The relation between job insecurity,job satisfaction and organizational commitment among employees in the tourism sector in Novi Sad

Abstract

This article analyses the relation between job insecurity, job satisfaction and organizational commitment among employees of companies working in the tourism sector in Novi Sad, Serbia. The article aims to discover whether and to what extent there is a relation between these three variables, drawing on theoretical approaches and a questionnaire conducted in Novi Sad in 2012/2013 on a sample of 149 respondents in companies involved in tourism (hotels, tourist agencies and restaurants). The results indicate that there are strong positive correlations between organizational commitment and the variables which measure job satisfaction, while job insecurity correlates negatively with the variables which describe job satisfaction and organizational commitment.

Keywords

Job insecurity job satisfaction organizational commitment tourism

Introduction

The aim of the study is to determine the relation between job insecurity, job satisfaction and organizational commitment among employees working in the tourism sector in Novi Sad, Serbia. Tourism is a significant global activity, which has recorded a growth rate of 25% in the last 10 years. It has been predicted that in years to come tourism will develop in all regions of the world, especially in developing countries (UNWTO, 2012). Also, it should not be ignored that tourism has a great influence on numerous economic sectors and is an important generator of employment. In tourism and hospitality, as well as in many other industries, employees’ attitude towards the company where they work depends primarily on job satisfaction. Thus, studying job satisfaction can give us an insight into how the employees perceive certain aspects of the hospitality and tourism sector (Clark, 1997). However, the tourism sector is specific in that it has unique aspects which contribute to a high turnover among employees: high work intensity, a poorly developed internal labour market, low social status and a low level of professional prestige. Studying the way employees perceive the company where they work is of key importance to understand what determines the attitudes of the employees towards their jobs (Tuzun, 2009).

We propose the following hypotheses in this article:

H1: Job insecurity correlates negatively with job satisfaction.

H2: Job insecurity correlates negatively with organizational commitment.

H3: Job satisfaction correlates positively with organizational commitment.

The article also studies the relation between gender and job insecurity, job satisfaction and organizational commitment variables; hence:

H4: There is a statistically significant difference between gender and job insecurity.

H5: There is a statistically significant difference between gender and job satisfaction.

H6: There is a statistically significant difference between gender and organizational commitment.

By analysing the data the article also examines the relation between employment type (temporary/permanent) and job insecurity, job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and we hypothesize:

H7: There is a statistically significant difference between employment type and job insecurity.

H8: There is a statistically significant difference between employment type and job satisfaction.

H9: There is a statistically significant difference between employment type and organizational commitment.

We also examine whether there is a statistically significant difference between company type and job insecurity, job satisfaction and organizational commitment:

H10: There is a statistically significant difference between company type and job insecurity.

H11: There is a statistically significant difference between company type and job satisfaction.

H12: There is a statistically significant difference between company type and organizational commitment.

Literature review

Job insecurity

Employment is an important source of material as well as personal satisfaction and security. One of the hallmarks of the current state of society is high levels of unemployment. In recent years, the companies in the tourism and hospitality sector, especially hotel management, have faced the process of restructuring and mass layoffs, in order to cut expenses, ensure higher flexibility and adjust better to new working conditions. However, due to new conditions on the labour market, a lot of workers change their job or are given contracts different from their previous ones (part-time working, shorter working hours, etc.), or they have lost their jobs, long-term or temporarily. Among a large number of workers who remain employed these changes have caused an increased feeling of insecurity in relation to their job (Hartley et al., 1991).

Job insecurity can be defined in different ways. Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt (1984: 438) define job insecurity as a feeling of helplessness in maintaining the desired continuity of the work situation. Roskies and Louis-Guerin (1990) consider insecurity a concern about the possibility of certain employment. Hartley et al. (1991: 39) define job insecurity as an evaluation of the existence of a threat of losing one’s job due to changes in the work environment, which is based on the interaction between the perceived possibility of losing one’s job and perceived certainty it will not happen, while Reisel et al. (2010) define job insecurity as the sum of total cognitive danger and concern. Probst (2002) sees job insecurity as a perceived stability and continuity of one’s job as one knows it, while De Witte (2005) defines it as a stressor which consists of the cognitive possibility of losing one’s job and the affective experience which is related to it. Đorđević (2012) points out that in various papers a difference is made between defining job insecurity in a narrow and a broader sense. Some authors connect job insecurity to current employment insecurity, which is the narrower sense (De Witte, 1999; Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt, 1984; Van Wyk and Pienaar, 2008), whereas other authors view job insecurity as a general employment insecurity which is not only related to current employment, but is an integral part of the professional life of the employees in general, which is the broader sense (Hartley et al., 1999).

Hellgren et al. (1999) draw a difference between two forms of job insecurity: qualitative insecurity, which is concern about losing one’s job and the feelings related to deterioration of working conditions and salary cuts or the impossibility of career development (Sverke et al., 2002), and quantitative insecurity, which is the loss of important job characteristics and general insecurity.

Borg and Elizur (1992) view job insecurity from two aspects, which include cognitive insecurity, which relates to the possibility of losing one’s job, and affective insecurity, which is the fear of losing one’s job.

Therefore, unlike losing one’s job, which is always expressed as unemployment, job insecurity depends on personal interpretations of different signals from the working and the social environment. However, job insecurity may have the same effect as losing a job as job insecurity results in changes in attitudes towards work and a person’s behaviour with regard to the company. The definitions point out that job insecurity is related to a subjective feeling, and job insecurity perception can negatively affect attitudes towards work, so it can be considered a chronic stressor at the workplace (Barling and Kelloway, 1996; De Witte, 1999; Hartley et al., 1991; Mauno and Kinnunen, 1999). In this sense, a large number of studies have shown that job insecurity correlates negatively with job satisfaction (e.g. Ashford et al., 1989; Davy et al., 1997; De Witte, 1999; Rosenblatt et al., 1999). Lawler (1973) points out that job satisfaction and job security are important external ‘rewards’ which positively affect job satisfaction. According to some authors (e.g. Brown et al., 2007) subjective concepts such as job satisfaction and job security are under the influence of norms and respondents’ expectations. In economic papers it is argued that there must be an interdisciplinary interpretation of the respondents’ (employees’) answers in order to avoid subjectivity (Green, 2006).

