Emotional labor, employee engagement and quality of life a research on service employees

UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY International School of Business HA THI TRUC MAI EMOTIONAL LABOR, EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AND QUALITY OF LIFE: A RESEARCH ON SERVICE EMPLOYEES MASTER OF BUSINESS (HONOURS) Ho Chi Minh City – Year 2018 UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY International School of Business HA THI TRUC MAI EMOTIONAL LABOR, EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AND QUALITY OF LIFE: A RESEARCH ON SERVICE EMPLOYEES MASTER OF BUSINESS (HONOURS) SUPERVISOR: DR NGUYEN THI MAI TRANG Ho Chi Minh City – Year 2018 Table of Contents List of acronyms List of figure List of table Acknowledgement Abstract Introduction Theoretical background and Hypothesis development 11 Emotional labor 11 Employee engagement 13 Emotional labor and employee engagement 14 Employee engagement and quality of life 16 Moderating effects of work life balance perception 18 Moderating effects of customer orientation 20 Methodology 22 Procedure and sample 22 Pilot study 23 Main survey 24 Measurement 25 Data analysis and results 26 Sample profile 26 Cronbach’s alpha results 27 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) results 28 Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) results 28 Hypothesis Testing Results 31 Moderating Testing Results 32 Discussion 34 Implications 35 Theoretical implications 35 Managerial implication 36 Limitation and direction for future research 38 Conclusion 39 References 40 Appendix 1: Guideline for Pilot study (qualitative in-depth interview) 46 Appendix 2: Vietnamese questionnaire 49 Appedix 3: Descriptive statistic of sample 51 Appendix 4: The results of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of reliability 54 Appendix EFA Results 58 Appendix CFA results for model 60 Appendix 7: Structural results for model 65 Appendix 8: Moderating testing results 68 Appendix 9: The answer of interviewing 10 people for the insignificant moderating role of work life balance perception 71 List of acronyms - HCM: Ho Chi Minh - EFA: Exploratory Factor Analysis - CFA: Confirmatory Factor Analysis - AVE: Average variance extracted - SA: Surface acting - DA: Deep acting - EE: Employee engagement - VI: Vigor - DE: Dedication - AB: Absorption - QL: Quality of life - WL: Work life balance perception - CO: Customer orientation List of figure Figure 1: Conceptual Model………………… .22 Figure 2: Research procedure……………………………………………………………23 Figure 3: Structural results (standadized estimates)…………………………………… 32 List of table Table 1: EFA results 29 Table 2: Standardized CFA Loadings of item 30 Table 3: Correlation results 31 Table 4: Results from the structural model………………………………………………32 Table 5: Moderator results……………………………… 33 Acknowledgement Firstly, I would like to thank all respondents who helped me finishing questionnaires Specially, I would like to thank my supervisor Mrs Nguyen Thi Mai Trang for her guidance and strong support that help me continue to write and research even during the most stressful moments Secondly, I would like to thank all teachers who taught me in International school of Business (ISB) during whole course I have got a lot of knowledge not only useful for my thesis but also for my work and continuous studying Thirdly, I would like to thank the thesis defense committee: Dr Tran Ha Minh Quan, Dr Nguyen Phong Nguyen for asking questions and advising to give positive arguments and constructive contribution for my thesis Besides, I would like to send my thankful to my MBUS family, my classmates and my friends gave me good conditions and generous support for completion my thesis Especially, I would like to thanks Ho Tan Vuong, who is not only my MBUS classmate but also my