commitment

International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

ldquoUnderstanding Studentsrsquo Commitment to Employment in the Tourism and

Hospitality Industryrdquo

Harmon Chellen BSc MSc Training Centre Manager

MITD ndash Ecole Hocircteliegravere Sir Gaeumltan Duval Ebegravene Reacuteduit

Mauritius Tel (+230) 404 7200 Fax (+230) 465 8835 hsmhebintnetmu

Robin Nunkoo BA MA MA Department of Management

Faculty of Law and Management University of Mauritius

Reacuteduit Mauritius

Tel (+230) 403 7522 Fax (+230) 465 6906 rnunkoouomacmu

Le Meridien Hotel Mauritius 24-27 August 2010 1


ldquoUnderstanding Studentsrsquo Commitment to Employment in the Tourism and Hospitality Industryrdquo

Abstract This research develops a model to understand the underlying factors influencing studentsrsquo commitment to employment in the tourism and hospitality industry Based on a literature review surrounding the topic six factors likely to influence commitment are used to develop a theoretical framework These factors include nature of work social status career prospects promotion opportunities physical working conditions and pay and fridge benefits The model is tested using responses collection from 300 students studying tourism and hospitality related programs at the Hotel School of Mauritius The study relied on the use of a structured questionnaire which was piloted tested with 30 students Multiple regression analysis was used to test the effect of each of the six factors on the level of commitment to employment in the tourism and hospitality industry Results indicated that the social status associated with employment in the industry as well as career prospects in the industry were the two major factors influencing studentsrsquo commitment The policy implications emerging from the findings are discussed These include the development of tourism action clubs providing career advices to students development of tourism awareness competition tourism scholarship programs company participation in job fairs and implementation of company sponsored tours

Keywords Students commitment employment tourism and hospitality industry



INTRODUCTION

Tourism industry depends largely on human interaction (Baum 1993) Tourism is a service

orientated industry where humans play a pivotal role in delivering a product that will influence the

overall experience of tourists lsquoMoment of truthsrsquo or the contact between employees in the tourism

industry with consumers (Carlzon 1987) will determine the extent to which the service fails meets or

exceeds the expectations of tourists Hence the overall quality of products or experiences in tourism is

influenced by competent and committed staff both at the front line and lsquobehind the scenesrsquo (Go

Monachello amp Baum 1996) With such crucial roles played by the workforce tourism employees will

determine the very survival of the tourism industry (Amoah amp Baum 1997) This notion is supported

by Swarbrooke (1995) that in the very nature of tourism business operations human resources often

constitute the biggest portion of the budget As such the tourism workforce deserves undivided

attention in tourism planning and management It is forecast that by 2020 there will be a total of 16

billion million jobs in the tourism industry (WTTC 2007) thus increasing the need for more motivated

qualified and skilled manpower ready to meet the challenges of an ever changing and demanding

industry

There is a common notion that the tourism and hospitality sector offers low pay very little

training and career prospects limited scope for promotion and unsociable working hours which have

collectively formed a negative image of tourism as a career (WTTC 2002a) As a result the tourism

industry is to-day facing more than ever greater challenges in attracting skilled and motivated staff

than the emerging sectors in the economy (Kelley-Patterson amp George 2001) An employeersquos

perception to any industry will no doubt be determined by their commitment perceptions and

attitudes towards working in the industry as well the types of jobs available in the industry It is argued

that this is particularly pertinent to tourism and hospitality as it has been reported that potential recruits

have a negative image of working in the industry (Aksu and Koksal 2005 Brien 2004 Getz 1994

Kusluvan and Kusluvan 2000) By using staff as the mechanism to gain an advantage over

competitors it is therefore argued that it is essential that tourism and hospitality graduates have a

positive attitude towards working in the industry (Kusluvan and Kusluvan 2000) Negative

perceptions of the tourism industry have become a global phenomenon and without immediate bold

and strategic effort by all parties concerned shortages of skilled workers will continue to be the one of

the most crucial issues facing the tourism and hospitality industry in the near future (WTTC 2002a)

Based on the aforesaid this research seeks to understand the studentsrsquo commitment towards

the tourism industry in Mauritius by developing a unique theoretical framework The proposed model

is shown in Figure 1 and focuses on the factors that have a direct bearing on the level of commitment

toward the industry Drawing from the current literature various factors have been considered to

influence studentsrsquo commitment toward the industry Such factors include nature of work social

status industry-person congeniality physical working conditions career prospects promotion

opportunities work relationship among staff members the managersrsquo role and support the pay and the



level of fringe benefits practiced in the tourism industry in Mauritius More specifically based on the

conceptual framework of the research (Figure 1) the research questions of the study are as follows

1 What is the influence of studentsrsquo perceived nature of work in the tourism and

hospitality sector on their level of commitment to the industry

2 What is the influence of students perceived career prospects in the tourism and


3 How do studentsrsquo perceptions of promotional opportunities in the tourism and

hospitality sector influence their level of commitment to the industry

4 How do studentsrsquo perceptions of pay and benefits in the tourism and hospitality

sector influence their level of commitment to the industry

5 How do studentsrsquo perceived social status in the tourism and hospitality industry

influence their level of commitment to the industry

Figure 1 The Conceptual Framework of the Research

Nature of work

Career prospects

Promotion opportunities

Pay and benefits

Commitment to the

industry

Social status

BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

Studentsrsquo perception of tourism employment



Tourism relies on people (Baum 1993) as it is a service-orientated industry and employees

play a central role in delivering a product that will influence the overall experience of tourists The

lsquomoments of truthrsquo or the contacts between front-line staff in the tourism industry with consumers will

determine the extent to which the service fails meets or exceeds the expectations of tourists (Carlzon

1987) The important role of employees determines the survival of the tourism industry (Amoah amp

Baum 1997) This notion is validated by Swarbrooke (1995) that in the very nature of tourism

business operations human resources often constitute the biggest portion of the budget As such

effective human resource management deserves more attention in tourism planning and management

(Christensen Hughes 2002)

Although there is substantial literature about tourism employment only a limited number of

studies were conducted to highlight the perceptions of students towards careers in the tourism industry

This means that more empirical studies focusing on tourism studentsrsquo commitment to the industry are

needed in order to evaluate the status of tourism jobs in the human resources (HR) planning process

for the tourism sector Generally HR plans focus on the employment needs of large international

tourism companies especially in hospitality and neglect perceptions of students Negative attitudes

towards working in tourism may result in the industryrsquos failure to capture and retain the most qualified

tourism students Since the tourism industry relies so heavily on people to deliver a service this would

result in a negative impact on service quality and consumer satisfaction which might then hinder the

competitiveness of the industry

Several researchers have surveyed the perceptions of secondary or high school students

towards employment in the tourism industry In his study of secondary school students in Australia

Ross (1994) found a high level of interest in management positions in the tourism industry Getz

(1994) surveyed high school students in the Spey Valley in Scotland His longitudinal study showed

that perceptions towards a potential career in tourism had become much more negative over a period of

14 years Airey and Frontistis (1997) compared the attitudes of secondary school students towards

tourism careers in Greece and the United Kingdom They showed that the UK students had a less

positive attitude towards tourism than their Greek counterparts At the end of their survey of high

school students in Arizona Cothran and Combrink (1999) stated that although minority students often

had less knowledge about hospitality jobs they had more interest in them

Several researchers have also studied the perceptions of undergraduate tourism and hospitality

management students Casadorsquos survey (1992) on student expectations of hospitality jobs revealed

that although they tended to be fairly realistic before their graduation the turnover of these students

seemed to be high Barron and Maxwell (1993) examined the perceptions of new and continuing

students at Scottish higher education institutions They found that in general the new students had

positive images of the industry whereas the students with supervised work experience were much less

positive in their views Purcell and Quinn (1995) surveyed 704 former tourism students and discovered

that graduates complained of having little opportunity to develop their managerial skills



A relatively recent study conducted by Kusluvan and Kusluvan (2000) four-year tourism and

hotel management students in seven different schools in Turkey reported negative perceptions

towards different dimensions of working in tourism Kozak and Kızılırmak (2001) carried out a similar

survey among the undergraduate tourism students in three different vocational schools in Turkey Like

Barron and Maxwell they too indicated that work experience as a trainee in the industry affected their

perceptions in a negative way In his comparative study of hospitality studentsrsquo future perceptions at

two different universities in the UK and in the Netherlands Jenkins (2001) also showed that as they

progress in their degree the studentsrsquo perceptions of the industry tend to deteriorate Birdir (2002)

surveyed those junior and senior tourism students at the University of Mersin in Turkey in order to

find out the reasons why some students were not eager to work in the industry after graduation The

main reason stated was the lack of quality education in tourism to enable them to be successful in the

sector Irregular working hours in tourism was the second major reason

Another study conducted among the tourism students of Adnan Menderes University in

Turkey examined what tourism and hospitality internship students expect from working in the industry

(Yuumlksel et al 2003) The results showed that internship students gave high priority to good and fair

wages opportunities for career development tactful and professional management and personal

growth The findings of the survey conducted by Goumlkdeniz et al (2002) at 4-star and 5-star hotels in

Turkey showed that one of the reasons for the enduring poor image of the industry is the managersrsquo

attitudes towards the trainees Most of the managers used the trainees because they were ldquocheap

labourrdquo and put these students into work in any department where staffs were needed

Numerous books and research papers have been published on the tourism industry yet little

research has been undertaken to understand tourism students perceptions of the tourism Industry in

Mauritius Many positions within the industry involve low-skilled work there are opportunities for

entry into the industry for individuals with little experience and low skills (OMahony and Sillitoe

2001 p 22) Casado (1992) investigated the basic expectations of students in the tourism sector and

found their expectations to be ldquofairly realisticrdquo before their graduation period Purcell and Quinn

(1995) undertook research with a sample of 704 students and identified that students complained of

problems in developing their managerial skills

Clearly perceptions of tourism industry should be investigated mainly from the studentsrsquo

perspective as they are the future employees of the tourism industry However the limitations of this

work required that the principal focus was the perspective of students Students can be influenced by

personal contact with tourism establishments for example through experience with the establishment

as a consumer by word of mouth from faculty members establishment representatives and from

students etc (Sciarini and Woods 1997 p 78)

Moreover previous research has shown that hospitality studentsrsquo attitudes towards hospitality

jobs are quite controversial Some studies have argued for the existence of positive attitudes among



secondary or high school students towards employment or careers in the tourism industry (Ross 1992

1994) However many more studies have noted that hospitality graduates hold unfavorable attitudes

towards working and making their careers in that industry For example Kusluvan and Kusluvan