Although various authors define insecurity in different ways (Sverke et al., 2002), the one basic conception which underlies all definitions is that job insecurity is a subjective perception (Klandermans et al., 2010). Job insecurity is also defined as a universality of concern about the existence of the job in the future (Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt, 1984). However, several authors treat job insecurity as an objective phenomenon (Fernie and Metcalf, 1998) experienced by every person exposed to equal, objective conditions including a high unemployment rate, company layoffs, etc.

Job satisfaction

It was Hopok who introduced the concept of job satisfaction into scientific circles (Wright, 2006). He considered job satisfaction a combination of psychological and physiological circumstances, as well as the circumstances of the environment which cause the employee to say: ‘I am happy with my job’ (Matanović, 2009). Hirschfeld (2000) connects job satisfaction to the extent to which employees like their job. Locke (1976: 1300) defines job satisfaction as a pleasant emotional state which is the result of one’s job or work experience. Rothmann and Agathagelou (2000) explain job satisfaction as a complex of variables which are affected by situational factors of the working environment. Using their two-factor theory Herzberg et al. (1959) examined different factors which affect job satisfaction.

Developing the ‘key incident’ method, Herzberg is one of the first theorists to argue that job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction are not two extremes on the same continuum, but are separate dimensions caused by different factors of the working situation. Thus satisfaction and lack of satisfaction are under the influence of external-extrinsic or ‘hygienic’ factors and they are controlled by the management. These include: material compensations, working conditions, the relationship between colleagues and superiors, job security and the company’s work policy. When met, these factors do not lead to higher motivation and employee satisfaction, but only prevent job dissatisfaction. On the other hand, another group of factors, which Herzberg calls motivators – or internal-intrinsic factors – are the source of work motivation and job satisfaction. These are the factors that concern those job aspects which are related only to doing the job, such as: job challenge, the possibility of personal achievement and success, the level of responsibility, the possibility of growth and self-actualization, the possibility of improvement and receiving credit for the effort made (Hancer and George, 2003). According to Lopopolo (2002), job satisfaction is a person’s attitude towards their own job and he emphasizes several dimensions which affect job satisfaction: the nature of relationships, hierarchy, the nature of the job, focus on rewards and support, internal motivation and moral values. Spector (1997: 2) defines job satisfaction as a feeling people have about their job and different job aspects. Spector states three dominant approaches in defining job satisfaction factors. The first approach points to different work environment aspects as main factors of satisfaction, such as: the variety of skills, significance of tasks, task identity, independence, feedback on whether the job is done correctly, etc. The second approach emphasizes the significance of personal characteristics for the subjective feeling of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the current job. The third approach emphasizes the relation between the person and the environment as a significant prerequisite for job satisfaction.

Satisfaction of employees is especially significant in the services sector, which includes companies involved in the tourism and hospitality industry. In such companies keeping the client is directly dependent on direct contact with the employees, which is why building employees’ job satisfaction can contribute considerably to the success of hospitality organizations (Lawler, 1973).

When it comes to job satisfaction we encounter two basic concepts in the literature. The first approach is a holistic one, which considers job satisfaction as a one-dimensional construct (Lawler, 2005). It entails a person’s attitude towards the job, one central feeling related to the job which is not split into individual aspects. The second approach to job satisfaction is an additive approach, which views the construct as multidimensional (Smith, 2005). According to this approach job satisfaction is seen as satisfaction with individual job aspects. What a person feels about their job is the sum of satisfaction with these individual aspects.

In companies in the hospitality sector, job satisfaction is especially important as it can affect the way consumers perceive the quality of the service given, as well as keeping consumers (Lawler, 2005). According to numerous theories, the workers will make more effort if they expect this to lead to their performance being rewarded in a desirable way (Campbell et al., 2001 [1970]).

In hotels, frontline employees have direct contact with the users. Users’ perception, satisfaction and loyalty are being created and developed during such interactions. Frontline employees should be satisfied with their job in order to give quality service to their guests (Spinelli and Canavos, 2000).

Kusluvan et al. (2010) have written an extensive review of managing human resources in tourism and hospitality. According to these authors the factors which affect job satisfaction in a general sense involve work space, job characteristics, organizational environment and industrial structure. Dienhart and Gregoire (1993) have determined that if managers wish to affect the guests’ perception and the employees’ focus on the guests, they should increase employees’ satisfaction with their job, the possibility to be involved and identify with the job as well as job security.

Ghiselli et al. (2001) have studied job satisfaction in the hospitality sector. The study results have pointed to the fact that salary affects job satisfaction. In the hotel sector, Aksu and Aktas (2005) have concluded that employees who work in the middle and top management are generally satisfied with their job despite the fact that they usually have extended work hours, sometimes work in poor conditions, receive little support from their colleagues and earn insufficient salaries.

LaLopa (1997) has shown that when employees feel satisfaction with their job, they are ready to commit themselves to the company and remain working there. Spinelli and Canavos (2000) have concluded that workers feel more satisfied if they are involved in the process of making decisions and if they have had proper training. Numerous employee benefits as well as efficient management have also been stated as significant factors which affect job satisfaction. In that sense, Lam et al. (2001) proposed organizing workshops, training and other development plans, especially for new and highly educated employees.

