@2013Discussion and Analysis. Despite continuous operation, Harbour Inn has had a higher level of staff turnover (considered as way above the industry level) recently. This is highlighted in the management style and the manner in which employee expectations are addressed. Complaints raised include coaching problems, lack of incentives and rewards, poor workplace relations, and unfulfilled promises. These problems have a significant impact on the quality service delivery within an organization and the entire industry. Quality service delivery within the hospitality industry reflects a growing focus on the intangibles and the already styled “human factor”.
As such therefore, human resources are key players in the execution of the business strategy and the realization of the business goals, objectives, and competitive advantage. Harbour Inn is composed of diverse workforce in terms of gender and nationality. During a high employee turnover rate, like in the case of the Harbour Inn hotel, there is a tremendous loss to the business in terms of skills and costs. Without analysis of the primary causes of such a trend and the subsequent implementation of necessary amendments, the primary factor of the production in the hotel (employees) will still remain a huge challenge to the hotel.
Loi, et al. (2006) points out that employee turnover, like in the case of Harbour Inn, presents a significant problem to any organization with reference to talent loss, additional staffing and coaching costs. This is also a reflection of turnovers in the hospitality sector highlighted by the Bureau of Labour Statistics. It indicates that the overall voluntary turnover in the country increased from previous 22 percent to an annual average of 23 percent, thereby making a slight increase.
The greatest turnover is dominated by accommodation and the sector of food service. Same sectors as well realized the greatest turnover growth recently while the hospitality industry increased by 5 percent. Such turnover costs raise business expenses by a significant amount of dollars. Such costs include the staffing and coaching costs and the productivity loss. 25 percent of the standard employ salary is frequently quoted by the industry experts as the turnover cost conservative estimate (http: //www. nobscot. com/library/retention. cfm). According to Loi, et al. (2006), previous research proposes that the organizational commitment of the employees and their intention to quit the employment are two crucial turnover antecedents.
Samad (2006) argued that the most effective method of reducing the actual rate of turnover lies in the identification of factors determining the turnover intentions. Conway & Briner, (2005) also highlight that researchers studying both the conceptual and the empirical turnover models have strongly supported the behavioural intentions (leaving intention) affecting the very behaviour (turnover). Organizational commitment is considered as among the most vital predictors of both the turnover and the intention of quitting, as in Harbour Inn.
According to Caykoylu et al. (2007) there is a realization that highly committed employees had little intent of leaving in comparison to the less committed employees. Loi, et al. (2006) also analysed the relationship existing in three attitudinal turnover antecedents; turnover intention, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction. Upon examining their whole model to verify the relationship existent in the three attitudinal antecedents, their discovery was that the organizational commitment considerably predicted the turnover intention while job satisfaction was ineffective to the turnover intention. This finding therefore implies that the committed employees have little intention of abandoning their employers.