husband for giving me strong support, advising on the thesis and SPSS data analyzing Finally, I would like to send thanks to my family for creating good condition to complete this thesis Thank you very much for always supporting, encouraging me and standing by my side no matter the circumstances Abstract This study investigates the impact of emotional labor including deep acting and surface acting on employee engagement It also examines the effect of employee engagement to quality of life of service employees in Vietnam Moreover, the moderator role of customer orientation and work life balance perception on the relationship between deep acting, surface acting and employee engagement is also tested in this study A structural equation model is applied and tested using data survey from a sample of 278 service employees in Ho Chi Minh City The results reveal that surface acting positively impacts on employee engagement whereas deep acting negatively impacts on employee engagement In addition, employee engagement positively effects on quality of life Furthermore, the moderating role of customer orientation to the relationship between surface acting and employee engagement is supported whereas deep acting is not significant Nevertheless, the moderating role of work life balance perception is not supported in this study Based on these findings, this study proposes some realistic tactics for management to have suitable strategy to improve employee engagement and employee quality of life through emotional labor and customer orientation Introduction During the past several years, although emotions have been an interest topic for sociologists and psychologists (Hochschild, 1983), increasing organizational scholars have focused on the topic of emotion display in organizations (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1993) According to Sutton (1991), the relationship between emotional expression and employee effectiveness has been conducted in many theoretical and empirical researches Moreover, increasing competition in the continuous growth service industry has forced organizations to put higher attention on service quality providing to customers (Bowen & Schneider, 1995) Bowen and Schneider (1988) also identified that the direct interaction between customers and employees is the main factor that affect to the perceived quality of service As a results, managers have had concern about “the images employees create for customers and the quality of interactions between employees and customers” (Morris and Feldman, 1996, p.986) Following the requirement of organization, service employees can either display fake and inauthentic emotions, pretend, put a mas (surface acting) or make efforts to adjust internal feeling to display sincere emotions (deep acting), that perceived as emotional labor (Hochschild, 1983) Generally, emotional labor is presented as the act to express required emotions of organization during service transactions (Morris & Feldman, 1996) Diefendorff, Croyle, and Gosserand (2005) indicated that personality variables, emotional expressivity, emotional display rules, frequency, routineness, duration, organizational Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Item Deleted DA1 DA2 DA3 DA4 Scale Variance if Item Deleted 11.52 11.43 11.53 11.45 Corrected Item- Cronbach's Alpha Total Correlation if Item Deleted 18.525 14.080 15.781 15.498 190 605 540 520 775 486 542 551 Cronbach’s alpha after deleting DA1 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items 775 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Item Deleted DA2 DA3 DA4 Scale Variance if Corrected Item- Cronbach's Alpha Item Deleted Total Correlation if Item Deleted 7.64 7.74 7.66 8.680 9.739 9.062 618 592 623 689 717 682 Vigor Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items 