International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 319–328

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Hospitality Management

journal homepage: [Link]/locate/ijhosman

The moderating effect of collectivistic orientation in psychological

empowerment and job satisfaction relationship
Henry Fock a,1 , Flora Chiang b,∗ , Kevin Y. Au c,2 , Michael K. Hui d,3
a
Department of Marketing, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong, China
b
Department of Management, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong, China
c
Department of Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong, China
d
Department of Marketing, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords: This study examines the moderating effect of collectivistic value on the relationship between psychologi-
Psychological empowerment cal empowerment and job satisfaction. Specifically, we propose that the multi-dimensional psychological
Collectivistic orientation effects of empowerment (i.e., meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact) on job satisfaction
Job satisfaction
differ between high and low collectivistic employees. Data collected from hotel employees in Canada
(n = 193) and China (n = 371) revealed that collectivistic orientation elevated (attenuated) the effect of
self-determination (impact) on job satisfaction. However, no significant results were found with respect
to meaning and competence. Research and practical implications for the findings as well as directions for
future research are suggested.
© 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction et al., 2000) have established that congruence between employ-

ees’ cultural values and management practices is fundamental to
Empowerment that provides employees with greater decision- their successful implementation. For example, the unique norms
making ability and discretionary power over how they perform and values inherent in different cultures affect the way employ-
their work and serve customers is considered an important man- ees are motivated (Chiang and Birtch, 2007). In Western cultures
agement tool in the quality of service provision (Spreitzer, 1995; (typically highly individualistic), theories about performance tend
Hancer and George, 2003). In the hospitality industry, frontline to focus on the individual dispositional attributes and competen-
employees act as boundary spanners and are often torn between cies (Betancourt and Weiner, 1982; Staw, 1980). By contrast, Asian
a myriad of supervisor’s and customers’ demands, affording them cultures (typically collectivistic) tend to value harmonious working
with considerable latitude, flexibility, and power over the content relationships and view performance a result of joint responsibility
of their interactions with customers and how work is accomplished and team effort (Hofstede, 2001). Moreover, previous cross-cultural
can induce a sense of personal achievement and job satisfaction, studies have alerted us the potential impacts of cultural values on
subsequently reduce the potential for stress (Chiang et al., 2009; the effectiveness of empowerment. Hui et al.’s (2004a) study found
Chow et al., 2006; Hancer and George, 2003). Despite its potential that the effects of empowerment on job satisfaction vary according
benefits, studies of psychological empowerment are rather limited to an individual’s power distance value. Robert et al. (2000) simi-
in the hospitality industry (Hancer and George, 2003). larly found a negative effect for empowerment in India versus other
While the idea of providing employees with flexibility, auton- countries sampled. These studies highlight the fact that empower-
omy, and discretion to serve customers is intuitively appealing, ment practices considered as effective in one country may not be
empowerment is an approach which is not universally embraced by suitable in another cultural setting. Some authors (e.g., Kirkman
all countries (Hui et al., 2004a; Randolph and Sashkin, 2002). Cross- and Shapiro, 2001; Robert et al., 2000) have therefore called for
cultural studies (e.g., Hirst et al., 2008; Hui et al., 2004a; Robert additional work that explicates and extends earlier efforts to the
cross-national setting. Our purpose is to address these calls for the
empirical examination of empowerment under the moderation of
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +852 3411 5214; fax: +852 3411 5583. the collectivistic values.
E-mail addresses: hfock@[Link] (H. Fock), fchiang@[Link] Since the seminal work of Thomas and Velthouse (1990) and
(F. Chiang), kevin@[Link] (K.Y. Au), Spreitzer (1995), psychological empowerment is defined as con-
kmhui@[Link] (M.K. Hui). sisting of four components: meaning (perceived work value),
1
Tel.: +852 3411 5202; fax: +852 3411 5586.
2 competence (feeling of self-efficacy), self-determination (sense of
Tel.: +852 2609 7802; fax: +852 2603 5473.
3
Tel.: +852 2609 8565; fax: +852 2603 5473. control), and impact (ability to influence). While research sup-

0278-4319/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/[Link].2010.08.002
320 H. Fock et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 319–328

ports this multi-dimensional conceptualization (Fulford and Enz, as unique and independent. When processing work related infor-
1995; Hancer and George, 2003), inconsistent results were found mation, they focus solely on the attributes of the task and in
between the individual dimensions of empowerment and job satis- doing so detach from the context, reflecting a context-independent
faction. For example, Liden et al. (2000) investigated the mediating processing style. As a result, individuals with high versus low
effects of empowerment on the relationship between job char- collectivistic values should differ in their interpretations of psy-
acteristics and satisfaction among service employees. Only the chological empowerment and its effects. That is, the collectivistic
dimensions of meaning and competence were found to be signif- orientation will attenuate or strengthen the effects of the four
icant. Fulford and Enz (1995) reported in their study of service dimensions of psychological empowerment on job satisfaction.
employees that self-determination had no effect on job satisfaction
while meaning and impact were significant predictors. Ambivalent 2.1. Work meaning
findings imply that the four dimensions of psychological empower-
ment exhibit differential influences on employees’ job satisfaction The dimension of meaning represents an individual’s intrinsic
and, hence, merit further investigation. In addition, inconsistent care about a task and is evaluated in relation to one’s own stan-
findings may be due to the moderating influence of employees’ dards (Thomas and Velthouse, 1990). When employees are able
value orientation (Robert et al., 2000). Given that empowerment’s to derive personal meaning from their job, they will be motivated
conceptualization has been acknowledged as being bounded by cul- and a higher level of job satisfaction will be resulted (e.g., Spreitzer,
tural differences (Hui et al., 2004a; Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001), 1995; Thomas and Velthouse, 1990).
examining its dimensions independently is likely to improve our However, cultural values influence a person’s work values and
understanding of which specific component(s) of empowerment expectations and that in turn affect their interpretation of task value
that is/are (not) motivating. These findings are particularly impor- (White, 2006). High collectivistic individuals may attach different
tant to international hotels as they attempt to empower employees meaning to work based on their cultural orientations (Hofstede,
across different cultural settings. They also allow hotels to tailor 2001). For high collectivists, work is not viewed as an indepen-
their programs to suit different cultural requirements. dent entity but embedded in relationship context (Triandis et al.,
1988). They are motivated by relational oriented job factors, such
as group relationships, cooperation, and harmony (Triandis, 1994).
2. Psychological empowerment and cultural value Work meaning is likely to be derived from the group (versus the
individual) values. Job satisfaction is derived from group recog-
Psychological empowerment is defined as a motivational nition and interpersonal relationships. Since people with a high
construct manifested through a constellation of experienced psy- collectivistic orientation are more oriented toward teamwork and
chological cognitions: meaning, competence, self-determination, group attainment and less on the inner self (Markus and Kitayama,
and impact (Spreitzer, 1995; Thomas and Velthouse, 1990). Mean- 1991), their sense of individual ownership of the work goal and task
ing is defined as the fit between job task requirements and one’s performance itself may not be as strong as the social expectations
own values, beliefs and behaviors. Competence is the self-belief that accompany those tasks (Kim, 1994). This view is supported by
that one possesses the skills and abilities necessary to perform a job Kirkman and Shapiro (2001) who found that collectivistic individu-
well. Self-determination is the feeling of having choice and control als tended to set aside their own self-interest for the benefits of the
over one’s work. Finally, impact is the belief that one has significant group. They valued mutual support, interdependence and coopera-
influence over strategic, administrative, or operational outcomes at tion. This is in contrast to people with low collectivistic orientation,
work. whose priority is task over relationship (Singelis et al., 1995). Based
According to Thomas and Velthouse (1990), the level of psy- on the above arguments, we hypothesize that:
chological empowerment is subject to how individuals interpret
their work tasks and how they form cognitions from their objective H1. The effect of the work meaning dimension of psychological
reality. As they claimed (1990, p. 669), “Interpretative cognitions empowerment on job satisfaction will be weaker for employees
go beyond the perception of facts to provide additional, needed with a high collectivistic orientation than for those with a low
meaning for an individual”. Some individuals may feel psycholog- collectivistic orientation.
ically empowered when they interpret and perceive their work
as meaningful, feel free and competent to determine their work, 2.2. Competence
and envisage success with sound impacts. Others may feel dis-
empowered as a result of different interpretations such that they The dimension of competence is a belief that one possesses the
perceive their work tasks as meaningless, “can’t do”, or redun- skills and abilities necessary to perform a job well (Thomas and
dant. In particular, individuals with different value orientations Velthouse, 1990). A feeling of lower competence leads to anxiety
may have different styles and tendencies in their task interpretation and avoidance behavior while a high level of self-efficacy often
process. results in initiating behavior and work enjoyment (e.g., Bandura,
Given the interpretative and cognitive nature of psychological 1997; Gist, 1987). Unlike meaning which influences job satisfaction
empowerment, individuals with different collectivistic values are derived from work nature, competence affects employee satisfac-
expected to differ in the way they react to and process informa- tion level by altering their interpretation of the level of difficulty
tion in relation to their work environment. A collectivistic value they encounter during the course of work. A satisfactory work
predisposes individuals towards construing themselves as being experience results when employees feel that they are capable
interdependent or part of a group (Magnini, 2010; Markus and of handling assignments from customers or supervisors indepen-
Kitayama, 1991). Consequently, individuals with a high collectivis- dently.
tic orientation are more aligned with a group-based as opposed to We posit that the influence of competence may have a more
an individual-based perspective. According to Nisbett et al. (2001), pronounced impact on highly collectivistic employees. High col-
collectivists interpret information in such a way as to take into lectivistic employees often interpret work tasks from a group
account their entire environment. They process work related infor- perspective (Triandis, 1994), prefer to work in teams, and tend
mation in a manner that combines both attributes of the task with to evaluate task difficulty according to the capability of their
those of the social context, reflecting a context-dependent process- group (Earley et al., 1999). Performance is oriented to benefit and
ing style. In contrast, low collectivistic individuals see themselves meet the expectations of significant others (Markus and Kitayama,
 H. Fock et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 319–328 321

