The relationships among workvalues, burnout, and

organizational citizenshipbehaviors

A study from hotel front-line serviceemployees in Taiwan

Ying-Wen LiangGraduate Institute of Tourism and Hospitality Management,

Jinwen University of Science and Technology, New Taipei City, Taiwan, ROC

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this research is to identify that both work values and burnout areimportant predictors for promoting organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs). Moreover, thisresearch also seeks to investigate the moderating impact of burnout on the relationships between workvalues and OCBs.

Design/methodology/approach – A total of 310 employee-supervisor dyads of hotel front-lineservice employees in Taiwan were selected as the research participants. The employees were asked toprovide information on the items about work values and burnout, and their supervisors were askedto complete items concerning the OCBs of their subordinates. A confirmatory factor analysis wasconducted to investigate measurement reliability and validity. All hypothesized relationships andmoderating effects were tested using hierarchical regression equations.

Findings – It was found that both work values and burnout are important factors to consider forpromoting OCBs. In addition, the study also proves that burnout as a moderator can decrease thepredictions of the relationship between work values and OCBs.

Research limitations/implications – The study is limited to the context culture and datacollection process.

Practical implications – This research argues that an employee having higher work values mayextend his/her upward striving from in-role behavior to extra-role behavior. However, a diminishedsense of personal accomplishment signifies that this job may no longer offer a personal interest to thepoint that an employee is unwilling to display OCBs.

Originality/value – Findings of the present study suggest that not only both work values andburnout are important factors in influencing OCBs, but also their interaction effect is a key factor ininfluencing OCBs.

Keywords Work values, Burnout, Organizational citizenship behaviors, Extrarole behaviour, Hotels,Employees, Taiwan, Stress

Paper type Research paper

IntroductionOrganizations have contractual arrangements and formal reward systems that aredesigned to ensure that employees engage in behaviors that promote the effectivefunctioning of the organizations. While organizational systems that define the role of

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-6119.htm

Hotel serviceemployees in

Taiwan

251

Received 28 October 2010Revised 1 March 2011

23 April 201131 May 2011

Accepted 6 August 2011

International Journal ofContemporary Hospitality

ManagementVol. 24 No. 2, 2012

pp. 251-268q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0959-6119DOI 10.1108/09596111211206169

each employee are an important element of organizational design, they are insufficientto guarantee the success of an organization (Steffen, 2008). One aspect of interpersonalwork relationships related to taking initiative on the job is the concept oforganizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs), which refer to informal, prosocialbehaviors that employees engage in voluntarily helping others in work(Ensher et al., 2001). Organ (1988) has pointed out the significance of OCBs fororganizational efficiency, effectiveness, innovation, and adaptability within diverseorganizations.

Work values refer to enduring perspectives that guide individuals to evaluate whatis fundamentally right or wrong in the work environment ( Judge and Bretz, 1992).There have been many studies on the construct of work values and how they affect jobbehaviors (Chen and Choi, 2008). Work values are important to a business beingeffective in a dynamic environment, because of their potential relationship with otherwork issues. Of particular interest has been how work values are perceived by workersin the hospitality industry (Wong and Chung, 2003).

Hospitality front-line employees frequently encounter demanding and difficultcustomers, resulting in burnout being a major contributor to this high turnover rate atall levels of related organizations, which has been formally defined as “prolongedresponses to chronic interpersonal stressors on the job” (Maslach, 1998, p. 68). Theconsequences of burnout that have considerable empirical support include adversephysical symptoms, psychological disorders, diminished job performance, desire toleave a job (Kuruuzum et al., 2008), and OCBs (Emmerik et al., 2005).

Previous research has successfully identified many antecedents and consequencesof OCBs as well as moderators of these relationships (see Podsakoff et al., 2000, for areview). Podsakoff et al. (2000) stated that dispositional variables are key antecedentsof OCBs, and Matic (2008) considered that work values represent an individualdispositional variable that affects job behaviors. However, surprisingly little attentionhas been paid to the possible relationship between work values and OCBs. Ourkeyword search (using “values” and “OCBs”) of the last 15 years of publications inmany research databases produced only ten studies on this issue, of which only threestudies used work values as the construct of values. These three studies used differentsets of work values to examine the impact of work values on OCBs. Although there isno single established classification of work values, many empirical studies and theorieshave used intrinsic and extrinsic work values as the components of work values(Hirschi, 2010). Therefore, we believe that examining the effects of intrinsic andextrinsic work values will complement previous research and will increase ourunderstanding of the determinants of OCBs.

OCBs represent one of the most widely studied topics in organizational behaviorresearch in recent years is OCBs (Chahal and Mehta, 2010), and thousands of academicstudies on burnout have been published (Schaufeli et al., 2008). Since burnoutnegatively impacts task performance (Halbesleben and Buckley, 2004), the authorsuspects there is a relationship between burnout and contextual performance(i.e. OCBs). However, there has been little interest in the relationship between burnoutand OCBs (Emmerik et al., 2005). Only a few literatures has demonstrated the linkbetween burnout and OCBs (e.g. Chiu and Tsai, 2006; Emmerik et al., 2005; Yucel, 2008),and some results of these studies are mixed. For example, Emmerik et al. (2005) positedthat emotional exhaustion had not any effect on OCBs, while Chiu and Tsai (2006)

IJCHM24,2

252

proved that emotional exhaustion exerted a negative effect on OCBs. Therefore, afurther study is needed to clarify the ambiguous relationship between burnout andOCBs.

It is possible that both work values and burnout exert significant and simultaneouseffects on OCBs, and thus, for those employees with the same level of work values mayobserve different OCBs due to their different levels of burnout. In other words, burnoutmay moderate the relationships between work values and OCBs. To the author’sknowledge, Yucel (2008) is the only published article to examine among work values,burnout, and OCBs. However, he did not test the moderating effects of burnout.Accordingly, the objectives of this research were threefold:

(1) to identify the established causal relationship between work values and OCBsby using a widely accepted construct of work values;

(2) to clarify the mixed causal relationship between burnout and OCBs; and

(3) to analyze statistically the moderating impact of burnout on the relationshipbetween work values and OCBs.

