Styles of Learning, Workplace Problem Solving Strategies and Tourism Industry Employment Context Preferences

This article was downloaded by: [University of Limerick]On: 15 May 2013, At: 22:26Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Anatolia: An InternationalJournal of Tourism andHospitality ResearchPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rana20

Styles of Learning, WorkplaceProblem Solving Strategies andTourism Industry EmploymentContext PreferencesGLENN F. ROSS aa School of Business-Tourism, James Cook University-Cairns Campus, Cairn, Qld, 4870, Australia E-mail:Published online: 01 Aug 2011.

To cite this article: GLENN F. ROSS (2003): Styles of Learning, Workplace ProblemSolving Strategies and Tourism Industry Employment Context Preferences, Anatolia:An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 14:1, 5-22

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2003.9687137

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make anyrepresentation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up todate. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should beindependently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rana20

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2003.9687137

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damageswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith or arising out of the use of this material.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3

Anatolia: An lnternational Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research Volume 14, Number 1, pp. 5-22.2003

Copyright 0 2003 anatolia Printed in Turkey. All rights resewed

1303-2917103 $20.00 + 0.00

Styles of Learning, Workplace Problem Solving Strategies and Tourism Industry Employment

Context Preferences

GLENN F. ROSS School of Business-Tourism James Cook University-Cairns Campus Cairns, Qld, 4870 Australia E-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

The criteria upon which prospective tourismlhospitality industry employees depend when making career context choices is relatively little researched or understood. Styles of learning and problem solving strategies are two factors that have been regarded as important in the lives o f many employees at times of career choice and change. This study has sought t o examine favourability judgements in respect of major tourisrnlhospitality work context types, together with possible associated factors from areas such as learning preferences and problem-solving strategies among a sample of prospective tourismlhospitality industry employees. The more prominent tourismlhospitality industry work contexts were revealed to be Self Employment and Large Organisations. Large Organisation employment preferences were predicted by a learning preference involving the desire to acquire new approaches in the comprehension of material and skills in written communication; Self Employment preferences were predicted by a desire to learn creatively, but definitely not as part of a team. In regard t o Large Organisational context preferences, significant differences were revealed as between those who did and those who did- not esteem the process of independent learning. Finally, an examination of an innovative problem-solving strategy as it related to choice of employment context preferences revealed significant associations for both Self Employment and Large Enterprise employment, with the latter context evidencing a dichotomous response pattern. The implications of these findings, for industry and for future tourism career pathway research, are considered.

Keywords: Career choice, learning styles, organisational types, problem-solving strategies.

Glenn Ross is currently Adjunct Associate Professor in Tourism at James Cook University. His major research focus involves the application of psychological models to tourism behavior, and has published in the areas of tourism/hospitality human resource management, sewice quality, backpacker behavior and tourism-host community relationships. He is currently examining professional development, ethical values and ethical problem-solving styles among those training for industry employment. He is a member of the International Academy for the Study of Tourism, the Australian Psycho- logical Society as well as various international psychological associations, and is a registered psy- cholooist.

Volume 14 Number 1 Summer 2003 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3

Styles of Learning, Workplace Problem Solving Strategies and Tourism Industry Employment ...

INTRODUCTION Boyatzis, McKee and Goleman (2002), in discussing career decision making at major turning points of work life, have emphasised the need for reflection upon basic processes such as the manner in which problems are solved, and the way in which the acquisition of knowledge and skill is conceived of and eventually incorporated into an individual's life. Career choice and change, they suggest, are typically accompanied by the need to become aware of, to examine, and perhaps even to modify processes central to the functioning of the individual in the workplace, such as personal problem solving strategies and learning styles. A major milestone for many young people occurs when they must make consequential decisions regarding their future employment, or further education for such employment; few studies, however, address critical issues that assist in the understanding of such vocational decisions and their antecedents. Moreover, relatively little is understood in respect of choice processes associated with the range of tourism industry employment contexts; those studies thus far completed have focused upon the employment context in general, and also upon individual and socio-demographic group variables. Fottler and Bain (1984) have examined a range of possible occupational choices together with background variables as they may have been associated with school leavers. Males, it was found, together with individuals from higher socio-demographic backgrounds, aspired to higher levels of the career ladder (Fottler and Bain 1984; Lawrence and Brown 1976). Both Argyle (1989) and Furnham (1992,1997) have suggested that when research endeavours are made to investigate predictor variables in this area, some researchers tend to favour personality variables as potent determinants of occupational choice and context, whereas other commentators have stressed environmental factors such as job availability and locational determinants. Furnham suggests that, in reality, both types of factors are likely to be of some importance; one particular type, he maintains, ought not be favoured at the expense of the other.