1991). Because of their other-focused attributes, collectivists are their professional judgment (e.g., in price negotiation), employ-
highly motivated by how their work behaviors affect the group ees would be torn between their subordinate and professional
(Crittenden and Bae, 1994; Choi et al., 1999). Inevitability, service roles (Agarwal, 1993). Consequently, role stress and dissatisfaction
employees often have to handle work assignments and deal with would arise. The dimension of self-determination of psychological
unexpected requests from customers independently. In these situ- empowerment releases employees from management constraints
ations, high collectivistic employees accustomed to working with and provides a solution to their role conflict, thereby reducing
their peers may feel helpless and incompetent, thereby increasing their stress and unleashing their suppressed professional decisions
their job strains, especially the attributional cause of performance (Agarwal, 1993; Dubinsky et al., 1992). Hence, self-determination
failure is often viewed by high collectivists as personal faults, such improves the work satisfaction of employees.
as lack of ability (Kashima and Triandis, 1986; Takata, 1987). With We suggest that the stress relief effect of self-determination
a higher level of self-competence, high collectivistic employees can should be more pronounced for high collectivistic employees than
see themselves as an asset as opposed to a burden to the team. Being to their low collectivistic counterparts. Since low collectivistic
more competent at work not only allows them to relieve job strains employees are accustomed to working in their own way without
but also reinforces their satisfaction about being a team member. affording much consideration to others’ views, no matter in-group
This view is consistent with Liu et al.’s (2007) findings that com- or out-group, the pressure to suppress their professional role and to
pared to the American, Chinese tended to consider mistakes and conform to others is relatively limited. As a result, their stress in a
helplessness major stressors in their job. Raising their perceived boundary-spanning role is much lower. Moreover, given autonomy
competence, therefore, should have a more profound effect on their and freedom at work is considered as a norm and a basic right by
belief of self efficacy in handling special tasks, help reduce their role low collectivists, self determination is more likely to be regarded
stress and increase their job satisfaction. as a hygiene than a motivation job factor of satisfaction (Herzberg
In contrast, low collectivistic employees are self-focused and et al., 1959). That is, receiving additional self-determination may
prefer to work independently. They often interpret task difficulty reduce dissatisfaction but will not produce job satisfaction. Alter-
according to an individual perspective (Triandis, 1994). Since they natively, satisfied need (self-determination) is no longer a powerful
rely on their own capability in daily activities, the motivational motivator for low collectivists (Maslow, 1954). This claim is in
influence of self-competence through empowerment at workplace, line with Liu et al.’s (2007) study that they found as job auton-
albeit helpful, may play a relatively less prominent role in stress omy increased, job satisfaction increased significantly more for
reduction than in the case of their high collectivistic counterparts. Chinese than Americans. Moreover, the relationship between inter-
personal relationships and job satisfaction was found stronger for
H2. The effect of the competence dimension of empowerment American than Chinese employees. Accordingly, the effect of self-
on job satisfaction will be stronger for employees with a high determination may only add marginally to the low collectivists’
collectivistic orientation than for those with a low collectivistic level of job satisfaction relative to their high collectivistic counter-
orientation. parts.