Literature reviewOrganizational citizenship behaviorsOCBs as specific types of helping behavior can be defined as activities entailing agreater commitment than spontaneous assistance, in which time is given freely tobenefit another person, group, organization, or cause (Wilson, 2000). OCBs are usuallyassociated with social responsibility or communal work, both of which are generallynot associated with monetary payment for the work undertaken (Noon and Blyton,1997). OCBs promote the effective performance of the organization and group(Coyle-Shapiro et al., 2004), which has prompted numerous studies examining theantecedents and consequences of OCBs.

The plethora of literature on OCBs has led to multiple conceptualizations ofdifferent types of OCBs, which in turn has led to confusion with regard to terminology(Steffen, 2008). Podsakoff et al. (2000) suggest that approximately 30 potentiallydifferent dimensions of citizenship behaviors have been considered in the literature.For example, Organ (1988) described the following five categories of OCBs:

(1) Conscientiousness: whereby employees do their in-role works painstakingly andwell beyond the minimum required levels.

(2) Altruism: where employees concern and help others selflessly.

(3) Civic virtue: this suggests that employees concern and participate responsibly inthe political life of the organization.

(4) Sportsmanship: whereby people have proper consideration for fairness, do notcomplain but have positive attitudes.

(5) Courtesy: where people treat others politely and courtly.

Williams and Anderson (1991) used two dimensions (i.e. OCBs-organization andOCBs-individual) to measure the levels of OCBs. OCBs-organization benefit theorganization in general (e.g. adhering to informal rules that have been devised tomaintain order), whereas OCBs-individual immediately benefit specific individuals,thus indirectly contributing to the organization (e.g. helping others who have been

Hotel serviceemployees in

Taiwan

253

absent). Masterson et al. (2000) subsequently categorized OCBs into two distinctdimensions: supervisor-directed OCBs (OCBs beneficial to the supervisor) andorganization-directed OCBs (OCBs beneficial to the organization).

Work valuesWork values are “evaluative standards associated with work or the work environmentby which individuals determine what is ‘right’ or assess the importance of preferences(Does, 1997, p. 228).” It is necessary for organizations to improve their understandingof the work values of their employees, since such work values influence the workoutcomes such as employees’ creativity (Ali and Al-Kazemi, 2005) and job satisfaction(Brown, 2002). Many scales have been developed to measure work value, such as theWork Values Inventory (Super, 1970) and the Work Values Scale (Gomez-Meija, 1986).Work value attributes have been categorized in various ways, including the intrinsic(e.g. achievement) and extrinsic (e.g. financial returns) domains (Zytowski, 1970) andthe social (e.g. making contributions to society) and prestige (e.g. having a prestigiousoccupation) dimensions (Ros et al., 1999).

BurnoutBurnout basically represents a mismatch between what a person wants to do and whatthat person must do, so that it arises when there is significant disharmony between thenature of a person’s job and the characteristics of the person doing the job (Maslachand Leiter, 2005). The most commonly accepted definition of burnout is thethree-component conceptualization used by Maslach (1998), which describes it as“prolonged responses to chronic interpersonal stressors on the job,” and defines theconcept in three dimensions:

(1) Exhaustion: feelings overextended and depleted of one’s emotional and physicalresources.

(2) Cynicism (or depersonalization): negative and uncaring attitudes toward othersand various aspects of the job.

(3) Inefficacy (or reduced accomplishment): deterioration of self-confidence, and alack of achievement and productivity in work.

Focusing on human service jobs such as teachers, Maslach and Jackson (1986)developed the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) to assess the level of burnout. Toaddress a broader set of jobs, Schaufeli et al. (1996) developed the MBI-General Survey(MBI-GS), which includes three burnout dimensions (exhaustion, cynicism, andreduced professional efficacy) that match the three factors of the original MBI(emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and diminished personal accomplishment).

Work values and organizational citizenship behaviorsThere are amount of research and theoretical analyses on OCBs due to its importancein organizational management. For example, Podsakoff et al. (2000) provide a detailedcritical review of the theoretical and empirical literature for both the antecedentsand consequences of OCBs. They proposed that individual dispositionalcharacteristics are key antecedents of OCBs. Chahal and Mehta (2010) also identifiedindividual disposition as a significant antecedent of OCBs. Previous studiesconcerning dispositional variables have focused on personality traits

IJCHM24,2

254

(e.g. Elanain, 2007; Singh and Singh, 2009) and values (e.g. Feather and Rauter, 2004;Jiao and Hardie, 2009; Liu and Cohen, 2010).

Despite the publication of a considerable amount of research on OCBs and itsantecedents every year, little attention has been paid to values and OCBs by academicresearchers. Table I outlines the key studies that have examined the relationshipsbetween values and OCBs since 1995. Most of these studies examined the impact ofcultural values on OCBs. Only three studies have examined the impact of work valueson OCBs. Since work values reflects a correspondence between need and satisfactionfrom work (Matic, 2008), we believe that it is critical to examine the relationshipbetween work values and OCBs.

Burnout and organizational citizenship behaviorsIt seems reasonable to assume that burnout and its dimensions could exert negativeeffects on OCBs. However, as mentioned above, only a few studies have investigatedthe relationships between burnout and OCBs. Table II outlines the key studies thathave examined the relationships between burnout and OCBs since 2003. Some of theirfindings were mixed, for example, Emmerik et al. (2005) found that only reducedpersonal accomplishment exerted a negative effect on OCBs, while Chiu and Tsai (2006)found that both emotional exhaustion and reduced personal accomplishment hadnegative effects.

HypothesesWork values and organizational citizenship behaviorsRyan (2002) investigated the effects of the Protestant work ethic (i.e. hard work,asceticism, independence, and non-leisure) on OCBs (i.e. helping, civic virtue, andsportsmanship). He found that hard work had a positive effect while independence had anegativeeffect on helping.When Featherand Rauter (2004) investigated the relationshipsbetween work values (i.e. influence, variety, and skill utilization) and OCBs, they foundthat skill utilization had a positive effect on OCBs. Values concerning work are connectedto job satisfaction (Martin and Phillips, 1991) and organizational commitment(Putti et al., 1989), both of which are critical antecedents of OCBs (Podsakoff et al., 2000).Therefore, work values may exert a significant positive impact on OCBs.

