The International Journal of Human Resource Management,

Vol. 19, No. 9, September 2008, 1667–1682

What role does culture play? A look at motivation and job satisfaction
among hotel workers in Brazil
Sally Sledgea*, Angela K. Milesb and Samuel Coppagec
a
Sorrell College of Business, Troy University, Norfolk, USA; bSchool of Business and Economics, North
Carolina A and T State University, Greensboro, USA; cCollege of Business and Public Administration, Old
Dominion University, Norfolk, USA
Job satisfaction has been associated with positive organizational outcomes such as increased
employee productivity, higher innovation and reduced turnover, all of which are linked to
improved firm performance. Motivation is considered to be a primary determinant of job
satisfaction. Yet little research has focused on the links between motivation, job satisfaction
and the impact of culture in the workplace. This qualitative research uses Herzberg’s
Two-Factor Theory of Motivation to assess job satisfaction in the Brazilian hotel industry.
The results partially support the theory and suggest that culture influences the degree of
job satisfaction.
Keywords: Brazil; hotel industry; job satisfaction; motivation

Introduction
Job satisfaction has been the topic of extensive scholastic research (Thierry 1998; Thomas and
Au 2002). Schneider (1985) described satisfaction as the attitudes of workers towards outcomes
on the job. Job satisfaction has been linked to positive employee outcomes such as lower stress
levels and greater empowerment (Thomas and Dunkerley 1999), as well as increased firm
performance as measured by enhanced employee productivity (Savery and Lucks 2001) and
organizational growth. Satisfied employees have also been shown to exhibit lower levels of
absenteeism and higher levels of motivation than their counterparts (Hwang and Chi 2005).
Oishi, Diener, Lucas and Eunkook (1999) demonstrated that job satisfaction is correlated to life
satisfaction as well as intrinsic motivation. Furthermore, Bushe, Havlovic and Coetzer (1996)
found that empowerment led to enhanced innovation and efficiencies in the workplace, which
subsequently led to increased customer satisfaction. Thus, researchers have linked job
satisfaction to many desirable work-related outcomes.
In a seminal study on job satisfaction, using US workers, Herzberg, Mausner and Snyderman
(1959) discovered that specific job aspects promoted employee satisfaction, while other job
aspects spurred feelings of dissatisfaction. Tests of Herzberg et al.’s theory (1959) have been
common using US and European workers, but less frequent using other samples. Thus, given
today’s global business and multicultural work environment, it is relevant to ask: Are these
considerations still valid? Does culture matter when assessing job satisfaction? To help firms
better manage and operate in the world market, researchers Thomas and Au (2002) and Galang
(2004) emphasized the value of studying concepts cross-culturally. Hence, in addressing these

*Corresponding author. Email: ssledge@cnu.edu

ISSN 0958-5192 print/ISSN 1466-4399 online

q 2008 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/09585190802295157
http://www.informaworld.com
1668 S. Sledge et al.

considerations, this study assesses job satisfaction in Brazil utilizing the Herzberg et al.
contribution (1959). This theory is an appropriate framework for studying job satisfaction and
culture because it allows for the construct to be broken down into composite elements found in
most jobs. Additionally, it is one of the most comprehensive theories of job satisfaction as it
uses 13 components to assess the construct. By studying these distinct elements, it is possible
to determine which job factors are most important to workers in various work environments
and cultures.

Job satisfaction and Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation

The premise of the Herzberg et al. (1959) theory, known as the Two-Factor Theory of
Motivation, was that managers could use factors known as ‘motivators’ to encourage employees
to gain satisfaction and, subsequently, better performance in the workplace. Similarly, managers
could try to minimize those factors that increase job dissatisfaction, ‘hygiene factors’ or
‘hygienes’ for short. Maximizing the motivators associated with their jobs could enhance
employees’ job satisfaction. On the other hand, if employees believe that factors associated with
hygienes drop below acceptable levels, job dissatisfaction grows. An interesting point of the
theory is that lack of satisfaction does not equate to dissatisfaction. Satisfaction and
dissatisfaction are on two separate continua. This means that when employees do not perceive
satisfaction among the motivators, they also may not perceive dissatisfaction among the
hygienes. Employees may well be in a state of limbo, where they are neither satisfied nor
dissatisfied. This is an unproductive state for both employees and organizations, as it does not
fuel growth, creativity or innovation. Therefore, there is entity value for organizational leaders
and managers to recognize those aspects of the jobs within their purview that can promote
satisfaction among employees and optimize them.
According to Herzberg (1966), the factors associated with work considered to be motivators
include: achievement; recognition; tasks (the work itself); responsibility; advancement; and
personal growth. The factors associated with work considered to be hygienes include: policies
and administration; supervision/managerial relationships; salary; working conditions; status;
security; and coworker relationships.
Other motivation theories have been studied extensively in the business literature, but they
do not break down the components of motivation as specifically as the Two-Factor Theory and
consequently do not allow for such detailed analysis. For example, Maslow’s Theory of Needs
(1954) states that individuals reach higher level needs such as self-esteem and self-actualization
only after lower level needs such as belongingness and safety needs have been met. While useful
in other contexts, this theory is not geared towards job-related motivation. Alderfer’s ERG
Theory (1972) states that people have three core needs: existence; relatedness; and growth. This
scheme does not include the rigid hierarchy of Maslow, indicating that employees may
experience needs concurrently. But its broad categories lead to a generalized evaluation of
motivation. McClelland’s Needs Theory (1961) also acknowledges three sets of needs:
achievement; power; and affiliation. His research suggests that achievement needs, and to a
lesser degree, power and affiliation needs, are related to job performance, thus linking employee
motivation with job outcomes. While beneficial at an individual level, the Needs Theory does
not focus on the dynamics of group-level motivation. Adams’ Equity Theory (1965) explains
that employees will strive for equitable situations when comparing themselves to coworkers as
they consider inputs to a job, level of effort expended and job outcomes. However, Equity
Theory does not expound upon the actual motivators that cause individuals to act the way that
they do in the workplace. Thus, Herzberg’s (1966) theory is best suited to this study because it
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 1669