2.3. Self-determination H3. The effect of the self-determination dimension of empow-

erment on job satisfaction will be stronger for employees with a
Self-determination refers to the feeling of having choice and high collectivistic orientation than for those with a low collectivistic
control over one’s work (Thomas and Velthouse, 1990). It addresses orientation.
an employee’s need for autonomy during the course of work. We
submit that employees with collectivistic orientations (high versus 2.4. Impact
low) may cognitively interpret the effects of self-determination in
dissimilar ways. Impact refers to the degree to which an individual can influence
Since high collectivists are embedded in groups and see the self his/her work outcomes. It reflects one’s beliefs about individ-
as interdependent, their behaviors are influenced strongly by the ual performance–outcome and person–environment relationships
thoughts, feelings, and actions of their in-group others (Triandis et (Mishra and Spreitzer, 1998; Spretizer, 1995). Unlike self-
al., 1988). Thus, to be successful in an organizational setting, one determination, the dimension of impact addresses the outcome of
must express a high level of social sensitivity and learn to fit in with work rather than the autonomy of employees during the course of
others. Individuals must not only be supportive to each other but work. Generally speaking, low collectivistic employees in Western
also be loyal to their organization. Serving common goals, observ- societies emphasize individual ability and contribution (Hofstede,
ing norms, and conforming to an organization’s rules are valued 1980). Individuals view themselves as ultimately responsible for
(Markus and Kitayama, 1991). Personal goals, nonconforming work job outcomes. Personal attributes (e.g., skills, abilities) are believed
behaviors, and emotions, have to be restrained to maintain har- to underlie an individual’s success (Betancourt and Weiner,
mony within the organization. The requests of in-group members 1982). Accordingly, the perceived performance–outcome linkage
(e.g., supervisors and colleagues) should be a priority over the out- is strongly held among low collectivistic individuals.
groups (e.g., customers, contractors, vendors) (Triandis et al., 1988). By contrast, high collectivists have stronger social identification
Hence, high collectivists may perceive autonomous and poten- with relevant others at work (Eby and Dobbins, 1997). Since work
tially individualistic practices as unclear and potentially stressful and decision-making are enacted primarily by groups, high collec-
(Triandis and Gelfand, 1998). tivistic employees tend to interpret work performance outcome
In many situations, employees may have to assume a boundary- as a result of others’ contribution and/or environmental influences
spanning role in which they are required to adjust their work (Markus and Kitayama, 1991). They are more susceptible to situ-
boundary between being a subordinate and a professional worker ational constraints unlike low collectivists who attribute causality
(Shamir, 1980). As a subordinate, they are required to conform primarily to personal impact (Choi and Nisbett, 1998; Masuda and
to the organizational norms and meet management expectations. Nisbett, 2001). Evidence for this distinction that high (low) collec-
Simultaneously, they are required to make professional decisions tivism is associated more with external (personal) attribution of
to address the concerns of their out-group counterparts (e.g., cus- performance outcomes has been confirmed in cross-cultural stud-
tomers’ requests) during the interactions and course of work. ies (Kashima and Triandis, 1986; Spector et al., 2002). For high
When the expectations of their management are in conflict with collectivists, happiness derived from successful work outcomes is
322 H. Fock et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 319–328

shared among work peers. Therefore, individual satisfaction may be ilar levels of satisfaction toward their job (MPRC = 4.94; MCA = 4.93;
less pronounced. Hence, an individual’s satisfaction derived from t = −0.16, df = 562, n.s.).
work impact will be moderated by collectivistic values.

H4. The effect of the impact dimension of psychological empow- 3.2. Measurements
erment on job satisfaction will be weaker for employees with a
high collectivistic orientation than for those with a low collectivistic All measurement items were originally written in English. The
orientation. questionnaire was translated into Chinese by a research profes-
sional in China following the back-translation procedure (Brislin,
1980) to assure language equivalence. Measures of psychological
3. Method
empowerment developed by Spreitzer (1995) were adopted in the
survey questionnaire (˛CA = 0.67–0.75; ˛PRC = 0.64–0.76). Sample
This study is part of a larger survey. The survey was adminis-
items included: “The work I do is meaningful to me”, “I am con-
tered in Canada and China. The two countries differ substantially
fident about my ability to do my job”, “I have significant autonomy
in their orientation toward collectivism (Hofstede, 1993), making
in determining how I do my job”, and “I have a great deal of con-
them ideal for testing our hypothesized moderation effects. Dif-
trol over what happens in my department/team”. Job satisfaction
ferent from previous cross-cultural study (e.g., Robert et al., 2000),
was measured by six items (˛CA = 0.78; ˛PRC = 0.85) adapted from
the present study utilized customer-contact employees in the hotel
Hartline and Ferrell (1996). Sample items were: “Overall speaking,
industry as opposed to factory workers. Unlike factory workers’
I am satisfied with my job” and “I am satisfied with my organiza-
jobs that are more standardized, routine, and repetitive, their ten-
tion’s policies”. Collectivistic orientation was assessed using a scale
dency to exercise empowerment is likely to be more restricted. By
developed by Singelis et al. (1995). Sample items included: “The
contrast, service employees who require a greater level of auton-
well-being of my co-workers is important to me”, “It is impor-
omy and flexibility in their interaction with customers (Chiang
tant to maintain harmony within my group”, “I feel good when I
et al., 2009) are more appropriate respondents for the study of
cooperate with others”. Their original scale had 32 items reflecting
empowerment.
different aspects of life along the vertical and horizontal dimen-
sions of collectivism. To avoid the possible confounding influence of
3.1. Sample
power distance embedded in vertical relations, only the four items
that measure collectivistic responses between work peers at the
We selected luxury hotels for our sample for three important
horizontal level were used in this study (˛CA = 0.62; ˛PRC = 0.67).
reasons. First, exemplary service and a high quality of workforce are
Participants indicated their responses on Likert-type scales (1-
of high importance. Second, customers’ service demands tend to be
strongly disagree; 7-strongly agree).
higher and employees are expected to go extra mile to serve their
Confirmatory factor analysis was performed on job satis-
customers. Third, customers are more likely to make special ser-
faction and the empowerment variables. The results for both
vice requests. Affording employees with discretionary power and
Canada and China indicated an acceptable fit of the measurement
flexibility when they interact with customers is therefore impor-
model (Canada: CFI = 0.92; NNFI = 0.90; RMSEA = 0.085; 2 = 460.39,
tant to achieving and sustaining competitive advantage. In Canada,
df = 194, p < 0.001; PRC: CFI = 0.96; NNFI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.052;
self-administered questionnaires were distributed to 265 frontline
2 = 386.47, df = 194, p < 0.001). All coefficient loadings () were
employees from 27 luxury hotels situated in the greater Toronto
significant (p < 0.001). Convergent validity of the constructs was
area. A total of 193 employees (73%) returned the questionnaire.
demonstrated. To check for discriminant validity, the correlations
In China, 653 frontline employees from 15 luxury hotels in Beijing
between each pair of constructs (␾ coefficients) were constrained
were contacted. Of these, 371 (57%) respondents returned the ques-
to 1.00 one by one. Chi-square difference tests indicated that the
tionnaire with complete information. A souvenir was presented
fit of all the constrained models were significantly less than that of
upon receipt of a completed questionnaire.
the original model.
Chinese respondents possessed an average of 5.91 years of expe-
rience in the hotel industry similar to their Canadian counterparts
(5.90 years). Gender composition was also similar (56 and 58% 3.3. Measurement invariance
female respondents in Canada and China, respectively). However, a
2 -test indicated that the two samples varied significantly in terms Following Cheung and Rensvold (1999), the CFA models of the
of age (2 = 24.72, df = 4, p < 0.001) and educational attainment two samples were compared and nested to test for factor form
(2 = 41.57, df = 3, p < 0.001). Fewer Chinese respondents (56%) were (configural) invariance and factorial invariance. This procedure
in the age group of 21–30 than Canadians (70%). Moreover, fewer determines whether the measurement instrument has adequate
Chinese employees (34%) received tertiary education relative to cross-national equivalence and ensures that the differences found
their Canadian counterparts (60.6%). The Chinese sample appears across the two national samples are attributed to the moderat-
to be older and less educated than that of the Canadian sample. ing factor of interest rather than the non-variance of measures
Since respondents of different age groups and education attain- (Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1998). Results indicated that the
ment levels may vary in job satisfaction and empowerment, these second item in the work meaning sub-scale of psychological
demographic factors were included in the subsequent regression empowerment was non-invariant. According to the procedures of
analyses as control variables. To control for the national differences, Cheung and Rensvold (1999), this item was removed from sub-
a dummy coded national variable was included in the subsequent sequent analyses to ensure partial measurement invariance. The
analysis for the merged data set. All these control variables were remaining two items in the work meaning scale maintained accept-
found non-significant (p > 0.05). able reliability (˛ = 0.59) and face validity.4 Table 1
Apart from the above differences, the Chinese sample’s mean presents the descriptive statistics.
score for collectivistic orientation was also significantly higher
than that for the Canadian sample (MPRC = 5.65; MCA = 5.36; t = 4.14,
df = 562, p < 0.001). This reflects that Chinese respondents gener- 4
Many empowerment studies in marketing and management literature also
ally have a higher collectivistic orientation than their Canadian reported similar levels of reliability for their empowerment scales (see Chebat and
counterparts. Employees in both countries did however report sim- Kollias, 2000, p. 76, for details).
Table 1
Descriptive statistics, reliabilities, and correlations.a , c

Variable Canada

M SD ˛ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1. Job satisfaction 4.98 0.88 0.78 1.00 0.11 0.03 −0.02 0.10 0.50 0.29 0.45 −0.05 0.41 0.35 0.33
2. Age 2.33 0.65 0.06 1.00 −0.16 0.04 0.67 0.02 0.04 0.19 0.06 0.12 0.10 0.06
3. Gender 1.56 0.50 −0.07 −0.19 1.00 −0.01 −0.13 0.02 0.02 −0.01 −0.09 0.08 −0.03 0.04

H. Fock et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 319–328

4. Education 4.50 0.69 0.02 −0.08 0.07 1.00 0.03 −0.04 −0.01 −0.02 0.11 −0.06 −0.05 0.00
5. Industrial experience 5.90 4.12 0.11 0.53 −0.10 −0.10 1.00 0.05 0.07 0.26 0.01 0.23 0.16 0.10
6. Proxy variable 3.93 1.19 0.68 −0.02 0.00 −0.06 −0.02 −0.05 1.00 0.00 0.17 0.02 0.07 0.05 0.15
7. Collectivistic orientation (COL)b 5.36 0.85 0.62 0.35 0.18 0.03 0.20 0.03 −0.12 1.00 0.42 −0.24 0.35 0.55 0.22
8. Single-dimensional psychological empowerment (SPE)b 5.40 0.69 0.84 0.50 0.08 0.00 0.17 0.09 0.01 0.40 1.00 −0.14
9. SPE × COL 0.23 0.65 −0.20 −0.05 −0.06 −0.20 0.08 −0.12 −0.18 −0.09 1.00
10. Meaningb 5.52 0.95 0.62 0.45 0.15 0.01 0.07 0.07 −0.08 0.24 1.00 0.35 0.43
11. Competenceb 5.93 0.76 0.67 0.23 0.13 −0.03 0.16 0.07 −0.01 0.35 0.30 1.00 0.25
12. Self-determinationb 5.34 0.89 0.74 0.40 −0.01 0.05 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.32 0.43 0.49 1.00
13. Impactb 4.85 1.03 0.72 0.45 0.02 −0.08 0.18 0.11 0.06 0.30 0.39 0.36 0.61
14. Meaning × COL 0.20 0.87 −0.21 0.06 −0.08 −0.16 0.10 −0.21 0.00 0.04 −0.08 −0.02
15. Competence × COL 0.22 0.75 −0.07 −0.03 −0.14 −0.14 0.15 −0.08 −0.08 −0.08 −0.29 −0.09
16. Self-determination × COL 0.24 0.85 −0.13 −0.06 −0.04 −0.24 0.07 −0.02 −0.23 −0.02 −0.09 −0.18
17. Impact × COL 0.26 1.04 −0.17 −0.07 0.03 −0.08 −0.03 −0.09 −0.18 0.11 0.05 −0.11

Variable PRC

13 14 15 16 17 M SD ˛

1. Job satisfaction 0.26 −0.03 −0.11 0.06 −0.07 5.02 1.05 0.85
2. Age 0.27 0.05 0.00 0.06 0.08 2.20 0.78
3. Gender −0.11 −0.04 −0.07 −0.06 −0.10 1.58 0.50
4. Education 0.02 0.12 0.11 0.06 0.07 4.06 0.80
5. Industrial experience 0.28 −0.02 −0.03 0.00 0.07 5.91 5.00
6. Proxy variable 0.18 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 4.16 1.18 0.70
7. Collectivistic orientation (COL)b 0.18 −0.19 −0.36 −0.13 −0.06 5.65 0.77 0.67
8. Single-dimensional psychological empowerment (SPE)b 5.09 0.77 0.80
9. SPE × COL 0.25 0.69
10. Meaningb 0.35 −0.09 −0.17 −0.04 −0.09 5.52 1.09 0.58
11. Competenceb 0.20 −0.21 −0.43 −0.12 −0.05 5.80 0.83 0.69
12. Self-determinationb 0.50 −0.04 −0.09 0.04 −0.04 4.75 1.24 0.76
13. Impactb 1.00 −0.09 −0.04 −0.04 0.04 4.42 1.11 0.67
14. Meaning × COL 0.12 1.00 0.50 0.45 0.45 0.29 0.92
15. Competence × COL 0.05 0.44 1.00 0.34 0.36 0.35 0.86
16. Self-determination × COL −0.11 0.35 0.41 1.00 0.54 0.21 0.95
17. Impact × COL −0.06 0.22 0.10 0.69 1.00 0.15 0.88

323
324 H. Fock et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 319–328

3.4. Common method variance

1.00
18
To check for common method variance, principal components

0.58
1.00
analysis was performed on all 108 items in the larger questionnaire
17

following a procedure for the one-factor test. The first compo-

0.38
0.26
1.00
nent (without rotation) captured only 22.35% of variance. Although
16

the first component in our one-factor analysis is not a dominant

0.47
0.42
0.34
1.00
variable, and common method seems not to be of significance in
15

this study, we are unable to eliminate the possibility of common

−0.03
−0.03
−0.04
1.00

0.03
method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Therefore, we used a proxy
14

variable based on the suggestion of Lindell and Whitney (2001) to

control for possible method variance in the regression analysis.5

−0.11
−0.03

−0.03
0.55
1.00

0.03
13

−0.17 4. Results
−0.39
−0.14
−0.04
0.32
0.26
1.00
12

To test our propositions of the differential impact of individual

−0.14
−0.03

−0.03
dimensions of empowerment on job satisfaction, the moderating
0.33
0.41
0.35
1.00

0.04
11

effects of collectivistic orientation were examined. Job satisfaction

was regressed on the empowerment dimensions and collectivistic
1.00
10

orientation. As the respondents from the two countries were differ-

ent in age and education, demographic variables were first included
−0.11
1.00

together with the proxy variable for common method variance as

9

control variables, followed by the main effects and the interaction

−0.19

−0.23
−0.13
−0.10

−0.10

terms. All independent variables were mean-centered to eliminate

0.36

0.31
0.46
0.19
0.18
1.00

possible multi-collinearity problems (Aiken and West, 1991).

8

−0.24
−0.18
−0.20

−0.08

−0.04
−0.00
0.17
1.00

0.03

0.05
0.08
0.01

4.1. Main effects

7

−0.03

−0.02

−0.03
−0.01

−0.03
0.12
1.00
0.10

0.10

0.02
0.02
0.09

0.00

Results are shown in Table 2. For the Canadian sample, the

6

main effects for two dimensions of empowerment, namely work

0.19
0.14
1.00
0.02

0.05
0.21
0.04

0.08
0.23
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.00

meaning (b = 0.30; t = 4.85; p < 0.001) and impact (b = 0.27; t = 4.14;

5

p < 0.001), were significant. Competence and self-determination

−0.26
−0.01
−0.06

−0.02

−0.01

were not significant, however. For China, with the exception of

1.00

0.01
0.08
0.01

0.03
0.09
0.11
0.01
0.01

0.03

impact, we found all three dimensions significant: work mean-

4

ing (b = 0.22; t = 4.19; p < 0.001), competence (b = 0.27; t = 3.67;

−0.12
−0.01

−0.01
−0.08

−0.01

−0.10
−0.05
−0.09
−0.05
−0.05
1.00
0.01

0.02
0.03

0.06

0.04

p < 0.001), self-determination (b = 0.10; t = 2.06; p < 0.05). For the

3

merged data, all four dimensions were positive and significant

−0.17

−0.08

−0.01

(b = 0.08–0.25; t = 1.98–5.99; ps < 0.05).

0.63

0.17

0.13
0.11

0.21
1.00

0.03

0.01

0.07

0.05

0.06

0.05

0.05
0.06

Canada data are presented below the diagonal; PRC data are presented above the diagonal.
2

4.2. Interaction effects

−0.11
−0.01

−0.08

−0.07
−0.08
1.00

0.31
0.45

0.42
0.31
0.33
0.31
0.09

0.10
0.03
0.02

0.02
0.00
1

Testing the hypotheses rendered the examination of the inter-

0.83

0.68

0.65
0.81

0.62
0.67
0.74
0.72

action effects between individual empowerment dimensions and

˛

the collectivistic value. The block of interaction variables explains

4.71
1.19
0.99

1.17
0.74

0.79

0.48
0.81
0.76
0.68
1.04
0.81

1.10
0.91
0.83
0.95
0.95
0.50

significantly more R2 (R2 = 0.02–0.10; p < 0.05) on top of the main

SD

effects in all equations.

2.25
1.57
4.21
5.91

5.55

5.52
5.93
5.34
4.85
4.08
0.66
5.00

5.20
0.22

0.26

0.18
0.16
0.30

Hypothesis 1 suggested that the dimensional effects of work

M

These variables were mean-centered in regression analyses.

meaning will be attenuated by the collectivistic orientation of

9. Single-dimensional psychological empowerment (SPE)b

employees. We found a mixed result. A significant negative inter-

action effect was found for the Canadian sample, as predicted
(b = −0.32; t = −4.70; p < 0.001). However, a similar effect was not
found in China (b = 0.03; t = 0.52, n.s.) or the merged (b = −0.08;
t = −1.60, n.s.) data sets. These results suggest that the strong effect
of work meaning may vary across the value of collectivism among
Canadian respondents. Further discussion on the non-significant
8. Collectivistic orientation COL)b

result among Chinese respondent is provided in the section below.

Hypothesis 2 suggested that the collectivistic value strengthens
17. Self-determination × COL

the effect of competence on job satisfaction. However, results of all

Merged data (n = 564).
5. Industrial experience

13. Self-determinationb

data sets revealed that the interaction effect between competence

16. Competence × COL
15. Meaning × COL
1. Job Satisfaction

12. Competenceb

18. Impact × COL

6. Proxy variable

11. Meaningb
10 SPE × COL
4. Education

14. Impactb

5
To account for the possible influence of common method variance in subse-
7. Country
3. Gender
Variable

quent analyses, we identified a three-item scale from our questionnaire that has the
2. Age
Table 1

smallest correlation with the dependent construct. The correlation between these
two constructs is considered indicative of method variance (Lindell and Whitney,
a

2001).
 H. Fock et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 319–328 325

Table 2
Results of mean centered moderated regression analyses.

Dependent variable Canada (n = 193) PRC (n = 371) Merged (n = 564)

Job satisfaction Job satisfaction Job satisfaction

Constant 6.25*** 4.83*** 5.03***

Control variables
Age −0.11 0.09 0.03
Gender −0.12 0.04 −0.01
Education −0.15 −0.00 −0.02
Industrial experience 0.02 −0.05 −0.00
Proxy variable of common method variance −0.05 −0.01 −0.01
Independent variables
Country (code: 0 = Canada; 1 = PRC) 0.09
Horizontal Collectivism (COL) 0.22*** 0.12 0.15**
Single-dimensional psychological empowerment (SPE)
Meaning 0.30*** 0.22*** 0.25***
Competence −0.06 0.27*** 0.17**
Self-determination 0.04 0.10* 0.08*
Impact 0.27*** 0.07 0.11**
SPE × COL
Meaning × COL −0.32*** 0.03 −0.08
Competence × COL −0.02 0.07 0.07
Self-determination × COL 0.20* 0.17** 0.18***
Impact × COL −0.19** −0.18** −0.19***
R2 0.45 0.27 0.28
Adj. R2 0.41 0.24 0.26
F-value 10.38*** 9.26*** 14.29***
R2 (interaction block) 0.10 0.02 0.03
F-value change (interaction block) 8.40*** 2.89* 5.57***

All coefficients are non-standardized; no VIF > 2.76.

*
p < 0.05.
**
p < 0.01.
***
p < 0.001.

and collectivistic orientation on job satisfaction was not significant Hypothesis 4 posited that the effect of impact will be weakened
(bCA = −0.02, t = −0.22, n.s.; bPRC = 0.07, t = 0.95, n.s.; bMERGED = 0.07, by collectivistic orientation. Results revealed consistent findings
t = 1.33, n.s.). Hypothesis 2 was not supported. to support this hypothesis. The interaction term was found to be
Hypothesis 3 suggested that collectivistic orientation strength- negative and significant across all data sets (bCA = −0.19, t = −2.66,
ens the effect of self-determination on job satisfaction. The results p < 0.01; bPRC = −0.18, t = −2.60, p < 0.01; bMERGED = −0.19, t = −3.92,
indicated strong support in all cases (bCA = 0.20, t = 2.05, p < 0.05; p < 0.001). Simple slope analysis (see Fig. 2) showed that the effect
bPRC = 0.17, t = 2.66, p < 0.001; bMERGED = 0.18, t = 3.59, p < 0.001). To of impact was significant among low collectivistic employees (at
interpret this significant interaction effect, simple slope analysis −1 SD: sb = 0.26, t = 4.60, p < 0.001) but was weakened and became
on the merged data set was conducted (Aiken and West, 1991). non-significant when the collectivistic orientation of respondents
Fig. 1 revealed that the effect of self-determination was significant increased (at +1 SD: sb = 0.04; t = −0.63; n.s.). These findings reveal
among high collectivistic individuals (at +1 SD: sb = 0.23; t = 3.60; that the positive effect of impact on psychological empowerment
p < 0.001). As predicted, the effect of self-determination was found is contingent upon a low collectivistic orientation. Hypothesis 4 is
to be non-significant among low collectivistic employees (at −1 supported.
SD: sb = −0.06; t = −1.05; n.s.). The pattern of these simple slopes
renders evidence to support Hypothesis 3.

Fig. 1. Moderating effect of collectivistic orientation of employees on the dimension Fig. 2. Moderating effect of collectivistic orientation of employees on the dimension
of self-determination. of impact.
326 H. Fock et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 319–328

5. Discussion tend to believe that successful work outcomes are attributable to

their group as opposed to themselves (Morris and Peng, 1994).
This study examined the moderating effect of collectivistic Taking too much personal credit (impact) for a job outcome may
value on the relationship between psychological empowerment be detrimental to group relationship, especially when it is dif-
and job satisfaction. Evidence from a two-country survey con- ficult to differentiate personal effort from situational influences.
firmed our hypotheses that influences of individual empowerment Hence, the effect of the impact was less obvious among high col-
dimensions on job satisfaction were not uniform and that their rela- lectivists. Although being able to make an impact is important to
tionships were contingent upon employees’ value orientation. We many people, the attributional causes of such impact may be per-
therefore submit that for empowerment to achieve their intended ceived differently. Further exploration of these differences could
utility necessitates understanding how employees with different inform both theory and practice.
value orientations perceive individual dimensions of empower- While self-determination and impact were shown to be con-
ment and which dimensions are most relevant and effective for tingent upon collectivistic orientation, our results revealed mixed
achieving desirable outcomes in its contexts. Future research pur- and non-significant results of the other two dimensions, i.e., work
suing this line of inquiry is warranted. meaning (Hypothesis 1) and competence (Hypothesis 2) of empow-
Our regression analyses indicated that the collectivistic ori- erment. For the former, we found a significant negative interaction
entation of employees elevated the effect of self-determination effect in Canada but not in China. This result may be partly due
(Hypothesis 3) but attenuated the effect of impact (Hypothesis 4) to the different level of economic development. Unlike Canada,
on job satisfaction. To high collectivistic employees, psychologi- the salary and work conditions of hotel employees in China are
cal empowerment was more pertinent to satisfaction stemming more favorable than other occupations. Hotel employees enjoy a
from choice of work (self-determination) than to outcomes of work higher social and economic status in Chinese society (Leung et
(impact). These moderating effects may in part explain the incon- al., 1996). Work meaning is more associated with the extrinsic
sistent effects of self-determination and impact found in previous aspects of the job as opposed to the intrinsic job values. Such work
empowerment studies (e.g., Fulford and Enz, 1995; Spreitzer et al., meaning of a social nature, though extraneous to the work moti-
1997). vation of psychological empowerment, fulfills Chinese individuals’
We found the stress relief effects of self-determination were desired values obtained from a job and enhances their job satisfac-
more pronounced for high collectivists but irrelevant to low col- tion independent of their collectivistic orientation (Locke, 1976).
lectivistic employees. This differential outcome likely stems from Thus, the negative moderation effect of collectivistic orientation
employees’ collectivistic interpretation of the relative importance may be counteracted and rendered non-significant. As Thomas and
of task and relationship at work. Shaped by their interdependent Velthouse (1990) purported, an individual’s cognition and inter-
and interconnected orientations, high collectivistic employees are pretation of work meaning can be shaped by and result from its
more willing to suppress their personal opinions and conform to interaction with contextual factors, in this case, level of economic
organizational norms. A heightened sense of self-determination development. In case of competence, contrary to our expectation,
derived from psychological empowerment helps release their sup- we found that both high and low collectivists are likely to interpret
pression of individual judgments and compromise of their role (in- competence similarly, a finding consistent with previous empow-
versus out-groups) fulfillment, thereby alleviating their stress in a erment literature (e.g., Silbereisen and Wiesner, 2002; Siu et al.,
boundary-spanning role. As a result, their satisfaction is markedly 2005). That is, competence is considered as a universal dimension
elevated (Hypothesis 3). On the contrary, influenced by their inde- of empowerment irrespective of their collectivistic orientation.
pendent self-construal without affording much consideration to To the best of our knowledge, this study represents the first
others’ views, the pressure to suppress their professional role (out- to offer evidence that collectivistic orientation has a moderating
group) and to conform to others (in-group) is relatively limited for effect on individual dimensions of psychological empowerment.
low collectivists. Another possible explanation may be that low We found that collectivistic orientation weakened the influence
collectivists consider autonomy and freedom at work as a norm of impact and heightened that of self-determination whereas it
and a basic right rather than an exception. Hence, additional self- exerted little/no influence on work meaning and competence. The
determination does not motivate behavior significantly, although exploration of collectivistic orientations has therefore added and
its absence may lead to job dissatisfaction (Herzberg et al., 1959). extended our knowledge of empowerment and its effects on job
The law of diminishing returns provides a case in point. After the satisfaction. The interpretative perspective put forward, combin-
optimal level is reached, as the level of self-determination increases ing both empowerment (Thomas and Velthouse, 1990) and cultural
eventually the corresponding increase in job satisfaction will value research (Triandis et al., 1988), has proven to be versatile
diminish. Hence, the effects of self-determination on ameliorating in providing a theoretical framework and an explanatory mecha-
job satisfaction become less prominent for low collectivists. These nism for the results. Such a perspective may be used to advance our
results provide new insight into Herzberg’s two-factor model. It understanding of cross-cultural studies on empowerment as well
may indicate that whether a job factor is a hygiene/maintenance as guiding future research.
and/or motivator is perceived as a matter of degree rather than a
two-factor dichotomy. Too much of even a motivator may receive
diminishing return. This notion warrants further studies and opens 6. Managerial implications
the research agenda in a promising new direction.
A reverse moderation pattern was apparent in our findings relat- Although a number of scholars have promoted empowerment
ing to the impact dimension (Hypothesis 4). Our results showed practices (e.g., Bowen and Lawler, 1992; Brymer, 1991), recent
that the effect of impact was more relevant to job satisfaction evidence suggests that empowerment is contingent upon cul-
for employees with a low collectivistic orientation than to those tural values (Hui et al., 2004a). This study further reveals that
with a high collectivistic orientation. As argued earlier, although the effects of multi-dimensional psychological empowerment are
satisfaction derived from a desirable work outcome is commonly mixed. International hotel managers should therefore be aware of
regarded as personal accomplishment by employees, this outcome its differential impact on employee job satisfaction. That is, its pos-
may be interpreted differently by employees with a high collectivis- itive effect on job satisfaction is contingent upon the collectivistic
tic orientation. High collectivistic employees would not interpret orientation of employees. In order to maximize the benefits of psy-
work impact as an important source of satisfaction because they chological empowerment, hotels should not rely on a universal
 H. Fock et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 319–328 327