Intrinsic work values enhance intrinsic career success (i.e. satisfaction with one’sjob and with one’s career), and employees may remain committed and productive whenthey achieve intrinsic career success (Erdogan et al., 2004). Employees with higherintrinsic work values tend to help others who have been absent or who have a heavyworkload, and to protect organizational property and obey informal rules that aredevised to maintain order. Therefore, intrinsic work values may exert a significantpositive impact on OCBs.

Employees with higher extrinsic work values are also willing to demonstrate theirOCBs because these behaviors may lead to greater consumer satisfaction and loyalty,which in turn will result in them being more useful to the company, and thus give themmore stable careers and better pay and job security. Therefore, extrinsic work valuesmay exert a significant positive impact on OCBs. Accordingly, the relationshipbetween work values and OCBs was examined by testing the following hypothesis:

H1. Work values: intrinsic work values (H1a) and extrinsic work values (H1b)have a positive effect on the engagement in OCBs.

Hotel serviceemployees in

Taiwan

255

Author(s) Values/dimensions OCBs/dimensions Results

Moorman andBlakely (1995)

Cultural values/collectivism OCBs/interpersonal helping,individual initiative, personalindustry, loyal boosterism

Collectivism had a positiveeffect on interpersonal helping( * * *) and a negative effectindividual initiative ( * *)

Van Dyne et al.(2000)

Cultural values/collectivism OCBs Collectivism had a positiveeffect on OCBs ( * * *)

Ryan (2002) Protestant work ethic/hardwork, asceticism,independence, and non-leisure

OCBs/helping, civic virtue,and sportsmanship

1. Hard work had a positiveeffect on helping ( * * *)2. Independence had anegative effect on helping ( * *)

Ang et al.(2003)

Cultural values/collectivism,power distance, anduncertainty

OCBs/helping Collectivism, power distance,and uncertainty avoidancehad not any effect on OCBs

Feather andRauter (2004)

Work values/influence,variety, and skill utilization

OCBs Influence ( *) and skillutilization ( * * *) had apositive effect on OCBs

Farh et al.(2007)

Cultural values/powerdistance and traditionality

OCBs/conscientiousness,altruism, and voice

Power distance had a negativeeffect on OCBs ( *)

Yucel (2008) Work values/selfdevelopment, recognition,friendly environment,autonomy, and beinginfluential

OCBs/ civic virtue, altruism,conscientiousness, andsportsmanship

1. Self development had apositive effect on civicvirtue ( * * * *), altruism ( * * * *

), conscientiousness ( * * *),sportsmanship( * * * *), andOCBs ( * * * *)2. Recognition had a positiveeffect on conscientiousness( * *) and OCBs ( *)3. Being influential had apositive effect on civicvirtue ( * * *), altruism ( * * * *),conscientiousness ( * * * *),sportsmanship( * *),and OCBs ( * * * *)

Cohen andKeren (2008)

Cultural values/collectivism,power distance, uncertaintyavoidance, and masculinity

OCBs/conscientiousness,altruism, and civic virtue

1. Collectivism had a positiveeffect on civic virtue ( * *)2. Power distance had anegative effect onconscientiousness ( * * *)3. Masculinity had a negativeeffect on civic virtue ( * *)

Jiao and Hardie(2009)

Cultural values/collectivismand power distance

OCBs/interpersonal OCB,organizational OCB

Collectivism had a positiveeffect on interpersonal OCB( * * *) and organizationalOCB ( * * *)

Liu and Cohen(2010)

Individual values/conformity,tradition, benevolence,universalism, self-direction,stimulation, hedonism,achievement, power, andsecurity

OCBs/altruistic OCB andorganizational OCB

1. Hedonism had a negativeeffect on altruistic OCB ( * *)and organizational OCB ( * *)2. Achievement had anegative effect on altruisticOCB ( * *)

Notes: *p , 0.1; * *p , 0.05; * * *p , 0.01; * * * *p , 0.001

Table I.Key empirical studiesexamining relationshipsbetween values and OCBssince 1995

IJCHM24,2

256

Author(s) Burnout/dimensions OCBs/dimensions Results

Cropanzanoet al. (2003)

Burnout/emotional exhaustion OCBs/organization-directedOCBs, supervisor-directedOCBs

1. Emotional exhaustion had anegative effect onorganization-directed OCBsfor employees working in alarge hospital ( * *)2. Emotional exhaustion had

a negative effect onsupervisor-directed OCBs foremployees working in adiverse number of industriesincluding human service,manufacturing, andfitness ( * *)

Emmerik et al.(2005)

Burnout/emotionalexhaustion, depersonalization,and reduced personalaccomplishment

OCBs Reduced personalaccomplishment had anegative effect on OCBs ( * *)

Chiu and Tsai(2006)

Burnout/ emotionalexhaustion, depersonalization,and diminished personalaccomplishment

OCBs Emotional exhaustion ( *) anddiminished personalaccomplishment ( * * *) had anegative effect on OCBs

Yucel (2008) Burnout/emotionalexhaustion, isolation, anddiminished selfaccomplishment

OCBs/civic virtue, altruism,conscientiousness, andsportsmanship

Diminished self-accomplishment had anegative effect on altruism ( *)

Schepman andZarate (2008)

Burnout/emotionalexhaustion, depersonalization,and reduced personalaccomplishment

OCBs/civic virtue, altruism,conscientiousness,interpersonal harmony,protecting company resources,sportsmanship, and courtesy

1. Emotional exhaustion isnegatively correlated withcivic virtue ( *), interpersonalharmony ( *), protectingcompany resources ( *),sportsmanship ( *), and OCBs( *) and is positively correlatedwith altruism ( * *)2. Depersonalization isnegatively correlated withcivic virtue ( *), interpersonalharmony ( *), protectingcompany resources ( *), andsportsmanship ( *) and ispositively correlated withaltruism ( * *)3. Reduced personalaccomplishment is negativelycorrelated with civic virtue ( *)and is positively correlatedwith altruism ( * *)4. Burnout is negativelycorrelated with civic virtue ( *),interpersonal harmony ( * *),protecting company resources( * *), sportsmanship ( *), andOCBs ( * *) and is positivelycorrelated with altruism ( * *)