contains many categories for analysis which allow for cultural evaluation, it is tailored to the
workplace, and it considers both individual and group level motivation.
Herzberg’s work (1966) is considered a major advancement in the literature. Befittingly, it
has also been used recently by researchers in the study of job satisfaction (Brislin, MacNab,
Worthley, Kabigting and Zukis 2005; DeShields, Kara and Kaynak 2005) with support for the
theory. Herzberg’s work has been employed to evaluate travellers’ satisfaction (Crompton 2003)
and student satisfaction (Chyung and Vachon 2005), illustrating its applicability to a variety of
settings. Yet all tests of the theory have not been confirmatory. Park (1988) and Al-Mekhlafie
(1991) found partial support for the motivator-hygiene dichotomy with samples from Korea and
Yemen, while Williams (1992) and Timmreck (2001) found mixed results using US samples. In
an evaluation of Herzberg et al. (1959) of the Thai construction industry, Ruthankoon and
Ogunlana (2003) found partial support for the theory. They attribute differences in the literature
to the varying occupations and variety of workplaces included in the research. Despite these
mixed theory results, motivation has been often associated with job satisfaction. Those
employees who express satisfaction with their jobs often are motivated in their jobs (Thierry
1998). Tietjen and Myers (1998) also linked motivation and job satisfaction using the Herzberg
(1966) framework. They concluded that once managers understood what motivated employees,
managers could focus on the appropriate strategies to create job satisfaction among those
workers. These varying results set the stage for additional research to occur with a new
emphasis, i.e. the role of culture.
Interestingly, the hospitality industry has been the focus of many job satisfaction studies. In a
study of over 4,000 hotel workers, Barsky and Nash (2004) found that employee satisfaction on
the job was driven by the emotions of the employees and their beliefs about their company.
Aksu and Aktas (2005) studied job satisfaction among Turkish managers in first-class hotels.
They discovered that despite long hours, low salaries and little colleague support (all hygienes),
the managers were generally satisfied with their jobs due to the nature of the work itself and the
authority (motivators) that came from managing a first-class facility. In a study of employee job
satisfaction among Taiwanese hotel workers, Hwang and Chi (2005) found that internal
marketing, or treating employees as customers, was positively related to job satisfaction and job
satisfaction was positively related to organizational performance. Sizoo, Plank, Iskat and Serrie
(2005) determined that among hotel workers at four-star hotels in Florida, employees with
higher intercultural sensitivity expressed higher levels of job satisfaction and social satisfaction.
This finding indicates that culture may influence employee perception of job satisfaction.
Although a great deal of research has been completed in the area of job satisfaction, an
examination of South American businesses remains a topic of value considering the continent’s
rapidly increasing economic and development status. Recent scholarship has been promising.
Ritter and Anker (2002) found workplace safety and job security issues were important to
Brazilians, while Spector, Cooper, Poelmans and Allen (2004) found that Latin Americans in
general had high job satisfaction. Barreto (2005) found that hotel guest satisfaction in Bahia,
Brazil increased when employee satisfaction programmes were implemented. Though
interesting, these studies did not comprehensively address all of Herzberg’s (1966) factors
and they did not fully consider the role of culture in the workplace.
The hotel industry is appropriate for this study as it is a service business in a multicultural
environment that incorporates global business practices. The industry has become a significant
contributor to the international economy due to the growth in world tourism. The World Tourism
Organization (2006) reports that tourism accounted for almost 30% of world service exports in
2003 and anticipates that worldwide tourist and business travel is expected to grow 4% annually
in subsequent years. Within Brazil, tourism expenditures rose 40% from 1995 to 2005 and the
trend is expected to continue for the foreseeable future (World Tourism Organization 2006).
1670 S. Sledge et al.