659 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Item Deleted VI1 VI2 VI3 VI4 Scale Variance if Item Deleted 12.43 12.09 12.45 12.47 11.192 14.183 11.223 11.218 Cronbach’s alpha after deleting VI2 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha 778 N of Items Corrected Item- Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted Total Correlation 528 164 617 523 529 778 478 532 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Item Deleted VI1 VI3 VI4 Scale Variance if Item Deleted 8.04 8.06 8.08 Corrected ItemTotal Correlation 6.970 7.090 6.954 Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted 731 639 730 586 674 587 Dedication Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items 812 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Item Deleted DE1 DE3 DE2 DE4 Scale Variance if Item Deleted 12.42 12.59 12.57 12.39 Corrected ItemTotal Correlation 18.230 19.009 18.513 18.614 Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted 660 614 612 634 749 771 773 762 Absorption Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items 810 Item-Total Statistics Scale Variance if Corrected Item- Cronbach's Alpha Item Deleted Total Correlation if Item Deleted Scale Mean if Item Deleted AB1 AB2 AB3 AB4 11.53 12.04 11.85 11.87 15.095 15.804 16.507 15.947 Quality of life Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha 775 N of Items 620 646 620 626 767 753 765 762 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Item Deleted QL1 QL2 QL3 Scale Variance if Item Deleted 8.67 8.55 8.62 Corrected Item- Cronbach's Alpha Total Correlation if Item Deleted 8.527 9.960 9.631 712 546 579 578 765 730 Work life balance perception Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items 747 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Item Deleted WL1 WL2 WL3 WL4 Scale Variance if Item Deleted 12.03 11.88 11.66 11.87 Corrected Item- Cronbach's Alpha Total Correlation if Item Deleted 16.840 16.635 17.244 17.889 570 576 486 539 673 670 722 692 Customer orientation Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha 878 N of Items Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Item Deleted CO1 CO2 CO3 CO4 11.88 11.80 11.82 11.86 Scale Variance if Item Deleted 27.748 28.419 29.520 28.680 Corrected Item- Cronbach's Alpha Total Correlation if Item Deleted 741 743 705 758 842 841 855 835 Appendix EFA Results KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy Bartlett's Test of Sphericity 819 2.063E3 190 000 Approx Chi-Square df Sig Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues Factor Total 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 5.678 1.963 1.783 1.562 1.458 1.173 676 650 604 575 546 494 433 418 395 384 361 323 291 233 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings % of Variance Cumulative % 28.392 9.813 8.915 7.811 7.289 5.864 3.381 3.248 3.022 2.875 2.729 2.470 2.165 2.091 1.976 1.920 1.806 1.615 1.453 1.164 28.392 38.205 47.120 54.931 62.220 68.084 71.465 74.713 77.735 80.610 83.339 85.809 87.974 90.065 92.041 93.961 95.768 97.383 98.836 100.000 Total 5.236 1.511 1.342 1.189 1.003 727 % of Variance 26.180 7.556 6.709 5.944 5.015 3.637 Rotation Sums of Squared Loadingsa Cumulative % 26.180 33.736 40.444 46.388 51.404 55.040 Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring a When factors are correlated, sums of squared loadings cannot be added to obtain a total variance Total 3.333 3.608 2.775 2.682 2.673 3.325 Pattern Matrixa Factor AB3 AB2 AB4 AB1 DE1 DE4 DE3 DE2 DA4 DA3 DA2 QL1 QL3 QL2 SA1 SA4 SA3 VI3 VI4 VI1 805 756 677 639 787 748 671 643 760 730 725 963 618 598 Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring Rotation Method: Promax with Kaiser Normalization a Rotation converged in iterations .786 735 624 795 703 666 Appendix CFA results for model Model Fit Summary CMIN