and standardized empowerment program. Instead, they must align Acknowledgements

empowerment programs to employee values and cognitive orien-
tations. For employees from highly collectivistic societies (such as We would like to thank Michael Harris Bond and Joyce Iun for
China, Japan, and Korea) who are more group-oriented and feel less their comments on early drafts of this paper. This study is supported
competent when they are required to make decisions on their own by the Earmark Grant of the Hong Kong Research Grants Council
(Earley, 1993; Markus and Kitayama, 1991), training which fosters (Ref. No. 2425/05H).
self-competence in decision-making is recommended. For employ-
ees from low collectivistic cultures (e.g., the USA and Canada),
recognition programs are likely to be more effective as empow- References
erment is interpreted as efficient to provide frontline employees
Aiken, L., West, S., 1991. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions.
with the ability to exercise their own discretion/judgment when Sage Publications Inc., CA.
interacting with customers (Hirst et al., 2008). Here recognition for Agarwal, S., 1993. Influence of formalization on role stress, organizational commit-
ment, and work alienation of salespersons: a cross-national comparative study.
personal effort and achievement is considered intrinsically moti-
Journal of International Business Studies 24, 715–739.
vating and satisfying. These findings are particularly relevant to Bandura, A., 1997. Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Freeman, NY.
service- and relationship-oriented hotels, which strive to deliver Betancourt, H., Weiner, B., 1982. Attributions for achievement-related events,
service excellence to their customers. When frontline employees expectancy, and sentiments: a study of success and failure in Chile and the
United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 13, 362–374.
are encouraged to freely interact on a more personal level with their Bowen, D., Lawler, E., 1992. The empowerment of service workers: what, why, how
customers, this personalization and customization of service not and when. Sloan Management Review Spring, 31–39.
only enhances the quality of customer service but also the intrinsic Brislin, R.W., 1980. Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In:
Triandis, H.C., Berry, J.W. (Eds.), Handbook of Cross-cultural Psychology. Allyn
value of the job. and Bacon, MA, pp. 389–444.
Brymer, R.A., 1991. Employee empowerment: a guest-driven leadership strategy.
Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 32, 58–68.
Chebat, J.C., Kollias, P., 2000. The impact of empowerment on customer contact
employees’ roles in service organizations. Journal of Service Research 3, 66–81.
7. Limitations Cheung, G.W., Rensvold, R.B., 1999. Testing factorial invariance across groups: a
reconceptualization and proposed new method. Journal of Management 25,
The contributions of this study should be viewed in the light of 1–27.
Chiang, F.T., Birtch, T.A., 2007. The transferability of management practices: exam-
some possible limitations. As with any survey research, the exclu- ining cross-national differences in reward preferences. Human Relations 60,
sive reliance on self-report data may have inflated the relationship 1293–1330.
between psychological empowerment and job satisfaction. How- Chiang, F.T., Birtch, T.A., Kwan, H.K., 2009. The moderating roles of job control and
work-life balance practices on employee stress in the hotel and catering indus-
ever, our focus is on the moderating effect of collectivistic values try. International Journal of Hospitality Management 29, 25–32.
on the relationship rather than the relationship itself. Moreover, Choi, I., Nisbett, R.E., 1998. Situational salience and cultural differences in the corre-
based on the findings of the one-factor analysis, common method spondence bias and in the actor–observer bias. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin 24, 949–960.
variance should not be a significant factor. Nevertheless, readers
Choi, I., Nisbett, R.E., Norenzayan, A., 1999. Causal attribution across cultures: vari-
should be cautious when interpreting the findings of this paper. ation and university. Psychological Bulletin 125, 47–63.
Collectivistic orientation is a powerful construing frame, how- Chow, I.H., Lo, T.W., Sha, Z., Hong, J., 2006. The impact of development experience,
empowerment, and organizational support on catering service staff perfor-
ever, it may not be the only factor affecting empowerment. An
mance. International Journal of Hospitality Management 25, 478–495.
individual’s cognition and interpretation of his/her job can be Cook, J.D., Hepworth, S.J., Wall, T.D., Warr, P.B., 1981. The Experience of Work—A
shaped by other values or work contextual factors. For instance, Compendium and Review of 249 Measures and their Use. Academic Press, San
paternalistic value and supervisor–supervisee relationship quality Diego, CA.
Crittenden, K.S., Bae, H., 1994. Self-effacement and social responsibility attribution
were recently found to be potential factors that might alter the sat- as impression management in Asian cultures. American Behavioral Scientist 37,
isfaction outcomes induced by delegation of power (Pellegrini and 653–671.
Scandura, 2006). Additionally, service concept and standards can Dubinsky, A.J., Michaels, R.E., Kotabe, M., Lim, C.U., Moon, H.C., 1992. Influence of role
stress on industrial salespeople’s work outcomes in the United States, Japan, and
be viewed differently in different countries due to level of eco- Korea. Journal of International Business Studies 23, 77–100.
nomic development, availability of qualified personnel, cultural Earley, P.C., 1993. East meets West meets Mideast: further explorations of collec-
attributes, and so forth. Service concept is relatively new in the tivistic and individualistic work groups. Academy of Management Journal 36,
319–348.
PRC. Cross-cultural research has shown that customers in the PRC Earley, P.C., Gibson, C.B., Chen, C.C., 1999. How did i do? Versus how did we do?
are less demanding and service providers are less proficient in ser- Cultural contrasts of performance feedback use and self-efficacy. Journal of
vice provision (e.g., Ho, 1997; Hui et al., 2004b). To uncover fully Cross-Cultural Psychology 30, 594–619.
Eby, L.T., Dobbins, G.H., 1997. Collectivistic orientation in teams: an individual and
the contingencies of different psychological empowerment dimen-
group-level analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior 18, 275–295.
sions, future research should therefore investigate the effects of Fulford, M.D., Enz, C.A., 1995. The impact of empowerment on service employees.
other values and contextual factors on empowerment. Journal of Management Issues 2, 161–175.
Gist, M.E., 1987. Self-efficacy: implications for organizational behavior and human
Furthermore, while we found that the dimensional effects of
resource management. Academy of Management Journal 12, 472–485.
psychological empowerment on individual employees are dis- Hancer, M., George, R.T., 2003. Psychological empowerment of non-supervisory
similar under the moderation of collectivistic orientation, the employees working in full-service restaurants. International Journal of Hospi-
predictions may or may not hold valid for team empowerment, tality Management 22, 3–16.
Hartline, M., Ferrell, O.C., 1996. The management of customer-contact service
which is more associated with values of collectivistic cultures employees: an empirical investigation. Journal of Marketing 60, 4, 52–70.
(Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001). Future studies that explore dimen- Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Snyderman, B., 1959. The Motivation to Work. Wiley, New
sional empowerment effect at team level would yield additional York.
Hirst, G., Budhwar, P., Cooper, B.K., West, M., Long, C., Chongyuan, X., Ship-
insights for managing hospitality employees in collectivistic soci- ton, H., 2008. Cross-cultural variations in climate for autonomy, stress and
eties. organizational productivity relationships: a comparison of Chinese and UK
Last but not least, we treated job satisfaction as a unidimen- manufacturing organizations. Journal of International Business Studies 39,
1343–1358.
sional construct in this study, however, a large body of literature Hofstede, G., 1980. Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-
has demonstrated that job satisfaction is a multi-facet construct Related Values. Sage Publications, California.
(Cook et al., 1981). It would therefore be interesting to observe Hofstede, G., 1993. Cultural constraints in management theories. Academy of Man-
agement Executive 7, 81–94.
the impact of empowerment on different satisfaction factors (e.g.,
Ho, S.C., 1997. The emergence of consumer power in China. Business Horizon 40 (5),
hygiene versus motivation factors) in a cross-cultural context. 15–21.
328 H. Fock et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 319–328

