior knowledge, customer
satisfaction measures, distribution channel management and revenue management. IT enables
the possibility of getting client opinions through email, corporate and various distribution
websites(e.g., Booking.com), cell-phone apps, interactive voice-response systems, and/or
traveler review websites (e.g., hotels.com).
Affiliate marketing involves activities directed to obtaining successful relational exchanges
(Morgan & Hunt, 1994). Its triumph is reliant on acquiring customer information to be used
for developing highly tailored packages (Sigala, 2005). Customer relationship management
(CRM) endeavors to gather and store client related data, share it all the way through the whole
23
organization, and then use it at all on organizational levels for creating distinctive visitor
experiences (Sigala, 2005). The newest technologies, such as smart- phone tracking, can follow
the guest's pathway within the hotel and fashion routes of client engagements.
Nowadays, most clients choose their stays through the Internet; so, in line with O'Connor and
Frew (2004), IT should provide hotels with a presence in suitable electronic distribution
channels (for example global distribution systems, hotel websites, OTAs,). Last, IT plays a
critical role in revenue management, which endeavors to design distinct service packages using
appropriate combinations of attributes, such as price, purchase restrictions, amenities, and
channels of distribution.
2.4.5 IT Enabled customer service systems and Hotel Performance
In the last twenty years, information systems have contributed to the transformation of
customer interactions, enabling an unprecedented scope and scale of personalization of
services in the tourism industry. Information Systems (IS) have been positively changing the
hospitality industry for over two decades (Piccoli & Lui, 2014) and the hotel industry
especially in the last five decades(Law, Leung, Au, & Lee, 2013).
In the hotel industry, Customer Service Systems (CSS) that are IT-enabled denote the
collection of information systems that enable and mediate the presentation of customer services
with the purpose of growing total customer value (Piccoli & Lui, 2014). The hotel industry is
very competitive and customers are become increasingly discerning and sophisticated,
demanding high level of value and quality (Outi Niininen, Dimitrios Buhalis, & Roger March,
2007).The design of a CSS which is IT enabled and that advances the learning phase of the
service personalization process fosters increased understanding of clients' personal needs by
the organization (Komiak & Benbasat, 2006). Service quality theory predicts that persons who
better specify their service needs experience a narrowing of the delivery-expectation gap
(Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1985) with an ensuing enhancement in perceived
satisfaction (Ho & Zheng, 2004). Consequently, personalization has arisen as one of the
principal aspects influencing the perception of e-service quality (Zhilin Yang, Robin T.
Peterson, & Shaohan Cai, 2003). As discussed above, the learning sub process embedded in
an IT-enabled CSS enables the disambiguation and presentation of a large number of options,
and it also allows for the univocal pairing of these choices to the salient likings of the customer
24
with precise identification and control (Overby, 2008). In the IT-enabled context of CSS,
individual attention and personalization have been linked to satisfaction with the shopping
experience (Zhilin Yang et al., 2003). As clients' perceive quality of service to be the difference
between received service perceptions and their expectations for a service offering
(Parasuraman et al., 1985), they will experience enhanced quality of service when they can
tailor more elements of the service experience to their expectations.
2.5 Chapter Summary
This chapter examined literature in connection with the internal factors that affect
organizational performance. The first section of the literature review examined the extent to
which shared values impacted the performance of an organization. The second section looked
at the skill set of employees and how it affects organizational performance. The third section
of the literature review analyzed how systems impact the performance of an organization. The
next chapter will discuss on the research methods that were utilized in this project.
25
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chapter comprised of the research design, the methods used to collect data, and the
population size that the researcher used for the study. It consisted of the population that was
studied, the design utilized in coming up with the sample framework and the sample size
collection. The data collection methods and analysis methods were highlighted as a proposition
for the study.
3.2 Research Design
The research design is defined as a blue print for a researcher to get information, measure
results and analyze data from respondents (Lewis, 2015). The study will consider quantitative
methods. Descriptive statistics will feature predominantly in the collection and analysis of data.
Hackman & Oldham (2004) states that the use of both quantitative and qualitative techniques
enriches any study and is important. Descriptive statistics addresses the research questions
through empirical assessments that involve numerical measurements and statistical analysis.
The variables have been identified in the research topic which has factors affecting
organizational performance as the dependent variables and shared values, employee skill set
and the systems in place as independent variables.
3.3 Population and Sampling Design
3.3.1 Population
Population is defined as the total number of people or elements in any study (Kothari, 2004).
The target population is Sankara Nairobi employees who work in the rooms division, food and
beverage kitchen and service and engineering department since they are the heart and the first
point contact between the clients. The total population of Sankara Nairobi is 300 employees;
6 senior managers, 20 line managers, 20 non-unionizable staff and 254 unionized staff. The
list containing the number of employees was obtained from the Sankara and was used as a
sampling frame.
26
Table 3.1: Target population
Positions Population %
Senior Managers 6 1
Line Managers 20 7
Unionized employees 20 7
Non- unionized employees 254 85
Total 300 100
Source: Sankara Nairobi (2016)
3.3.2 Sampling Design
Sampling design can be seen in two aspects: the sample and the sampling method. The Sample
is a section of a population and the sampling methods of any study are the rules which are
governed by the selection of the sample (Shields & Rangarajan, 2013).
3.3.2.1 Sampling Frame
This is a list that shows all the items or individuals in a population being researched on
(Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2009). The list of these employees was provided by the Human
Resource Department of Sankara Nairobi and consisted of rooms’ division food and beverage
service, line managers and a few senior managers
3.3.2.2 Sampling Technique
For this research the population was divided into strata where stratified sampling and random
sampling will be used since the population is heterogeneous. The population is divided into
different strata depending on a specific attributes. The strata are divided into the unionized
staff, line managers and the senior managers. The sampling technique used was stratified
sampling which ensured that each strata was well represented from the sample chosen.
(Castillo, 2009).
27
3.3.2.3 Sample Size
Cooper and Schindler (2008), argues that the sample size is a smaller set of the larger
population. Mugenda and Mugenda (2008) also states that that ten percent provides adequate
representation of a sample based on the accuracy and the type of analysis that the researcher is
going to undertake. The sample size was proportionate to the total population expected to be
drawn. For this study, target population sizes with values less than twenty had a sample size
of twenty percent. The table is a representative of the sample size:
Table 3.2: Sample Size
Stratum Target
Population
Sample Size
Senior Management 6 2
Management 20 4
Unionized staff 254 26
Non-unionized staff 20 4
Total 300 36
3.4 Data Collection Method
The study will use primary data. The questionnaire will be a useful tool for collecting data
from respondents because it provides a means of gathering data in an open, clear, objective
and cost effective way. Questionnaires are a relatively quick to collect information using a
questionnaire and potentially information can be collected from a large portion of a group
(Koehler, 2009) and hence will be the appropriate tool for data collection. For this study, a
questionnaire will be provided to the respondents and it will be divided into four sections; the
first section will be based on demographics and the other three sections will take into account
the research questions that are the independent variables which are shared values, employee
skill set and systems and their impact on organizational performance in Sankara. The questions
28
will be closed questions and semi-structured .The closed ended questions will guide the
respondents to have specific responses and a guide on the subject of study. A Likert scale
divided from one to five will be used which will give levels of agreement to the statements
provided in the questionnaire (I strongly disagree, I agree, neutral, I agree and I strongly agree).
3.5 Research Procedures
The questionnaire was pretested to ensure validity and reliability of the research tool in a group
of respondents were included in the study. Necessary modifications were made and the
questionnaires administered to the respondents. The researcher phoned the respondents. The
researcher dropped and picked the questionnaires later from the line managers, non-
unionizable and unionizable staff. For the senior managers, the researcher emailed the
questionnaire and collected feedback via email. Data was checked for accuracy before entry
into the computer. According to Barbara, (2008) reliability research relates to the degree to
which a measurement, given repeatedly, remains the same; the stability of a measurement over
time; and the similarity of measurements within a given time period. The researcher did a
follow up through emails, telephone calls and visits to ensure a high number of responses.
3.6 Data Analysis Methods
The data to be collected was both qualitative and quantitative due to the structured and semi-
structured questions. An analysis of quantitative data was presented using tables and pie charts.