Organizational commitment

Organizational commitment is a positive attitude of the employee, leading also to a psychological connection and identification with the organization. Forming an organizational commitment entails creating and maintaining continuous psychological relations between the employee and the company (Mowday et al., 1979). Employees who are characterized by a high level of organizational commitment firmly believe in the values and the goals of the company where they work. Also, such employees are ready to increase their efforts in the interests of the company and have a strong desire to remain working there. This model of commitment is also known as affective commitment or attitude commitment and it explains organizational commitment from the perspective of the relations of the employees to the company (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990). Another popular definition of organizational commitment has been developed by Allen and Meyer (1990), who claim that it consists of three dimensions: affective, continuous and normative.

Authors such as Cullen et al. (2003) claim that organizational commitment is related to organizational achievement and productivity. For example, Elliot and Dan (1994) emphasize that organizational commitment will affect productivity as employees are ready to work hard. Riketta (2002) claims that a committed employee is focused on work and that there is a low level of turnover in companies where there is organizational commitment. Sarminah (2006) considers low turnover in a company to be a significant advantage for the company as it reduces operational costs in managing human resources, primarily in terms of recruiting and training new employees. Also, committed workers are characterized by higher ethics in terms of absence from work and greater support of the organizational values (Randall and O’Driscoll, 1997).

In the last few years, studying the organizational commitment of employees in the tourism sector and their involvement in the working environment has become very popular (Yeh, 2013). Studies have shown a connection between the level of involvement of employees in the job with different indicators of organizational performance, such as a low level of negative burnout (Schaufeli and Bakker, 2004), low turnover (Saks, 2006), low stress levels (Britt et al., 2005), higher employee productivity, better financial results and greater organizational commitment (Richman, 2006).

Committed employees give better service to their guests, which in turn increases guests’ loyalty to the company (Salanova et al., 2005). Satisfied and committed employees, primarily frontline employees, can give their guests high quality performance and service (LaLopa, 1997).

How do commitment on the part of management and focus on the quality of service affect frontline employees? Bagozzi (1992) advocates that the commitment of each person affects the quality of the service and has a positive outcome (Babakus et al., 2003). Empirical evidence points to the fact that commitment by management and focus on the quality of service lead to satisfaction of both employees and guests (Hartline and Ferrell, 1996). Also, recent studies reveal that organizational commitment positively affects consumer-oriented strategies (Hartline et al., 2000).

Organizational commitment and job satisfaction are two very common reactions to the commitment of the management to the company and the employees. Training, empowerment of the employees, rewards and creating a collectivist spirit have an important role in creating organizational commitment (Argyris, 1998; Forrester, 2000).

Study methodology

Sample

The sample consists of respondents working in three different kinds of companies within the tourism sector: the employees in hotels, restaurants and tourist agencies in Novi Sad, Serbia. The number of respondents in each company depended upon the readiness of the employees to fill out the questionnaire. The questionnaire was distributed in paper form. The total number of valid questionnaires was 149. Table 1 shows the demographic composition of the respondents.

Table 1.

Demographic variables of the respondents.

Variable	Category	Number of respondents	Percentage
Gender	Male	63	42.3
Gender	Female	86	57.7
Age	< 20	32	21.5
	21–25	28	18.8
	26–30	39	26.2
	31–35	28	18.8
	36–40	14	9.4
	> 40	8	5.4
Education	High school	47	31.5
	College	25	16.8
	BA	62	41.6
	MA	15	10.1
Employment type	Temporary	79	53.0
Employment type	Permanent	70	47.0
Company type	Hotel	49	32.9
	Restaurant/cafe/bar	50	33.6
	Tourist agency	50	33.6

Instrument

The questionnaire consisted of five parts. The first part covered demographic characteristics, while the other parts measured the job insecurity, job satisfaction and organizational commitment of the respondents, where the respondents expressed their agreement with the statements on a five-point Likert scale, with 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree and 5 = strongly agree.

Job insecurity was measured by the Job Insecurity Inventory Scale, which consists of 11 items and measures cognitive and effective aspects of job insecurity, and scale reliability is .92 (De Witte, 2000). A scale with seven items was used in the questionnaire. Although it measures two dimensions, total job insecurity was observed in the present study.

Overall job satisfaction was measured by the Brayfield–Rothe Overall Job Satisfaction Scale (OJS) (Brayfield and Rothe, 1951), which consists of 18 items which explain the relationship of the employees with their job.

Job satisfaction was measured by the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) (Weiss et al., 1967), which reflects the extent to which the respondents are satisfied or dissatisfied with individual job aspects. The scale consists of 20 questions and it measures external (extrinsic) and internal (intrinsic) job aspects.

Although both scales measure job satisfaction, it is important to point out that the OJS was designed to estimate how the respondents feel about their job overall, while the MSQ assesses the respondents’ attitude towards different job aspects (Schleicher et al., 2004), namely:

Activity – possibility of maximum utilization of the working hours;

Independence – possibility to work independently;

Variability – possibility to do different jobs;

Social status – getting respect from others;

Monitoring and control – human resources – relationship between the superior and the employee;

Monitoring and control – technical part – technical quality of control and monitoring;

Moral values – possibility to do the job with a personal conscience and sense of responsibility;

Security – the way the job ensures secure employment;

Social service – possibility to do the job as a favour to others;

Having authority – having a chance to tell others what to do;

Usefulness of one’s abilities – possibility to do something due to one’s personal abilities;

Company policy and practice – the way the organizational policy of the company is implemented;

Compensation – feeling of adequate financial compensation in exchange for the amount of work done;

Promotion – possibility of being promoted in the job;

Responsibility – freedom to use personal judgement at work;

Creativity – possibility to apply personal methods at work;

Working conditions – physical aspects of the working environment;

Colleagues – the relationship between colleagues;

Recognition – recognizing a job well done;

Accomplishment – feeling of personal contribution at work.