Notes: *p , 0.05; * *p , 0.01; * * *p , 0.001

Table II.Key empirical studies

examining relationshipsbetween burnout and

OCBs since 2003

Hotel serviceemployees in

Taiwan

257

Burnout and organizational citizenship behaviorsBurnout is a serious condition with recognizable antecedents that can lead to costlyand dangerous consequences for organizations (Maslach and Leiter, 2008). Employeeswho with a greater degree of burnout are less willing to display OCBs due to theirphysical, emotional, and mental exhaustion. Schepman and Zarate (2008) showed thatthere is a negative correlation between burnout and OCBs, with burnout exerting anegative effect on the engagement in OCBs.

Employees with a greater workload can experience emotional exhaustion (Maslachand Leiter, 1997), and then lack of motivation to perform OCBs. Cropanzano et al. (2003)and Chiu and Tsai (2006) found that emotional exhaustion exerts a negative effect onOCBs. Therefore, emotional exhaustion may exert a negative effect on the engagementin OCBs. Maslach and Leiter (1997) reported that burnout can result fromreward-domain mismatch, whereby a person is not awarded appropriately for thework performed. This lack of recognition leads to cynicism and reduced personalaccomplishment, since it devalues both the work and the worker. Employees who arecynical will lack the motivation to demonstrate OCBs, as will those who possess areduced sense of personal accomplishment. In addition, Emmerik et al. (2005) and Chiuand Tsai (2006) found that reduced personal accomplishment exerted a negative effecton OCBs. Yucel (2008) suggests that diminished self-accomplishment has a negativeeffect on altruism. Accordingly, the relationship between burnout and OCBs wasexamined by testing the following hypothesis:

H2. Burnout: emotional exhaustion (H2a), cynicism (H2b), and reduced personalaccomplishment (H2c) exert a negative effect on the engagement in OCBs.

Moderating effects of burnoutWhen an employee has higher work values and lower burnout, the interaction betweenwork values and burnout will have a greater influence on the engagement in OCBs.Thus, employees who experience a lower degree of burnout will exert a greaterinfluence on the engagement in OCBs (for a constant work value). This is due to theengagement in OCBs being conditioned not only by work values but also by the level ofburnout experienced by the employee. Likewise, the above-mentioned argument aboutburnout also applies to the three dimensions of burnout. Accordingly, the followinghypothesis was proposed and tested:

H3. The positive relationship between work values and the engagement in OCBsis weaker in the presence of a greater degree of burnout, which is the degree ofemotional exhaustion (H3a), cynicism (H3b), and reduced personalaccomplishment (H3c) experienced by the employee.

In sum, the causal relationships between work values, burnout, and OCBs wereexamined, and the structural framework for this study is presented in Figure 1.

MethodologySample selection and data collectionHotel work is labor-intensive and involves significant face-to-face and voice-to-voicecontact between employees and guests. Employees in the hospitality industry are oftensubjected to antisocial working hours (Karatepe et al., 2009), relatively low wages,heavy workloads, long working hours, and time pressures (Kuruuzum et al., 2008).

IJCHM24,2

258

These stressors are liable to culminate in burnout and to reduce their motivation toperform OCBs. Accordingly, hotel front-line service employees in Taiwan wereselected as the research participants. To generate samples, the author contacted thehuman resources (HR) managers of 30 hotels from a list provided by the EmployerAssociation of Hotel and Restaurants to seek their willingness to participate in thisstudy. The HR managers of the 14 hotels that agreed to provide lists of front-lineemployees, and the name of the supervisor (i.e. the manager in each department) foreach employee. The number of listed employees per hotel ranged from eight to 50, witha median of 22. A convenience sample of respondents was chosen that comprised all ofthe front-line employees of these 14 target hotels. Data were collected between July andAugust, 2010. The employees were asked to provide information on the items aboutwork values and burnout, and their supervisors were asked to complete itemsconcerning the OCBs of their subordinates. The questionnaires clearly stated that theanonymity of the respondents would be guaranteed. From a total of 310employee-supervisor dyads provided by the HR managers, usable data werecollected for 260 dyads (46 supervisors and 260 employees). Of the employeeparticipants, 61.2 percent were women, the mean age was 29.6 years, 63.4 percent weresingle, the mean education duration was 14.2 years, and the mean organizationaltenure was 5.6 years.

MeasurementWork values were assessed using a measurement instrument adapted from de Vanusand McAllister (1991) that comprised two dimensions: intrinsic work values andextrinsic work values. Each dimension was measured by five items, and so the workvalues construct was assessed by a total of ten items. Respondents were asked toindicate their levels of agreement with each item of work values on a five-point Likertscale that ranged from “strongly disagree” (score of 1) to “strongly agree” (score of 5).

OCBs were assessed using an instrument adapted from Williams and Anderson(1991). Two classes of OCB were measured:

Figure 1.Conceptual framework

Hotel serviceemployees in

Taiwan

259

(1) those that have a specific individual as the target (OCBs-individual); and

(2) along that focus on primarily benefiting the organization (OCBs-organization).

These were evaluated using seven and six items, respectively, and thus OCBs wereassessed by a total of 13 items. Respondents were asked to indicate their levels ofagreement with each OCB item on a five-point Likert scale that ranged from “stronglydisagree” (score of 1) to “strongly agree” (score of 5). In order to reduce thecommon-method bias, the scales of Williams and Anderson (1991) were adapted tomeasure the supervisor’s perception of the level of OCB of his/her subordinates.

Three subscales of the MBI-GS (Schaufeli et al., 1996) were used to measure burnout:the five-item Emotional Exhaustion Subscale (EES; feeling drained of emotion andfatigued), the four-item Cynicism Subscale (CS; feeling detached from one’s emotionsand from other people), and the seven-item reduced Professional Efficacy Subscale(PES; characterized by a loss of efficiency and capability, low morale, and inability tocopy).