Therefore, this article brings together the topics of job satisfaction and culture within the
hospitality industry in Brazil. We believe an analysis of this particular mix of dimensions will be
a valuable contribution to the field of international business research. Accordingly, to further
extend the current research in these areas, this qualitative study addresses the following research
questions; ‘What can Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Motivation reveal about job satisfaction
among hotel workers in Brazil?’ and ‘How do cultural factors impact job satisfaction among
hotel workers in Brazil?’. Deliberation and reflection on these inquiries can be catalysts for
further debate and investigation on the topics of job satisfaction, culture and hospitality. Despite
broad research on the Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Motivation, a qualitative study was
deemed appropriate for this study due to its exploratory nature in an emerging market.

The importance of culture

Culture has become a common subject in international business research (Black 2005; Gerhart
and Fang 2005), as well as in academic textbooks and the popular press. With the increasing
globalization and mobility of the world-wide labour force, such emphasis is appropriate.
Hofstede (1980) defines culture as ‘the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes
the members of one group from that of another’ and incorporates ‘the interactive aggregate of
common characteristics that influence a group’s response to its environment’. Hofstede’s (1980)
‘dimensions of culture’ has been one of the most popular typologies in scholarly works due to its
widespread applicability and its validation over time (Ross 1999; Kalliny, Cruthirds and Minor
2006). It is useful because it delineates the concept of culture into five continua which reveal
preferences and norms. The dimensions are listed below:
1. Power distance: degree to which control and influence are distributed unequally in society.
2. Individualism versus collectivism: the concepts of ‘I and Me’ versus ‘We and Us’.
3. Uncertainty avoidance: the degree of risk aversion.
4. Masculinity versus femininity: the desire for material possessions and recognition versus the
desire for relationships and family.
5. Confucian dynamism: long-term versus short-term orientation.
Taken together, these dimensions offer insights towards behaviour and standards in the context
of culture. The dimensions will be used here to explore the forces behind the motivators and
hygienes in the workplace.

Brazil
Brazil has the largest population in Latin America, the largest tourism industry on the continent,
the fifth largest populace in the world and the ninth largest economy in the world, yet
management scholars have studied the country relatively infrequently. Although the nation has
been included in multi-country studies (Ritter and Anker 2002; Spector et al. 2004), it has
not been the focus of many studies that are human resource-based.
Academics have used both anthropological and organizational perspectives to shed light on
Brazilian culture. Roberto DaMatta is one of the most noted scholars on Brazilian life. In 1995
he presented the concept of a triad of influences on the Brazilian people as opposed to Hofstede’s
(1980) dualistic model. Hess and DaMatta (1995) found Brazil to be an ‘intermediate society’
where members were often in the middle of collectivist or individualistic influences. This
research also emphasized the importance of situational analysis of cultural implications. Both
Hofstede and Hofstede (2005) and Hess and DaMatta (1995) advocate recognizing recurring
themes when studying national culture while leaving room for variability and interpretation.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 1671

In an application of Hofstede’s model among Brazilians, O’Keefe and O’Keefe (2004) found
that behavioural indicators supported the high power distance score of the country. They
discovered that the opinions of senior workers carried more weight than those of lower level
employees. The famous Brazilian jeitinho or ‘little way around’ was used to find solutions to
conflicts and manage uncertainty in the workplace. Other validations of Hofstede’s work came
in the form of the Brazilian’s strong long-term commitment to both nuclear and extended family
groups. They also attached a great importance to their quality of life and were unlikely to take
unfamiliar risks.
Often, studies on Brazil primarily focused on industry trends and economic issues (Brown
1995; Smith 2003). The country illustrates the entire spectrum of economic development, thus it
provides a wealth of research opportunities for management scholars. Bahia is the largest of
the coastal states in the North-eastern region of Brazil. Salvador, Bahia’s capital and the colonial
capital of the country, has a population of 2.5 million and its tourism industry is second in Brazil
only to that of Rio de Janeiro. Salvador is the third largest city in Brazil and accounts for roughly
one-sixth of Bahia’s population. We chose the city of Salvador as our study location as it has a
highly indigenous population, 60% of its citizens are employed in the service sector and it is
representative of the demographic makeup of Bahia. It also reflects Brazil’s cultural mores based
on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions (1980) of high power distance, collectivism, high uncertainty
avoidance, femininity, and a moderate long-term orientation, as indicated by a pre-test of
100 native Salvadorians conducted prior to the study.