Organizational commitment was measured using a part of the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) (Mowday et al., 1979) and consisted of 15 items. The modified scale (Kosanović, 2002) consisted of two factors: the first factor is employee’s identification with the company and the second factor measures commitment to the company. The respondents were expected to think about the extent to which they are commited to the company and answer the given statements accordingly. Overall commitment to the company is observed in the article.

Statistical techniques used in the study were as follows: descriptive statistical measures (arithmetic mean, standard deviation) and statistical techniques of inference (r – Pearson’s coefficient, the t-test, the ANOVA test), utilizing the SPSS statistical package.

Results

Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics, showing the mean ranking and standard deviation of the variables job insecurity (JITotal), overall job satisfaction (OJSTotal), job satisfaction (MSQTotal) and organizational commitment (OCQTotal). Ideally, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient should be above .7 (Nunnally, 1978), which was achieved in each of the scales used, so it can be said that the internal consistency of the scales is good.

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics, reliability of the scale and correlations.

	Number of items	Cronbach’s alpha	Mean	SD	Correlations
	Number of items	Cronbach’s alpha	Mean	SD	JITotal	OJSTotal	MSQTotal	OCQTotal
JITotal	7	.780	2.10	.714	–
OJSTotal	18	.867	3.70	.542	−.413^**
MSQTotal	20	.945	3.24	.838	−.367^**	.595^**
OCQTotal	15	.893	3.63	.635	−.404^**	.625^**	.792^**	–

Correlation is significant at the .01 level (two-tailed).

Moreover, Table 2 shows the correlations between the analysed variables, which were examined by applying Pearson’s linear correlation coefficient. According to Cohen’s criterion (Cohen, 1988) the mean values of the correlation between job insecurity and overall satisfaction (OJSTotal), job satisfaction (MSQTotal) and organizational commitment (OCQTotal) were calculated. According to Cohen’s criterion (Cohen, 1988) there were strong positive correlations between organizational commitment (OCQTotal) and the job satisfaction (OJSTotal and MSQTotal) variables, which confirms hypotheses H1, H2 and H3.

The t-test results of the independent samples (Table 3) show that there is no statistically significant difference between men and women for the job insecurity dimension (JITotal), job satisfaction, measured by the OJSTotal, and organizational commitment (OCQTotal) as in each case p was over .05, which refuted hypotheses H4 and H6. Job satisfaction with some job aspects measured by MSQTotal shows that there is a statistically significant difference between men and women for the job satisfaction dimension, so we can say that hypothesis H5 is partly confirmed.

Table 3.

T-tests according to gender.

	Gender	N	Mean	SD	t	Sig. (2-tailed)
JITotal	1 Male	63	2.01	.738	−1.393	.166
JITotal	2 Female	86	2.17	.692	−1.393	.166
OJSTotal	1 Male	63	3.73	.545	.607	.545
OJSTotal	2 Female	86	3.68	.542	.607	.545
MSQTotal	1 Male	63	3.44	.749	2.417	.017
MSQTotal	2 Female	86	3.11	.875	2.417	.017
OCQTotal	1 Male	63	3.73	.677	1.604	.111
OCQTotal	2 Female	86	3.56	.597	1.604	.111

df = 147.

Table 4 analyses two groups of employees, the first consisting of employees with temporary jobs, and the second consisting of employees with permanent jobs. Based on the results of the t-test shown in Table 4, it was determined that there is a statistically significant difference of the mean values, p = .00, of overall job satisfaction (MSQTotal) where, by subsequent calculation of the eta-squared according to Cohen (1988: 284–287), a difference has been determined between the mean values characteristics, η² = .14. Significance can also be confirmed for the OJSTotal variable, p = .06, which is relatively close to the value which shows significance (p ≤ .05), so we can say that hypothesis H8 is confirmed. The independent samples of the t-test have determined that there is a statistical difference between employees with permanent and employees with temporary jobs, p = .00, which confirms hypothesis H9. However, by calculating the eta-square, η² = .08, it can be seen that there is a moderate difference in terms of organizational commitment (OCQTotal) between the examined groups. As far as job insecurity is concerned (JITotal) it can be concluded that there is no statistically significant difference between the analysed groups, as p > .05, so hypothesis H7 is refuted.

Table 4.

T-tests according to employment type.

	Employment type	N	Mean	SD	t	Sig. (2-tailed)
JITotal	1 Temporary	69	2.21	.732	1.753	.082
JITotal	2 Permanent	80	2.01	.688
OJSTotal	1 Temporary	69	3.61	.543	−1.898	.060
OJSTotal	2 Permanent	80	3.78	.532
MSQTotal	1 Temporary	69	2.92	.824	−4.635	.000
MSQTotal	2 Permanent	80	3.52	.750
OCQTotal	1 Temporary	69	3.43	.563	−3.623	.000
OCQTotal	2 Permanent	80	3.80	.649

df = 147.

Table 5 shows the results of the ANOVA test according to company type, which examines the difference between company type and job insecurity, overall job satisfaction, job satisfaction and organizational commitment variables. The results show that there are no differences between hotels, restaurants and tourist agencies in the sample examined, considering that p was not under .05 in any case, which dismisses hypotheses H10, H11 and H12.

Table 5.

ANOVA test according to company type.

	Company type	Sum of squares	df	Mean square	F	Sig.
JITotal	Between groups	.938	2	.469	.920	.401
	Within groups	74.421	146	.510
	Total	75.359	148
OJSTotal	Between groups	.909	2	.454	1.558	.214
	Within groups	42.591	146	.292
	Total	43.500	148
MSQTotal	Between groups	3.239	2	1.619	2.349	.099
	Within groups	100.640	146	.689
	Total	103.879	148
OCQTotal	Between groups	1.791	2	.896	2.257	.108
	Within groups	57.937	146	.397
	Total	59.728	148

Discussion and conclusion

The primary goal of this article was to study the relations between job insecurity, job satisfaction and organizational commitment in the tourism sector. The secondary goal was to study the eventual existence of statistically significant differences between the aforementioned variables among employees, considering their gender, employment type and company type (hotels, tourist agencies and restaurants). The empirical findings of this study support the basic assumption about the relation between job insecurity, job satisfaction and organizational commitment in the tourism sector.