Thus, in total 16 items were used for the MBI-GS evaluation, with a high degree ofburnout being indicated by elevated EES and CS scores and depressed PES scores.Respondents were asked to indicate their feelings regarding each item of burnout on afive-point Likert scale, as follows: “never feel like this” (score of 1), “seldom feel likethis” (score of 2), “occasionally feel like this” (score of 3), “often feel like this” (score of4), and “almost always feel like this” (score of 5). The reduced-PES scores were derivedfrom an inverted version of the PES, and ranged from “never feel like this” (score of 5)to “almost always feel like this” (score of 1). The total burnout score was calculated bysumming the EES, CS, and reduced-PES scores.

Measurement reliability and validity analysisA confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to investigate measurement reliabilityand validity. This study specified the measurement model as described in Table III,including two composite indicators of work values, two composite indicators of OCBs,and three composite indicators of burnout. The goodness-of-fit parameters were asfollows: x2 ¼ 1742:40, df ¼ 660, x2=df ¼ 2:64, GFI ¼ 0.93, AGFI ¼ 0.91,RMSEA ¼ 0.05, NFI ¼ 0.92, and NNFI ¼ 0.94. The most important index, x2=df,was less than 3.00, RMSEA was equal to 0.05, and GFI, AGFI, NFI, and NNFI were alllarger than 0.90, indicating acceptable reliability.

Table III indicates that all of the measures were found to be reasonably reliable,with Cronbach’s a values greater than 0.70 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). Specifically, the CRranged between 0.80 and 0.92, which conformed to the criteria for internal consistency(Hair et al., 1998).

Convergent validity is present when the proportion of average variance extracted(AVE) exceeds 0.5. Discriminant validity is present when the proportion of AVE ineach dimension exceeds the square of the coefficient, representing its correlation withother dimensions (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The maximum squared correlation in allpairs (0.652) was smaller than the minimum AVE (0.53), which supports the presence ofconvergent and discriminant validity. Overall, it can be concluded that themeasurement model exhibited an acceptable goodness of fit, reliability, and validity.

IJCHM24,2

260

Dimensions and items Factor loading t-value AVE CR Cronbach’s a

Intrinsic work values 0.61 0.88 0.871. Opportunity to use initiative 0.82 * 3.832. Achieve something 0.77 * 3.673. Responsibility 0.75 * 2.594. Meet one’s abilities 0.80 * 3.905. Interesting work 0.77 * 3.88

Extrinsic work values 0.53 0.84 0.841. Generous holidays 0.82 * 4.682. Good hours 0.73 * 3.543. Not too much pressure 0.67 * 3.414. Good pay 0.73 * 3.375. Good job security 0.66 * 2.05

OCB-individual 0.55 0.82 0.821. Helps others who have been absent 0.75 * 3.292. Helps others who have heavy workloads 0.72 * 3.283. Assists supervisor with his/her work (when not been asked) 0.73 * 3.144. Takes time to listen to co-worker’s problems and worries 0.67 * 2.335. Goes out of way to help new employees 0.65 * 2.426. Takes a personal interest other employees 0.63 * 2.817. Passes along information to co-workers 0.65 * 2.09

OCB-organization 0.54 0.80 0.801. Attendance at work is above the norm 0.84 * 3.632. Gives advance notice when unable to come to work 0.74 * 2.253. Takes undeserved work breaks (R) 0.55 * 1.974. Complains about insignificant things at work (R)a 0.27 (0.98)5. Conserves and protects organizational property 0.73 * (2.85)6. Adheres to informal rules devised to maintain order 0.77 * (2.78)

Emotional exhaustion 0.67 0.91 0.901.I feel emotionally drained from my work 0.77 * 2.222. I feel used up at the end of the work day 0.83 * 4.293. I feel burned out from my work 0.85 * 3.524. I feel tired when I get up in the morning and have to face

another day on the job 0.85 * 3.345. Working all day is really a strain for me 0.80 * 2.37

Cynicism 0.74 0.92 0.901. I have become more cynical about whether my work

contributes anything 0.85 * 3.662. I have become less interested in my work since I started

this job 0.86 * 3.193. I have become less enthusiastic about my work 0.85 * 3.694. I doubt the significance of my work 0.90 * 4.47

Professional efficacy 0.57 0.88 0.871. At my work, I feel confident that I am effective at getting

things done 0.79 * 3.392. I can effectively solve the problems that I arise in my work 0.81 * 4.933. In my opinion, I am good at my work 0.61 * 1.984. I feel I am making an effective contribution to what thisorganization does 0.75 * 2.015. I feel exhilarated when I accomplish something worthwhile in

my job 0.79 * 2.246. I have accomplished many worthwhile things in this job 0.80 * 3.12

Notes: aItem erased due to a factor loading (standardized loading) of less than 0.4 (and not significant); *p , 0.01; R meansreverse-scored item

Table III.Confirmatory factor

analysis of dimensionsand items

Hotel serviceemployees in

Taiwan

261

Analysis and resultsResults of hypotheses testingAll hypothesized relationships and moderating effects were tested using hierarchicalregression equations. Six models were assessed in a step-by-step manner to testhypotheses H1, H2, and H3. First, following estimation of model 1, work values wereregressed on OCBs to test hypothesis H1. It was found that work values had asignificant positive impact on OCBs (b ¼ 0:555, p , 0.01, R 2 ¼ 0:308, adjustedR 2 ¼ 0:306, and F ¼ 170:633). Since multidimensional measures provide moreinformation than unidimensional scales and offer more insight into tested hypothesesand managerial implications (Tsaur and Liang, 2008), detailed analyses were thenperformed from the perspective of multidimensional measures. Second, with model 2,OCBs were regressed on two components of work values to retest hypothesis H1. Theintrinsic (b ¼ 0:412, p , 0.01) and extrinsic (b ¼ 0:229, p , 0.01) work values werefound to have a significant positive impact on OCBs (R 2 ¼ 0:318, adjusted R 2 ¼ 0:314,and F ¼ 89:100). Thus, hypothesis H1 was supported.