Hofstede, G., 2001. Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institu- Robert, C., Probst, T.M., Martocchio, J.J., Drasgow, F., Lawler, J.J., 2000. Empowerment
tions, and Organizations Across Nations. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. and continuous improvement in the United States, Mexico, Poland and India
Hui, M.K., Au, K., Fock, H., 2004a. Empowerment effects across cultures. Journal of predicting fit on the basis of the dimensions of collectivistic orientation and
International Business Studies 35, 46–60. individualism. Journal of Applied Psychology 85, 643–658.
Hui, M.K., Au, K., Fock, H., 2004b. Reactions of service employees to organization- Shamir, B., 1980. Service and servility: role conflict in subordinate service roles.
customer conflict: across-cultural comparison. International Journal of Research Human Relations 33, 741–756.
in Marketing 21, 107–121. Silbereisen, R.K., Wiesner, M., 2002. Lessons from research on consequences of Ger-
Kashima, Y., Triandis, H.C., 1986. The self-serving bias as a coping strategy: a cross- many unification: continuity and discontinuity of self-efficacy and the time
cultural study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 17, 83–97. of psychosocial transitions. Applied Psychology: An International Review 51,
Kirkman, B.L., Shapiro, D., 2001. The impact of team members’ cultural values on 291–317.
productivity, cooperation, and empowerment in self-managing work Teams. Singelis, T.M., Triandis, H.C., Bhawuk, D., Gelfand, M., 1995. Horizontal and vertical
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 32, 597–617. dimensions of individualism and collectivism: a theoretical and measurement
Kim, U., 1994. Introduction to individualism and collectivism: conceptual clarifica- refinement. Cross-Cultural Research 29, 240–275.
tion and elaboration. In: Kim, U., Triandis, H.C., Kagiticibassi, C., Choi, S.C., Yoon, Siu, O.L., Spector, P.E., Cooper, C., Lu, C.Q., 2005. Work stress, self-efficacy, Chinese
G. (Eds.), Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, Method, and Application. Bev- work values, and work well-being in Hong Kong and Beijing. International Jour-
erly Hills. Sage Publishing, CA, pp. 19–40. nal of Stress Management 12, 274–288.
Leung, K., Smith, P.B., Wang, Z., Sun, H., 1996. Job satisfaction in joint venture hotels Spector, P.E., Cooper, C.L., Sanchez, J.I., O’Driscoll, M., Sparks, K., Bernin, P., Büssing,
in China: an organizational justice analysis. Journal of International Business A., Dewe, P., Hart, P., Lu, L., Miller, K., Renault de Moraes, L., Ostrognay, G.M.,
Studies Special issue, 947–962. Pagon, M., Pitariu, H., Poelmans, S., Radhakrishnan, P., Russinova, V., Salamatov,
Liden, R.C., Wayne, S.J., Sparrowe, R.T., 2000. An examination of the mediating role V., Salgado, J., Shima, S., Siu, O.L., Stora, J.B., Teichmann, M., Theorell, T., Vlerick, P.,
of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal Westman, M., Widerszal-Bazyl, M., Wong, P., Yu, S., 2002. A 24 nation/territory
relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology 85, 407–416. study of work locus of control in relation to well-being at work: how gen-
Lindell, M.K., Whitney, D.J., 2001. Accounting for method variance in cross-sectional eralizable are western findings? Academy of Management Journal 45, 453–
research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology 861, 114–121. 466.
Liu, C., Spector, P.E., Shi, L., 2007. Cross-national job stress: a quantitative and qual- Spreitzer, G., 1995. Psychological empowerment in the workplace: dimensions,
itative study. Journal of Organizational Behavior 28, 209–239. measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal 38, 1442–
Locke, E.A., 1976. The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In: Dunnette, M. (Ed.), The 1465.
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Rand McNally College Spreitzer, G., Kizilos, M., Nason, S., 1997. A dimensional analysis of the relationship
Publishing, Chicago. between psychological empowerment and effectiveness, satisfaction, and strain.
Magnini, V.P., 2010. The influence of collectivism in restaurant selection: a sentence Journal of Management 23, 679–704.
completion experiment. International Journal of Hospitality Management 29 (1), Staw, B.M., 1980. Rationality and justification in organizational life. In: Staw, B.M.,
191–193. Cummings, L.L. (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 2. JAI Press,
Markus, H.R., Kitayama, S., 1991. Culture and the self: implications for cognition, Greenwich, CT, pp. 45–80.
emotion and motivation. Psychological Review 98, 224–253. Steenkamp, J.E.M., Baumgartner, H., 1998. Assessing measurement invariance
Maslow, A.H., 1954. Motivation and Personality, 2nd ed. Harper & Row, New York. in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research 25,
Masuda, T., Nisbett, R.E., 2001. Attending holistically versus analytically: comparing 78–90.
the context sensitivity of Japanese and Americans. Journal of Personality and Takata, T., 1987. Self-deprecative tendencies in self-evaluation through social com-
Social Psychology 81, 922–934. parison. Japanese Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 27, 27–36.
Mishra, A., Spreitzer, G., 1998. Explaining how survivors respond to downsizing: the Thomas, K., Velthouse, B., 1990. Cognitive elements of empowerment: an interpre-
roles of trust, empowerment, justice, and work design. Academy of Management tive model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review 15,
Review 23, 567–568. 666–681.
Morris, M.W., Peng, K., 1994. Culture and cause: American and Chinese attribution Triandis, H.C., 1994. Theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of col-
for social and physical events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67, lectivism and individualism. In: Kim, U., Triandis, H.C., Kagitcibasi, C., Choi, S.C.,
949–971. Yoon, G. (Eds.), Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, Method, and Applica-
Nisbett, R.E., Peng, K., Choi, I., Norenzayan, A., 2001. Culture and systems of thought: tions. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 41–51.
holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review 108, 291–310. Triandis, H.C., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M.J., Asai, M., Lucca, N., 1988. Individual-
Pellegrini, E.K., Scandura, T.A., 2006. Leader–member exchange LMX, paternalism ism and collectivism: cross-cultural perspectives on self in-group relationships.
and delegation in the Turkish business culture: an empirical investigation. Jour- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54, 323–338.
nal of International Business Studies 37, 264–279. Triandis, H.C., Gelfand, M.J., 1998. Converging measurement of horizontal and verti-
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S., Lee, J.Y., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method cal individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recom- 74, 118–127.
mended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology 88, 879–903. White, C., 2006. Towards and understanding of the relationship between work val-
Randolph, W.A., Sashkin, M., 2002. Can organizational empowerment work in multi- ues and cultural orientations. International Journal of Hospitality Management
national settings? Academy of Management Review 16, 102–115. 25, 669–715.