The completed questionnaires were edited to ensure consistency and completeness. The data
was be coded into statistical software (Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)) for
analysis. Data was analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. Linear regression
and correlation were done to ascertain the existence of relationship between the variables.
Correlation is a statistical technique that can show whether and how strongly pairs of variables
are related.
29
3.7 Chapter Summary
The chapter described the research methodology that was used to carry out the research. The
study was descriptive and focused on line managers and the line staff of Sankara Nairobi. The
chapter was organized in the following ways: the research design, population and sample, data
collection methods, sampling design and sample size, research procedures and data Chapter
four will present the results and findings of this study.
30
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 RESULTS AND FINDINGS
4.1 Introduction
This chapter is about the results and findings of this research. It will present the results on the
factors that influence the Organizational Performance of Sankara. The first section of the
results and findings will be based on respondent’s demographic profile. The second section
will be based on how shared values impact the performance of the organization. The third
section of the results and findings will be based on the extent to which the skill set of employees
affects organizational performance. The fourth section will be based on the extent to which
systems impact organizational performance. The response rate was 100% with all 36
respondents filling in the questionnaires
4.2 Demographic Information
The demographic information is organized into the following categories: gender, age, and
highest level of education, work experience in the organization, work department and
management level in the organization.
4.2.1 Gender
The study investigated the gender of the target respondents involved. The findings in Figure
4.1 established that 44% of the respondents were male and 56% were female. This shows that
majority of the respondents were female.
31
Figure 4.1 Gender of Respondents
4.2.2 Age Bracket
Among the respondents 61% were aged between 22 and 29 years, 28% were between 30 and
37 years and 11% were between 38 and 46 years. This showed that majority of the respondents
were aged below 29 years.
Figure 4.2 Age Bracket of Respondents
Male44%
Female56%
GENDER
61%
28%
11%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
1
Age
22-29 Years 30-37 Years 38-46 Years
32
4.2.3 Highest Level of Education
Among the respondents 63.89% had a bachelor’s degree, 22.22% had either a diploma or a
certificate, 8.33% had a post graduate degree and 5.56% had a secondary school certificate.
This showed that most respondents had a bachelor’s degree
Figure 4.3 Highest Level of Education
4.2.4 Work Experience
Half of the respondents had over 4 years of experience, 16.67% of the respondents had 3 to 4
years work experience, 13.89% had 2 to 3 years work experience, 8.33% had 1 to 2 years work
experience while 11.11% of the respondents had between 0 and 1-year work experience at the
organization. This showed that majority of the respondents had over four years work
experience.
Figure 4.4 Work Experience
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Secondary Certificate
Diploma/Certificate
Bachelors Degree
Postgraduate Degree
Highest Level of Education
0-1 year11%
1-2 years8%
2-3 years14%
3-4 years17%
Over 4 years50%
WORK EXPERIENCE
33
4.2.5 Department of Work
Among the respondents, 27.78% worked in the Housekeeping department, 36.11% worked in
the front office department, and 16.67% worked in either the sales department of food or
beverage department, while 2.78% worked in the engineering department. This showed that
most of the respondents worked in the front office department.
Figure 4.5 Department of Work
4.2.6 Level of Management.
72.2 % of the respondents were unionized staff, 11.11% were line managers or non-unionized
staff while 5.56% of the respondents were line managers. This showed that majority of the
respondents were unionized staff.
Figure 4.6 Level of Management
36%
28%
17%
3%
17%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Work Department
Front Office House Keeping Sales Department Engineering Food and Beverage
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Unionized Staff
Non Unionized Staff
Line Managers
Senior Managers
Level of Management
34
4.3 Impact of Shared Values on Organizational Performance
The study was aimed at investigating the relationship between shared values and organizational
performance. Correlation and linear regression were done to establish the relationship between
the two variables
4.3.1. Correlation of Shared Values and Organizational Performance
According to table 4.1 there is a positive significant relationship between organizational
performance and the statement “Organization has emphasis on understanding the mission
and vision of the hotel” (r= 0.449, p=0.006).This relationship is extended to “The company
encourages diversity in the workplace (r=0.465, p=0.004), “Working together as a team
improves performance”(r=0.416,p=0.012), ”I know the shared values of the
company”(r=0.455,p=0.005), “The objectives of our organization are seen in our shared
values”(r=0.349,p=0.037), “The values that are instilled in the staff during training affect
the financial performance”(r=0.465,p=0.004), “Trust Between staff affect the overall
performance”(r=0.558,p=0.000), Negative but insignificant correlations are seen between
organizational performance and the statements “Organization invests heavily on the values
that were there in the 2010”, (r=-0.029) and “Communication is done using the bottom up
approach”, (r=-0.182).
35
Table 4.1 Correlation: Shared Values and Organizational Performance
Mission and vision is shared
Trust and diversity Org Values Communication Team work
Mission and vision shared
Pearson Correlation
1 .757** .255 .198 .754**
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000 .134 .248 .000
N 36 36 36 36 36
Trust and diversity
Pearson Correlation
.757** 1 .222 -.043 .565**
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000 .194 .802 .000
N 36 36 36 36 36
Org Values Pearson Correlation
.255 .222 1 .306 .396*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.134 .194 .070 .017
N 36 36 36 36 36
Communication Pearson Correlation
.198 -.043 .306 1 .549**
Sig. (2-tailed)
.248 .802 .070 .001
N 36 36 36 36 36
Team work Pearson Correlation
.754** .565** .396* .549** 1
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000 .000 .017 .001
N
36 36 36 36 36
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
4.3.2 Regression Model of Shared Values and Organization Performance
Having found a relationship between the two variables, the researcher went ahead and did a
regression analysis. Table 4.2 illustrates the model summary of the multiple regression model.
It shows that the R Square value is 0.615. This shows that 61.5 % of the variation in
Organizational performance can be explained by shared values.
36
Table 4.2 Model Summary
Model Summary
Model R R Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of
the Estimate
Durbin-
Watson
1 .784a .615 .414 .868 2.345
a. Predictors: (Constant), Shared Values
b. Dependent Variable: Organizational Performance
The findings in relation to the impact of shared values on organizational performance are
represented in table 4.3 below. The table gives the correlation coefficients to be utilized in
coming up with a formula showing the relationship between organizational performance and
shared values. It is as follows;
Organizational Performance = 0.599 - 0.349 Sharing of Mission and Vision + 0.568
Knowing Company Values + 0.136Visibility of Organizations Values + 0.361Installation
of Company’s Value
37
Table 4.3: Coefficient Results
Coefficientsa
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
95.0%
Confidence
Interval for B
B
Std.
Error Beta
Lower
Bound
Upper
Bound
1 (Constant) .599 .572 1.047 .303 -.568 1.766
Sharing of Mission and
Vision
-.349 .211 -.383 -
1.654
.108 -.779 .081
Knowing Company’s
Values
.568 .265 .551 2.142 .040 .027 1.109
Visibility of Organizations
Values
.136 .256 .114 .531 .599 -.387 .659
Installation of Company’s
Value
.361 .227 .262 1.589 .122 -.102 .824
a. Dependent Variable: Organizational Performance
The study sought to investigate the impact of Shared Values on Organizational Performance.
In so doing the study sought to establish the significance of statements associated to shared
values and their relationship to organizational performance as indicated in part B of the
questionnaire. The statements were ranked by their coefficient of variation as reflected in table
4.4 Communication using a bottom up approach is highest ranked with a coefficient of
variation of 0.34 while emphasis on understanding the mission is ranked least with a coefficient
of variation of 0.65.
38
Table 4.4: Impact of Shared Values on Organizational Performance
Mean Std.
Deviation
Coefficient
of
Variation Ranking
Communication is done using the bottom up
approach 3.11 1.063 0.34 1
The values that are instilled in the staff during
training affect the financial performance of
Sankara
2.31 .822 0.36 2
The objectives of our organization are seen in our
shared values 2.31 .951 0.41 3
I know the shared values of the company 2.36 1.099 0.47 4
The organization shares the vision of the
company every financial year 2.64 1.246 0.47 5
Trust Between staff affect the overall
performance of the organization 2.31 1.091 0.47 6
Organization invests heavily on the values that
were there in the 2010 2.75 1.317
0.48 7
The organization's performance measures are
shared regularly with the staff 2.33 1.121 0.48 8
The organization creates an environment that the
staff enjoy their work 2.44 1.275 0.52 9
The company encourages diversity in the
workplace 2.22 1.174
0.53 10
Working together as a team to improve
performance 2.31 1.283 0.56 11
Organization has emphasis on understanding the
mission and vision of the hotel 2.17 1.404 0.65 12
39
4.3.3 Trust and Diversity: Shared Values and Organizational Performance
According to Table 4.5, 33.3% of the respondents strongly agreed that the company encourages
diversity in the workplace, 30.6% agreed with this question, 22.2% stayed neutral, 8.3%
disagreed and 5.6% strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that more than half
of the respondents agreed to this.
Table 4.5: The Company encourages diversity in the workplace
Frequency Percent
Strongly
Agree 12 33.3
Agree 11 30.6
Neutral 8 22.2
Disagree 3 8.3
Strongly
Disagree 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0
The results on table 4.6 show that 16.7% of the respondents strongly agreed that the
organization invests heavily on the values that were there in 2010, 33.3% agreed, 25% were
neutral, 8.3% disagreed and 16.7% strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that
50% of the respondents agreed to this.
40
Table 4.6: Organization invests heavily on the values that were there in the 2010
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 6 16.7
Agree 12 33.3
Neutral 9 25.0
Disagree 3 8.3
Strongly
Disagree 6 16.7
Total 36 100.0
According to table 4.7, 5.6% of the respondents strongly agreed that communication is done
using the bottom up approach, 19.6% agreed, 47.2% were neutral on the matter, 13.9%
disagreed and another 13.9% disagreed. The cumulative percentage shows that less than 25%
agreed.
Table 4.7: Communication is done using the bottom up approach
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 2 5.6
Agree 7 19.4
Neutral 17 47.2
Disagree 5 13.9
Strongly
Disagree 5 13.9
Total 36 100.0
41
The results on table 4.8 show that 16.7% of the respondents strongly agreed that the
organization shares the vision of the company every financial year, 38.9% agreed, 19.4% were
neutral, 13.9% disagreed and 11.1% strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed
that 55.6% of the respondents agreed to this.
Table 4.8: The organization shares the vision of the company every financial year
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 6 16.7
Agree 14 38.9
Neutral 7 19.4
Disagree 5 13.9
Strongly
Disagree 4 11.1
Total 36 100.0
4.3.3.1 Crafting a Vision of Shared Value Creation
The results on table 4.9 show that 33.3% of the respondents strongly agreed that working
together as a team improves performance, 30.6% agreed, 16.7% were neutral, 11.1% disagreed
and 8.3% strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that 63.9% of the respondents
agreed to this.
42
Table 4.9: Working together as a team improves performance
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 12 33.3
Agree 11 30.6
Neutral 6 16.7
Disagree 4 11.1
Strongly Disagree 3 8.3
Total 36 100.0
According to table 4.10, 30.6% of the respondents strongly agreed that the organization creates
an environment in which staff enjoy their work, 22.2% agreed, 27.8% were neutral on the
matter, 11.1% disagreed and another 8.3% strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage
shows that 52.8% agreed with the statement.
Table 4.10: The organization creates an environment that the staff enjoy their work
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 11 30.6
Agree 8 22.2
Neutral 10 27.8
Disagree 4 11.1
Strongly
Disagree 3 8.3
Total 36 100.0
43
The results on table 4.11show that 22.2% of the respondents strongly agreed that they know
the shared values of the company, 41.7% agreed, 16.7% were neutral, 16.7% disagreed and
2.8% strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that 63.9% of the respondents
agreed or strongly agreed to this.
Table 4.11: I know the shared values of the company
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 8 22.2
Agree 15 41.7
Neutral 6 16.7
Disagree 6 16.7
Strongly
Disagree 1 2.8
Total 36 100.0
According to table 4.12, 19.4% of the respondents strongly agreed that the objectives of the
organization are seen in their shared values, 41.7% agreed, 30.6% were neutral on the matter,
5.6% disagreed and another 2.8% disagreed. The cumulative percentage shows that 61.1%
agreed or strongly agreed with this statement.
Table 4.12: The objectives of our organization are seen in our shared values
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 7 19.4
Agree 15 41.7
Neutral 11 30.6
Disagree 2 5.6
Strongly
Disagree 1 2.8
Total 36 100.0
44
4.3.3.2 Work Values and Transition to Work Life
The results on table 4.13 show that 13.9% of the respondents strongly agreed that the values
that are instilled in the staff during training affect the financial performance of Sankara, 50%
agreed, 27.8% were neutral, 8.3% disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that 63.9%
of the respondents either agreed or strongly agreed to this.
Table 4.13: Values instilled during training affect the financial performance of Sankara
Frequency Percent
Strongly
Agree 5 13.9
Agree 18 50.0
Neutral 10 27.8
Disagree 3 8.3
Total 36 100.0
According to table 4.14, 27.8% of the respondents strongly agreed trust between staff affects
the overall performance of the organization, 33.3% agreed, 19.4% were neutral on the matter,
and 19.4% disagreed. The cumulative percentage shows that 61% either strongly agreed or
agreed to this statement.
Table 4.14: Trust between staff affect the overall performance of the organization
Frequency Percent
Strongly
Agree 10 27.8
Agree 12 33.3
Neutral 7 19.4
Disagree 7 19.4
Total 36 100.0
45
The results on table 4.15 show that 27.8% of the respondents strongly agreed that the
organization's performance measures are shared regularly with the staff, 27.8% agreed, 33.3%
were neutral, 5.6% disagreed and 5.6% strongly disagreed.
Table 4.15: The organization's performance measures are shared regularly with the staff
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 10 27.8
Agree 10 27.8
Neutral 12 33.3
Disagree 2 5.6
Strongly
Disagree 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0
According to table 4.16, 30.6% of the respondents strongly agreed that shared values like trust,
commitment and honesty of employees improve the performance of the organization, 41.7%
agreed, 13.9% were neutral on the matter, 8.3% disagreed and another 5.6% disagreed. The
cumulative percentage shows that 72.2% either agreed or strongly agreed.
46
Table 4.16: Shared values improve the performance of the organization
Frequenc
y Percent
Strongly Agree 11 30.6
Agree 15 41.7
Neutral 5 13.9
Disagree 3 8.3
Strongly
Disagree 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0
4.4 Impact of the Skill Set of Employees on Organizational Performance
The study sought to find out the relationship between Employee Skill Set and Organizational
Performance. The data was analyzed by using Pearson’s correlation coefficient and multiple
regressions to ascertain the relationship.
4.4.1 Correlation of Employee Skill Set and Organizational Performance
According to table 4.33, there is a positive significant relationship between organizational
performance and the employee skill set statement “Multi-skilled employees enhance the
performance” (r= 0.657, p=0.000). This relationship is extended to “Promotions in the hotel
are done based on the skill set” (r=0.442, p=0.007), “Skill Sets offer competitive Advantage
”(r=0.577,p=0.000), ” Staff feel that they have opportunity to grow”(r=0.331,p=0.048), where
r is the Pearson’s correlation coefficient and p is the P value or the degree of certainty.
47
Table 4.17: Correlation: Employee Skill Sets and Organizational Performance
Multi-skilled employees
Skill offers Comp Adv
Staff Training based on
competencies
Growth opp for
staff
Emp Opinion Counts
Multi skilled Employees
Pearson Correlation 1 .399* .699** .485** .017
Sig. (2-tailed) .016 .000 .003 .923
N 36 36 36 36 36
Skills offers Comp Adv
Pearson Correlation .399* 1 .576** .502** .210
Sig. (2-tailed) .016 .000 .002 .218
N 36 36 36 36 36
Staff Training based on competencies
Pearson Correlation .699** .576** 1 .718** .224
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .188
N 36 36 36 36 36
Growth Opp for Staff
Pearson Correlation .485** .502** .718** 1 .221
Sig. (2-tailed) .003 .002 .000 .196
N 36 36 36 36 36
Emp Opinion counts
Pearson Correlation .017 .210 .224 .221 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .923 .218 .188 .196
N 36 36 36 36 36
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
4.4.2 Regression Model of Skill Set and Organizational Performance
This section will show the impact of employee skills on organization performance. Table 4.18
illustrates the model summary of the multiple regression model. It shows that the R Square
48
value is 60.4 %. This indicates that 60.4% of the variation in Organizational performance can
be explained by the skill sets of employees.
Table 4.18 Model Summary
Model Summaryb
Model R R Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of
the Estimate
Durbin-
Watson
1 .777a .604 .397 .765 2.060
a. Predictors: Employee Skillset
b. Dependent Variable: Organizational Performance
The findings in relation to the impact of Employee Skill Sets on Organizational performance
are represented in table 4.18 below. The table gives the correlation coefficients to be utilized
in coming up with a formula showing the relationship between Organizational performance
and Employee Skill Sets. It is as follows;
Organizational Performance = 1.002 + 0.430 Multi Skilled Employees + 0.140 Promotion
Based on Skill + 0.012 Departmental Skill Sets
49
Table 4.19: Coefficients
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
95.0%
Confidence
Interval for B
B
Std.
Error Beta
Lower
Bound
Upper
Bound
1 (Constant) 1.002 .706 1.419 .169 -.458 2.462
Multi Skilled
Employees
.430 .170 .610 2.530 .019 .079 .782
Promotions
Based on Skill
.140 .186 .134 .752 .460 -.245 .525
Departmental
Skill Sets
.012 .301 .013 .041 .968 -.611 .635
a. Dependent Variable: Organizational Performance
The study sought to investigate the relationship between skill set of employees and
Organizational Performance. In so doing the study sought to establish the significance of
statements associated to Employee Skill Sets and their relationship to organizational
performance as indicated in part C of the questionnaire. The statements were ranked by their
coefficient of variation as reflected in table 4.20 Planning to work for the company in the next
six months was highest ranked with a coefficient of variation of 0.33 while multi skilled
employees enhancing organizational performance is ranked least with a coefficient of variation
of 0.75.
50
Table 4.20 Impact of the Skill Set of Employees on Organizational Performance
Descriptive Statistics
N Mean
Std.
Deviation
Coefficient
of
Variation Ranking
I plan to work for the company for the
next six months 36 3.06 1.013 0.33 1
Employees are encouraged to develop
their knowledge and skills 36 2.39 .903 0.38 2
Promotions in the hotel are done based
on the skill set of employees 36 2.47 .941 0.38 3
The staff are involved in achieving the
mission and vision of the company 36 2.47 1.028 0.42 4
Staff feel that they have opportunity to
grow 36 2.81 1.167 0.42 5
The organization places high value on
staff training and development 36 2.36 .990 0.42 6
Overall good skill sets and training
positively affect the performance of the
organization
36 2.33 .986 0.42 7
Training given to staff is based on the
core competencies of the organization 36 2.31 .980 0.43 8
The skill set in my department offers
competitive advantage for the company 36 2.39 1.022 0.43 9
Staff are committed to the organization 36 2.53 1.082 0.43 10
Employees know that their opinion
counts 36 2.92 1.422 0.49 11
Multi-skilled employees enhance the
performance of my organization 36 1.86 1.397 0.75 12
Valid N (listwise) 36
51
4.4.3 Multivariate Skills and Employee Work Assignment
The results on table 4.21 show that 66.7% of the respondents strongly agreed that multi-skilled
employees enhance the performance of the organization, 5.6% agreed, 13.9% were neutral,
2.8% disagreed and 11.1% strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that 72.2%
of the respondents agreed to this.
Table 4.21: Multi-skilled employees enhance the performance of my organization
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 24 66.7
Agree 2 5.6
Neutral 5 13.9
Disagree 1 2.8
Strongly
Disagree 4 11.1
Total 36 100.0
According to table 4.22, 11.1% of the respondents strongly agreed that promotions in the hotel
are done based on the skill set of employees, 47.2% agreed, 27.8% were neutral on the matter,
11.1% disagreed and another 2.8% disagreed. The cumulative percentage shows that more than
58.3% agreed.
52
Table 4.22: Promotions in the hotel are done based on the skill set of employees
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 4 11.1
Agree 17 47.2
Neutral 10 27.8
Disagree 4 11.1
Strongly
Disagree 1 2.8
Total 36 100.0
The results on table 4.23 show that 22.2% of the respondents strongly agreed that the skill set
in their department offered competitive advantage for the company, 33.3% agreed, 27.8% were
neutral, 16.7% disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that 55.6% of the respondents
agreed to this.
Table 4.23: The skill set of my department is a competitive advantage
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 8 22.2
Agree 12 33.3
Neutral 10 27.8
Disagree 6 16.7
Total 36 100.0
According to table 4.24, 16.7% of the respondents strongly agreed that staff are involved in
achieving the mission and vision of the company, 38.9% agreed, 27.8% were neutral on the
53
matter, 13.9% disagreed and another 2.8% disagreed. The cumulative percentage shows that
55.6% of the respondents agreed with this.
Table 4.24 Staff are involved in achieving mission and vision of the company
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 6 16.7
Agree 14 38.9
Neutral 10 27.8
Disagree 5 13.9
Strongly Disagree 1 2.8
Total 36 100.0
The results on table 4.25 show that 25% of the respondents strongly agreed the organization
places high value on staff training and development, 25% agreed, 38.9% were neutral and
11.1% disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that half of the respondents agreed to
this.
Table 4.25: The organization places high value on staff training and development
Frequency Percent
Strongly
Agree 9 25.0
Agree 9 25.0
Neutral 14 38.9
Disagree 4 11.1
Total 36 100.0
54
According to table 4.26, 25% of the respondents strongly agreed that training given to staff is
based on the core competencies of the organization, 25% agreed, 30.6% were neutral on the
matter, 33.3% disagreed and another 11.1% disagreed. The cumulative percentage shows that
55.6% of the respondents agreed with this.
Table 4.26:Training given to staff is based on the core competencies of the organization
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 9 25.0
Agree 11 30.6
Neutral 12 33.3
Disagree 4 11.1
Total 36 100.0
4.4.4 Skills, Challenges and Work Enjoyment
The results on table 4.26 show that 16.7% of the respondents strongly agreed that staff are
committed to the organization, 36.1% agreed, 30.6% were neutral, 11.1% disagreed and 5.6%
strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that only 52.8% agreed with this
statement.
55
Table 4.27: Staff are committed to the organization
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 6 16.7
Agree 13 36.1
Neutral 11 30.6
Disagree 4 11.1
Strongly
Disagree 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0
According to table 4.28, 13.9% of the respondents strongly agreed that employees are
encouraged to develop their knowledge and skills, 44.4% agreed, 33.3% were neutral on the
matter, 5.6% disagreed and another 2.8% disagreed. The cumulative percentage shows that
less than 58.3% of the respondents agreed to this.
Table 4.28: Employees are encouraged to develop their knowledge and skills
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 5 13.9
Agree 16 44.4
Neutral 12 33.3
Disagree 2 5.6
Strongly
Disagree 1 2.8
Total 36 100.0
56
The results on table 4.29 show that 25% of the respondents strongly agreed that the employees
know that their opinion counts, 13.9% agreed, 19.4% were neutral, 27.8% disagreed and 13.9%
strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that only 38.9% agreed with this
statement.
Table 4.29: Employees know that their opinion counts
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 9 25.0
Agree 5 13.9
Neutral 7 19.4
Disagree 10 27.8
Strongly
Disagree 5 13.9
Total 36 100.0
According to table 4.30, 11.1% of the respondents strongly agreed that staff feel that they have
opportunity to grow, 33.3% agreed, 30.6% were neutral on the matter, 13.9% disagreed and
another 11.1% disagreed. The cumulative percentage shows that less than half, that is 44.4%
agreed with this statement.
57
Table 4.30: Staff feel that they have opportunity to grow
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 4 11.1
Agree 12 33.3
Neutral 11 30.6
Disagree 5 13.9
Strongly
Disagree 4 11.1
Total 36 100.0
The results on table 4.31 show that 8.3% of the respondents strongly agreed that they planned
to work for the company for the next six months, 11.1% agreed, 58.3% were neutral, 11.1%
disagreed and 11.1% strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that only 19.4%
agreed with this statement.
Table 4.31: I plan to work for the company for the next six months.
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 3 8.3
Agree 4 11.1
Neutral 21 58.3
Disagree 4 11.1
Strongly Disagree 4 11.1
Total 36 100.0
58
According to table 4.32, 19.4% of the respondents strongly agreed that overall good skill sets
and training positively affect the performance of the organization, 41.7% agreed, 27.8% were
neutral on the matter, 8.3% disagreed and another 2.8% disagreed. The cumulative
percentage shows that 61.1% agreed with this statement.
Table 4.32: Skill sets and training positively affects Organizational Performance
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 7 19.4
Agree 15 41.7
Neutral 10 27.8
Disagree 3 8.3
Strongly
Disagree 1 2.8
Total 36 100.0
4.5 Impact of systems on Organizational Performance
The study sought to determine the relationship between the Systems used in the hotel and
Organization Performance. Pearson’s Correlations coefficient and linear regression was done
to determine how the two variables were related.
4.5.1 Correlation between Systems and Organizational Performance
According to table 4.33, there is a positive significant correlation between organizational
performance and the systems statement “IT Systems Enhance Productivity” (r=0.792,
p=0.000). This relationship is extended to “The operating systems e.g. Opera, reduce the
time used to process transactions (r=0.821, p=0.004), “Information Technology Systems
have helped reduce the time used to process transactions impacting how the organization
performs ”(r=0.633,p=0.000), ” Information Technology Systems have helped in processing
financial details of the company”(r=0.698,p=0.000), “Guests can make bookings through
online channels e.g. Expedia, Booking.com”(r=0.737,p=0.000), “Guests Book the hotel
59
through email”(r=0.783,p=0.000), “Guests book the hotel by making phone calls
”(r=0.734,p=0.000)
Table 4.33: Correlation between Systems and Organizational Performance
Productivity enhances
performance Lead time reduction
Processing transactions
is easier
Supplier information
and payment done in good
time
Productivity enhances performance
Pearson Correlation
1 .792** .744** .693**
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000 .000 .000
N 36 36 36 36
Lead time reduction Pearson Correlation .792** 1 .792** .781**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 36 36 36 36
Processing transactions is easier
Pearson Correlation .744** .792** 1 .802**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 36 36 36 36
Supplier info and paymnet done in good time
Pearson Correlation .693** .781** .802** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 36 36 36 36
Operational productivity Pearson Correlation
.661** .879** .748** .850**
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000 .000 .000 .000
N 36 36 36 36
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
60
4.5.1 Regression Model of Systems and Organization Performance
Table 4.34 illustrates the model summary of the multiple regression. It shows that the Adjusted
R Square value is 0.871. This indicates that 87% of the variation in Organizational performance
can be explained by Systems.
Table 4.34: Model Summary
Model Summaryb
Model R R Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of
the Estimate
Durbin-
Watson
1 .933a .871 .820 .485 2.093
a. Predictors: (Constant), Systems
b. Dependent Variable: Organizational Performance
The findings in relation to the impact of Systems on Organizational performance are
represented in table 4.35 below. The table gives the correlation coefficients to be utilized in
coming up with a formula showing the relationship between Organizational performance and
Systems. It is as follows;
Organizational Performance = -0.262 + 0.439 IT Productivity + 0.436 Time Reduction by
Systems + 0.018 Financial Processing
61
Table 4.35: Coefficients
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
95.0%
Confidence
Interval for B
B
Std.
Error Beta
Lower
Bound
Upper
Bound
1 (Constant) -.262 .233 -1.125 .271 -.743 .218
IT
Productivity
.439 .154 .421 2.845 .009 .121 .757
Time
Reduction by
Systems
.436 .213 .422 2.044 .052 -.003 .875
Financial
Processing
.018 .203 .017 .088 .931 -.401 .436
a. Dependent Variable: Organizational Performance
The study sought to investigate the impact of Systems on Organizational Performance. In so
doing the study sought to establish the significance of statements associated to Systems and
their relationship to organizational performance as indicated in part D of the questionnaire.
The statements were ranked by their coefficient of variation as reflected in table 4.36:
Information Technology helping to reduce processing times was highest ranked with a
coefficient of variation of 0.44 while guest being able to make bookings through online
channels ranked least with a coefficient of variation of 0.74.
62
Table 4.36 Impact of systems on Organizational Performance
N Mean
Std.
Deviation
Coefficient
of Variation Ranking
Information Technology Systems have
helped reduce the time used to process
transactions impacting how the
organization performs
36 2.08 0.91 0.44 1
Information Technology Systems have
helped in processing financial details
of the company reducing the payment
of suppliers in the organization
36 2.19 1.12 0.51 2
The productivity of the organization is
enhanced by the information systems
available
36 2.06 1.09 0.53 3
The staff feel that their skillset is a
competitive advantage that sets them
apart from other hotels
36 2.22 1.22 0.55 4
Guests book the hotel by making
phone class 36 2.08 1.16 0.55 5
Guests Book the hotel through email 36 1.83 1.03 0.56 6
The information systems in the hotel
are user friendly to the staff 36 2.03 1.18 0.58 7
The operating systems e.g. Opera,
reduce the time used to process
transactions for the guests impacting
how the organization performs
36 1.75 1.11 0.63 8
The Information Technology Systems
in the hotel make it easy for clients to
do bookings.
36 1.81 1.14 0.63 9
The hotels information systems help in
enhancing operational productivity 36 2.00 1.26 0.63 10
Guests can make bookings through
online channels e.g. Expedia,
Booking.com
36 1.83 1.36 0.74 11
63
4.5.1.1 Operational Productivity and Information Systems
According to table 4.37, 33.3% of the respondents strongly agreed that the productivity of the
organization is enhanced by the information systems available, 44.4% agreed, 11.1% were
neutral on the matter, 5.6% disagreed and another 5.6% disagreed. The cumulative percentage
shows majority of the respondents agreed with this.
Table 4.37: The productivity of the organization is enhanced by the IT systems available
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 12 33.3
Agree 16 44.4
Neutral 4 11.1
Disagree 2 5.6
Strongly
Disagree 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0
The results on table 4.38 show that 58.3% of the respondents strongly agreed that the operating
systems e.g. opera, reduce the time used to process transactions for the guests impacting how
the organization performs, 22.2% agreed, 8.3% were neutral, 8.3% disagreed and 2.8%
strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that 80.6% of the respondents agreed
to this.
64
Table 4.38: The operating systems e.g. Opera, reduce transactions processing times
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 21 58.3
Agree 8 22.2
Neutral 3 8.3
Disagree 3 8.3
Strongly
Disagree 1 2.8
Total 36 100.0
The results on table 4.39 show that 22.2% of the respondents strongly agreed that the
information technology systems have helped reduce the time used to process transactions
impacting how the organization performs, 58.3% agreed, 11.1% were neutral, 5.6 % disagreed
and 2.8% strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that 80.6% of the respondents
agreed to this.
Table 4.39: IT Systems have helped reduce the time used to process transactions
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 8 22.2
Agree 21 58.3
Neutral 4 11.1
Disagree 2 5.6
Strongly Disagree 1 2.8
Total 36 100.0
According to table 4.40, 36.1% of the respondents strongly agreed that information technology
systems have helped in processing financial details of the company reducing the payment of
65
suppliers in the organization, 22.2% agreed, 3.6% were neutral on the matter, 8.3% disagreed
and another 2.8% disagreed. The cumulative percentage shows that 58.3% of the respondents
agreed.
Table 4.40: IT Systems have helped in processing financial details of the company
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 13 36.1
Agree 8 22.2
Neutral 11 30.6
Disagree 3 8.3
Strongly Disagree 1 2.8
Total 36 100.0
4.5.1.2 Information Technology and Employee Productivity
The results on table 4.41 show that 50% of the respondents strongly agreed that the hotels
information systems help in enhancing operational productivity, 22.2% agreed, 11.1% were
neutral, 11.1% disagreed and 5.6% strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that
72.2% of the respondents agreed to this.
Table 4.41: Hotels information systems enhance operational productivity
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 18 50.0
Agree 8 22.2
Neutral 4 11.1
Disagree 4 11.1
Strongly Disagree 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0
66
According to table 4.42, 55.6% of the respondents strongly agreed that the information
technology systems in the hotel make it easy for clients to do bookings, 22% agreed, 13.9%
were neutral on the matter, 2.8% disagreed and another 5.6% disagreed. The cumulative
percentage shows that less than 77.8% agreed.
Table 4.42: The IT Systems in the hotel make it easy for clients to do bookings
Frequency Percent
Valid Strongly Agree 20 55.6
Agree 8 22.2
Neutral 5 13.9
Disagree 1 2.8
Strongly
Disagree 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0
4.5.1.3 Customer Service and Information Systems
The results on table 4.43 show that 41.7% of the respondents strongly agreed that the
information systems in the hotel are user friendly to the staff, 33.3% agreed, 11.1% were
neutral, 8.3% disagreed and 5.6% strongly disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that
75% of the respondents agreed to this.
67
Table 4.43: The information systems in the hotel are user friendly to the staff
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 15 41.7
Agree 12 33.3
Neutral 4 11.1
Disagree 3 8.3
Strongly
Disagree 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0
According to table 4.44, 63.9% of the respondents strongly agreed that guests can make
booking through online channels, 16.7% agreed, 11.1% disagreed and another 8.3% strongly
disagreed. The cumulative percentage shows that 80.6% agreed with this matter.
Table 4.44: Guests can make bookings through online channels
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 23 63.9
Agree 6 16.7
Disagree 4 11.1
Strongly Disagree 3 8.3
Total 36 100.0
68
4.5.1.4 IT Commercialization, CSIS and Hotel Performance
The results on table 4.45 show that 50% of the respondents strongly agreed that the guests can
book through email, 25% agreed, 19.4% were neutral, 2.8% disagreed and 2.8% strongly
disagreed. The cumulative percentage showed that 75% of the respondents agreed to this.
Table 4.45 Guests Book the hotel through email
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 18 50.0
Agree 9 25.0
Neutral 7 19.4
Disagree 1 2.8
Strongly Disagree 1 2.8
Total 36 100.0
The results on table 4.46 show that 61.1% of the respondents strongly agreed that overall use
of information technology systems have improved the performance of the organization, 25%
agreed, 2.8% were neutral, 5.6% disagreed and 5.6% strongly disagreed. The cumulative
percentage showed that 86.1% of the respondents agreed to this.
Table 4.46: IT Systems have improved the performance of the organization
Frequency Percent
Strongly Agree 22 61.1
Agree 9 25.0
Neutral 1 2.8
Disagree 2 5.6
Strongly
Disagree 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0
69
4.6 Chapter Summary
This chapter was about the results and findings of the study. It presented respondent responses
on the factors that influence organizational performance in tables and diagrams. Brief
explanations of what the figures represent have been offered so that readers can understand the
presentations. The next chapter will give the research summary, conclusions and
recommendations.
70
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
This chapter will discuss the results and findings of the research based on the factors that affect
organizational performance. Based on the literature review, it will also give a conclusion on
the research objectives. The chapter will also make recommendations on each objective.
5.2 Summary
The purpose of this study was to investigate the factors that influence organizational
performance of Sankara Nairobi. The study investigated the extent to which shared values
impacted the performance of an organization, the extent to which skill sets of employees affects
organizational performance and the extent to which systems impacts the performance of an
organization.
This study used a descriptive research design. It used stratified random sampling to study 36
respondents out of 300 employees of Sankara Nairobi. The data was collected using a
questionnaire which was pretested to ensure credibility and accuracy of information obtained.
Questionnaires were administered to line managers, unionized staff, and non- unionized staff
and for senior management, emails were sent to them to fill in the questionnaire. Once data
was collected it was classified into meaningful categories (coded), edited and tabulation of the
same was done using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 23 was used for
initial tabulation analysis. Correlations, regressions and coefficients of variations were used to
analyze the data.
The first research question was to investigate how shared values impacted the performance of
an organization. The regression analysis carried out on the impact of shared values on
organizational performance showed that 61.5% of the variation in organizational performance
could be explained by shared values. The Analysis of Variance carried out on the first research
question also found that the regression model was significant and accurate to a 95% degree of
certainty.
In relation to shared values, findings in there was a positive significant relationship between
organizational performance and Organization has emphasis on understanding the mission and
71
vision of the hotel. There is a positive relationship between diversity in the workplace and
Organizational performance. While there was strong positive correlation between team work
and Organizational performance, shared values impacted organizational performance, working
together as a team improves performance. The researcher found that with a combination of the
abovementioned an organization would develop a strong culture which was essential to
organization performance
The second research question was regarding employee skill set.There is a positive relationship
between the skillset of employees and organizational performance and promotions are done
based on skill set, which was summarized in the following equation: The regression analysis
carried out on the impact of employee skill sets on organizational performance found that
60.4% of the variation in organizational performance could be explained by the skill sets of
employees.
The third research question was to investigate the extent to which systems impact the
performance of an organization. The regression model analysis found that 87% of the variation
in organizational performance could be explained by systems. There is a positive significant
correlation between organizational performance and the systems statement “IT Systems
Enhance Productivity. This relationship is extended to “The operating systems e.g. Opera,
reduce the time used to process transactions. There was also a positive significant relationship
between reduction of the time used to processing transactions and how an organization
performs. Technology was discovered to vital in all the processes that the hotel used. This
directly affected the organization either positively or negatively Online booking methods were
found to be significant not only to achieve the financial goals of the company but also enabling
their guests to make bookings easily.
5.3 Discussion
In this section, the results and finding of the study will be interpreted in line with the research
questions that were utilized to investigate the factors that influence organizational performance
using Sankara Nairobi
72
5.3.1 How Shared Values Impact The Performance Of An Organization.
On investigating how shared values impacted the performance of an organization, it was
determined that 61.5% of the variation in organizational performance could be explained by
shared values. According to Dylag et al., (2013) sharing of these values positively impacts the
performance of the organization. This complemented Beugelsdijk and Klasing (2016), who
argued that greater diversity especially value diversity, referencing philosophical values, was
linked to lower trust levels. Despite this, in the hotel industry where employers look for greater
diversity bearing in mind the nature of the hospitality business, diversity encourages greater
organizational performance (Freitag & Buhlmann, 2009).
The regression and correlation analysis had established that organizational performance is
determined to a greater extent by shared values which comprise of the company’s mission and
vision, the company values, the organization’s visibility and the installation of company values
onto the employees. According to Greenwood et al., (2011), knowing of the company’s values
and consistent reinforcement of the company’s mission and vision through practice have the
greatest impact on organizational performance when it comes to shared values. Porter and
Kramer (2011) added to this by stating that organizations should focus on creating shared
values to enhance their performance, including improving social and economic conditions in
the communities in which they operate. In spite of all these positive associations between
shared values and organizational performance, Peloza and Falkenberg (2009) did not find any
significant associations between performance and shared values in their study corporate social
responsibly.
On crafting a vision of shared value creation, Porter and Kramer (2011) argued that
Organizations should focus on creating shared value to improve their performance, Wasko,
Faraj and Johnson (2006) stated that the cognitive dimension of an organization is made up of
the factors that impact shared understanding among other staff members of the organization,
Strong correlations between the objectives of the organization being seen in shared values and
working together as a team showed that objectives of the organization should be emphasized
in achieving team work and greater organizational performance.
On work values and the transition to work life, Jin and Rounds (2012) considers work values
as a potential resource that affects individual paths to success within an organization. There
73
was a positive correlation between trust and organization performance at a significance level
of .0000. Trust between staff affects the overall performance of the organization. Nooteboom
(2002) put forth that trust reinforces familiarity and a feeling of shared purpose thereby
improving the performance of the organization. The observable strong correlation between the
organization’s performance measures being shared with the staff and shared values like trust
and honesty improving organizational performance showed that companies need to put
emphasis on shared values.
5.3.2 How Employee Skill Set Impacts Organizational Performance
On investigating how employee skill sets impacted the performance of an organization, it was
determined that 60.4% of the variation in organizational performance could be explained by
the various skill sets of employees. Brilon (2015), argued that organizations should find better
ways to assign workers jobs based on their skill sets and the organizational capacity as this will
affect both the organizational performance and the worker’s performance. There was also
positive correlation between multi-skilled employees and organizational performance. There
was no significant relationship between development of the skills and knowledge of staff and
organizational performance. There was also no relationship between staff training and
organizational performance. This approach shows that organizations need to focus on task
assignment problems when workers have different combination of skills and also vary in their
skill level (Gathmann & Schonberg, 2010).