(2000) find evidence of the results of unfavorable evaluations towards different dimensions of working

in the tourism industry They have suggested that finding out hospitality studentsrsquo perceptions and

attitudes towards hospitality jobs may help predict the likelihood of students seeking employment in

the same industry after graduation

Another study shows that the percentage of people who were likely to work in the hospitality

industry was reduced by half over the 1978ndash1992 periods The percentage of people who considered

the hospitality industry attractive decreased from 43 to 29 over that period (Getz 1994) Most

hospitality graduates have been found to believe that a number of extrinsic factors such as poor

working conditions high pressure long working hours and a lack of motivation training programs

and career opportunities may contribute to poor employment aspirations high turnover rates and the

wastage of educational investment (eg Kang and Gould 2002 Jenkins 2001) This should be a

cause for concern since attitudes are considered to be effective predictors of behavior (Ajzen and

Fishbein 1980) Essentially negative attitudes toward hospitality jobs are expected to decrease the

studentsrsquo desire to seek hospitality employment

Previous studies have found that hospitality students are much less committed to the

hospitality industry when they have more experience within the profession (Purcell and Quinn 1996

Getz 1994)Research has also shown that internship experience negatively affects the hospitality

studentsrsquo attitudes toward the industry and their intentions in terms of getting hospitality jobs

(Waryszak 1999) Zhang and Wu (2004) also identify that most students of vocational hospitality and

tourism colleges in China know very little about hotels and tourism before entering colleges and many

of them experience a lsquolsquoreality shockrsquorsquo when they find out more about hospitality and tourism

operations

Similarly Jenkins (2001) has noted that undergraduate hospitality studentsrsquo perceptions of the

industry deteriorate as their degree course progresses While many studies have focused on the impact

of internshipwork experience on studentsrsquo attitudes towards hospitality employment intentions the

present study seeks to find out the factors that influence studentsrsquo perception towards working in the

tourism industry

Furthermore there is relatively little evidence that research has been conducted in this area

Airey and Frontistis (1997 p 157) comment that perhaps the most important reason for undertaking

this type of study is that there are so many questions which still need to be answered about the attitudes

of young people to tourism careers At a time when tourism is held out as one of the worldrsquos major

industries and generator of employment it would be timely to know more about what potential recruits

think about the industry in order to provide a basis for attracting the best possible work force This



leaves us with the problem of trying to understand what factors students believe are important in

influencing their choice of career and then the extent to which they thought tourism and hospitality as

a career offers these factors The purpose of this study therefore is to understand what factors

respondents found important when considering a career and how well they thought the tourism and

hospitality industry offered these

Finally the most recent survey conducted by Aksu and Koumlksal (2005) at the Akdeniz

University School of Tourism and Hotel Management in Antalya investigated the main expectations

of students from the tourism industry The results indicated that generally they had low expectations

However positive perceptions were found among respondents who had chosen the school as one of

their top three choices at the university entrance exam chosen the school willingly and carried out

practical work experience outside of Turkey

Kusluvan and Kusluvan (2000) and Ross (1994) claim that the image of a particular industry

will have a major effect on potential recruits perceptions of the industry which will impact on the

quality and quantity of future staff The image of tourism and hospitality is one that has two sides On

one side the industry is seen as a glamorous one while on the other it is deemed as being one of low

skill low status and low pay (Riley et al 2002) There are reports that the sector has a particularly

poor image in the eyes of hospitality students which suggests that the industry may have greater

difficulty attracting recruiting and retaining quality staff (Jenkins 2001)

According to Brien (2004) discussions relating to the poor image started in 1990 when the

UK industry magazine Hospitality reported that the industryrsquos image was the main barrier to

recruitment in the UK In the late 1990s a BBC television series Hotel showed various hotels and

hotel antics and highlighted the working conditions in the industry This helped form an image that

many thought was alarming unconstructive and negative (Brien 2004) It has been argued that this

poor image is impeding the recruitment of quality staff as many potential employees are anxious about

the working conditions in the industry caused by this negative portrayal (Aksu and Koksal 2005

Brien 2004 Kusluvan and Kusluvan 2000)

There are studies indicating that the proportion of workers in the tourism and hospitality

industry who have tertiary qualifications is much lower than most other industry sectors (Australian

Bureau of Statistics 2006) There are also reports of many tourism and hospitality management

graduates leaving the industry or even failing to enter the industry upon graduation due to low job

satisfaction poor employment conditions and absence of motivating factors resulting in high staff

turnover and wastage of trained and experienced personnel (Doherty et al 2001 Jenkins 2001

Pavesic and Brymer 1990 Zacerelli 1985)

This raises the issue of finding out and explaining the perceptions of individuals who are

likely to enter the tourism and hospitality work-force to explore whether the industry is meeting their



expectations There is relatively little evidence that research has been conducted in this area Airey and

Frontistis (1997 p 157) comment that perhaps the most important reason for undertaking this type of

study is that there are so many questions which still need to be answered about the attitudes of young

people to tourism careers

At a time when tourism is held out as one of the worldrsquos major industries and sources of

employment it would be timely to know more about what potential recruits think about it in order to

provide a basis for attracting the best possible work force This leaves us with the problem of trying to

understand what factors students believe are important in influencing their choice of career There

seems to be a common understanding in the literature that studies about perceptions and intentions of

the labour market towards tourism as a career are still scarce (Aksu amp Koumlksal 2005 Ross 1992)

indicating a need for such studies to be conducted Most studies only examine the perceptions of one

stakeholder or the relationships between two stakeholders whereas Aksu and Koumlksal (2005436)

emphasize that the four stakeholders as identified earlier in this chapter are crucial To date apart from

the work by Lewis (2006) on stakeholdersrsquo perceptions in the Caribbean and Ernawati and Pearce

(2003) on stakeholdersrsquo perceptions in Indonesia research that examines all four of these stakeholders

is still limited

With the aim to provide a more exhaustive perspective regarding the perceptions of tourism as

a graduate career in Mauritius this study will seek to identify the factors that are likely to influence

studentsrsquo commitment towards working in the tourism industry Besides that much of the literature on

perceptions of tourism education and tourism as a career has focused on developed countries and there

is a lack of similar research being conducted in developing countries (Ernawati amp Pearce 2003) and

the Asia Pacific region (Ross 1992) Besides a study by Liu (2002) in comparing perceptions of

tourism programs and careers between university students in Malaysia and China there has been an

overall lack of research dedicated to these topics Therefore this study attempts to examine similar

issues in the setting of a developing country Mauritius which is also the fastest growing region in

global tourism Although a similar study in this region has been conducted by Ernawati and Pearce

(2003) who investigated the perceptions of the stakeholders regarding tourism education in Indonesia

the central issue was the curriculum and no emphasis was given towards tourism as a graduate career

Determinants of Studentsrsquo Commitment

Nature of Work

The nature of tourism jobs such as low pay and unsociable working hours may exert a

negative influence on the job satisfaction and motivation and force them to leave the industry (Parsons

amp Care 1991) Other features such as seasonality instability low skilled repetition low income poor

physical working environment can contribute towards the poor image of the tourism industry

(Marshall 1999) In view of the above it can be reasonably assumed that the nature of work can be a



good determinant of studentsrsquo commitment towards working in the tourism industry Hence the

following hypothesis is proposed

H1 ndash There is a direct positive relationship between nature of work and studentsrsquo commitment

towards working in the tourism industry

Career Prospects

Travel and Tourism one of the worlds largest foreign exchange earner among industries

provides employment directly to millions of people worldwide and indirectly through many associated

service industries A very wide industry it includes Government tourism departments Immigration

and customs services travel agencies airlines tour operators hotels etc and many associated service

industries such as airline catering or laundry services Guides Interpreters Tourism promotion and

sales etc Travel and Tourism enterprises include major internationals with a workforce of thousands

to the small private travel agent with a handful of employees Careers are not for life but rather work

is seen as part of an episodic sequence of experiences which also include study and travel People

therefore are likely to be interested in entry to new working environments such as tourism at various

ages from school leaver onwards and will not necessarily be influenced by traditional careers

communications media Sennett (1998) argues that present-day work arrangements promote a short-

term opportunistic outlook among employees one that undermines loyalty trust and long-term

commitment Increased public awareness contributes to increase in tourism activities It can easily be

assumed that career prospect can be proposed as a determinant of studentsrsquo commitment towards

working in the tourism industry

H2 - There is a direct positive relationship between career prospect and commitment of students


Promotion Opportunities

Possible advancement opportunities can be an important characteristic of a job and can lead to

increased earnings and other desirable job attributes Some jobs were perceived as ldquogoodrdquo jobs

because they provide a decent path for advancement When jobs are seen to offer limited opportunities

for progression graduates may consider changing jobs Staffs in touristic establishments like to have a

clear and transparent promotion systems and possibilities for the future and promotion decision

making must be equitable Equitable promotions will automatically increase job satisfaction and the

productivity of personnel Promotion opportunities can be considered as a determinant of commitment

Hence the following hypothesis is proposed

H3 - There is a direct positive relationship between promotion opportunities and commitment of

students towards working in the tourism industry

Pay and Benefits

Pay structure is an issue that requires serious attention from hotel managers With an effective

pay structure and fringe benefits a hotel should be able to attract potential candidates from the labor

market retain motivate and satisfy employees develop a culture of learning and development and



benefit the end users of the hotel that is the hotel guest As identified in Luirsquos (2002) study hotel

employees expect high salaries training and development opportunities To procure a higher income

one must perform better and acquire more skills if performances are determinants for higher salary If

hotels are to survive in to-days enormously competitive business environment they need to attract and

retain quality employees and cultivate a culture of learning ( Terry amp Lam 2000) Factors influencing

job satisfaction are salary type of job physical conditions relations with colleagues security

promotion opportunities empowerment status financial and morale awards training being involved

in decision making communication social activities policy and management of organizations As a

general tendency people leave establishments because of dissatisfaction with salary mobbing from

peers or superiors disagreement with human resources management policies (Tanke 1990) Following

from the above it can safely be assumed that paybenefits is a factor that can influence studentsrsquo

commitment towards working in the tourism industry Hence the hypothesis proposed below

H4 - There is a direct positive relationship between PayBenefits and commitment of students