Argyle (1989) has argued that motivation has long been known to influence both occupational choice and context; those people high in achievement motivation, he asserts, are likely to choose disciplines such as finance and business, in preference to other professional arenas. Such individuals, Argyle finds, have a tendency to readily accept risk-taking in the confident hope of making a great deal of money. They are also the people who desire to construct large enterprises, and leave their impression upon the world. Finally, Argyle maintains that people generally gravitate towards employment types and contexts that are perceived to be a fit with their own personality; indeed Argyle (1989) makes the point that a significant cause of work stress is the lack of complementarity as between the individual, in such domains as temperament, skill and interest, and the demands of the particular workplace

An enduring notion within the study of human behaviour in the workplace is that of person-environment fit. Organisational and personal outcomes

6 . Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3

Glenn F. Ross

such as productivity and job satisfaction may be attributed to the fit as between the characteristics of the individual, such as skills, temperament, problem-solving styles, and the demands of a particular position (Chan 2001). The fit is said to be the correspondence between the values and expectations of an organisation, and those of a particular individual. Furnham (1987) has pointed out that this notion has antecedents in the education and work social- ization process; the more precise the match between a person's values and skills, and the requirements of the workplace chosen or aspired to, the higher will be the probability of later attaining job satisfaction, satisfactory performance and career success. A number of commentators have now suggested that there is ample evidence so as to conclude that the notion of person-environment fit does have considerable explanatory power in regard to those individuals who do report workplace satisfaction and career success; moreover, such findings have been replicated in a variety of occupational groups, in various countries, on different age groupings, and in regard to labour turnover (eg. Harrison 1978; Kahana, Liang and Felton 1980; Kasl1973; Tan- nenbaum and Kuler 1978).

Konradt, Schmook and Makecke (2001) suggest it is now understood by many workers that the context of employment in the western world has undergone considerable change, and continues to do so. Both globalisation of national economies and technological advancement are generally regarded as the leading engines of such change. Arnold (2001) argues that various organisational forms are now emerging, having a common central core of per- manent staff with direct loyalty to the organisation. On the periphery, however, are said to be many casualised workers, some of whom may have a high skill level and be undertaking ad hoc project work; others associated with th s periphery are likely to be more lowly skilled, and be engaged in contracted- out tasks, such as cleaning or food service.

Arnold, quoting Hutton (1995), has written of the 30/30/40 society: 30% of people either unemployed or economically inactive; 30% of people in inse- cure or impermanent work, affording few if any benefits; 40% of people priv- ileged, highly skilled and securely employed or self employed. Drawing upon notions from a range of commentators, Arnold goes on to discuss a new type of career wherein individuals are exhorted to see themselves as self- employed, even though they may presently have an employer; they are urged to acquire and sustain a variety of skills and experiences that afford them an employability in the eyes of a range of employers. He advances the term 'boundaryless career' in order to describe this growing employment perspective that holds the capability of transporting many formerly marginalised employees across conventional employer boundaries. Problem solving skills would likely rank highly in the estimation of many employers.

Problem-solving Orientations Effective problem-solving strategies in the workplace are widely held to be critically important in the pursuit of organisational effectiveness. One promi-


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3


nent model within the organisational literature focusing on such concepts as that advanced by Kirton (1961,1976,1994). His model has been propounded so as to explain the manner by which individuals within organisations approach the central process of problem solving, and is generally known as the Adap- tion-Innovation Theory. Kirton (1994) has written that the model emanates from various studies of corporate management functioning; such studies have investigated the manner by which notions that had produced significant organisational change came to be devised and valued. Kirton suggested that people in organisations demonstrate a wide range of strategies relating to creativity, problem-solving and decision-making. He suggests that people may be represented by scores that locates them at a particular point along a continuum, which has an Adaptive style of problem solving at one end, and an Innovative style of problem solving at the other end. Adaptors are said to be typically conservative, operating within the confines of orthodox guidelines and solving problems in a conventional manner.

By way of contrast, Kirton suggests that innovators are likely to take the view that these very guidelines are likely to be the core of the problem to be encountered. Kirton holds that these individuals may be regarded as risk- takers; they pursue entirely new solutions outside what it often seen as con- ventionality, with solutions said to be novel, innovative and often involving a redefinition of the established protocols for organisational problem solving. Kirton has made the point that innovators most often gravitate toward, and find themselves more satisfied with, work contexts such as self employment or smaller organisations, wherein their creativity is welcomed or at least tol- erated; adaptors, it is suggested, are more likely to find greater validation for their preferred problem solving styles in larger organisations or public service bureaucracies wherein precedent and orthodoxy are more likely to be valued and encouraged among staff.

Kirton and de Ciantis (1986) report that many predictive studies, conducted in order to explore the relationship between the behavioural assumptions of Kirton's Adaptor-Innovator formulation and various personality con- structs. High adaptive individuals have been found to be less inclined to risk- taking, and rather more likely to evidence a tendency towards being dogmat- ic and inflexible. Kirton and de Ciantis further write that this type of individual can often be less tolerant of ambiguity. They conclude that a considerable breadth of studies in many countries and across a range of occupational groups have concluded that high innovators are associated with problem- solving patterns very different to those evidenced among adaptors.

Perspectives on Learning

The successful completion of study and learning programs and skilling exer- cises is often a necessary prerequisite to career advancement in most organisations and work contexts. Yet relatively little has been written about this important process, particularly as it may be related to the particular demands

8 Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3

Glenn F. Ross

of certain industries. Entwistle and Thomson (1974) have pointed out that obsessive, but ineffective learning styles rarely culminate in learning success. They have written that, if variables such as time spent studying, is not an accurate predictor of academic attainment, other areas ought be investigated. They have further suggested that the work of researchers such as Marton (Marton, Hounsell and Entwistle 1984) might contain some answers to this dilemma; (Marton et al. (1984) have advanced the notion that higher education students are likely to differ in terms of what they consider education to be about. One approach is said to involve remembering as much as possible of the material that the person is presented with, and then attempting to reg'urgi- tate it for a specific circumstance such as an exam, company presentation or similar demand. This is termed surface-approach learning; they suggest that not all people embrace such an approach. Others may adopt the view that they are creators and assimilators of knowledge, and employ their talents to make reflective judgements and logical conclusions; they are the people who generate and incorporate their own views ((Marton et al. 1984)). In similar vein, Entwistle and Ramsden (1983) have adumbrated a four-fold study orientation typology: Meaning, Reproducing, Achieving and Non-academic.

Ramsden (1984) has outlined the basic elements of these orientations to learning: Within the Meaning orientation a person is said to look for connections of meaning and for links with everyday life; the person interacts actively and examines evidence critically yet cautiously, and embraces learning for its own sake, rather than just as a means to an end. Within the Reproducing orientation the person is more likely to put their trust in rote learning as a way of syphoning up information typically for some specific goal such as an examination. Such people are said to lack some self-confidence, to not be prepared to seek relationships and connections among ideas, and to have a focus instead on assessment requirements. The person who is said to fall within the Strategic orientation category actively pursues as a matter of major importance the assessment requirements, and is said to place considerable importance upon outcomes such as qualifications and performance as ways of impressing others. Finally, those individuals who would fall within this category are said to have as their principal learning orientation are said to place little value upon planning, upon prompt submission of work, upon ideas or critical thinking within any formal framework such as courses as they may be offered by universities, technical institutions or other formal structures; these types of learners are said more readily to favour an over-generalising approach wherein conclusions may be reached by the individual without recourse to sufficient evidence. Two major and valuable typologies of learning style emerge from the work of Entwistle ~ . . d Ramsden: The first is that of a static, conventional and unadventurous approach; the second may be described as creative, reflective and analytical. This latter style may be characterised as the more functional and successful of the two in regard to outcomes such as comprehension, assimilation into a worldview, future utility of knowledge acquired, and enjoyment of the learning process.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3

Styles of Learning. Workplace Problem Solving Strategies and Tourism Industry Employment ...

TourismMospitality Industry Employment Over the past decade of so there has been growing research interest in a range of demains related to tourism/ hospitality industry employee attitudes and behaviour. Areas investigated include attitudes and skills (e.g. Balmer and Baum 1993; Ross 1992), commitment and organizational culture (e.g. Smith, Gregory and Cannon 1996; Wood 1994), staff-management relationships (e.g. Lee-Ross and Boles 1994; Waryszak and King 2001), staff perceptions of management (e.g. Deery and Jago 2001), stress (e.g. Ross 1995; Law, Pearce and Woods 1995), entrepreneurialism (e.g. Szivas 2001; Koh and Hutton 2002), team working (e.g. Ingram and Desombre 2000), the origins and ontology of hospitality and its management (e.g. Brotherton 1999), and customer service (e.g. McCaskey 2002; Noe 1999). Such studies encompass the general hospitality area, hotels, and tourism; relatively fewer studies, however, address tourism-related issues than address hospitality or Iodging topics.

One area of research that touches directly upon the subject of the present research is that of education for the tourism/hospitality industry. Lashley (2002), in a study of learning styles among students of hospitality management, has documented a consistent learning style preference which was regarded as antithetical to the need to be reflective, to have an experiential perspective on learning. Lashley makes the point that whilst graduates of this discipline need to be practical and pragmatic, they also meed to be analytical and theoretical. They require the capacity to reflect upon what they learn and thus construct a new form of cognitive and problem-solving archi- tecture, which they may then take into their future career. In similar vein, Morrison (2002) has argued that hospitality higher education needs to include the capability of enhancing critical analytical thinking, and compares this facility with the more traditional and dominant perspectives of vocation and action. Such a reflective model, she argues, facilitates within students a problem solving style not encumbered by a traditional outlook, but rather one that allows the individual to create new and innovative products, or to deliver service in a fresh, spontaneous and more satisfying manner. Finally, Morri- son suggests that graduates of such education are more likely to be attuned to an industry and a society that is constantly changing, and one that requires employees and operatives who can react creatively when confronted with ambiguity, diversity and uncertainty.

This study has sought to examine tourism/hospitality industry employment context preferences and their associations with styles of learning and problem solving strategies. In particular, it has explored differences as between the contexts of Self Employment and Small Enterprise Employment, and the contexts of Large Enterprise Employment and Public Service Employment; it has also examined learning styles and problem solving strategies, particularly in so far as creative and reflective learning styles and innovative problem solving strategies may be associated with Self Employment and Small Enter- prise Employment, and reproducing/non-analytic learning styles and adap-

1 0 . Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3

Glenn F. Ross

tive problem solving strategies may be associated with Large Enterprise Employ- ment and Public Service Employment. Finally, the study seeks to assess the degree of person-environment fit revealed as revealed in the findings.

METHOD

Subjects This study was conducted in the Far North Queensland region of Australia; this is now one of the fastest growing tourist regions of Australia, with many secondary and tertiary students reporting a marked interest in tourism industry employment (Ross 1997,1998). Five hundred and eighty six students were surveyed, during August and September of 1998, when most graduands were typically considering post-secondary college education or employment options. Career counsellors chose sampled classes so as to optimally represent the range of ethnic groups, academic skill levels and post-secondary college education/employment interests and aspirations. Secondary college graduands at this level represent a major pool of both part-time and fulltime employees for the tourism industry of this region. The dominance of the tourism industry withn the region mandates that many of the young people who do not choose to enter tertiary education immediately after leaving college will likely find employment within this industry or associated service industries.

Measures Respondents were asked to rate the following Industry Employment Con- texts generated by the researcher: My preferred tourism work situation would be:

AGREECOMPLETELY 5 4 3 2 1 DISAGREE COMPLETELY

[ Self Employed I Public Service I Small Enterprise 1 Large Enterprise I

Respondents were also asked to respond the following set of Learning Pref- erence Styles, taken from the work of Entwistle (1981), and Entwistle and Rarnsden (1983).

We are interested in what it is that you see as ideally coming from the Learning Process. Could you please rate each of these l e M n g preferences: - -

ina ally, respondents completed a scale devised from the work of Kirton (1994), so as to measure the elements of each of the Adaptors and the Imova- tors styles of workplace problem solving. The variables Age and Sex were also recorded. Mean age was revealed to be 16 years, and the male: female sample ratio 401:186.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3


AGREECOMPLETELY 5 4 3 2 1 DISAGREE COMPLETELY ~p

1. Learn a creative approach to the solution of problems

2 Improve my analytical skills for solving problems

3. lmprove my grounding in workplace communications skills

4. Gain some idea of the industrial context of the work that I will do

5. lmprove my ability to think in abstract terms

6. Improve my ability to learn independently

7. lmprove my ability to use new approaches or ideas when called upon to solve a problem

8. lrnprove my ability to solve new problems by using basic principles and concepts

9. lmprove my skills in oral communication

10.lmprove my skills in written communication

11.Learn howto obtain relevant information from the library and other sources

12.lmprove my ability to think creatively

13.lmprove my ability to think critically

14.Develop my abilityto do research or original work

15.Develop my ability to work with a team or in a group

16.lncrease my interest in the theoretical side of my future profession

ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS The first set of analyses in this study involved Analysis of Variance procedures (by repeated measures), which have been employed so as to examine differences among the set of preferred work contexts and also among the set of learning preferences. Table 1 reports results from an analysis involving the set of work context preferences, and reveals significant differences among the various types of work contexts; an inspection of means shows that Self Employment and Small Enterprise were both highly favoured, as also was Large Enterprise, though to a lesser extent. Least favoured was Public Ser- vice as a desired employment destination for these potential tourism industry personnel. Scheffe post-hoc analyses confirmed no significant differences as between Self Employment and Small Enterprise employment, between Self Employment and Large Enterprise employment, and between Small Enter- prise employment and Large Enterprise employment; significant differences, however, were found as between Public Sector employment and all other contexts of tourism employment.

Table 2 reports on a One Factor (repeated measures) ANOVA for the set of learning preferences, and reveals significant differences among these various learning variables. An examination of the various means from the descriptive statistics table reveals that the learning preferences Improve my ability to

Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3

Glenn F. Ross

Table I . Descriptive statistics table

Variable Mean Std. Dev.

Self Employed Public Service Small Enterprise Large Enterprise

Between Subjects F=.97 (p=.667)

Post-Hoc Analysis Table

Treatments F 4 9 . 5 2 5 (p=.0001)

Comparison Mean Difference Scheffe F test

Self Employed vs Public Service

Self Employed vs Small Enterprise

Self Employed vs Large Enterprise

Public Service vs Small Enterprises

Public Service vs Large Enterprise

Small Enterprise vs Large Enterprise

learn independently and Improve my skills in written communication were both regarded highly, whereas the learning preference Increase my interest in the theoretical side of my profession was found to be the least favoured.

- -

The next set of analyses involved the use of multiple regression procedures so as to examine the relative predictive power of each of the learning preferences in respect of the four employment preferences. Two analyses revealed the formation of significant linear functions: those involving Self Employ- ment and Large Enterprise employment preferences. Table 3 reveals details associated the significant function involving Self Employment, and reveals that the learning preferences Learn a creative approach to the solution of problems, and Develop my ability to work in a team or in a group were significant predictors of the self employment context, as also was the learning perception Improve my ability to think creatively, though to a lesser extent. It is worth noting here that the perception Develop my ability to work with team or in a group was found to be a negative predictor of this work preference.

Table 4 reports a significant multiple regression function of the same set of learning preferences, this time using the Large Enterprise work context as cri- terion variable. This table reveals that the major significant predictor was the


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3


Table 2. Descriptive statistics table

Leaning Strategy Mean Std. Dev.

Learn a creative approach to the solution of problems 3.688 1.21 6 Improve my analytical skills for solving problems 3.644 1.098 Improve my grounding in workplace communication skills 3.69 1.104 Gain some idea of the industrial context of the work I will do 3.55 1.162 Improve my ability to think in abstractterms 3.517 1.122 Improve my abilityto learn independently 3.83 1.152 lmprove my ability to use new approaches or ideas when called upon to solve a problem 3.687 1.133 lmprove my ability to solve new problems by using basic principles and concepts 3.703 1.097 Improve my skills in oral communication 3.718 1.184 Improve my skills in written communication 3.804 1.147 Learn to obtain relevant information from the library and other sources 3.61 1.112 Improve my ability to think creatively 3.675 1.107 Improve my ability to think critically 3.681 1.114 Develop my abilityto do research or original work 3.724 1.205 Develop my ability to work with a team or in a group 3.623 1.176 Increase my interest in the theoretical side of my future profession 3.59 1.29

Between Subjects F=8.6 1 (p=.0001) Treatments F=4.02 (p=.0001)

Table 3. Beta coefficent table

Learning Strategy Std Coeff T value

Learn a creative approach to the solution of problems ,113 2.152 p=.0319

Develop my ability to work with a team or in a group -.I2 2.237 p=.0259

Improve my abilityto think creatively ,107 1.962 p=.0504

Improve my abilityto think critically .093 1.608 Develop my abilityto do research or original work -.087 1.561 Improve my analytical skills to solve prohlems ,065 1.1111 lmprove my ability to solve new problems by using basic principles and concepts -.059 1.08 lmprove my ability to use new approaches or ideas when called upon to solve problems -.058 ,997 Improve my ability to learn independently ,052 ,946 Improve my skills in oral communication -.051 ,864 Increase my interest in the theoretical side of my future profession ,036 .704 Improve my skills in written communication -.011 ,198 Gain some idea of the industrial context of the work I will do .02 ,374 Learn to obtain relevant information from the library and other sources .-011 .I98 Improve my grounding in workplace communication skills .006 , 1 1 1

Rsq. = ,153


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3

Glenn F. Ross

Table 4. Beta Cwfficent table

Leaning Strategy Std. Coeff. T value

lmprove my ability to use new approaches or ideas when called upon to solve a problem ,155 2.686

p=.0075 Improve my skills in written communication .I04 1.849

p=.0651 Improve my abilityto think creatively -.083 1.535 Learn to obtain relevant information from the library and other sources -.078 1.462 Improve my analytic skills for solving problems .07 1.191 Gain some idea of the industrial context of the work I wil l do .067 1.256 Improve my abilityto learn independently .044 .828 Improve my skills in oral communication -.04 .682 lmprove my ability to solve new problems by using basic principles and concepts .033 ,605 Increase my interest in the theoretical side of my future profession -.036 ,707 Learn a creative approach to the solution of problems .025 .489 Develop my ability to work with a team or in a group .024 .448 Improve my abilityto think in abstractterms -.023 .462 Improve my grounding in workplace communication skills .O1 ,184 Improve my ability to think critically ,006 .lo1 Develop my ability to do research or original work .003 ,051

Rsq = ,168

learning preference Improve my ability to use new approaches or ideas when called upon to solve problems. Another predictor variable, though demon- strating lesser power, was Improve my skills in written communication.

The final parametric analysis involved the use of factorial Analysis of Vari- ance procedures so as to elucidate the relative influence of each of the three prominent learning preferences, so revealed in Table 2. Table 5 presents major ANOVA indices associated with the perceptions Improve my ability to learn independently, Improve my skills in written communication, and Increase my interest in the theoretical side of my future profession. From the summary statistics tabulation here, it can be seen that only the learning perception Improve my ability to learn independently was found to be signifi- cantly different (in regard to high and low scoring respondents), and only for the Large Enterprise context. An examination of marginal totals from the incidence table within Table 5 reveals the magnitude of these differences.

Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA (by ranks) non-parametric procedures have also been employed in this study so as to gauge the relative explanatory value of the Adaptors/Innovators typology in regard to each of the four Industry Context Preferences. From Table 6 it can be seen that a relatively straitfor- ward association was found between Innovators and Self Employment: those more likely to evidence a high score on the Innovators measure were also


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3


Table 5. Summary statistics table

Source df Sum of Sqs. Mean Sqs. F test P value

Improve my ability to Learn Independently (A) 1 Improve my skills in written communication ( 0 ) 1 AB 1 Increase my interest in the theoretical side of my profession (C) 1 AC 1 B C 1 ABC 1 Error 327

The AB indidence table ony: self employment

Low Score (B) High Score (B) Totals

Low Score (A)

High Score (A)

Totals

(l)=N. of Cases (2)=Mean Score

more likely to exhibit a high preference for Self Employment. The analysis involving the Large Enterprise employment context, however, manifested a somewhat more complex pattern. High Innovators were to be found associated with high preferences, and also moderately low preference scores for the Large Enterprise employment context.