Model Default model Saturated model Independence model NPAR 49 210 20 CMIN 253.903 000 2120.200 DF 161 190 P 000 CMIN/DF 1.577 000 11.159 RMR, GFI Model Default model Saturated model Independence model RMR 143 000 727 GFI 921 1.000 413 AGFI 897 PGFI 706 352 374 NFI Delta1 880 1.000 000 RFI rho1 859 IFI Delta2 953 1.000 000 TLI rho2 943 Baseline Comparisons Model Default model Saturated model Independence model 000 000 CFI 952 1.000 000 RMSEA Model Default model Independence model RMSEA 046 192 LO 90 035 184 HI 90 056 199 PCLOSE 743 000 Covariances: (Group number - Default model) DA DA DA QL QL SA < > < > < > < > < > < > QL SA EE SA EE EE Estimate 535 -.321 4.604 -.617 5.148 -4.900 S.E .158 135 964 159 1.062 1.000 C.R 3.380 -2.381 4.774 -3.878 4.847 -4.900 P *** 017 *** *** *** *** Label Correlations: (Group number - Default model) DA DA DA QL QL SA < > < > < > < > < > < > QL SA EE SA EE EE Estimate 263 -.190 556 -.310 528 -.606 Regression Weights: (Group number - Default model) AB DE VI AB3 AB2 AB4 AB1 DE1 DE4 DE3 DE2 DA4 DA3 DA2 QL1 QL3 QL2 SA1 SA4 SA3 VI3 VI4 VI1 < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < - EE EE EE AB AB AB AB DE DE DE DE DA DA DA QL QL QL SA SA SA VI VI VI Estimate 100 148 135 1.000 1.142 1.106 1.199 1.000 944 892 941 1.000 866 1.015 1.000 792 713 1.000 1.044 842 1.000 902 915 S.E C.R P 025 022 5.983 6.174 *** *** 112 111 121 10.211 9.948 9.915 *** *** *** 086 084 088 11.008 10.584 10.695 *** *** *** 091 103 9.558 9.831 *** *** 078 075 10.211 9.519 *** *** 109 095 9.588 8.829 *** *** 086 087 10.442 10.572 *** *** Label Appendix 7: Structural results for model 65 Model Fit Summary CMIN Model Default model Saturated model Independence model NPAR 47 210 20 CMIN 254.106 000 2120.200 DF 163 190 P 000 CMIN/DF 1.559 000 11.159 RMR, GFI Model Default model Saturated model Independence model RMR 143 000 727 GFI 921 1.000 413 AGFI 898 PGFI 715 352 374 NFI Delta1 880 1.000 000 RFI rho1 860 IFI Delta2 953 1.000 000 TLI rho2 945 Baseline Comparisons Model Default model Saturated model Independence model 000 000 CFI 953 1.000 000 RMSEA Model Default model Independence model RMSEA 045 192 LO 90 034 184 HI 90 055 199 PCLOSE 779 000 Scalar Estimates (Group number - Default model) Maximum Likelihood Estimates Regression Weights: (Group number - Default model) EE EE QL VI DE AB AB3 < < < < < < < - DA SA EE EE EE EE AB Estimate 2.929 -3.458 093 100 109 073 1.000 S.E .552 598 016 C.R 5.307 -5.780 5.987 P *** *** *** 016 012 6.970 6.166 *** *** Label 81 AB2 AB4 AB1 DE1 DE4 DE3 DE2 DA4 DA3 DA2 QL1 QL3 QL2 SA1 SA4 SA3 VI3 VI4 VI1 < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < - AB AB AB DE DE DE DE DA DA DA QL QL QL SA SA SA VI VI VI Estimate 1.143 1.106 1.198 1.000 944 892 941 1.000 865 1.012 1.000 794 713 1.000 1.043 842 1.000 902 915 S.E .112 111 121 C.R 10.215 9.943 9.911 P *** *** *** 086 084 088 11.010 10.582 10.694 *** *** *** 090 103 9.561 9.825 *** *** 078 075 10.221 9.512 *** *** 109 095 9.590 8.831 *** *** 086 087 10.447 10.576 *** *** Label Covariances: (Group number - Default model) DA < > SA Estimate -.321 S.E .135 C.R -2.379 Correlations: (Group number - Default model) DA < > SA Estimate -.190 P 017 Label Appendix 8: Moderating testing results Model Fit Summary CMIN Model Default model Saturated model Independence model NPAR 69 300 24 CMIN 333.531 000 2287.107 DF 231 276 P 000 CMIN/DF 1.444 000 8.287 RMR, GFI Model Default model Saturated model Independence model RMR 129 000 614 GFI 914 1.000 446 AGFI 888 PGFI 704 398 410 NFI Delta1 854 1.000 000 RFI rho1 826 IFI Delta2 950 1.000 000 TLI rho2 939 Baseline Comparisons Model Default model Saturated model Independence model 000 000 CFI 949 1.000 000 RMSEA Model Default model Independence model RMSEA 040 162 LO 90 030 156 HI 90 049 168 PCLOSE 963 000 Scalar Estimates (Group number - Default model) Maximum Likelihood Estimates Regression Weights: (Group number - Default model) EE EE EE EE EE < < < < < - DA SA SA.CO DA.CO SA.WL Estimate 2.913 -3.237 -1.320 784 600 S.E .580 593 575 573 521 C.R 5.019 -5.455 -2.297 1.369 1.152 P *** *** 022 171 249 Label EE QL VI DE AB AB3 AB2 AB4 AB1 DE1 DE4 DE3 DE2 DA4 DA3 DA2 QL1 QL3 QL2 SA1 SA4 SA3 VI3 VI4 VI1 < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < - DA.WL EE EE EE EE AB AB AB AB DE DE DE DE DA DA DA QL QL QL SA SA SA VI VI VI Estimate 326 096 100 113 077 1.000 1.140 1.101 1.192 1.000 948 900 947 1.000 884 1.004 1.000 794 712 1.000 990 837 1.000 909 919 S.E .495 016 C.R .658 5.991 P 510 *** 016 012 6.998 6.234 *** *** 111 110 120 10.263 9.974 9.936 *** *** *** 086 085 089 10.983 10.605 10.691 *** *** *** 089 100 9.889 10.070 *** *** 078 075 10.234 9.511 *** *** 100 092 9.915 9.102 *** *** 087 087 10.441 10.539 *** *** Label Covariances: (Group number - Default model) DA DA DA DA DA SA SA SA SA SA.CO SA.CO SA.CO DA.CO DA.CO SA.WL < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > SA SA.CO DA.CO SA.WL DA.WL SA.CO DA.CO SA.WL DA.WL DA.CO SA.WL DA.WL SA.WL DA.WL DA.WL Estimate -.320 -.217 -.297 -.057 -.076 -.202 -.203 -.151 -.061 -.241 134 032 036 088 -.140 S.E .137 092 094 089 093 093 093 091 094 064 061 063 061 064 063 Correlations: (Group number - Default model) DA DA DA DA DA SA SA SA SA SA.CO SA.CO SA.CO DA.CO DA.CO SA.WL < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > SA SA.CO DA.CO SA.WL DA.WL SA.CO DA.CO SA.WL DA.WL DA.CO SA.WL DA.WL SA.WL DA.WL DA.WL Estimate -.186 -.164 -.223 -.044 -.056 -.152 -.151 -.114 -.045 -.234 132 030 035 083 -.135 C.R -2.326 -2.361 -3.165 -.639 -.815 -2.189 -2.175 -1.656 -.653 -3.799 2.185 502 584 1.384 -2.222 P 020 018 002 523 415 029 030 098 514 *** 029 616 559 166 026 Label Appendix 9: The answer of interviewing 10 people for the insignificant moderating role of work life balance perception Đối với tôi, work life balance bắt buộc mà công ty áp dụng cho nhân viên, khơng làm ảnh hưởng tới việc gắn kết công ty Đối với tôi, đặc trưng giao dịch viên ngân hàng chịu áp lực cao, làm việc Vì tơi khơng cảm nhận work life balance cơng việc Tuy nhiên tơi hết lịng với cơng việc gắn bó với cơng ty Cơng việc sales phải chịu áp lực doanh số đặc trưng cơng việc Vì vậy, tơi khơng cảm work life balance ảnh hưởng nhiều đến nỗ lực công việc gắ kết với công ty Tôi thường xuyên nhận gọi từ khách hàng vào buổi tối cuối tuần Tuy nhiên tơi nhận thấy đặc trưng công việc dịch vụ khách hàng nỗ lực để đáp ứng nhu cầu khách hàng cách tốt Tôi nghĩ cơng ty có sách nghỉ thai sản, chăm sóc cái, du lịch, chăm sóc sức khỏe, nghỉ phép…Nên điều không ảnh hưởng nhiều đến gắn kết công ty Việc thể cảm xúc đối công việc không bị ảnh hưởng work life balance, mà bị ảnh hưởng chủ yếu tâm trạng Tôi không cảm nhận work life balance cơng việc sales phải gặp khách hàng lúc kể tuần buổi tối Nhưng tơi với cơng việc Tơi quan trọng lương thưởng work life balance công việc Theo tôi, work life balance có bắt buộc công ty Tôi trọng đến kết cơng việc để thăng tiến cơng ty 10 Đặc trưng cơng việc tín dụng tơi gặp khách hàng thường xun, tơi khơng cảm nhận nhiều work life balance ...UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY International School of Business HA THI TRUC MAI EMOTIONAL LABOR, EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AND QUALITY OF LIFE: A RESEARCH ON SERVICE EMPLOYEES MASTER... Discussion Realizing the emotional labor role in the employee engagement and quality of life for service employee, this study tests the impacts of emotional labor on employee engagement, and subsequently,... between emotional labor, employee engagement and quality of life, focusing on the case of service employees in Vietnam In addition, this study fosters emotional regulation theory by testing the negative