Study results clearly indicate a negative correlation between job insecurity and job satisfaction and organizational commitment variables, which points to the fact that employees who do not feel secure about their employment have a lower level of job satisfaction and are less committed to the company where they work (De Witte, 1999; De Witte and Näswall, 2003; Hartley et al., 1991; Sverke et al., 2002).

In accordance with previous studies (Koch and Steers, 1978; Mathieu and Zajac, 1990; Porter et al., 1974; Vandenberg and Lance, 1992) the present results point to a positive correlation between job satisfaction and organizational commitment, i.e. employees who are satisfied with their job feel greater commitment to the company.

The sample mean values indicate partial job satisfaction and job commitment, as well as a lower level of job insecurity among employees in the tourism sector. In informal conversations with the employees it was noted that the most common reason for satisfaction derives from the very nature of working in the tourism and hospitality sector. As the basic factor of satisfaction the respondents state the dynamic nature of the job, the variety of tasks, the possibility to do new things and forming good relationships. However, considering the poor social and economic state in Serbia, which has been present for many years, and the high level of unemployment, the findings can be interpreted as ‘disguised’ job satisfaction. A poor economic situation to a great extent means that in such conditions a person is satisfied with the very existence of their employment, so they often equate the possibility of having a permanent job, regular income and legally defined employment rights with job satisfaction. Because of this, the workers often accept poor working conditions out of fear of losing their job.

With the statistical procedures applied, it has been determined that there is no statistically significant difference between male and female respondents in terms of job insecurity and organizational commitment. Contrary to these results, some researchers have determined that there is a difference between men and women in experiencing job insecurity, where the results show that men perceive job insecurity more intensely (Näswall et al., 2005), which could be explained by their traditional role of breadwinner (Oljača, 2007).

Our results in terms of job satisfaction measured by the OJS are in accordance with the findings of many previous studies which show that there is no statistical significance between genders (Al-Ajmi, 2006; Frye and Mount, 2007; Koyuncu et al., 2006; Linz, 2003). On the other hand, some studies have shown that men show higher levels of satisfaction (Mora and Ferrer-i-Carbonell, 2009), which is indicated by results measured by the MSQ as well. According to other authors (Clark, 1997; Jung et al., 2007; Kim, 2005; Okpara et al., 2005) women show higher job satisfaction.

The present study shows that there is no difference between gender in terms of organizational commitment, which has been confirmed in previous studies (Al-Ajmi, 2006; Marsden et al., 1993; Savicki et al., 2003). However, some studies show that men feel higher organizational commitment (Dodd-McCue and Wright, 1996; Kaldenberg et al., 1995), while others show that women feel higher commitment to the company (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990).

Companies in the tourism sector increasingly hire workers on a temporary basis, which increases their flexibility and ensures competitiveness on the market. Previous studies show that workers with temporary jobs perceive their job as more insecure compared to employees who have permanent jobs (Beard and Edwards, 1995; Näswall and De Witte, 2003; Pearce, 1993) – although this is contrary to the results shown in this research. Namely, the workers with a temporary job continually experience uncertainty related to their job, and this very uncertainty is key in forming the feeling of job insecurity. Apart from this subjective feeling of job insecurity, some authors define a permanent job contract as an objective type of job insecurity.

Previous results, in accordance with the study reported in this article, point out that workers with temporary jobs feel less satisfied with the job compared to employees who have permanent jobs (De Witte and Lagrou, 1990; Van Breukelen and Allegro, 2000).

Our results, in accordance with previous studies, have shown that employees who have a temporary job feel a lower level of commitment to the company than is the case with employees who have permanent jobs (Lee and Johnson, 1991; Sverke et al., 2000; Van Dyne and Ang, 1998). However, some studies have shown no difference between employees with temporary and permanent jobs in terms of organizational commitment (De Witte and Naswall, 2003; Pearce, 1993; Van Breukelen and Allegro, 2000).

With the applied statistical procedures, it has been determined in this study that there is no statistically significant difference between company type and job insecurity, job satisfaction and organizational commitment variables, which can be explained by the fact that companies which belong to same type of work are the object of study, but also that the sample is small. Furthermore, it should be taken into account that predominantly non-managerial staff were questioned.

Limiting factors

The study conducted has certain methodological disadvantages. The data used in the study were gathered and interpreted by the authors, which increases the possibility of overestimating the significance of the examined variables. Recommendation for future studies is to use different sources (interviewing or surveying the managers or guests in the tourism sector considering that predominantly frontline staff were examined in the article). Also, it must be particularly emphasized that a relative small sample was used in the study, so the results should be viewed with caution, and their interpretation is very limited. We should not ignore the fact that the study was conducted in the tourism sector, which is specific in its dynamics and high employee turnover. Apart from that, all of the constructs were measured in one moment in time, i.e. from the statistical perspective. It would be useful to apply the suggested model longitudinally, in order to take into account the dynamics of the employees and consumers’ perception.

Implications for future studies

Unemployment and concern about job security have become one of the most popular topics, but also one of the biggest problems and frustration in Serbia, so we consider it important to point out the phenomenon of job insecurity and its consequences. In future studies it would be useful to analyse what consequences the feeling of job insecurity has on the psychological and physical health of a person but also on the company, for example job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Also, future studies should examine other psychological and contextual factors which may affect job satisfaction, as well as the relation between job satisfaction and the satisfaction of guests.