Third, with model 3, OCBs were regressed on burnout to test hypothesis H2. It wasfound that burnout had a significant negative impact on OCBs (b ¼ 20:385, p , 0:01,R 2 ¼ 0:183, adjusted R 2 ¼ 0:181, and F ¼ 85:835). Again, to investigate therelationships from the perspective of multidimensional measures, three componentsof burnout were regressed on OCBs in model 4 to retest hypothesis H2. It was foundthat emotional exhaustion (b ¼ 20:445, p , 0:01), cynicism (b ¼ 20:212, p , 0:05),and reduced professional efficacy (b ¼ 20:335, p , 0:01) had a significant negativeimpact on OCBs (R 2 ¼ 0:192, adjusted R 2 ¼ 0:190, and F ¼ 46:803). Thus, hypothesisH2 was supported. Subsequently, work values, burnout, and the product of workvalues and burnout were incorporated in the regression model to implement model 5.The product of work values and burnout had a significant negative impact on OCBs(b ¼ 20:255, p , 0:01, R 2 ¼ 0:407, adjusted R 2 ¼ 0:404, DR 2 ¼ 0:098, andF ¼ 77:199), supporting the hypothesized interaction effects. Finally, the products ofwork values and three components of burnout were used as the moderating terms inthe regression model to implement model 6. The product of work values and emotionalexhaustion (b ¼ 20:279, p , 0:01), cynicism (b ¼ 20:183, p , 0:05), and reducedprofessional efficacy (b ¼ 20:235, p , 0:05) had a significant negative impact onOCBs (R 2 ¼ 0:418, adjusted R 2 ¼ 0:414, DR 2 ¼ 0:100, and F ¼ 92:346), supportingthe hypothesized interaction effects. The findings of models 5 and 6 suggest thatburnout, emotional exhaustion, and cynicism reduce the impact of work values onOCBs, while professional efficacy strengthens it. Thus, hypothesis H3 was supported.The findings for all of the models predicting OCBs are summarized in Table IV.

DiscussionIndividual depositional characteristics as well as work-specific variables should betaken into consideration when studying OCBs. The findings of this study suggest thatboth work values and burnout are important factors to consider when promotingOCBs. In addition, it was also found that burnout and its three dimensions aremoderators that can decrease the predictions and explanations of the theoreticalrelationship between work values and OCBs.

IJCHM24,2

262

Relationship between work values and OCBsWork values are important factors in determining behavior and choices. The presentresearch establishes the concept that work values impact significantly and positivelyon OCBs. One possible explanation for this finding is that an employee with higherwork values may extend his/her upward striving and pride in work from an intrarolebehavior to an extrarole behavior. Furthermore, this research also shows that bothintrinsic and extrinsic work values have a significant positive impact on OCBs, whichindicates that both satisfaction with one’s overall job experience and actualadvancements in job level and salary will promote the performance of extrarolebehaviors by employees. It may thus be posited that OCBs are undertaken byindividuals when they see a valued meaningful outcome, when they believe theircontributions to be valued and encouraged, and when the organizational proceduresare perceived as being fair.

Relationship between burnout and OCBsAs expected, this study found that employee burnout plays a critical a role in thedevelopment of OCBs, implying that OCBs are doomed if burnout is not managedappropriately. Therefore, to increase employees’ OCBs, managers may minimize theirburnout by employing managerial strategies such as organizational support and careeradvancement. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated herein that emotional exhaustionhas a significant negative impact on OCBs. This indicates that exhausted employeeswill be too tired to invest time and effort in activities other than what their workalready requires them to do. In addition, employees are inclined to resent anorganization that overworks them to the point of emotional exhaustion, causing themto perceive the organization’s actions as unfair that would lead to fewer OCBs.

This study also showed that cynicism and reduced professional efficacy exertsignificant negative impacts on OCBs respectively. One plausible explanation for thisnegative effect of reduced personal accomplishment is that a diminished sense ofpersonal accomplishment signifies that this job may no longer offer a personalchallenge or personal interest to the point that an employee is unwilling to displayOCBs.

Moderating effects of burnout and its dimensionsThe present study proposed and confirmed the concept that the moderating effects ofburnout and its dimensions decrease the predictions and explanations of the theoreticalrelationship between work values and OCBs. Since burnout commonly occurs amongemployees who are unable to cope with extensive demands on their energy, time, andresources, and among employees whose work requires contact with consumers, itminimizes the effects that work values exert on OCBs. In other words, the strength ofthe positive relationship between work values and OCBs will be weakened by burnout.

ConclusionsThe current study makes three significant contributions to knowledge and practice inthis field. First, there is only sparse literature concerning the relationships betweenwork values and OCBs, and the present article significantly enriches ourunderstanding of this issue. Furthermore, the external validity of data in theliterature may be limited by the constructs of work values being too narrow to be

Hotel serviceemployees in

Taiwan

263

generalized to other areas. The widely accepted construct of work values used inthe present article has a higher external validity. Second, this study helps to resolve theambiguity regarding the relationships between burnout and OCBs in the literature.Previous studies examining the relationships between burnout and OCBs haveproduced variable results, while those of the present study confirm that burnout and itsdimensions have negative impacts on OCBs for hotel front-line service employees inTaiwan, both theoretically and statistically. Finally, the findings of the present studysuggest not only that both work values and burnout are important factors influencingOCBs, but also that their interaction effect is a key factor influencing OCBs. Thissuggestion has several managerial implications for the promotion of OCBs, asexplained below.

Managerial implicationsOrganizations wanting to encourage OCBs should find ways to attract, select, andretain employees who have higher work values. They should then construct anorganizational system that encourages their employees to increase their work valuesby using managerial policies such as providing equitable rewards, supportive workingconditions, and mentally challenging work. According to Attraction-Selection-Attritiontheory, individuals choose to work for organizations that exhibit traits and values thatare similar to their own. A better fit of the work values between individuals andorganizations is likely to enhance job satisfaction and performance, and to encourageOCBs. In addition, supportive managerial relationships, shared organizational goals,and group decision-making can help employees to reduce their level of burnout.