Social Status

In sociology or anthropology social status is the honor or prestige attached to ones position

in society (ones social position) A societys stratification system which is the system of distributing

rewards to the members of society determines social status Social status the position or rank of a

person or group within the stratification system can be determined two ways One can earn their social

status by their own achievements which is known as achieved status Alternatively one can be placed

in the stratification system by their inherited position which is called ascribed status Status is also

important for increasing job satisfaction and it has an important place among personnel Generally

high status makes giving instructions and finishing duties easier However when giving instructions to

carryout duties it is recognised that explaining the reasons for the task is a positive leadership trait

and beneficial for personnel harmony (Selek 1997) To exacerbate the human resource challenge

employment in the sector is often stigmatized by families deeming it too liberal and not fit for women

or as an industry inferior to other ldquomore prestigiousrdquo professions for males This has resulted in the

sectorrsquos inability to attract sufficient talented employees Accordingly it is important to work on

enhancing the image of the sector As a result of the above it can be assumed that social status can be

a good determinant of studentsrsquo commitment towards working in the tourism industry Hence the

hypothesis that follows

H5 - There is a direct positive relationship between social status and commitment of students


The Proposed Model with Hypothesized Relationships



Career prospects


Pay and benefits

H5

H4

H3

H2

H1

Commitment to the

industry

Social status

Nature of work

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Following the quantitative research approach a questionnaire survey was determined as the most

appropriate instrument for primary data collection As one of the most popular methods of gathering

quantitative data the questionnaire survey allows for a large number of respondents and is less biased

and less intrusive than other methods (Brunt 1997) It is also ldquocheaper and quickerrdquo (Veal 1998 p

146) The questionnaire survey also suited the present study since the method could assure the

anonymity of the participants easily (Brunt 1997) The questionnaire sought to investigate studentsrsquo

perceptions of tourism as a career after their graduation when they are about to embark on their career

path It also intends to identify the factors influencing their decision to choose a tourism programme

and their future intention to work in tourism after graduation The questionnaire was designed

following a review of existing work in the field (Airey amp Frontistis 1997 Ajzen amp Fishbein 1980

Aksu amp Koumlksal 2005 Amoah amp Baum 1997 Arizona Choy 1995 Cothran amp Combrink 1999

Barron amp Maxwell 1993 Baum 1993 Birdir 2002 Carlzon 1987 Casado 1992 Christensen

Hugues 2002 Ernawati amp Pearce 2003 Goumlkdeniz et al 2002 Jenkins 2001 Kang amp Gould 2001

Kozak amp Kizihrmak 2001 Kusluvan and Kusluvan 2000 OrsquoMahony amp Silitoe 2001 Pavesic amp

Brymer 1990 Purcell amp Quinn 1995 Ross 1994 Getz 1994 Sciarini amp Woods 1997 Swarbrooke

1995 Yuumlksel et al 2003 Zhang amp Wu 2004)



In developing the questionnaire the researcher adhered to the research questions primarily the

perceptions of tourism as a career from the studentsrsquo perspective Certain variables suggested by the

literature that influence studentsrsquo perceptions of the tourism industry were used to guide the

development of the questionnaire questions In addition to this some of the questions were borrowed

from the literature Among those questions borrowed from the literature are statements which are

derived from the attitude dimensions that influence commitment to the tourism industry developed by

Kusluvan and Kusluvan (2000) in their study of tourism students in Turkey These dimensions include

the nature of work social status industry-person congeniality physical working conditions career

prospects promotion opportunities co-workers and managers paybenefits and commitment to the

tourism industry

Borrowing or adapting questions developed by other researchers according to Czaja and Blair (2005)

is allowed and could assist this research in many ways This is because the questions have proven to

work well in the research it was developed for hence saving the effort for this research to test its

usability In addition to that the findings between studies

that use the same questions can be compared and thus add to the breadth of the research in the area

being studied However as this research is also unique in its interests in the context of Mauritius where

some new questions were also developed

The first type is statements using 5-point Likert scales from the lowest point of 1= Strongly agree to 5=

Strongly disagree In the study by Kusluvan amp Kusluvan (2000) and

Aksu and Koumlksal (2005) the scale of 1= Strongly agree to 4= Strongly disagree was used For this

research a mid-point of 3= Neutral is used to give the students the opportunity to take the position of

lsquoneither agree nor disagreersquo to the statement This is because a Likert scale gives more freedom to the

respondents to select the desired level of agreement or disagreement towards a given statement

(Saunders Lewis amp Thornhill 2000) There are ten sets of questions using this format namely the

skills and knowledge expected from studying tourism the skills or qualities the students perceived as

important to the employer and the perceptions of tourism as a career The questionnaire used close-

ended questions This design makes it easy for the respondents to answer because it is fast and does not

require extensive answers from the respondents At the same time close-ended questions ensured that

responses were comparable (Bryman amp Bell 2003) The use of attitude scale questions is also

appropriate to measure perceptions which are the key thrust of this study (Tashakkori amp Teddlie

1998)

The second type is questions which require ldquoYesrdquo or ldquoNordquo answers This type of question is mostly

used to determine intention to work in the industry whether the respondent has Commitment to the

Tourism Industry work experience in tourism family and friends working in tourism and choose

course willingly



The third type is questions with some answers to choose from where the respondents were directed to

choose only one answer that best describes their position An extra answer choice of ldquootherrdquo was also

provided with a blank space for the students to fill with

answers that differed from the choices given (if necessary) This addresses the issue of limited choice

of answers in the questionnaire by providing flexibility to the respondents to provide answers other

than the ones provided by the researcher (Bryman amp Bell 2003) which will also suggest new ideas to

the researcher This format is mostly used to investigate factors for choosing to study tourism sectors

in tourism that the students have experience working inintend to work in and the way in which they

obtained information about tourism careers gender ethnic groups and place of place of residence

312 Survey Method

The survey was conducted during the months of August and September 2009 The questionnaires in

batches of twenty were given to the Head trainers responsible of the various courses It was suggested

that distributing a self-administered questionnaire to students in a classroom is a cost-effective and

efficient technique especially when the lecturers allow the researcher to use their lecture time (Czaja amp

Blair 2005) The support given by the trainers from the Ecole Hocircteliegravere Sir Gaeumltan Duval was

instrumental in the achieving a 100 response rate

A questionnaire survey was chosen as the technique for collecting data from the students because there

are a large number of students studying tourism and hospitality at the Ecole Hocircteliegravere Sir Gaeumltan

Duval Hence the fastest and cheapest way to gather information about their perceptions is through a

questionnaire (Bryman amp Bell 2003) That is why most of the earlier studies on studentsrsquo perceptions

of tourism as a career also employed the same technique (Jenkins 2001 Purcell amp Quinn 1996)

A self-completion questionnaire was selected for this study because the researcher was able to obtain

access to the students easily Self-completion questionnaires are easy for the respondents to answer and

also assist the researcher in collecting data from a large sample in a fast manner (Bryman amp Bell

2003)

313 Structure of the Questionnaire

First Part of the Questionnaire

The first part of the questionnaire (Annex 1) is a multi item attitude scale questions classified into ten

factors developed and tested by Kusluvan and Kusluvan (2000) and Kyriacou C Coulthard

M(2000) were used to facilitate the data collection The factors were nature of work social status

industry-person congeniality physical working conditions career prospects promotion opportunities

co-workers mangers paybenefits and commitment to the tourism industry



The items in the attitude scale were Likert-type with five categories (Strongly Disagree Disagree

Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree and Strongly Agree)

Second Part of the Questionnaire

This section is used to gain information about the demographic background of the respondents

However this research only looks at the respondentsrsquo gender ethnicity place of residence courses

followed practical work experience These questions are not relevant to this piece of work but can be

used for future research

The questionnaire consisted of 13 structured questions that are mainly dichotomous and

multichotomous questions The types of rating scale used were nominal and likert

315 Pilot Testing

As suggested by Oppenheim (1992) and Zikmund (1994) who argued the significance of pre-test in a

questionnaire survey a pilot survey was conducted on the 14th and 18th of September 2009 To ensure

the usability of the questionnaire it is important that it is tested with the group of people who are not in

the sample but share its characteristics (Bryman amp Bell 2003)

This exercise was aimed at detecting problems in the questionnaire design Thirty questionnaires were

distributed to two classes studying the National Trade Certificate (NTC) level 2 in Housekeeping and

NTC level 3 in Front office respectively The pre-tested questionnaire contained 107 questions

classified under ten categories namely ldquoNature of Workrdquo ldquoSocial Statusrdquo ldquoIndustry-Person

Congenialityrdquo Physical working conditionsrdquo ldquoCareer prospectsrdquo ldquoPromotion Opportunitiesrdquo

ldquoCo-workersrdquo ldquoManagersrdquo ldquoPay and Benefitsrdquo and Commitment to the Tourism Industryrdquo The

questionnaire contains 12 closed questions about demographic situation under General information

This section was intended to seek demographic information of respondents namely gender religion

place of residence level of courses followed willingness to follow courses course followed relatives

working in the industry and practical work experience All the thirty questionnaires were returned

representing a 100 response rate

The purpose of this pilot test was to test the relevance and applicability of the instrument The pilot

samples gave a very positive feedback such as an easy-to-follow layout clear instruction

understandable statements ease of answering and comfortable time (averaging 15 minutes) to

complete the questionnaire It was also useful in assessing its readability and the clarity of the

instructions This helped revise and refine the questionnaire for the survey At the same time the

respondents also proposed several constructive suggestions for further improvement which resulted in

some changes to be brought to the final version of the questionnaire



316 Proposed Model

The Figure below shows the proposed model of the present study The model (Figure 2) postulates

that the dependent variable is given as lsquoCommitment to the Tourism Industryrsquo (COM) Six variables

namely promotions opportunities paybenefits social status physical working conditions career

prospects and nature of work are proposed to be determining the level of commitment towards the

industry

Figure 2 Proposed Model with Hypothesised Relationship


Commitment to the Tourism Industry

(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1

Physical Working Conditions (PHY) W k (NOW)

Social Status (SS)

Nature of Work (NOW)


Promotions Opportunities (PO)

Career Prospects (CP) H4

Pay Benefits (PAB) 317 Research Hypotheses

Based on the literature review and the key research questions of the present study the following

research hypotheses have been established and will be tested in this study

H1 ndash There is a positive direct relationship between nature of work and commitment of students

to the tourism industry

H2 - There is a positive direct relationship between Social Status and commitment of students to

the tourism industry

H3 - There is a positive direct relationship between Career Prospect and commitment of students


H4 - There is a positive direct relationship between PayBenefits and commitment of students to


H5 - There is a positive direct relationship between promotion opportunities and commitment of

students to the tourism industry

H6 - There is a positive direct relationship between physical working conditions and commitment

of students to the tourism industry

318 Limitations of the Survey



There was no major problem in collecting the data as the students were easily accessible and very keen

to participate in this study The non-probability sampling method used in the questionnaire survey was

driven by the limitation of time for this research It was impossible to include all tertiary institutions in