The correlation and regression analysis had established that organizational performance is
determined to a large extent by the skill set of employees which comprised of departmental
skill sets, the presence of multi skilled employees and the fact that promotions are based on
skill. According to Brilon (2015), only specific workers should get promoted or reassigned and
performance in one job may act as an indicator for achievement in another job. In addition to
this, Gathamann and Schonberg (2010) stated that organizations should focus on the task
assignment problem when workers vary in their skill levels where different combination of
skills are required by different tasks. Nevertheless, Lazear (2009), argued that workers should
only have firm specific skills in order to maximize their individual output thereby optimizing
overall organizational performance.
74
To find out whether the organization was reaping benefits by allocating staff to the correct
positions based on their various skill sets, respondents were asked whether the skill set in their
department offered competitive advantage for their organization. The study also found that the
company performance had improved greatly as a result of employees being placed in
departments in which they can harness the full benefits of their skills. It should be noted that
according to Gibbons and Waldman (2004), employees have relative advantages in one or
more tasks and considering this, companies capitalize on the notion on skills that are task
specific.
For performance in different categories of jobs and tasks, Schonberg (2010), noted that workers
have a lot of skills and that their ability profile is necessary in order for them to excel in their
tasks. It was observed that a strong correlation was found between staff being involved in
achieving the mission and vision of the company and staff having the correct skill set in one’s
department thereby offering competitive advantage hence affect how the organization
performed. The study found that there was positive correlation between the skill set of their
employees and organizational performance to a significance level of .0000. This is seen by the
skillsets of employees giving the hotel a competitive edge. Koch and Nafziger (2012), have a
similar result and in their model, they show that aligning workers in departments coherent to
their skill sets, enables them to put little effort and yet yield great results.
On skill challenges and enjoyment of work, the study found that staff training and organization
performance were not correlated to a significance level of 14.7%. Brauer and Leischnign
(2016) found that a balance of challenges and abilities at work and sufficient training is
paramount for work enjoyment for most employees in the hospitality industry. Crook et.al,
(2011) argued that organizations needed skilled and talented individuals to be deeply engaged
so as to create competitive gain and achieve the organization’s performance goals
5.3.3 Impact of Systems on Organizational Performance.
On investigating how systems impacted the performance of an organization, it was determined
that 82% of the variation in organizational performance could be explained by the systems.
Respondents were asked whether information technology systems had helped in reducing
transaction processing times. Bannister and Remenyi (2000) stated that IT systems utilized in
the correct manner, not only improved the performance of a firm but also would eventually
75
deliver services at lower costs and with greater efficiency. There was a positive correlation
between information technology systems reducing the lead time and organizational
performance. This means that IT systems have assisted in processing financial processes of the
organization thereby reducing the payment times of suppliers and distributors in the
organization. Piccoli and Lui (2014), showed that IT enabled systems improved financial
performance of organizations in the hotel industry, mediated the presentation of customer
services and eventually increased total customer value.
The regression and correlation analysis established that organizational performance is
impacted to a large extent by the systems of the organization which consist of IT Productivity
systems, IT Financial Systems and IT time reduction systems. According to Bannister and
Remenyi (2000), the course through which systems improve organizational performance is
more complicated than delivering services at lower costs. He states that IT systems should be
connected with other non-IT organizational facors like services and clients in order to improve
organizational performance. Tangen (2005) added that pertinent outputs (such as revenue and
number of clients), and relevant inputs (such as energy and raw materials) should be optimized
through IT Systems. In addition to this Chathoth (2007) stated that quality service which brings
out quality outcomes, could be enhanced by Information Technology systems by helping
hotels to deliver services quicker. Nonetheless, even with the great achievements by IT systems
in enhancing organizational performance, Zhilin Yang et al., (2003), companies should not
forget that clients also need to personalize these systems in addition to receiving individual
human attention for greater customer experience and organizational performance.
On information technology systems and employee and organizational productivity, the
respondents were asked whether the information systems had assisted in improving the
organization’s operational productivity. There was Kim et.al, (2012) suggest that hospitality
organizations can be successful in using IT systems to enhance operational productivity of staff
and the company at large. This may be done through reducing staff expenses and costs without
actually inhibiting performance and productivity outputs. Other than decreasing employee
costs organizational productivity can be attained through higher output while simultaneously
restraining any increase in employee costs by using information systems and technology
(Doukas et.al, 2007).
76
On customer service and information systems, Bitner, Brown and Meuter (2000), stated that
the user friendliness of Information Systems in the hotel industry were features of service
quality which enhance service encounters by providing for customization, while at the same
time improving service recovery and spontaneously delighting guests. A strong, positive and
significant correlation was found between user friendly IT systems both guests and staff and
organizational performance. Kokkinou and Cranage (2013), state that user friendly systems
benefit organizations greatly benefit organizations in the service industry and improve their
performance by avoiding situations characterized by a possibly negative rapport experience.
5.4 Conclusion
5.4.1 Impact of shared value on Organizational Performance
The first research question of this study was to investigate how shared values impacted on the
performance on an organization. It was determined that shared values such as commitment and
trust positively impacted the performance of an organization. This study also determined that
trust and diversity were critical to positive organizational performance in the hospitality
industry.
5.4.2 Impact of skill sets of employees on Organizational Performance
The second research question of this study was to investigate how the skill set of employees
impacted the performance of an organization. The study found that multivariate skills and
employee work assignment if done correctly significantly and positively impacted
organizational performance. The study also determined that positive organizational
performance was associated with the organization’s emphasis on enhancing employee skills,
challenging employees and ensuring that employees enjoy their work
5.4.3 Impact of systems on Organizational performance
The third research question of this study was to investigate how systems impacted the
performance of an organization. The study determined that employee productivity and
operational productivity due to information systems of the organization positively impacted
organizational performance. The study also determined that use of information systems
enhanced organizational performance through improved IT enabled customer service systems.
77
The research also determined that Information Technology Systems improved hotel revenues
and as a result improved performance.
5.5 Recommendations
5.5.1 Recommendation for Improvement
5.5.1.1 Impact of shared values on organizational performance
The study recommends that Organizations put an emphasis on their ideals, developed by the
leadership and adopted by members of the group. The study recommends that core values
should be shared to and known by all employees of the organization. The study also
recommends that organizations work on solving trust and diversity challenges amongst their
staff members will at the same time craft a vision of shared value creation. The study also
recommends that work values should be able to allow for the transition of employees from
personal life to work life.
5.5.1.2 Impact of skill set of employees on organizational performance
The study recommends that organizations strive to equip their employees with multivariate
skills through training and ensure that employee work assignment is based on skill of the
individual. The study also recommends that the skill of the employee combined with the work
assignment should be such that one enjoys work.
5.5.1.3 Impact of systems on organizational performance
The study recommends that organization invest in the latest, most efficient, user friendly
systems that have been tested in the industry to ensure increased organizational performance.
The study also recommends that hotels put an emphasis on systems that will improve customer
service and allow for both guest customization and staff customization to enable efficiency and
greater productivity.
5.5.2 Recommendation for Further Studies
Similar studies should be carried out to gauge the reliability of these findings within other
organizations within this region. Further studies should be undertaken on the impact of
diversity and trust on organizational performance since we are now living in a multi-faceted
and multi-cultural world which requires one to accommodate the needs of another. A further
78
research should also be done on organization performance in an uncertain political system as
this is a possible scenario in many African countries.
79
REFERENCES
Bannister, F., & Remenyi, D. (2000). Acts of faith: instinct, value and IT investment
decisions. Journal of Information Technology, 15(3), 231–241.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02683960050153183
Bavik, A. (2016). Developing a new hospitality industry organizational culture scale.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 58, 44–55.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.07.005
Beugelsdijk, S., & Klasing, M. J. (2016). Diversity and trust: The role of shared values.
Journal of Comparative Economics, 44(3), 522–540.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jce.2015.10.014
Brilon, S. (2015). Job assignment with multivariate skills and the Peter Principle. Labor
Economics, 32, 112–121.
Buonocore, F. (2010). Contingent work in the hospitality industry: A mediating model of
organizational attitudes. Tourism Management, 31, 378–385.
https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.04.005
Chathoth, P. K. (2007). The impact of information technology on hotel operations, service
management and transaction costs: A conceptual framework for full-service hotel
firms. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 26(2), 395–408.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2006.03.004
Corina, G., Liviu, I., & Roxana Stegerean. (2011). Determinants of Organizational
Performance: The Case of Romania, 6(2), 285–300.