VariablesModel 1(Std b)

Model 2(Std b)

Model 3(Std b)

Model 4(Std b)

Model 5(Std b)

Model 6(Std b)

Independent variablesWork values 0.555 * * 0.513 * * 0.509 * *

Intrinsic work values 0.412 * *

Extrinsic work values 0.229 * *

ModeratorsBurnout 20.385 * * 20.296 * *

Emotional exhaustion 20.445 * * 20.412 * *

Cynicism 20.212 * 20.190 *

Reduced professional efficacy 20.335 * * 20.285 * *

Moderating termsWork values £ burnout 20.255 * *

Work values £ emotionalexhaustion 20.279 * *

Work values £ cynicism 20.183 *

Work values £ reducedprofessional efficacy 20.235 *

R 2 0.308 0.318 0.183 0.192 0.407 0.418Adjusted R 2 0.306 0.314 0.181 0.190 0.404 0.414DR 2 0.098 0.100F 170.633 89.100 85.835 46.803 77.199 92.346

Notes: *p , 0.05; * *p , 0.01

Table IV.Results for predictingorganizational citizenshipbehavior

IJCHM24,2

264

Finally, managers wanting to promote OCBs may also employ methods that arespecifically targeted to reduce burnout. Managers can adopt stress managementmechanisms to mitigate emotional exhaustion and cynicism, such as reduced roleconflicts and the creation of an agreeable working atmosphere, and to stimulatepersonal accomplishment by providing frequent feedback on job performance and thevalue of the work performed by employees.

Research limitations and future researchThis study also offers several avenues for future research. First, although the authorexplored causality, this can only be fully tested using data collected at different timepoints. Therefore, researchers could consider using longitudinal investigations todemonstrate the causal relationships reported here. Next, although it is obvious andreasonable that burnout exerts significant negative impacts on OCBs, the relationshipbetween cynicism and OCBs remains to be elucidated. Future research should retestand clarify this relationship. Then, the use of convenience sampling can introduceunknown systematic and variable errors (Davis, 2000). In addition, our data wereobtained from Taiwan, whose society is heavily influenced by Confucianism.Confucianism emphasizes diligence and responsibility values, which may promoteOCBs due to the inherent work values. Compared with the Taiwanese, WesternEuropeans focus more on the importance of leisure. It is unclear whether our findingsare generalizable to non-Confucian societies such as Western Europe. Further researchshould encompass more cultures, which may establish a more rigorous understandingof the causal relationship among work values, burnout, and OCBs.

References

Ali, A.J. and Al-Kazemi, A. (2005), “The Kuwaiti manager: work values and orientations”, Journalof Business Ethics, Vol. 60, pp. 63-73.

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L. and Begley, T.M. (2003), “The employment relationships of foreignworkers versus local employees: a field study of organizational justice, job satisfaction,performance, and OCB”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 24, pp. 561-83.

Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of structural equation models”, Academy ofMarketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 76-94.

Brown, D. (2002), “The role of work and cultural values in occupational choice, satisfaction, andsuccess: a theoretical statement”, Journal of Counseling & Development, Vol. 80, pp. 48-55.

Chahal, H. and Mehta, S. (2010), “Antecedents and consequences of organizational citizenshipbehaviour (OCB): a conceptual framework in preference to health care sector”, Journal ofServices Research, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 25-44.

Chen, P.-J. and Choi, Y. (2008), “Generational differences in work values: a study of hospitalitymanagement”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 595-615.

Chiu, S.-F. and Tsai, M.-C. (2006), “Relationships among burnout, job involvement, andorganizational citizenship behavior”, The Journal of Psychology, Vol. 140 No. 6, pp. 517-30.

Cohen, A. and Keren, D. (2008), “Organizational commitment and cultural values: examiningtheir relationship and their mutual effect on in-role performance and organizationalcitizenship behavior”, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 33, pp. 425-52.

Hotel serviceemployees in

Taiwan

265

Coyle-Shapiro, J.A.-M., Kessler, I. and Purcell, J. (2004), “Exploring organizationally directedcitizenship behavior: reciprocity or ‘it’s my job’?”, Journal of Management Studies,Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 85-106.

Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D.E. and Byrne, Z.S. (2003), “The relationship of emotional exhaustion towork attitude, job performance, and organizational citizenship behavior”, Journal ofApplied Psychology, Vol. 88, pp. 160-9.

Davis, D. (2000), Business Research for Decision Making, Duxbury, Pacific Grove, CA.

de Vanus, D. and McAllister, I. (1991), “Gender and work orientation”, Work and Occupations,Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 72-94.

Does, J.J. (1997), “Work values: an integrative framework and illustrative application toorganizational socialization”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,Vol. 70 No. 3, pp. 219-40.

Elanain, H.M.A. (2007), “The five-factor model of personality and organizational citizenshipbehavior in United Arab Emirates”, SAM Advanced Management Journal, Vol. 72 No. 3,pp. 47-57.

Emmerik, I.H.V., Jawahar, I.A. and Stone, T.H. (2005), “Associations among altruism, burnoutdimensions, and organizational citizenship behavior”, Work and Stress, Vol. 19 No. 1,pp. 93-100.

Ensher, E.A., Grant-Vallone, E.J. and Donaldson, S.I. (2001), “Effects of perceived discrimation onjob satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behavior, andgrievances”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 53-72.

Erdogan, B., Kraimer, M.L. and Lidan, R.C. (2004), “Work values congruence and intrinsic careersuccess: the compensatory roles of leader-member exchange and perceived organizationalsupport”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 305-32.

Farh, J.L., Hackett, R.D. and Liang, J. (2007), “Individual-level cultural values as moderators ofperceived organizational support-employee outcomes relationships in China: comparingthe effects of power distance and traditionality”, Academy of Management Journal,Vol. 50, pp. 715-29.

Feather, N.T. and Rauter, K.A. (2004), “Organizational citizenship behaviours in relation to jobstatus, job insecurity, organizational commitment and identification, job satisfaction andwork values”, Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, Vol. 77 No. 1, pp. 81-94.

Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. (1981), “Evaluating structure equations models with unobservablevariables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.

Gomez-Meija, L.R. (1986), “The cross-cultural structure of task-related and contextualconstructs”, Journal of Psychology, Vol. 120, pp. 5-19.

Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis,Prentice Hall, London.

Halbesleben, J.R.B. and Buckley, M.R. (2004), “Burnout in organization life”, Journal ofManagement, Vol. 30, pp. 859-79.

Hirschi, A. (2010), “Positive adolescent career development: the role of intrinsic and extrinsicwork values”, The Career Development Quarterly, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 276-87.

Jiao, C. and Hardie, T. (2009), “Nationality, cultural values and the relative importance of taskperformance and organizational citizenship behaviour in performance evaluationdecisions”, Journal of Comparative International Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 17-28.

Judge, T.A. and Bretz, R.D. (1992), “Effects of work values on job choice decisions”, Journal ofApplied Psychology, Vol. 77 No. 3, pp. 261-71.

IJCHM24,2

266

Karatepe, O.M., Yorganci, I. and Haktanir, M. (2009), “Outcomes of customer verbal aggressionamong hotel employees”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 713-33.

Kuruuzum, A., Anafarta, N. and Irmak, S. (2008), “Predictors of burnout among middle managersin the Turkish hospitality industry”, International Journal of Contemporary HospitalityManagement, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 186-98.

Liu, Y. and Cohen, A. (2010), “Values, commitment, and OCB among Chinese employees”,International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 493-506.

Martin, C.L. and Phillips, W.G. (1991), “Historical, descriptive and strategic perspective on theconstruct of product commitment”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 53-60.

Maslach, C. (1998), “Theories of organizational stress”, in Cooper, C.L. (Ed.), A MultidimensionalTheory of Burnout, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 68-85.

Maslach, C. and Jackson, S.E. (1986), Maslach Burnout Inventory Manual, ConsultingPsychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.

Maslach, C. and Leiter, M.P. (1997), The Truth about Burnout, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Maslach, C. and Leiter, M.P. (2005), “Stress and burnout: the critical research”, in Cooper, C.L.(Ed.), Handbook of Stress Medicine and Health, CRC Press, Lancaster, pp. 155-72.

Maslach, C. and Leiter, M.P. (2008), “Early predictors of job burnout and engagement”, Journal ofApplied Psychology, Vol. 93 No. 3, pp. 498-512.

Masterson, S.S., Lewis, K., Goldman, B.M. and Taylor, M.S. (2000), “Integrating justice and socialexchange: the differing effects of fair procedures and treatment on work relationships”,Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 738-48.

Matic, J. (2008), “Cultural differences in employee work values and their implications formanagement”, Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 93-104.

Moorman, R.H. and Blakely, G.L. (1995), “Individualism-collectivism as an individual differencepredictor of organizational citizenship behavior”, Journal of Organizational Behavior,Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 127-42.

Noon, M. and Blyton, P. (1997), The Realities of Work, Macmillan, Houndmills.

Organ, D.W. (1988), Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Good Soldier Syndrome, LexingtonBooks, Lexington, MA.

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Pain, J.B. and Bachrach, D.G. (2000), “Organizationalcitizenship behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature andsuggestions for future research”, Journal of Management, Vol. 26, pp. 513-63.

Putti, J.M., Aryee, S. and Liang, T.K. (1989), “Work values and organizational commitment: astudy in the Asian context”, Human Relations, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 275-88.

Ros, M., Schwartz, S. and Surkiss, S. (1999), “Basic individual values, work values, and themeaning of work”, Applied Psychology – An International Review, Vol. 48, pp. 49-71.

Ryan, J.J. (2002), “Work values and organizational citizenship behaviors: values that work foremployees and organizations”, Journal of Business & Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 123-32.

Schaufeli, W.B., Leiter, M.P. and Maslach, C. (2008), “Burnout: 35 years of research and practice”,Career Development International, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 204-20.

Schaufeli, W.B., Leiter, M.P., Maslach, C. and Jackson, S.E. (1996), “The Maslach burnoutinventory: general survey (MBI-GS)”, in Maslach, C., Jackson, S.E. and Leiter, M.P. (Eds),Maslach Burnout Inventory Manual, 3rd ed., Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto,CA, pp. 19-26.

Hotel serviceemployees in

Taiwan

267

Schepman, B.S. and Zarate, M.A. (2008), “The relationship between burnout, negative affectivityand organizational citizenship behavior for human services employees”, InternationalJournal of Humanities and Social Sciences, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 216-21.

Singh, A.K. and Singh, A.P. (2009), “Does personality predict organisational citizenshipbehaviour among managerial personnel”, Journal of the Indian Academy of AppliedPsychology, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 291-8.

Steffen, R. (2008), “Does bureaucracy kill individual initiative? The impact of structure onorganizational citizenship behavior in the hospitality industry”, International Journal ofHospitality Management, Vol. 27, pp. 179-86.

Super, D.E. (1970), Work Values Inventory, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.

Tsaur, S.-H. and Liang, Y.-W. (2008), “Serious leisure and recreation specialization”, LeisureSciences, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 325-41.

Van Dyne, L., Vandewalle, D., Kostova, T., Latham, M.E. and Cummings, L.L. (2000),“Collectivism, propensity to trust and self-esteem as predictors of organizationalcitizenship in a non-work setting”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 21, pp. 3-23.

Williams, L.J. and Anderson, S.E. (1991), “Job satisfaction and organizational commitment aspredictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors”, Journal of Management,Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 601-17.

Wilson, J. (2000), “Volunteering”, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 26, pp. 215-40.

Wong, C. and Chung, K. (2003), “Work values of Chinese food service managers”, InternationalJournal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 66-75.

Yucel, C. (2008), “Teacher burnout and organizational citizenship behavior in Turkishelementary schools”, Educational Planning, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 27-43.

Zytowski, D.G. (1970), “The concept of work values”, Vocational Guidance Quarterly,Vol. 18, pp. 176-86.

Corresponding authorYing-Wen Liang can be contacted at: stliang@ms4.hinet.net

IJCHM24,2

268

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints