The Mediating Role of Organizational Culture on the Relationship between Employee Performance and Antecedents in the Hotel Sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Hotel managers face more risks and complexity in their work environment compared to their manufacturing firms' counterparts owing the unique service characteristic offered by hotels. The hotel managements' budgetary participation and their leadership styles, commitment quality management practices (QMPs) in terms of communications can all assist them in tackling the uncertain and risky environment for better performance of jobs. This article defined and measured leadership style, organizational commitment, quality management practices (QMPs) and their impact on organizational performance, and examined the moderating role of organizational culture on the above relationship. The article conducted an analysis of the empirical studies and models that related leadership style, organizational commitment, quality management practices (QMPs), organizational culture and performance. It primarily aimed to illustrate the conceptualization, measurement and examination of the different concepts. Following the analysis of literature, the findings showed that leadership style, organizational commitment, quality management practices (QMPs) and organizational culture significantly effects various hotel processes, employees and performance. The article also provided a description of the various dimensions of the leadership style and it found that with committed employees with norms and values consistent to those of the organization, the performance of the hotels can increase towards achieving it goals. This article suggests that the balanced scorecard (BSC) be used as a tool to measure performance in the performance management system. It also suggests that future studies focus in this area to shed light on the nature and the ability of variables to influence hotel performance. Hotel management and leaders are suggested to form robust quality management practices within the hotels to enhance its overall performance.Â
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".