Implications for management

The results of this study point to several practical implications. A high level of job satisfaction is very desirable in a company as it results in positive working conditions, while a low level of job satisfaction causes organizational inefficiency and disciplinary problems. When the employees are satisfied with their job, they will give better service to their guests and in that way the level of satisfaction of guests will increase. To increase the level of job satisfaction among employees in the tourism sector, managers should strive to provide a working environment which is sensitive to the employees’ needs and their levels of competence.

Based on the results of this study, there is a need to motivate the employees in order to improve their commitment to the job. In order for the company to be successful, the needs of the company but also its employees have to be met.

This study has important implications for the quality of human resources in a company, and it is particularly significant for the development of human resources. Managers must continually search for efficient ways to improve the performance and satisfaction of frontline employees. Training is one of the most efficient tools for achieving this goal. Thus, the management should understand that training is not an option, but a prerequisite for a successful business and a satisfied employee. Trained employees give quality service and are committed to the company. Organizations with a high level of commitment among employees also have higher orientation towards the guests, which ultimately can contribute to increased satisfaction of the guests.

Footnotes

Funding

The research reported in this article was funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development, Republic of Serbia (project No. 47007).

Author biographies

Dunja Vujičić is a PhD student in the Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Serbia. She graduated from the University of Novi Sad and is currently writing her PhD thesis on communication. Dunja’s research interests focus on job satisfaction, work motivation, online communication and new technologies. She has published 15 papers in national and international journals and conferences.

Ana Jovičić is currently a PhD student in tourism at the Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Serbia. She works as a research associate at the Geographical Institute Jovan Cvijić, on project No. 47007 funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development, Republic of Serbia, and as a teaching assistant at the Faculty of Legal and Business Studies in Novi Sad. She has published 30 papers in national and international journals and conferences.

Snježana Gagić is an assistant at the College of Professional Studies in Management and Business Communication, and a PhD student in tourism at the Faculty of Science, Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, University of Novi Sad. She earned an MA in hospitality management from the University of Novi Sad. She is a member of the Caterers Association and Food Technologists Association. She gained the title Sommelier and she is in commission for wine quality evaluation in the region.

Danijela Lalić, PhD, is an assistant professor at the Faculty of Technical Sciences, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, University of Novi Sad, Serbia, where she teaches courses on corporate communications, public relations management and business communications. She is a partner in the consultancy agency ProMethod Network Solution System where she has conducted many communication management projects. She has experience in cooperation with scientific institutions, public relations agencies and international organizations. She has been a lecturer and trainer on numerous educational programmes in the field of communications and public relations management. She is also actively involved in numerous international projects. Danijela’s research interests also include Internet and Intranet systems, internal relationships and internal communication and new technologies.

Aleksandar Cvejanov is employed by the Development Fund of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina, Novi Sad, Serbia. Aleksandar graduated from the University of Novi Sad and is currently writing his PhD thesis on marketing management. His research interests focus on economy, marketing management and HR management.

References

Aksu

Aktas

(2005) Job satisfaction of managers in tourism: Cases in the Antalya region of Turkey. Managerial Auditing Journal 20(5): 479–488.

Al-Ajmi

(2006) The effect of gender on job satisfaction and organizational commitment in Kuwait. International Journal of Management 23(4): 838–943.

Allen

Meyer

(1990) The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology 63: 1–18.

Argyris

(1998) Empowerment: The emperor’s new clothes. Harvard Business Review 76(3): 98–105.

Ashford

Lee

Bobko

(1989) Content, causes, and consequences of job insecurity: A theory-based measure and substantive test. Academy of Management Journal 32(4): 803–829.

Babakus

Ugur

Osman

(2003) The effect of management commitment to service quality on employees’ affective and performance outcomes. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 31(3): 272–286.

Bagozzi

(1992) The self-regulation of attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Social Psychology 55(2): 178–204.

Barling

Kelloway

(1996) Job insecurity and health: The moderating role of workplace control. Stress and Medicine 12(4): 253–259.

Beard

Edwards

(1995) Employees at risk: Contingent work and the psychological experience of contingent workers. In: Cooper

Rousseau

(eds) Trends in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 2. Oxford: John Wiley, pp. 109–126.

10.

Borg

Elizur

(1992) Job insecurity: Correlates, moderators and measurement. International Journal of Manpower 13(2): 13–26.

11.

Brayfield

Rothe

(1951) An index of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology 35(5): 307–311.

12.

Britt

Castro

Adler

(2005) Self-engagement, stressors, and health: A longitudinal study. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 31(11): 1475–1486.

13.

Brown

Charlwood

Forde

Spencer

(2007) Job quality and the economics of New Labour: A critical appraisal using subjective survey data. Cambridge Journal of Economics 31(6): 941–971.

14.

Campbell

Dunnette

Lawler

Weick

(2001 [1970]) Expectancy theory. In: Natemeyer

McMahon

(eds) Classics of Organizational Behavior, 3rd edn. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, pp. 96–101.

15.

Clark

(1997) Job satisfaction and gender: Why are women so happy at work? Labour Economics 4: 341–372.

16.

Cohen

(1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum .

17.

Cullen

Parboteeah

Victor

(2003) The effects of ethical climates on organizational commitment: A two study analysis. Journal of Business Ethics 46(2): 127–141.

18.

Davy

Kinicki

Scheck

(1997) A test of job insecurity’s direct and mediated effects on withdrawal cognitions. Journal of Organizational Behavior 18(4): 323–349.

19.

De Witte

(1999) Job insecurity and psychological well-being: Review of the literature and exploration of some unresolved issues. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 8(2): 155–177.

20.

De Witte

(2000) Arbeidsethos en jobonzekerheid: Meting en gevolgen voor welzijn, tevredenheid en inzet op het werk. In: Bouwen

De Witte

Taillieu

(eds) Van groep tot gemeenschapp. Leuven: Garant, pp. 1–32.

21.

De Witte

(2005) Job insecurity: Review of the international literature on definitions, prevalence, antecedents and consequences. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology 31(4): 1–6.