Mauritius Therefore the research looked at only one institution Therefore this research excluded all

the other training institutions and colleges that offer tourism courses at the certificate level and

diploma levels as well as the private institutions that also play an important role in producing tourism

graduates in Mauritius The selection of Ecole Hocircteliegravere Sir Gaeumltan Duval makes the data of this thesis

limited to only one institution Future studies could explore the possibility of including more

institutions private and public that are offering tourism or tourism related courses

Apart from that the selection of only tourism management students ignored the students in other

tourism related programs that are also likely to enter the tourism labour market after graduation

Interest towards tourism which influenced the decision to study tourism among students could also

influence their commitment towards of tourism as a career Future studies could examine students

across different academic programs who wish to pursue tourism as a career Research could also

expand the scope of the study to colleges and private tertiary institutions in Mauritius

FINDINGS A factor analysis was conducted through SPSS (Version 160) All the statements within the ten

constructs (nature of work social status industry-person congeniality physical working conditions

career prospects promotion opportunities co-workers managers paybenefits and commitment to

the tourism industry) for the 30 pilot tested questionnaires were factor analysed

To test the appropriateness of factor analysis Bartlettrsquos test of sphericity was performed and the

KaiserndashMeyerndashOlkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy was used These results verified the

suitability of the correlation matrix structure and confirmed the need to carry out an Exploratory Factor

Analysis (EFA) (Hair et al 1998) Principal axis factoring and varimax rotation methods were used to

extract factors for subsequent analyses

A Cronbachrsquos alpha test was conducted on the retained items Results indicated that all constructs had

a Cronbach alpha value of 070 or above The initial questionnaire (Appendix 1) comprising of

10 constructs with a total of 106 statements was reduced after being factor analysed to 52 statements

After the reduction work the remaining statements within each construct constituted the final

questionnaire (Appendix 2)

412 Nature of Work (NOW)



The majority of tourism students admit learning new things everyday (95 per cent) Similarly tourism

jobs were seen as providing an opportunity to meet famous people while working in the tourism

industry (80 per cent) On the other hand half of the respondents indicated that jobs in tourism industry

negatively affects family life due to the nature of work (50 percent) and the working hours are not

suitable for a regular life while working in the tourism industry (60 per cent) These are certainly both

negative and positive evaluations of tourism jobs (Table 5)

Table 5 Descriptive Statistics Nature of Work How much do you agree or disagree with each statement Strongly Disagree Agree Mean Std Dev + Disagree +Strongly Agree percent () a percent () a Dimensions (facets) and items Nature of work 1 Family life is negatively affected for people working 23 50 332 105 in the tourism industry due to the nature of work (R) 2 I like to meet famous people while working in the 9 80 400 100 tourism industry 3 There is always something new to learn each day in 1 95 452 066 tourism jobs 4 Working hours are not suitable for a regular life in the 21 60 354 116 tourism industry (R) Note N=298 a Adjusted (corrected) per cent excluding missing observations B Scale 5=Strongly Agree 4=Agree 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree 2=Disagree 1=Strongly Disagree (R) These items are reverse coded 1=Strongly Agree 2=Agree 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree 4=Disagree 5=Strongly Disagree 413 Social Status (SS)

Over three-quarter of the respondents said that their families were proud of their profession (82 per

cent) and they could talk to their friends and relatives with pride about their vocation in tourism (84

per cent) and (42 per cent) of the respondent disagree with the statement that parents would want their

daughters to marry someone working in the Tourism Industry Whereas nearly three quarter of the

students perceived that working in tourism was a respected vocation (73 per cent) however almost two

third of the students indicated that those working in the tourism industry are not valued in society (66

) There is an overall positive perception from the students (Table 6)

Table 6 Descriptive Statistics Social Status How much do you agree or disagree with each statement Strongly Disagree Agree Mean Std Dev + Disagree +Strongly Agree percent () a percent ()a Dimensions (facets) and items Social status 1 My family is proud of my profession in tourism 2 83 411 73 2 Working in tourism is a respected vocation 4 73 391 80 in the Mauritian Society 3 I think that those working in the tourism industry are not 66 21 237 132 valued in the society(R) 4 Parents would not want their daughters to marry 42 30 278 128 someone working in the tourism industry (R)



5 I talk to my relatives and friends with pride about my 4 84 411 83 vocation in the tourism industry Note N=298 a Adjusted (corrected) per cent excluding missing observations b Scale 5=Strongly Agree 4=Agree 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree 2=Disagree 1=Strongly Disagree (R) These items are reverse coded 1=Strongly Agree 2=Agree 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree 4=Disagree 5=Strongly Disagree

414 Physical Working Conditions (PHY)

Most of the respondents did not have an opinion on the conditions of the dormitories ( 45 per cent)

Similarly for the bathrooms (38 per cent) On the other hand (58 per cent) of the respondents

considered the working environment not clean in the tourism industry On a more positive note more

than half of students described actual working conditions in the Tourism Industry as being good (63

per cent) The respondent do not seem to agree nor disagree on the level of accident risk in the tourism

industry(Table 7)

Table 7 Descriptive Statistics Physical Working Conditions How much do you agree or disagree with each statement Strongly Disagree Agree Mean Std Dev + Disagree +Strongly Agree percent ()a percent ()a Dimensions (facets) and items Physical working conditions 1 Physical working conditions are generally good in the 15 63 362 99 tourism industry 2 Working environment are not very clean in tourism (R) 58 19 240 114 3 Employee dormitories are in satisfactory conditions in 21 41 317 93 most tourism firms 4 There is a high risk of work accidents in the tourism 36 34 300 108 Industry(R) 5 Employee bathrooms are not in good conditions in most 29 38 317 119 tourism firms (R) Note N=298 a Adjusted (corrected) per cent excluding missing observations B Scale 5=Strongly Agree 4=Agree 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree 2=Disagree 1=Strongly Disagree (R) These items are reverse coded 1=Strongly Agree 2=Agree 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree 4=Disagree 5=Strongly Disagree

415 Career Prospects (CP)



Nearly half of the respondents do not have an opinion as regards whether tourism jobs are more

respected than the other jobs (48 per cent) The majority of respondents considered that studying

hospitality courses at the school is a correct investment in their career development (94 per cent)

Similarly the students surveyed agreed that meeting new people in the tourism industry is a pleasant

experience (95 per cent) However over forty per cent (44 per cent) of the respond believed that it is

not necessary to have a vocational qualification to work in the tourism industry Nearly half of the

respondents do not think that there is sex discrimination in the place of work While over half of the

students considered that the working hours are not suitable for a regular life in the tourism industry (57

per cent) yet (45 per cent) believed that jobs in the industry are not exhausting However in general

the respondents agreed that the advantages of working in the industry outweigh the disadvantages (39

per cent) while (45 per cent) neither agree nor disagree with this statement (Table 8)

Table 8 Descriptive Statistics Career Prospects How much do you agree or disagree with each statement Strongly Disagree Agree Mean Std Dev + Disagree +Strongly Agree percent ()a percent ()a Dimensions (facets) and items Career Prospects 1 Tourism related jobs are most respected than other jobs 22 36 317 91 2 To study tourism or hospitality courses at the school is a 1 94 438 65 correct investment in my career development 3 Meeting new people by working in the Tourism Industry 1 95 444 60

is a pleasant experience 4 It is not necessary to have a vocational qualification to 44 31 286

114 work in the Tourism Industry 5 There is no sex discrimination in the Tourism Industry 40 47 317

125 6 In general the advantages of working in the Tourism 12 39 336 83 industry outweigh the disadvantages 7 To me jobs in tourism are exhausting 22 44 330 99 8 Working hours are not suitable for a regular life in 18 57 356 107 the Tourism Industry Note N=298 a Adjusted (corrected) per cent excluding missing observations b Scale 5=Strongly Agree 4=Agree 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree 2=Disagree 1=Strongly Disagree (R) These items are reverse coded 1=Strongly Agree 2=Agree 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree 4=Disagree 5=Strongly Disagree

416 Promotion opportunities (PO)

Over two-thirds of respondents believe that promotion opportunities are satisfactory in the tourism

industry (68 per cent) and that it is based on merit (68 per cent) Respondents do not have an opinion

on whether promotions are handled fairly or not (40 per cent) over half of the respondent opined that

the opportunity of getting promoted to managerial positions is not limited (53 per cent) and nearly two

third of the students surveyed is of the opinion that the number of years worked in the industry is taken

into consideration in promotion decision (66 per cent) Nearly half of respondents (45 per cent) neither

agree nor disagree that promotion are systematic in the tourism industry(Table 9)

Table 9



Descriptive Statistics Promotion Opportunities How much do you agree or disagree with each statement Strongly Disagree Agree Mean Std Dev + Disagree +Strongly Agree percent ()a percent ()a Dimensions (facets) and items Promotion opportunities 1 Promotion is based on merit in the tourism industry 16 68 360 102 2 Promotion opportunities are satisfactory in the tourism 10 68 370 087 Industry 3 Promotions are not handled fairly in the tourism 25 36 321 144 industry (R) 4 The opportunity of getting promoted to managerial 18 53 349 100 positions is limited in the tourism industry (R) 5 Number of years worked in the industry is taken into 13 66 368 100 consideration in promotion decisions 6 Promotions are unsystematic in the tourism industry (R) 22 33 316 91 Note N=298 a Adjusted (corrected) per cent excluding missing observations b Scale 5=Strongly Agree 4=Agree 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree 2=Disagree 1=Strongly Disagree (R) These items are reverse coded 1=Strongly Agree 2=Agree 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree 4=Disagree 5=Strongly Disagree

417 Co-workers

Respondents seemed to be divided into two about the attitudes towards co-workers nearly half

evaluating favourably and the other half unfavourably However the majority of respondents agreed

that there is cooperation amongst employees in the tourism industry (70 per cent) While most of the

respondents agreed that it is easy to make friends with people working in the industry (89 per cent) yet

it is not easy to get along with them (50 per cent) On the hand the students surveyed are of the

opinion that most of the employees in the industry are rude people (57 per cent) Generally people with

a formal qualification in tourism work in the Tourism Industry (50 per cent)