Dyląg, A., Jaworek, M., Karwowski, W., Kożusznik, M., & Marek, T. (2013). Discrepancy
between individual and organizational values: Occupational burnout and work
engagement among white-collar workers. International Journal of Industrial
Ergonomics, 43(3), 225–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2013.01.002
Gathmann, C., & Schonberg, U. (2010). How general is human capital? A task-based
approach. Journal of Labor Economics, 28, 1–49.
80
Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011).
Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses. The Academy of
Management Annals, 5, 317–371.
Ho, T. H., & Zheng, Y.-S. (2004). Setting Customer Expectation in Service Delivery: An
Integrated Marketing-Operations Perspective. Management Science, 50(4), 479–488.
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0170
Jung, H. S., & Yoon, H. H. (2016). What does work meaning to hospitality employees? The
effects of meaningful work on employees’ organizational commitment: The
mediating role of job engagement. International Journal of Hospitality Management,
53, 59–68. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.12.004
Law, R., Leung, D., Au, N., & Lee, H. “Andy.” (2013). Progress and Development of
Information Technology in the Hospitality Industry: Evidence from Cornell
Hospitality Quarterly. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 54(1), 10–24.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965512453199
Lazear, E. (2009). Firm-specific human capital: a skill-weights approach. Journal of Political
Economics, 117, 914–940.
Lo, F.-Y., & Fu, P.-H. (2016). The interaction of chief executive officer and top management
team on organization performance. Journal of Business Research, 69(6), 2182–2186.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.027
Outi Niininen, Dimitrios Buhalis, & Roger March. (2007). Customer empowerment in
tourism through consumer centric marketing (CCM). Qualitative Market Research:
An International Journal, 10(3), 265–281.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750710754308
Overby, E. (2008). Process Virtualization Theory and the Impact of Information Technology.
Organization Science, 19(2), 277–291. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0316
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service
Quality and Its Implications for Future Research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41–50.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1251430
81
Peloza, J., & Falkenberg, L. (2009). The role of collaboration in achieving corporate social
resposibility objectives. California Management Review, 51, 95–113.
Piccoli, G., & Lui, T.-W. (2014). The competitive impact of information technology: can
commodity IT contribute to competitive performance? European Journal of
Information Systems, 23(6), 616–628. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2013.20
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). The big idea: Creating shared value. Harvard
Business Review, 89, 2.
Richards, G. (2011). Creativity and tourism: The State of the Art. Annals of Tourism
Research, 38(4), 1225–1253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2011.07.008
Suh, E., West, J. J., & Shin, J. (2012). Important competency requirements for managers in
the hospitality industry. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education,
11(2), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2012.02.005
Tangen, S. (2005). Analysing the requirements of performance measurement systems.
Measuring Business Excellence, 9(4), 46–54.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13683040510634835
Tomatzky, L. g, & Klein, K. J. (1982). Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption
implementation: a meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, 28–45.
Zhilin Yang, Robin T. Peterson, & Shaohan Cai. (2003). Services quality dimensions of
Internet retailing: an exploratory analysis. Journal of Services Marketing, 17(7), 685–
700. https://doi.org/10.1108/08876040310501241
82
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1: COVER LETTER
Sharon Mule,
United States International University – Africa,
P.O. Box 52616,
Nairobi
18/10/2016
Dear Respondent,
My name is Sharon Mule and I am a graduate student pursuing a Masters’ degree in Business
Administration (MBA) at the Chandaria School of Business, United States International
University - Africa (USIU). As a requirement of my course, I am writing a research thesis
whose title is Factors Affecting Organizational Performance in The Hospitality industry: A
Case Study of Sankara Nairobi.
The questionnaire is divided into four sections that will require approximately 15 minutes of
your time. You are humbly requested to answer the questions honestly. Taking part in this
process is voluntary and completion and return of the questionnaire will indicate your
willingness to participate in this study. The information collected in this study will remain
confidential.
Your participation in this study highly appreciated as it will ensure that I successfully complete
my academic endeavors.
For further information with regard to both the questionnaire and the project study, please
contact me using the information below.
Yours sincerely,
Sharon Mule
Mobile no: +254 726854126
83
APPENDIX II: RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE
SECTION A: Background Information
1. Your gender: Male [ 1 ] Female [ 2 ]
2. You age bracket (Tick whichever appropriate)
Below 22 [ 1 ]
22 -29 years [ 2 ]
30 - 37 years [ 3]
38 - 46Years [ 4 ]
Over- 46 years [ 5 ]
3. What is your highest level of education? (Tick as applicable)
Primary Certificate [ 1 ] Secondary Certificate [ 2 ]
Diploma/Certificate [3 ] Bachelors’ degree [ 4 ]
Postgraduate degree [ 5 ] others [ 6 ]
If others, specify ……………………………………………………………..
4. Working experience in the Organization
0 – 1 years [ 1 ] 1– 2 years [ 2 ]
2 – 3 years [ 3] 3 – 4 years [ 4 ]
Over 4 years [ 5 ]
5. Department that you work
Front Office [ 1 ] Housekeeping Department [ 2 ]
Sales Department [ 3] Engineering [ 4 ]
Food and Beverage [ 5]
6. Level of Management
Unionized Staff [ 1] Non- unionized staff [ 2 ]
Line Managers [3] Senior Managers [4 ]
84
SECTION B: SHARED VALUES
To what extent do you agree with the following statements? (1 - Strongly Agree, 2 - Agree,
3 - Neutral, 4 –Disagree, 5 – Strongly Disagree)
1 2 3 4 5
7.Organization has emphasis on understanding the mission
and vision of the hotel
8.The company encourages diversity in the workplace
9.Organization invests heavily on the values that were there in
the 2010
10.Communication is done using the bottom up approach
11.The organization shares the vision of the company every
financial year
12.Working together as a team to improve performance
13.The organization creates an environment that the staff
enjoy their work
14.The shared values that are instilled in the staff during
training affect the financial performance Sankara
15.Trust between staff affect the overall performance of the
organization
16.The organizations performance measures are shared
regularly with the staff
17a.Shared values like trust, commitment and honesty of
employees improve the performance of the organization
85
17b If you think that there are other ways in which shared values e.g. teamwork and trust
influence the performance of the organizations kindly feel free to give details
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
SECTION C: SKILL SET OF EMPLOYEES
To what extent do you agree with the following statements? (1 - Strongly Agree, 2 - Agree,
3 - Neutral, 4 –Disagree, 5 – Strongly Disagree)
1 2 3 4 5
18.Multi-skilled employees enhance the performance of my
organization
19.Promotions in the hotel are done based on the skill set of
employees
20.The skill set in my department offers competitive
advantage for the company
21.The staff are involved in achieving the mission and
vision of the company
22.The organization places high value on staff training and
development
86
23.Training given to staff is based on the core competencies
of the organization
24.Staff are committed to the organization
25.Employees are encouraged to develop their knowledge
and skills
26.Employees know that their opinion counts
27.Staff feel that they have opportunity to grow
28.I plan to work for the company for the next six months
29a.Overall good skill sets and training positively affect the
performance of the organization
29b.If you think or feel that the skill set of employees affect the performance of the
organization in other ways, please feel free to share in detail
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
87
SECTION D: SYTEMS IN THE ORGANIZATION
How important are the following important in terms of the internal and external systems in
your hotel on a scale of 1-5, where 1 = very important and 5 = unimportant
SYSTEMS
1 2 3 4 5
30.The productivity of the organization is enhanced by
the information systems available
31.The operating systems e.g. Opera, reduce the time
used to process transactions for the guests impacting
how the organization performs
32.Information Technology Systems have helped reduce
the time used to process transactions impacting how the
organization performs
33.Information Technology Systems have helped in
processing financial details of the company reducing the
payment of suppliers in the organization
34.The hotels information systems help in enhancing
operational productivity
35. The Information Technology Systems in the hotel
make it easy for clients to do bookings.
36.The information systems in the hotel are user friendly
to the staff
37.Guests can make bookings through online channels
e.g. Expedia, Booking.com
38a.Overall use of Information Technology Systems
have improved the performance of the organization
38. Are there other ways in which Information Technology systems can improve the
performance of your organization? Please give details
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