22.

De Witte

Lagrou

(1990) The quality of employment in the career of young psychologists and its impact on their job- and life satisfaction. Psychologica Belgica 31(2): 1–22.

23.

De Witte

Näswall

(2003) Objective versus subjective job insecurity: Consequences of temporary work for job satisfaction and organizational commitment in four European countries. Economic and Industrial Democracy 24(2): 149–188.

24.

Dienhart

Gregoire

(1993) Job satisfaction, job involvement, job security, and customer focus of quick-service restaurant employees. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research 16(2): 29–43.

25.

Dodd-McCue

Wright

(1996) Men, women, and attitudinal commitment: The effects of workplace experiences and socialization. Human Relations 49(8): 1065–109l.

26.

Đorđević

(2012) Nesigurnost zaposlenja – priroda, posledice i strategije upravljanja. Teme 36(1): 335–350.

27.

Elliot

Dan

(1994) Organizational commitment and job involvement: Applying Blau and Boal’s typology to purchasing professionals. American Business Review 12(1): 6–14.

28.

Fernie

Metcalf

(1998) (Not) Hanging on the Telephone: Payment Systems in the New Sweatshops. CEP Discussion Paper No. 390. London: London School of Economics and Political Science.

29.

Forrester

(2000) Empowerment: Rejuvenating a potent idea? Academy of Management Executive 14(3): 67–80.

30.

Frye

Mount

(2007) An examination of job satisfaction of general managers based on hotel size and service type. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality and Tourism 6(2): 109–134.

31.

Ghiselli

LaLopa

Bai

(2001) Job satisfaction, life satisfaction and turnover intent among food-service managers. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 42(2): 28–37.

32.

Green

(2006) Demanding Work: The Paradox of Job Quality in the Affluent Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

33.

Greenhalgh

Rosenblatt

(1984) Job insecurity: Toward conceptual clarity. Academy of Management Review 9: 438–448.

34.

Hancer

George

(2003) Job satisfaction of restaurant employees: An empirical investigation using the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research 27: 85–100.

35.

Hartley

Jacobson

Klandermans

Van Vuuren

(1991) Job Insecurity: Coping with Jobs at Risk. London: Sage.

36.

Hartline

Ferrell

(1996) The management of customer-contact service employees: An empirical investigation. Journal of Marketing 60(4): 52–70.

37.

Hartline

Maxham

III McKee

(2000) Corridors of influence in the dissemination of customer-oriented strategy to customer contact service employees. Journal of Marketing 64(2): 35–50.

38.

Hellgren

Sverke

Isaksson

(1999) A two-dimensional approach to job insecurity: Consequences for employee attitudes and well-being. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 8(2): 179–195.

39.

Herzberg

Mausner

Snyderman

(1959) The Motivation to Work, 2nd edn. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

40.

Hirschfeld

(2000) Validity studies: Does revising the intrinsic and extrinsic subscales of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form make a difference? Educational Psychological Measurement 6: 255–270.

41.

Jung

Moon

Hahm

(2007) Do age, gender, and sector affect job satisfaction? Results from the Korean labor and income panel data. Review of Public Personnel Administration 27(2): 125–146.

42.

Kaldenberg

Becker

Zvonkovic

(1995) Work and commitment among young professionals: A study of male and female dentists. Human Relations 48(11): 1355–1377.

43.

Kim

(2005) Gender differences in the job satisfaction of public employees: A study of Seoul Metropolitan Government, Korea. Sex Roles 52(9/10): 667–681.

44.

Klandermans

Klein Hesselink

Van Vuuren

(2010) Employment status and job insecurity: On the subjective appraisal of an objective status. Economic and Industrial Democracy 31(4): 557–577.

45.

Koch

Steers

(1978) Job attachment, satisfaction, and turnover among public employees. Journal of Vocational Behavior 12: 119–128.

46.

Kosanović

(2002) Relacije upitnika organizacijske privrženosti (OCQ) i skale opšteg zadovoljstva poslom (OJS) u merenju integrisanosti ljudskih resursa. Ličnost u višekulturnom društvu: Organizacijska multikuiturainost i evropski identitet 4: 61–74.

47.

Koyuncu

Burke

Fiksenbaum

(2006) Work experience and satisfaction of male and female professors in Turkey: Signs of progress? Equal Opportunities International 25(1): 38–47.

48.

Kusluvan

Ilhan

Buyruk

(2010) The human dimension: A review of human resources management issues in the tourism and hospitality industry. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly 51(2): 171–214.

49.

LaLopa

(1997) Commitment and turnover in resort jobs. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research 21(2): 11–16.

50.

Lam

Zhang

Baum

(2001) An investigation of employees’ job satisfaction: The case of hotels in Hong Kong. Tourism Management 22(2): 157–165.

51.

Lawler

(1973) Motivation in Work Organizations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

52.

Lawler

(2005) Motivating and Satisfying Excellent Individuals: Management Skills: A Jossey-Bass Reader. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley and Sons.

53.

Lee

Johnson

(1991) The effects of work schedule and employment status on the organizational commitment and job satisfaction of full versus part time employees. Journal of Vocational Behavior 38: 208–224.

54.

Linz

(2003) Job satisfaction among Russian workers. International Journal of Manpower 24(6): 626–652.

55.

Locke

(1976) The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In: Dunnette

(ed.) Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally, pp. 1297–1349.

56.

Lopopolo

(2002) The relationship of role-related variables to job satisfaction and commitment to the organization in the restructured hospital environment. Physical Therapy 82(10): 984–1000.

57.

Marsden

Kalleberg

Cook

(1993) Gender differences in organizational commitment: Influences of work positions and family roles. Work and Occupations 20(3): 368–390.

58.