DISCUSSION

This study has produced a range of interesting and useful results arising from an examination of tourism employment context preferences among prospective employees. This is so in regard to differential patterns of responses among the various industry contexts, as well as the various learning preferences and the workplace problem-solving strategies. First of all, the most highly favoured contexts involved Self Employment and also the Small Enterprise industry situations; the Large Enterprise context was not so highly regarded. The least favoured prospect involved tourism employment within a Public Sector context. A number of conclusions may be drawn from this set of findings. Those individuals who would prefer to work as a sole operator, or at least, their own supervisor/immediate superior, were found to be strongly represented in this study. This particular work context preference was the most highly scored of the four industry employment contexts, and also high-

1 6 . Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3

Glenn F. Ross

Table 6. Response pattern table-self employment by innovators --

Count Sum of Ranks Mean Ranks

Low Moderately Low Neutral Moderately High High

P (corrected for ties) = .OD2

Response pattern table - large enterprise by innovators

Count Sum of Ranks Mean Ranks

Low 64 15760 246 Moderately Low 56 16150 290 Neutral 119 30893 259 Moderately High 140 35952 256 High 159 47789 300

P (corrected for ties) = .05

ly rated in absolute terms. Thus it may be suggested that many in this group who are likely to pursue this type of work context are, or regard themselves as entrepreneurial in nature, and may well entertain the eventual goal of owning their own tourism business; these people may be the ones who wish to have major control over their own business life and to have final say in the direction of their workplace. It was also the case that many fewer individuals regarded the public sector as representing a satisfying work context; they may see such a situation as offering a work life too confining and restrictive, particularly if they wish to leave open the possibility of entrepreneurial activ- ity as part of their future.

Analyses performed upon the set of learning preferences revealed that independence in learning and proficiency in written communication were the factors most highly regarded. Least esteemed were perceptions involving theoretical notions relating to the individual's chosen profession. It may be suggested that the very practical aspects associated with both the present educational/learning process, and also future work in their desired profession were regarded most highly because they ar perceived to be the core aspects, critical in terms of survival and also advancement. An active and self reliant approach to one's learning, combined with an overwhelmingly important mode of expression, ie written communication, is perceived as essential- ly practical and immediately useful, whereas notions concerning theoretical models and seemingly non-practical formulations are abjectly regarded and therefore rated lowly.

Volume 14 Number Summer 2003 17

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3


The predictive power of the various learning preferences has also been explored in regard to each of the four industry context preferences; two significant findings emerged, involving Self Employment and Large Enterprise employment. In regard to the former, creative thinking and behaviour emerged as favoured strategies. Being a team player, on the other hand, was clearly not highly regarded. This creativity of thought and action might be regarded as the core notion to emerge here in respect of tourism industry self employment; it may be the case that those who favour this work context are essen- tially the most egregiously creative people within the group, and may per- ceive that this creativity that they believe they possess in sufficient abun- dance, is most appropriately expressed in the context of tourism self employment. An organization which is typically more likely to favour those who do not value this creative learning style, may well, at least in their view, not wel- come them or seek to retain them as valued members of the organisation.

Large Enterprise employment context preferences lend some support to the notion that the less creative in their learning endeavours are not attracted to the context; those individuals who regard the learning and skilling process as fundamentally introducing them to a range of ideas and procedures that, at most, they will only need to adapt or modify, are more likely to such an arena. Creativity is not primarily involved here, nor is the infraction, or indeed overturning, of conventional rubrics, as may be the case in regard to the more entrepreneurial individuals attracted to the previously mentioned context. Within this latter group of respondents, there is the accurate perception that learning the procedures and approached of others within the Large Enter- prise, in order that they may be shaped to suit any situation, is the perceived mode best suited to survive and prosper in the larger enterprise. Basically what has emerged here is a preference for quite different learning styles associated with Self Employment and also Large Enterprise employment; those who declare a creative proclivity to the learning and skilling process see themselves in the Self Employment context, whereas those who are more conventional, less given over to creativity in their personal style, believe the Large Enterprise is the context for them.

A further analysis in this study investigated the three most prominent learning preferences, together with each of the four work context preferences. Here, only the analysis involving Self Employment produced a significant finding. Those individuals more likely to highly regard learning as, in part, the acquisition of a facility to learn independently were found to be associated with a preference for Self Employment, whereas those more lowly regarding such a facility did not so esteem Self Employment. Thus it might be suggested that independent learning was deemed to be an important aspect of the entrepreneurial disposition, the basis of success, and perhaps the attraction to Self Employment.

In this study it has also been revealed that the more innovative problem- solvers unambiguously declared a preference for tourism industry Self Employment; such findings are in general accord with those of Argyle (1989),


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3

Glenn F. Ross

together with those of Jennings, Cox and Cooper (1994), Peterson and Goma- lez (2000) and Zimmerer and Scarborough (1996). Moreover, the findings of this study in regard to the association as between Innovators and Large Enter- prise employment context preferences are somewhat less clear in their implications. The analysis revealed two apparent groups of innovative respondents: those who would readily endorse a Large Enterprise choice, and also those innovative graduands who were prepared to display reluctance for such as career context. Thus these findings may be an indicator to a group of potential tourism industry employees who are innovative and of the entrepreneurial disposition, who regard Large Enterprise contexts as possible arenas wherein their talents may flourish - perhaps being those people whom Macrae (1976) and Pinchot (1985) would term 'intrapreneurs' - and another group of innovative individuals who do not see such a context as being the optimal arena for their abilities to flourish. This group may even believe that Large Enterprise contexts could possibly inhibit their entrepreneurial spirits; the Self Employment context may be the preferred future arena for such individuals. Such a group would not seem worthy of further research scrutiny.