Table 10 Descriptive Statistics Co-Workers How much do you agree or disagree with each statement Strongly Disagree Agree Mean Std Dev + Disagree +Strongly Agree percent () a percent ()a Dimensions (facets) and items Co-workers 1 There is cooperation amongst employees in the tourism 11 70 370 93 Industry 2 I can make friends easily with people working in the 4 88 410 75 tourism industry 3 It is not easy to get along with people working in the 44 27 280 101 tourism industry (R) 4 Generally people with a formal qualification in 21 50 332 100 tourism work in the Tourism Industry 5 Most people working in the Tourism Industry are rude 57 17 244 110 people (R) Note N=298 a Adjusted (corrected) per cent excluding missing observations



b Scale 5=Strongly Agree 4=Agree 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree 2=Disagree 1=Strongly Disagree (R) These items are reverse coded 1=Strongly Agree 2=Agree 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree 4=Disagree 5=Strongly Disagree

418 Managers

In general respondents expressed positive attitudes towards managers in the tourism industry Over

half of students perceive that managers do value employees (54 per cent) and their suggestions (45 per

cent) The students are of the opinion that the employees are consulted in any decisions pertaining to

their jobs (46 per cent) Nearly three quarter of the respondents is of the opinion that mangers do

provide vocational training when necessary (75 per cent)

Table 11 Descriptive Statistics Managers How much do you agree or disagree with each statement Strongly Disagree Agree Mean Std Dev + Disagree +Strongly Agree percent ()a percent ()a Dimensions (facets) and items Managers 1 Managers give due value to employees in the tourism 10 54 345 82 Industry 2 Managers value employees suggestions 18 45 330 95 3 Managers are jealous of university graduates with 33 18 297 111 a degree in tourism (R) 4 Managers make sure that employees participate in 23 46 326 103 decisions affecting their job 5 Managers do provide vocational training when necessary 5 75 386 83 in the tourism industry Note N=298 a Adjusted (corrected) per cent excluding missing observations b Scale 5=Strongly Agree 4=Agree 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree 2=Disagree 1=Strongly Disagree (R) These items are reverse coded 1=Strongly Agree 2=Agree 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree 4=Disagree 5=Strongly Disagree

419 Paybenefits (PAB)

There was a very negative attitude towards pay and benefits dimension of working in the tourism

industry About 67 per cent of the respondents agreed that the pay was low for most tourism jobs

Again a large majority of students (66 per cent) indicated that the pay for most tourism jobs was not

enough to maintain a satisfactory (normal) life Also the level of fringe benefits like bonuses leisure

time meals holidays etc were considered insufficient by two third of responding students (66 per

cent) Nearly three quarter of the respondents (76 per cent) opined that the pay is low in the tourism

industry considering the long hours and the work load

Table 12 Descriptive Statistics PayBenefits How much do you agree or disagree with each statement Strongly Disagree Agree Mean Std Dev + Disagree +Strongly Agree percent () a percent ()a



Dimensions (facets) and items Paybenefits 1 I think the pay is low for most jobs in the tourism industry (R) 13 67 384 110 2 I think that the pay for most tourism jobs not sufficient 16 66 373 105 to lead a satisfactory life(R) 3 Considering the long hours and work load I find the pay 7 76 403 94 low in the tourism industry (R) 4 The level of fringe benefits (bonuses leisure holidays 14 66 378 103 mealsetc) is insufficient in the tourism industry (R) Note N=298 a Adjusted (corrected) per cent excluding missing observations b Scale 5=Strongly Agree 4=Agree 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree 2=Disagree 1=Strongly Disagree (R) These items are reverse coded 1=Strongly Agree 2=Agree 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree 4=Disagree 5=Strongly Disagree

420 Industry-person congeniality

Respondents seem to hold contradicting views about the industry-person congeniality dimension For

example most of the students surveyed felt that their character fitted with tourism jobs (80 per cent)

Similarly over ninety per cent of the students (91 ) get pleasure from working in the tourism

industry and from seeing happy customers when they served them (95 per cent) Less than three

quarter of the students surveyed believes that their moral values would degrade if they worked in the

tourism industry which will contradict with their religious values

Table 13

Descriptive Statistics Industry-Person Congeniality How much do you agree or disagree with each statement Strongly Disagree Agree Mean Std Dev + Disagree +Strongly Agree percent ()a percent ()a Dimensions (facets) and items Industry-person congeniality 1 My character fits to working in the tourism industry 6 80 4 82 2 Working in tourism is in contradiction with my religious 62 22 23 127 values (R) 3 I derive pleasure while working in the tourism industry 6 91 4 85 4 I like to see satisfied customers when I serve them 1 95 5 62 Note N=298 a Adjusted (corrected) per cent excluding missing observations b Scale 5=Strongly Agree 4=Agree 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree 2=Disagree 1=Strongly Disagree (R) These items are reverse coded 1=Strongly Agree 2=Agree 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree 4=Disagree 5=Strongly Disagree

421 Commitment to the industry

It can be concluded that respondents have a strong commitment towards working in the tourism

industry as over three quarter of students (87 per cent) indicated that they are very happy to have

chosen tourism as a vocation Most of students surveyed would like to work in the tourism industry

after their graduation (89 per cent) and a very good proportion of the respondents(67 per cent) would

recommend a job in the tourism industry to their friends and relatives because they believe it is very

nice to be part of this industry Over fifty per cent do not plan to work in another industry other than

the tourism industry(61 per cent) There is strong commitment of respondents to the tourism industry



as is implied by the fact that over three quarter of the students see their vocational future in the tourism

industry (78 per cent)

Table 14

Descriptive Statistics Commitment to the Tourism Industry How much do you agree or disagree with each statement Strongly Disagree Agree Mean Std Dev + Disagree +Strongly Agree percent ()a percent ()a Dimensions (facets) and items Commitment to the tourism industry 1 I am very happy to have chosen tourism as a vocation 13 87 418 70 path 2 I would like to work in the tourism industry after 1 89 440 240 graduation 3 I recommend a job in the tourism industry to my friends 6 67 377 86 and relatives because it is very nice to be part of this industry 4 I do not plan to work in another industry other than 6 61 368 82 the tourism industry 5 I see my vocational (professional) future in the tourism 3 77 405 80 industry Note N=298 a Adjusted (corrected) per cent excluding missing observations b Scale 5=Strongly Agree 4=Agree 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree 2=Disagree 1=Strongly Disagree (R) These items are reverse coded 1=Strongly Agree 2=Agree 3 Neither Agree nor Disagree 4=Disagree 5=Strongly Disagree

422 Proposed Model

A causal model was developed in order to find the attitude dimensions that were most important in

determining the studentsrsquo commitment to the tourism industry In the proposed model the dependent

(criterion) variable was the dimension of commitment to the tourism industry and the independent

(predictor) variables were the remaining six dimensions namely Nature of work social status physical

working conditions career prospects promotion opportunities and pay and benefits It was assumed

that the six factors or dimensions determine commitment to the tourism industry which in turn will

influence attitudes towards working in the industry



H6 H2

H1

Physical Working Conditions (PHY)

Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)


Career Prospects (CP)


research hypotheses have been established and tested the findings of which are presented and

analysed

To test the proposed hypotheses multiple regression analysis was used Result from the multiple

regression analysis is shown in Table below (Table 15)

423 Multiple Regression Analysis

Multiple regressions (the term was first used by Pearson 1908) is to learn more about the relationship

between several independent or predictor variables and a dependent or criterion variable In statistics

regression analysis includes any techniques for modelling and analyzing several variables when the

focus is on the relationship between a dependent variable and one or more independent variables More

specifically regression analysis helps us understand how the typical value of the dependent variable

changes when any one of the independent variables is varied while the other independent variables are

held fixed Most commonly regression analysis estimates the conditional expectation of the dependent

variable given the independent variables mdash that is the average value of the dependent variable when

the independent variables are held fixed Regression analysis is also used to understand which among

the independent variables are related to the dependent variable and to explore the forms of these



relationships In restricted circumstances regression analysis can be used to infer causal relationships

between the independent and dependent variables

Table 15

Multiple Regression Analysis of Tourism Studentsrsquo Commitment to the Tourism Industry with attitude Dimensions as Predictor (Independent) Variables

Dependent Variable Studentsrsquo commitment to the Tourism Industry

Independent Variables NOW SS PHY CP PO PAB

Summary Statistics ( Goodness of Fit) p=000

Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081

Standard Error = 70339

Analysis of Variance

df Sum of Squares Mean

Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient

Independent Variables in Equation

Coefficient Std Coeff

βeta t -Value Sig

Social Status 244 156 2637 009

Career Prospects 350 192 3150 002

Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010

Promotion Opportunities 107 069 1157 248

Physical Working Conditions -120 084 -1400 163

Pay amp Benefits -022 026 -436 663



The above results indicate a perfect model ( ρ lt 0001) emerged indicating that the data fits the model

well

ρ = 000

The significance level is lt 005 In fact the significance level is 010 The t-value ( t = - 2609)

represents the strength of the relationship The β value which indicates the direction of the relationship

between the Independent variable ( NOW) and the Dependent variable (COM) shows a negative

figure (β = - 157) Even though the significance level is lt 005 yet the hypothesis is rejected because

of the negative relationship



H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )

H2 - There is a direct relationship between Social Status and commitment of students to the

tourism industry

This hypothesis was supported at plt 005 It can therefore be deduced that there is a direct relationship

between social status and commitment meaning that the better the social status the stronger is the

commitment towards the industry Therefore social status is a determinant of commitment The t-value

indicates a strong relationship between social status and commitment Therefore the hypothesis is

accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)

H3 - There is a direct relationship between Physical Working Conditions and commitment

The significance level is gt 005 In fact the significance level is 163 It can therefore be said that there

is no direct relationship between physical working conditions and commitment meaning that physical

working conditions is not a determinant of commitment The t- value shows a strong negative

relationship between physical working conditions and commitment This can be explained by the fact

that the physical working condition is the tourism industry is satisfactory Therefore the hypothesis is

rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )

H4 - There is a direct relationship between Career Prospect and commitment of students towards


The significance level is lt 005 In fact the significance level is 0002 It can therefore be said that

there is a direct relationship between career prospect and commitment meaning that career prospect is a

determinant of commitment The t- value is a strong one indicating a strong positive relationship

between career prospect and commitment Therefore the hypothesis is accepted

H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )

H5 - There is a direct relationship between promotion opportunities and commitment of students


The significance level is gt 005 In fact the significance level is 0248 It can therefore be argued that

there is no direct relationship between promotion opportunities and commitment meaning that

promotion opportunities are not a determinant of commitment In fact the t- value shows a positive



figure (t = 1157) relationship meaning to say that there is a strong relationship between promotion

opportunities and commitment Since the significance level is greater than 005 the hypothesis is

rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )

H6 - There is a direct relationship between PayBenefits and commitment of students to the

tourism industry

The tourism industryrsquos traditional image of low pay is not supported by the findings of this survey as

706 of the respondents agreed with the statement ldquoone can make good money by working in

tourismrdquo This can be explained by the diversity of tourism related jobs There is considerable variation

in tourism occupations and consequently there are many instances of well-paid occupations in the

industry (Riley et al 2002) The significance level is gt 005 In fact the significance level is 0663 It

can therefore be deduced that there is no direct relationship between paybenefits and commitment

meaning that it is not a determinant of commitment The t- value shows a negative positive figure (t = -

436) Since the significance level is greater than 005 the hypothesis is rejected

H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )

CONCLUSION AND FINAL REMARKS

The current study investigated the factors likely to influence students commitment towards working in

the tourism industry with a new and relatively reliable and valid attitude scale Based on the literature

review and the key research questions of the present study the following six research hypotheses were

developed The results are summarized in the table below

511 Results of Hypothesis testing

Table 16

Hypotheses Coef Sig Result

H1 - There is a positive direct relationship between nature of work and -157 010 Rejected



studentsrsquo commitment towards working in the tourism industry

H2 - There is a positive direct relationship between Social Status and


156 009 Supported

H3 - There is a positive direct relationship between Career Prospect and


192 002 Supported

H4 - There is a positive direct relationship between PayBenefits and


-026 663 Rejected

H5 - There is a positive direct relationship between promotion

opportunities and studentsrsquo commitment towards working in the

tourism industry

069 248 Rejected

H6 - There is a positive direct relationship between physical working

Conditions and studentsrsquo commitment towards working in the

tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected

The above results indicate support for only two of the hypotheses namely H2 amp H3 (Table 16) The H2

hypothesis indicates that there is a direct positive relationship between social status and commitment

whereas H3 hypothesis confirms the direct positive relationship between career prospect and

commitment Both social status and career prospects are therefore strong determinants of commitment

It can be deduced that a better recognition of the tourism jobs will bring about a rise in the level of

commitment of students towards the industry Similarly a clearly defined career prospects will impact

positively on the commitment of the student towards the tourism industry

This finding contains important policy implication for the policy makers relevant ministries public

and private training institutions and the industry at large The implications will therefore highlight the

needs for an adoption of tactics and strategies at ensuring

1) to provide a clear and well defined career path for students joining the industry

2) better recognition to those employed in the tourism industry thereby raising the social status

of professions in the tourism industry

51200 Recommendations



The above can be achieved with the collaboration of one and whole Following the results of the

research it is clear that students have an overall positive attitude towards the industry This can be

further reinforced by creating the right working environment better pay packet good promotion

opportunities improved the nature of the tourism jobs but more importantly raising the social status of

the employees and also to provide well defined career path

Various initiatives and measures are being proposed to address some of the issues highlighted above

51201 Tourism Action Clubs (TAC)

Tourism Action Clubs serves as interesting fun ways of consistently promoting tourism awareness

amongst secondary and tertiary students This will allow the students and educators to have further

exposure to Mauritius varied tourism product and its partners in the industry outside of the regular

tourism awareness activities The activities of the club can be planned under three categories work

education and recreation

51202 General Tourism Awareness Activities

Activities under the above mentioned programme can include visits to various secondary schools or

community groups participation in training programmes for students and school leavers assisting the

organization with familiarization trips for various groups providing assistance to hospitality students

for their studies by arranging interviews referring them to sources or providing them with speakers

setting up tourism exhibits planning tourism awareness seminarsworkshops conferences and use of

media

51203 Careers in Tourism Programme

The careers in tourism programme seek to offer guidance to students as well as the general adult

population about career opportunities within the tourist industry Until and unless the career

opportunities are not well exposed there will not be full commitment of students towards the tourism

industry

51204 Tourism Awareness Competitions

Tourism awareness competitions can be organized which will provide opportunity for students to

participate in a variety of interesting fun competitions that focus on current tourism related matters

These competitions could include the essays and poster competitions Travel Writing and Case Study

competition This will create enthusiasm among the students and based on the preparation needed for

these competitions the students will engage in much tourism related research which will have a

lasting impression on them creating a passion for the industry The exposure that they get as winners

often creates ambassadors for the industry and eventually considering pursuing a career in tourism




With the collaboration of AHRIM and other Tourism related associations like the SKAL club

Mauritius career fairs could be organized region wise to sensitize potential students and the public at

large on the various job opportunities available and the career prospect This will make them

knowledgeable about the operations within the industry and are focused about what it is they want to

achieve from their career choices

51206 Tourism Scholarship Programme

Tourism which is gathering significant importance in Mauritius and government laying a lot of

emphasis in tourism and hospitality training should envisage awarding a state scholarship for Tourism

alongside the state scholarship on medical studies Now that many colleges have introduced Travel and

Tourism as an examinable at the Cambridge Higher School Certificate makes it easier to award such

scholarship

51207 Experience with the company as a consumer

Whether this comes early in the students life for instance as a result of a family visit to a hotel resort

or restaurant or later when the individual is a college student we do not know What is certain

however is that the type and quality of service that students experienced as consumers from hospitality

companies has a long-lasting and strong effect on which companies they choose to go to work for after

their graduation The culture of eating out should be popularized

51208 Word of mouth from students

The high degree of importance that word of mouth from other students plays in developing student

perceptions of companies confirms that there is likely a spillover effect that occurs among students

51209 Guest lecturers in classes

Guest lecturers are often used by faculty members to augment the information presented in the

classroom While using guest lecturers is a valuable and accepted teaching tool we did not anticipate

the power that this contact has on student perceptions regarding career choices and future employers

One conclusion that can drawn from research carried out ( Richard 1995) is that company

representatives should be greatly interested in making classroom appearances (as is indeed the case

with many successful hospitality firms)

51210 Company participation in job fair

Research (Anderson 2001) reveals that many students base their perceptions of companies on the

individual contact they have with those firms at a job fair As with several of the results ranked higher

this finding confirms the importance students place on personal contact with company representatives

The implication for hospitality organizations is that they should invest the time and resources to appear

at job fairs

51211 Company-sponsored tours



Many faculty members can use field trips to enhance students understanding of the industry and of

specific companies In addition student organizations could often arrange tours with specific

companies The effectiveness of this approach can be seen by its mid-level ranking Still some

companies may be proficient at this type of recruiting while others may be inefficient An implication

for companies that welcome field trips and those thinking about doing so is to do it well or not at all

51212 Tourism Channels

The government should have a dedicated Tourism Channel on the National Broadcasting Corporation

whereby the activities directly related to tourism should be broadcast This will help in building and

consolidate the image of the industry Role models of successful students in the industry could be

interviewed thus raising the profile of the tourism jobs



REFERENCES

Airey D A Frontistis (1997) Attitudes to careers in tourism An Anglo Greek comparison Tourism Management Vol 18 pp149 - 158 Ajzen I amp Fishbein M 1980 Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior Prentice-Hall NJ Ajzen I (1988) Attitudes personality and behaviour Milton KeynesOpen University Press Akis S Peristianis N amp Warner J 1996 Residents attitudes to tourism development the case of Cyprus Tourism Management vol 17 pp 481-94 Aksu AA Koksal CD 2005 Perceptions and attitudes of tourism students in Turkey International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 17 (5) 436ndash447 Amoah V A amp Baum T (1997) Tourism education policy versus practice International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 9(1) 5 - 12 Ap J amp Crompton JL 1993 Residents strategies for responding to tourism impacts Journal of Travel Research vol 33 no 1 pp 47-50 Ap J 1990 Residents perceptions research on the social impacts of tourism Annals of Tourism Research vol 17 pp 610-6Applied Social vol 24 pp 2151-63 Ap J 1990 Residents perceptions research on the social impacts of tourism Annals of Tourism Research vol 17 pp 610-6 Association des Hocircteliers et Restaurateurs ndash Ile Maurice Annual Report 2009 Australian Bureau of Statistics 2006 Australian Labour Market Statistics (No 61050) ABS Canberra

BagozziRP U Dholakia (1999) Goal setting and goal striving in consumer behavior Journal of Marketing Vol 63 pp19 - 32 Barron P amp Maxwell G (1993) Hospitality management students image of the hospitality industry International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 5(5) 5-8 Barron PE (2006) Stormy outlook domestic studentsrsquo impressions of international students at an Australian university The Journal of Teaching in Travel and Tourism 6(2) 1-18 Baruch Y (2004) Transforming careers from linear to multidirectional career paths organisational and individual perspectives Career Development International 9(1) 58-73 Baum T (2007) Human resources in tourism Still waiting for change Tourism Management 28(6) 1383-1399 Bergeron F Raymond L Rivard S amp Gara S 1995 Determinants of EIS use testing a behavioral model Decision Support vol 14 pp 131-46 Berings D Fruyt FD Bouwen R 2004 Work values and personality traits as predictors of enterprising and social vocational interests Personality and Individual Differences 36 349ndash364 Besculides A Lee ME amp McCormick PJ 2002 Residents perceptions of the cultural benefits of tourism Annals of Tourism Research vol 29 no 2 pp 303-19 Bettencourt L A amp Brown S W (1997) Contact employees Relationships among workplace fairness job satisfaction and prosocial behaviours Journal Of Retailing 73(1) 39-61



Birdir B (2002) Turizm ve otel isletmeciliği eğitimi alan lisans oumlğrencilerinin turizm enduumlstrisinde ccedilalısmayı tercih etmemelerinin temel nedenleri Bir nominal grup tekniği arastırması In Ministry of Tourism (ed) Proceedings of the conference and workshop on tourism education 495-504 Ankara Ministry of Tourism Press Bonn M amp Forbringer L (1992) Reducing turnover in the hospitality industry an overview of recruitment selection and retention International Journal of Hospitality Management 11 47 -63 Boudreau JW Boswell WR Judge TA Bretz Jr RD 2001 Personality and cognitive ability as predictors of job search among employed managers Personnel Psychology 54 (1) 25ndash50 Brien A 2004 Do I want a job in hospitality Only till I get a real job In Smith KA Schott C (Eds) Proceedings of the New Zealand Tourism and Hospitality Research Conference Wellington NZ