Matanović

(2009) Osobine ličnosti kao prediktori zadovoljstva poslom. Primenjena psihologija 3(2): 327–338.

59.

Mathieu

Zajac

(1990) A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin 108: 171–194.

60.

Mauno

Kinnunen

(1999) Job insecurity and well-being: A longitudinal study among male and female employees in Finland. Community, Work and Family 2(2): 147–171.

61.

Mora

Ferrer-i-Carbonell

(2009) The job satisfaction gender gap among young recent university graduates: Evidence from Catalonia. Journal of Socio-Economics 38(4): 581–589.

62.

Mowday

Steers

Porter

(1979) The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior 14(2): 224–247.

63.

Näswall

De Witte

(2003) Who feels insecure in Europe? Predicting job insecurity from background variables. Economic and Industrial Democracy 24(2): 189–215.

64.

Näswall

Sverke

Hellgren

(2005) The moderating role of personality characteristics on the relationship between job insecurity and strain. Work and Stress 19(1): 37–49.

65.

Nunnally

(1978) Psychometric Theory, 2nd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.

66.

Okpara

Sqillace

Erondu

(2005) Gender differences and job satisfaction: A study of university teachers in the United States. Women in Management Review 20(3/4): 177–190.

67.

Oljača

(2007) Doživljaj nesigurnosti posla kod zaposlenih osoba različitih demografskih i radnih karakteristika. Ocjenski rad, Filozofski fakultet u Zagrebu, Department of Psychology.

68.

Pearce

(1993) Toward an organizational behavior of contract laborers: Their psychological involvement and effects on employee co-workers. Academy of Management Journal 36(5): 1082–1096.

69.

Porter

Steers

Mowday

Boulian

(1974) Organizational commitment, job satisfaction and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology 59(5): 603–609.

70.

Probst

(2002) The impact of job insecurity on employee work attitudes, job adaptation and organizational withdrawal behaviors. In: Brett

Drasgow

(eds) The Psychology of Work: Theoretically Based Empirical Research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

71.

Randall

O’Driscoll

(1997) Affective versus calculative commitment: Human resource implications. The Journal of Social Psychology 13(5): 606–617.

72.

Reisel

Probst

Swee-lim

Maloles

König

(2010) The effects of job insecurity on job satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior, deviant behavior, and negative emotions of employees. International Studies of Management and Organization 40(1): 74–91.

73.

Richman

(2006) Everyone wants an engaged workforce: How can you create it? Workspan 49(1): 36–39.

74.

Riketta

(2002) Attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior 23(3): 257–266.

75.

Rosenblatt

Talmud

Ruvio

(1999) A gender-based framework of the experience of job insecurity and its effects on work attitudes. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 8(2): 197–217.

76.

Roskies

Louis-Guerin

(1990) Job insecurity in managers: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Organizational Behavior 11(5): 345–359.

77.

Rothmann

Agathagelou

(2000) Die verband tussen lokus van beheer en werkstevredenheid by senior polisiepersoneel [The relationship between locus of control and job satisfaction of senior police personnel]. Tydskrif vir bedryfsielkunde 26(2): 20–26.

78.

Saks

(2006) Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology 21(7): 600–619.

79.

Salanova

Agut

Peiro

(2005) Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service climate. Journal of Applied Psychology 90(6): 1217–1227.

80.

Sarminah

(2006) Predicting turnover: The case of Malaysian government doctors. The Journal of American Academy of Business 8(2): 113–119.

81.

Savicki

Cooley

Gjesvold

(2003) A harassment as a predictor of job burnout in correctional officers. Criminal Justice and Behavior 30(5): 602–619.

82.

Schaufeli

Bakker

(2004) Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior 25(3): 293–315.

83.

Schleicher

Watt

Greguras

(2004) Reexamining the job satisfaction–performance relationship: The complexity of attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology 89(1): 165–177.

84.

Smith

(2005) Job retention in child welfare: Effects of perceived organizational support, supervisor support, and intrinsic job value. Children and Youth Services Review 27(2): 153–169.

85.

Spector

(1997) Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment. Causes and Consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

86.

Spinelli

Canavos

(2000) Investigating the relationship between employees satisfaction and guest satisfaction. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 41(6): 29–33.

87.

Sverke

Gallagher

Hellgren

(2000) Alternative work arrangements: Job stress, well-being and proorganizational attitudes among employees with different employment contracts. In: Isaksson

Hogstedt

Erikss

(eds) Health Effects of the New Labour Market. New York: Kluwer Academic, pp. 145–169.

88.

Sverke

Hellgren

Näswall

(2002) No security: A meta analysis and review of job insecurity and its consequences. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 7(3): 242–264.

89.

Tuzun

(2009) The impact of identification and commitment on job satisfaction: The case of a Turkish service provider. Management Research News 32(8): 728–738.

90.

UNWTO (UN World Tourism Organization) (2012) International tourism results and prospects for 2012. UNWTO News. Madrid.

91.

Van Breukelen

Allegro

(2000) Effects of ﬂexibility: A study in the logistic sector. Gedrag en Organisatie 13(2): 107–125.

92.

Vandenberg

Lance

(1992) Examining the causal order of job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Journal of Management 18(1): 153–167.

93.

Van Dyne

Ang

(1998) Organizational citizenship behavior of contingent workers in Singapore. Academy of Management Journal 41(6): 692–703.

94.

Van Wyk

Pienaar

(2008) Towards a research agenda for job insecurity in South Africa. Southern African Business Review 12(2): 49–86.

95.

Weiss

Dawis

England

Lofqui

(1967) Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

96.

Wright

(2006) The emergence of job satisfaction in organizational behavior: A historical overview of the dawn of job attitude research. Journal of Management History 12(3): 262–277.

97.

Yeh

(2013) Tourism involvement, work engagement and job satisfaction among frontline hotel employees. Annals of Tourism Research 42: 214–239.