The notion of person-environment fit, when applied to a workplace context, would suggest that individuals, when faced with major decisions such as employment and career context choice, would likely aspire to those types of organisations wherein they believe that their particular skills and abilities, including learning styles and problem solving strategies, will be accepted and perhaps rewarded. The findings of this study suggest that, for tourism / hospitality industry contexts, such an effect would appear to be in evidence; those individuals drawn to tourism / hospitality Self Employment were found to be more independent, more creative, more reflective and more innovative in their overall problem solving strategy. In contrast, those drawn to Large Enterprise Employment would more likely emphasise practical learning in the form of written communication, evidence a cautious approach to new ideas, and reveal an adaptive style of problem solving. There were, however, those respondents who favoured both an innovative problem solving strategy and also elect for Large Enterprise Employment, possibly the more intrapreneurial of the respondents, those who would bring an entrepreneurial mindset to a large organisation. These results, overall, suggest that the notion of person-environment fit does have utility in the explication of the relationship between career context choice and processes such as learning and problem solving. Those creative, reflexive and innovative individuals do, it would appear, aspire to Self Employment wherein their talents are likely to flourish, whereas those more practically oriented and adaptive choose larger work contexts as places that are perceived to suit their particular dispositions.

This study has only examined those who are on the threshold of career choice; it wouId now seem appropriate to investigate the explanatory value of variables such as learning styles and problem solving strategies among tourism/hospitality industry employees in various contexts, in a variety of


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3


locations and at different levels of industry development. Finally, longitudinal research might be of assistance so as to examine how career change processes suggested by Boyatzis et al. (2002), such as learning and problem solving, become incorporated into an individual's work life; insights might be afforded into the manner by which the career trajectories of such people are thereby altered.

CONCLUSIONS These results, overall, suggest that the notion of personenvironment fit does have utility in the explication of the relationship between career context choice and processes such as learning and problem solving. Those creative, reflexive and innovative individuals do, it would appear, aspire to Self Employment wherein their talents are likely to flourish, whereas those more practically oriented and adaptive choose larger work contexts as places that are perceived to suit their particular dispositions. This study has only exarn- ined those who are on the threshold of career choice; it would now seem appropriate to investigate the explanatory value of variables such as learning styles and problem solving strategies among tourism/ hospitality industry employees in various contexts, in a variety of locations and at different levels of industry development. Finally, longitudinal research might be of assistance so as to examine how career change processes suggested by Boyatzis et a1 (2002), such as learning and problem solving, become incorporated into an individual's work life; insights might be afforded into the manner by which the career trajectories of such people are thereby altered.

REFERENCES Argyle, M. (1989). The Social Psychology of Work. London: Penguin.

Arnold, J. (2001). The Psychology of Careers in Organisations. In C. Cooper and I. Robertson (Eds), Organisational Psychology and Development (pp.23-66). Chichester: Wiley.

Balmer, S. and Baum, T. (1993). Applying Herzberg's Hygiene Factors to the Changing Accom- modation Environment, International Iournal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 15(1):46-52.

Boyatzis, R., McKee, A. and Goleman, D. (2002). Reawakening your Passion for Work, Harvard Bztsiness Revi~w, April: 87-94.

Brotherton, B. (1999). Towards a Definite View of the Nature of Hospitality and Hospitality Man- agement, Intm~ationnl Iollrnal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 11:165-173.

Chan, D. (2001). Conceptual and Empirical Gaps in Research on Individual Adaptation at Work. In C. Cooper and I. Robertson (Eds), Organisational Psychology nnd Development (pp.1-22). Chichester: Wiley.

Deery, M. and Jago, L. (2001). Hotel Management Style: A Study of Employee Perceptions and Preferences, Hospitality Management, 20: 325-338.

Entwistle, N. J. (1981). Styles of learning and Tenching. Chichester: Wiley.

Entwistle, N. J. and Ramsden, P. (1983). Understandiilg Student Learniilg. London: Croom Helm.

Entwistle, N. and Thompson, J. (1974). Motivation and Study Habits, Higher Edlication, 3: 379-396.

Fottler, M. D. and Bain, T. (1984). Realism of Occupational Choice among High School Seniors: implications for Quality of Work Life, Iournal of Occzrpational Behnvior, 5: 237-251.

20 . Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3

Glenn F. Ross

Furnham, A. (1987). Work Related Beliefs and Human Values, Personality and Individual Differ- ences, 8: 627-637.