Brown D (1996) Browns values-based holistic model of career and life-role choices and satisfaction In D Brown L Brooks amp Associates (Eds) Career choice and development (pp 337ndash372) San Francisco CA Jossey-Bass Press Brunt P amp Courtney P 1999 Host perceptions of sociocultural impacts Annals of Tourism Research vol 26 no 3 pp 493-515 Bryman A amp Bell E (2003) Business Research Methods Oxford Oxford University Press Caldwell DF Burger JM 1997 Personality and social influence strategies in the workplace Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 23 1003ndash1012 Carlzon J (1987 July) Moments of truth Industry Week 234 40-42 Casado M A (1992) Student expectations of hospitality jobs Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 33(4) 80-82

Chen JS KH Chu W Wu (2000) Tourism students perceptions of work values A case of Taiwanese universities International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management Vol 12 pp360 - 365

Chen P Y Choi (2008) Generational differences in work values A study of hospitality management International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management Vol 20 pp595 - 615 Cheng A amp Brown A (1998) HRM strategies and labour turnover in the hotel industry A comparative study of Australia and Singapore The International Journal of Human Resource Management 9 136-154 Christensen Hughes J M (2002) Recruitment and selection issues and strategies within international resort communities In N DAnnunzio-Green G A Maxwell amp S Watson (Eds) Human Resource Management International Perspective in Hospitality and Tourism London Continuum Clark CJ (1994) ldquoThe effect of co-operative education on graduate employment prospectsrdquo paper presented at the conference Industry and Education The Cooperative Venture Auckland New Zealand 24-26 August Cohen J amp Cohen P 1983 Applied Multiple Regressioncorrelation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences Erlbaum Hillsdale NJ Cooper C amp Westlake J (1998) Stakeholders and tourism education curriculum planning using a quality management framework Industry and Higher Eductaion12(2) 93-100 Cothran C C and Combrink T E (1999) Attitudes of minority adolescents toward hospitality industry careers Hospitality Management 18 143-158



Czaja R amp Blair J (2005) Designing Surveys A Guide to Decisions and Procedures Holstein (Eds) Handbook of interview research Context and Method (pp 675-693)

Darkenwald GG (1980) Continuing education and the hard to reach adult in Knox AG (Eds)New Directions for Continuing Education Jossey-Bass San Francisco CA pp1-10 Davidson M (1996) Demographic profile and curriculum expectations of first year hospitality management degree students Australian Journal of Hospitality Management 3(2) 9-14 Davis L Ajzen L Saunders J amp Williams T 2002 The decision of African American students to complete high school an application of the theory of planned behavior Journal of Educational Psychology vol 94 no 4 pp 810-19

Deery M Iverson R (1995) Enhancing productivity intervention strategies for employee turnover Proceedings of IAHMS Spring Conference Norwich Hotel School Norwich Drucker P (1992) The new society of organisations Harvard Business Review pp95-104 Doherty L Guerrier Y Jamieson S Lashley C Lockwood A 2001 Getting ahead graduate careers in hospitality management CHMEHEFCE London Doxey GV 1975 A causation theory of visitor irritants methodology and research inferences in Travel and Tourism Research Associations Sixth Annual Conference Proceedings San Diego pp 195-8

Elizur D (1994) Gender and work values A comparative analysis Journal of Social Psychology Vol 134 pp201 - 212 EPU (2006) Realising Tourism Potential The 9th Malaysian Plan (2006-2010) Economic Planning Unit (EPU) Prime Ministers Department of Malaysia Ernawati D amp Pearce P (2003) lsquoTourism courses at the higher education level in Indonesia The perspectives of the stakeholdersrsquo Journal of teaching in Travel vol 3 no 2 pp 1-18 Foster JJ 2001 Data Analysis using SPSS for Windows Versions 8-10 A Beginners Guide SAGE Publications London-Thousand Oaks-New Delhi Freeland B 2000 Demands of training Australian tourism and Hospitality National Centre for Vocational Education Research Adelaide

GetzD (1994) Students work experiences perceptions and attitudes towards careers in hospitality and tourism A longitudinal case study in Spey Valley Scotland International Journal of Hospitality Management Vol 13 pp25 - 37

Go FM Monachello ML Baum T (1996) Human Resource Management in the Hospitality Industry John Wiley amp Sons Inc UK Green S B Salkind N J amp Akey T M (1997) Using SPSS for windows Analysing and understanding data Englewood Clis NJ Prentice-Hall Gursoy D Jurowski C amp Uysal M 2002 Resident attitudes a structural modeling approach Annals of Tourism Research vol 29 no 1 pp 79-105 Hair JF Anderson RE Tatham RL Black WC 1998 Multivariate Data Analysis fifth ed Prentice-Hall New Jersey Haralambopoulos N amp Pizam A 1996 Perceived impacts of tourism the case of Samos Annals of Tourism Research vol 23 pp 503-26 Howard DR 1976 Multivariate relationships between leisure activities and personality Research Quarterly vol 47 pp 226-37



International hospitality travel and tourism a snapshot International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 12(3) 215 - 216 Jafari J (1979) Tourism and the Social Sciences A bilbiography 1970-78 Annals of Tourism Research 6(2) 149-194 Jenkins AK (2001) Making a career of it Hospitality studentsrsquo future perspectives an Anglo-Dutch study International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 13(1) 13-20 Jenkins C L amp Henry B M (2007) Government involvement in tourism in developing countries In T Huybers (Ed) Tourism in Developing Countries Cheltenham UK Northampton MA Edward Elgar Johnson J Snepenger D amp Akis S 1994 Residents perceptions of tourism development Annals of Tourism Research vol 21 pp 629-42 Joseph FHJ Rolph EA Ronald LT amp William CB 1995 Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings Fourth Edition Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs NJ Judd C M Elliot R S amp Kidder L (1991) Research methods in social sciences Forth Worth The Dryden Press Jurowski C amp Gursoy D 2004 Distance effects on residents attitudes toward tourism Annals of Tourism Research vol 31 no 2 pp 296-312 Kang SK Gould R 2002 Hospitality graduatesrsquo employment status and job satisfaction Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Education 14 (4) 11ndash18 Kaplan A (1982) A management approach to hospitality and tourism education International Journal of Hospitality Management 1(1) 11-17 Kelley-Patterson D amp George C (2001) Securing graduate commitment an exploration of the comparative expectations of placement students graduate recruits and human resource managers within the hospitality leisure and tourism industries International Journal of Hospitality Management 20(4) 311-323

KnowlesT R Teixeira D Egan (2003) Tourism and hospitality education in Brazil and the UK A comparison International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management Vol 15 pp45 - 51 Kozak and Kizilirmak 2001 Career perceptions of unndergrduate students A case study in Turkey Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport and Tourism Education 6(1) 4 -17 Kusluvan S Kusluvan Z 2000 Perceptions and attitudes of undergraduate tourism students towards working in the tourism industry in Turkey Tourism Management 21 251ndash269 Kyriacou C Coulthard M 2000 Undergraduatesrsquo views of teaching as a career choice Journal of Education for Teaching 26 (2) 117ndash126 Ladkin A (2002) Career analysis a case study of hotel general managers in Australia Tourism Management 23 379-388 Lankford S 1994 Attitudes and perceptions toward tourism and rural regional development Journal of Travel Research vol 32 pp 35-43 Lavery P (1988) Careers in tourism Tourism Management 9(2) 167-171 Lawson RW Williams J Young T amp Cossens J 1998 A comparison of residents attitudes towards tourism in 10 New Zealand destinations Tourism Management vol 19 no 3 pp 247-56



Lind D A Marchal W G amp Wathen S A (2005) Statistical Techniques in Business and Economics (12th ed) New York McGraw-Hill

Liu HJ(2006) A highlight of tourism and hospitality education issues in Taiwan from the hospitality human resource managers point of view Journal of Teaching in Travel amp Tourism Vol 6 pp89 - 102 Liu A (2002) Human resources development and planning for tourism Case studies from PR China and Malaysia Unpublished PhD University of Waterloo (Canada) Canada Liu J amp Var T 1986 Resident attitudes toward tourism impacts in Hawaii Annals of Tourism Research vol 13 pp 193-214 McMahon U and Quinn U (1995) Maximizing the hospitality management student work placement experience a case study Education and Training 37(4) 13-17 Millar R amp Shevlin M 2003 Predicting career information-seeking behavior of school pupils using the theory of planned behavior Journal of Vocational Behavior vol 62 no 1 pp 26-42

OLearyS J Deegan (2005) Career progression of Irish tourism and hospitality management graduates International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management Vol 17 pp421 - 432

OMahony BG JF Sillitoe (2001) Identifying the perceived barriers to participation in tertiary education among hospitality employees International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management Vol 13 pp21 - 29 Oppenheim AN 1992 Questionnaire Design Interviewing and Attitude Measurement Pinter Publishers New York Ou Z (2004) The reform of tour guidesrsquo salary system in China Journal of Guilin Institute of Tourism 15(4) 44-48 Pallant J 2001 SPSS Survival Guide A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS Allen amp Unwin Crows Nest Parker D Manstead ASR amp Stradling SG 1995 Extending the theory of planned behaviour the role of personal norm British Journal of Social Psychology vol 34 pp 127-37 Parsons D amp Care P (1991) Developing managers for tourism London National Economic Development Office Pizam A 1978 Tourism impacts the social costs to the destination community as perceived by its residents Journal of Travel Research vol 16 pp 8-12

Pizam A SW Thornburg (2000) Absenteeism and voluntary turnover in Central Florida hotels A pilot study International Journal of Hospitality Management Vol 19 pp211 - 217 Pizam A Uriely N amp Reichel A 2000 The intensity of tourist-host social relationship and its effects on satisfaction and change of attitudes the case of working tourists in Israel Tourism Management vol 21 no 4 pp 395-406

Pizam ARC Lewis (1979) Work values of hospitality students Journal of Hospitality Education Vol 3 pp5 - 16 Pizam A (1982) Tourism manpower the state of the art Journal of Travel research 11(2) 5-9

Pollock B Richie H (1990) Designing the Four-Year Tourism Management Curriculum A Marketing Approach Journal of Travel Research Vol 34 No 1 68-72 (1990)



Purcell K (1997) Womens employment in UK tourism gender roles and labour markets In M T Sinclair (Ed) Gender Work and Tourism Routledge Purcell K amp Quinn J (1996) Exploring the education-employment equation in hospitality management a comparison of graduates and HNDs International Journal of Hospitality Management 15(1) 51-68

Purcell K Quinn J (1995) Hospitality Management Education and Employment Trajectories School of Hotel and Catering Management Oxford

Raybould M amp Wilkins H (2005) Over qualified and under experienced Turning graduates into hospitality managers International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 17(3) Riley M (2000) Managing People (2nd ed) Butterworth-Heinemann Riley M Ladkin A amp Szivas E (2002) Tourism Employment analysis and planning Channel View Publications Clevedon UK Riley M Ladkin A Szivas E 2002 Tourism Employment Analysis and Planning Channel View Publications Sydney

Ross M SH Schwartz S Surkiss (1999) Basic individual values work values and the meaning of work Applied Psychology ndash An International Review Vol 48 pp49 - 72 Ross G (1992) Tourism management as a career path vocational perceptions of Australian school leavers Tourism Management 13 242-247 Ross G (1994) What do Australian school leavers want of the industry Tourism Management 15 62-66 Sage CA The Employment Interview Handbook (Thousand Oaks CA Sage 1999) 56 J Burnett and SJ Motowidlo Sciarini M P amp Woods R H (1997) Selecting that First Job How Students Develop Perceptions about Potential Employers Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 38(4) 76-81 Sciarini M Pand Woods R H (1997) Perceptions and attitudes of tourism students in Turkey p 78 Simons T amp Enz C A (1995) Motivating hotel employees Beyond the carrot and the stick Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Management 36(1) 20-27 Swarbrooke J (1995) The Management and Development of Visitor Attractions Oxford Butterworth-Heinemann Swarbrooke J (1999) Sustainable Tourism Management Wallingford CABI PublishingSymposium on Motivation Beliefs Attitudes and Values University of Nebraska Press Lincoln Tashakkori A amp Teddlie C (1998) Mixed Methodology Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (Vol 46) California Sage Publications Teng CC 2006 What do they really think A study of hospitality studentsrsquo learning satisfaction in Taiwan Journal of Hospitality and Home Economics 3 (2) 153ndash167 TIANZ (2006) New Zealand Tourism and Hospitality Workforce Strategy UNWTO (2002) Madrid declaration on human resources in tourism Paper presented at the Human Resource Management in Tourism Towards a New Paradigm UNWTO (2007) Tourism Highlights World Tourism Organization




UNWTO (2008) Tourism Highlights World Tourism Organization UNWTO (2009) Tourism Highlights World Tourism Organization UNWTO (2008) Tourism Barometer World Tourism Organisation UNWTO (2009) Tourism Barometer World Tourism Organisation Var T Kendall KW amp Tarakcioglu E 1985 Resident attitudes towards tourists in a Turkish resort town Annals of Tourism Research vol 12 pp 652-7 Veal AJ 1998 Research Methods for Leisure and Tourism A Practical Guide Pitman Publishing London Waryszak RZ (1995) ldquoHospitality and tourism student expectations of cooperative educationrdquo in Shaw RN (Ed) Proceedings of the National Tourism and Hospitality Research Conference Melbourne CAUTHE 26-32

World Travel amp Tourism Council 2002a

World Travel amp Tourism Council 2007

World Travel amp Tourism Council 2009 Yuksel U Mermod A and Elmadag B 2003 A model of unplanned buying behavior and in-store cues Marketing World (Pazarlama Dunyasi) vol175 pp 36-46 Zacarelli H E (1985) Is the hospitalityfood service industry turning its employees on - or off International Journal of Hospitality Management 4 123-124 Zeithaml VA Bitner MJ 1996 Services Marketing McGraw-Hill New York Zhang G Pine R amp Zhang H (2000) Chinarsquos international tourism development Present and future International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 12 282-290 Zhang HQ Wu E 2004 Human resources issues facing the hotel and travel industry in China International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 16 (7) 424ndash428 Zhang J Inbakaran RJ amp Jackson M 2006 Understanding community attitudes towards tourism and host-Guest interaction in the urban-rural border region Tourism Geographies vol 8 no 2 pp 182-204 Zhang W amp Fan X (2005) China In D W Airey amp J Tribe (Eds) An International Handbook of Tourism Education (pp 148-160) Oxford England Elsevier Science Zikmund WG 1994 Business Research Method 4th Ed Dryden Press Harcourt Brace Coddege Publishers New York

Zinser R (2003) Developing career and employability skills a US case study Education+Training Vol 45 No7 pp402-41 Zopiatis A (2007) Hospitality internships in Cyprus a genuine academic experience or a continuing frustration International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 19(1) 65 - 77



ldquoUnderstanding Studentsrsquo Commitment to Employment in the Tourism and Hospitality Industryrdquo

Abstract This research develops a model to understand the underlying factors influencing studentsrsquo commitment to employment in the tourism and hospitality industry Based on a literature review surrounding the topic six factors likely to influence commitment are used to develop a theoretical framework These factors include nature of work social status career prospects promotion opportunities physical working conditions and pay and fridge benefits The model is tested using responses collection from 300 students studying tourism and hospitality related programs at the Hotel School of Mauritius The study relied on the use of a structured questionnaire which was piloted tested with 30 students Multiple regression analysis was used to test the effect of each of the six factors on the level of commitment to employment in the tourism and hospitality industry Results indicated that the social status associated with employment in the industry as well as career prospects in the industry were the two major factors influencing studentsrsquo commitment The policy implications emerging from the findings are discussed These include the development of tourism action clubs providing career advices to students development of tourism awareness competition tourism scholarship programs company participation in job fairs and implementation of company sponsored tours

Keywords Students commitment employment tourism and hospitality industry



INTRODUCTION














industry






































Nature of work

Career prospects


Pay and benefits

Commitment to the

industry

Social status










































































































operations





tourism industry





























































is still limited














Nature of Work












Career Prospects





























Pay and Benefits




















Social Status






















Career prospects


Pay and benefits

H5

H4

H3

H2

H1

Commitment to the

industry

Social status

Nature of work





























tourism industry





















1998)




course willingly












312 Survey Method















2003)



















315 Pilot Testing

























316 Proposed Model





industry




(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1


Social Status (SS)















































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES














































INTRODUCTION














industry






































Nature of work

Career prospects


Pay and benefits

Commitment to the

industry

Social status










































































































operations





tourism industry





























































is still limited














Nature of Work












Career Prospects





























Pay and Benefits




















Social Status






















Career prospects


Pay and benefits

H5

H4

H3

H2

H1

Commitment to the

industry

Social status

Nature of work





























tourism industry





















1998)




course willingly












312 Survey Method















2003)



















315 Pilot Testing

























316 Proposed Model





industry




(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1


Social Status (SS)















































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES



























































Nature of work

Career prospects


Pay and benefits

Commitment to the

industry

Social status










































































































operations





tourism industry





























































is still limited














Nature of Work












Career Prospects





























Pay and Benefits




















Social Status






















Career prospects


Pay and benefits

H5

H4

H3

H2

H1

Commitment to the

industry

Social status

Nature of work





























tourism industry





















1998)




course willingly












312 Survey Method















2003)



















315 Pilot Testing

























316 Proposed Model





industry




(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1


Social Status (SS)















































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES



















































































































































operations





tourism industry





























































is still limited














Nature of Work












Career Prospects





























Pay and Benefits




















Social Status






















Career prospects


Pay and benefits

H5

H4

H3

H2

H1

Commitment to the

industry

Social status

Nature of work





























tourism industry





















1998)




course willingly












312 Survey Method















2003)



















315 Pilot Testing

























316 Proposed Model





industry




(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1


Social Status (SS)















































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES


































































































is still limited














Nature of Work












Career Prospects





























Pay and Benefits




















Social Status






















Career prospects


Pay and benefits

H5

H4

H3

H2

H1

Commitment to the

industry

Social status

Nature of work





























tourism industry





















1998)




course willingly












312 Survey Method















2003)



















315 Pilot Testing

























316 Proposed Model





industry




(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1


Social Status (SS)















































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES


















































Career Prospects





























Pay and Benefits




















Social Status






















Career prospects


Pay and benefits

H5

H4

H3

H2

H1

Commitment to the

industry

Social status

Nature of work





























tourism industry





















1998)




course willingly












312 Survey Method















2003)



















315 Pilot Testing

























316 Proposed Model





industry




(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1


Social Status (SS)















































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES




























































Social Status






















Career prospects


Pay and benefits

H5

H4

H3

H2

H1

Commitment to the

industry

Social status

Nature of work





























tourism industry





















1998)




course willingly












312 Survey Method















2003)



















315 Pilot Testing

























316 Proposed Model





industry




(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1


Social Status (SS)















































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES














































Career prospects


Pay and benefits

H5

H4

H3

H2

H1

Commitment to the

industry

Social status

Nature of work





























tourism industry





















1998)




course willingly












312 Survey Method















2003)



















315 Pilot Testing

























316 Proposed Model





industry




(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1


Social Status (SS)















































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES























































tourism industry





















1998)




course willingly












312 Survey Method















2003)



















315 Pilot Testing

























316 Proposed Model





industry




(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1


Social Status (SS)















































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES























































312 Survey Method















2003)



















315 Pilot Testing

























316 Proposed Model





industry




(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1


Social Status (SS)















































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES























































315 Pilot Testing

























316 Proposed Model





industry




(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1


Social Status (SS)















































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES














































316 Proposed Model





industry




(COM)

H6

H5 H3

H2

H1


Social Status (SS)















































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES


























































































































industry(Table 7)




























Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES





































































Table 9




417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES















































417 Co-workers












418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES















































418 Managers


























Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES






















































Table 13














Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES
















































Table 14


422 Proposed Model










H6 H2

H1


Social Status (SS)



H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES














































H5 H3 H4


(COM)

Pay Benefits (PAB)





analysed


















Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES
















































Table 15





Multiple R =284



Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES














































Rsup2 = 081




Square

F-Test

Regression 6 12622 2104 4252

Residual 291 143974 495 p=000

Total 297 156596

Beta Coefficient



βeta t -Value Sig



Nature of Work -209 -157 -2608 010







well

ρ = 000








H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES














































H1 ( β = - 157 t = - 2609 ρ lt 005 )


tourism industry





accepted

H2 (β = 156 t = 2637 ρ lt 005)







rejected

H3 ( β = - 084 t = - 1400 ρ gt 005 )







H4 ( β = 192 t = 3150 ρ lt 005 )










rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES
















































rejected

H5 ( β = 069 t = 1157 ρ gt 005 )


tourism industry









H6 ( β = 026 t = -436 ρ gt 005 )







Table 16








156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES

















































156 009 Supported



192 002 Supported



-026 663 Rejected



tourism industry

069 248 Rejected



tourism industry

-084 163 Rejected



































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES
































































media





industry






















scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES
























































scholarship






















at job fairs
















REFERENCES


























































REFERENCES













































commitment

Documents