Furnham, A. (1992). Personality at Work. London: Routledge. Furnham, A. (1997). The Psychology of Behaviour at Work: The Individual in the Organisation. Lon-

don: Psychology Press. Harrison, R. (1978). Person-environment Fit and.Work Stress. In C Cooper and R. Payne (Eds.),

Stress at Work (pp.175-208). Chichester: Wiley. Hutton, W. (1995). The State We're In. London: Cape. Ingrarn, H. and Desombre, T. (2000). Teams and Teamworking in Hotels, Tourism and Hospitality

Research, 1: 351-368. Jennings, R., Cox, C. and Cooper, C. (1994). Business Elites. London: Routledge. Kahana, E., Liang, B, and Felton, B. (1980). Alternative Models of Person-environmental Fit: Pre-

diction of Morale in three Homes for the Aged, Journal of Gerontology, 35: 584-595. Kasl, S. (1973). Mental Health and the Work Environment, fournal of Occupational Medicine, 15:

509-518. Kirton, M. J. (1961). Management lnitintive. London: Acton Society Trust. Kirton, M. J. (1976). Adaptors and Innovators: A Description and Measure, Journal of Applied Psy-

chology, 61: 622-629. Kirton, M. J. (1980). Adaptors and Innovators in Organisations, Human Relations, 33: 312-324. Kirton, M. J. (1994). (Ed.). Adaptors and Innovators. London: Routledge. Kirton, M. J. and de Gantis, S. M. (1986). Cognitive Styles and Personality, Personality and Individ-

ual Differences, 7: 141-146. Koh, K. and Hatten, T. (2002). The Tourism Entrepreneur: The Overlooked Player in Tourism Devel-

opment Studies, lnternatiorzal Journnl of Hospitality and Tourism Administration, 3: 21-48. Konradt, U., Schmook, R. and Makecke, M. (2001). Impacts of Telework on Individuals, Organi-

sations and Families-A Critical Review. In C. Cooper and I. Robertson (Eds.), Orpnisation- a1 Psychology and Development (pp. 339-376). Chichester: Wiley..

Lashley, C. (2002). Learning Styles and Hospitality Management Education, The Hospitality Review, April: 56-60.

Law, J., Pearce, P. and Woods, B. (1995). Stress and Coping in Tourist Attraction Employees, Tourism Managenlent, 16: 277-284.

Lee-Ross, D. and Boles, J. (1994). Exploring the Influence of Workplace Relationships on Work- related Attitudes and Behaviours in the Hospitality Work Environment, International lour- nal of Hospitality Management, 12: 155-171.

McCaskey, D. (2002). No, nay never, no nay never no more, The Hospitality Review, April: 13-20. Macrae, N. (1976). The Coming Entrepreneurial Revolution, Economist, December: 41-66. Marton, F., Hounsell, D. and Entwistle, N. (1984). (Eds.). The Experience of Learning. Edinburgh:

Scottish Academic Press. Morrison, A. (2002). Editorial: Hospitality Curriculum - Industry myopia or world-vision, The

Hospitality R w i m , 4: 3-4. Noe, F. (1999). Tourist Service Satisfnction: Hotel, Transportation, Recreation. Champaign, Ill.: Sag-

amore Publishing. Peterson, N. and Gonzalez, R. (2000). The Role of Work in People's Lives. Belmont: BrooksICole. Pinchot, G. (1985). Intrapreneuring. New York: Harper and Row. Ramsden, P. (1984). The Context of Learning. In. F. Marton, D. Hounsell and N. Entwistle (Eds.).

The Experience of Learning. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press. Ross, G. (1992). Work Attitudes and Management Values: The Hospitality Industry, l n f m t i o n a l

Journal of Contemporary Hospitality M a n a p e n f , 4: 3. Ross, G. (1995a). Interpersonal Stress Reactions and Service Quality Responses among Hospitali-

ty Industry Employees, Service Industries loumal, 15: 341-351.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3


Ross, G. F. (1995b). Tourism/Hospitality Management Employment Interest as Predicted by Job Attributes and Workplace Evaluations, Tourism Recreation Research, 20: 63-71.

Ross, G. F. (1997). Tourism/Hospitality Industry Employment Acquisition Strategies, Higher Education Preferences and the Work Ethic, Managing Leisure: An international Journal, 2: 82-93.

Ross, G. F. (1998). The Psychology of Tourism. (2nd edition). Melbourne: Hospitality Press. Smith, K, Gregory, S. and Cannon, D. (1996). Becoming an Employer of Choice: Assessing Com-

mitment in the Hospitality Workplace, Interrlational Iournal of Contemporary Hospitality Mnnagetnent, 8: 6-9.

Szivas, E. ( 2001). Entrance into Tourism Entrepreneurship: A UK Case Study, Tourism and Hospi- tality Research, 3: 163-172.

Tannenbaum, A. and Kuleck, W. (1978). The Effect on Organisational Members of Discrepancy between Perceived and Preferred Rewards In~plicit in Work, Huinnn Relatioils, 21: 809-822.

Waryszak, R. and King, 8. (2001). Managerial Attitudes towards Activities in the Hospitality and Service Industries, Intcnlational journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 13: 197-203.

Wood, R. (1994). Hotel Culture and Social Control, Annals of Tourism Research, 21: 65-79. Zimmerer, T. W. and Scarborough, N. M. (1996). Entreprene~iriship and the new Venture Formation.

Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Submitted : ]line 2002 Resl~bnlitted : Novernber ZOO2

Accepted : Februnry 2003 Refereed anonyinously


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

imer

ick]

at 2

2:26

15

May

201

3

Documents

Styles of Learning, Workplace Problem Solving Strategies and Tourism Industry Employment Context Preferences