Methods
Sample
Five hotels in Salvador, Brazil comprised the study locations. The hotels were selected to
achieve diversity within the sample along several dimensions. The business models included
locally owned operations, national hotel chain members and sole proprietorships to allow variety
in type of establishment. Hotels located in both rural and urban settings in different segments of
the city were used to optimize variability. Hotel class levels included 2-, 3- and 4- star
operations. Hotels ranged in size from 30 rooms to 1,000 rooms. While hotel type, class and
location were important for diversity, specific hotels were selected due to accessibility and guest
traffic/or average occupancy rates. The more accessible establishments with a 50% occupancy
rate were targeted.
Managers were contacted in advance for permission to participate in the study. Hotel
industry workers were identified for observation, interview, and participation in the study based
upon job title and shift assignment. On-the-job observations and personal interviews constituted
the primary data collection methods. Interviews continued until theoretical saturation had been
achieved. Qualitatively, the number of subjects is contingent upon theoretical saturation of
information, thereby, indicating that respondents were revealing no new information beyond that
obtained from previous respondents. This procedure is consistent with the recommendations of
Glaser and Strauss (1967). Appropriately, the sample size was 81. Analogous with the
theoretical sampling procedure advocated by Strauss and Corbin (1998), attempts were made to
include a diverse sample of hotel employees and responsibilities as evidenced by the respondent
demographics provided in Table 1.

Data collection
Data collection involved four modalities conducted by three American researchers and one
Brazilian assistant over two three-week periods. One of the American researchers was familiar
 1672
Table 1. Respondent demographics (N ¼ 81).
Age distribution Employment type Hours in working week Tenure (years) Education*

Range Number Job Number Range Number Range Number Level Number

S. Sledge et al.
20 – 29 25 Professional 15 Under 20 3 ,1 year 17 1st 15
30 – 39 19 Service 38 20– 29 6 1–5 24 2nd 32
40 – 49 20 Trades 5 30– 39 14 6 – 10 21 3rd 7
50 – 59 13 Retail 8 40– 49 37 11 – 20 13 Superior 20
60 – 69 4 Managerial 8 50– 59 8 21 – 30 5 Post-superior 5
Gender Clerical 7 60– 69 4 30 þ 1 Other 2
Male 49 70– 79 7
Female 32 80 þ 2
Notes: *Educational attainment: 1st Level ¼ US 6th grade; 2nd Level ¼ US Middle School; 3rd Level ¼ US High School Diploma; Superior ¼ Some College/College Degree; Post
Superior ¼ Advanced Degree. Sample job titles: administrative assistant, bartender, bellman, executive head waiter, front desk attendant, hotel clerk, lunchette worker, manager,
marketing sales representative, owner/operator of the hotel, porter, receptionist, secretary, window washer.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 1673

with Bahian culture through acculturation and spoke the Portuguese language fluently. First,
hotel employees were observed on the job. Second, primary and follow-up interviews were
performed with hotel employees. At the hotels, contract workers commonly offered ancillary
services such as transportation and tours for the hotel guests. Third, the contract workers were
observed on the job. Fourth, contract workers for the hotels were interviewed. All observations
and interviews were conducted using a previously designed in-depth protocol to assure
consistency (Miles, Sledge and Coppage 2005). Interviews were utilized over self-report
questionnaires to benefit from face-to-face communication and to allow for explanation of
concepts that might be culturally bound or culturally specific. In addition, work environment
surroundings together with non-verbal information allowed interviewers to capture
reinforcement data on job satisfaction. Furthermore, the observations allowed an additional
collection method to minimize the effects of common method variance (Saxton and Dollinger
2004). The structured interview questions requested demographic information such as sex, age,
education/preparation, job level/position, job tenure and other factors noted in Table 1. No
unions were operating in any of the hotels in the study, so union membership was not questioned.
Global interview techniques such as back translation, dual listeners, translator presence, random
sampling and multifaceted questions were used to reduce interviewer bias and ethnocentrism, as
well as recency and halo effects from the participants.
We chose to modify existing job satisfaction survey instruments to conduct the interviews
based on methodological concerns documented in the literature (Hwang and Chi 2005). Many of
the previous instruments were constructed in a questionnaire format, which could limit the
richness of the information captured. Face-to-face interviews allow for cultural cues to surface
during the data collection process. Therefore, we integrated the elements from existing
instruments deemed most useful to this study into a personal interview format. For instance,
Hackman and Oldham’s (1980) Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS) includes employee motivation, job
satisfaction levels, and employee growth and development, all desired job outcomes. The JDS
links these items to many of Herzberg’s (1966) factors, including task significance, autonomy,
feedback, managerial relations, coworkers, meaningfulness of work, responsibility and
appropriate training for the job. However, it does not incorporate the cultural aspects of work,
which we felt were important. While the Job Description Index (JDI) of Smith, Kendall and Hulin
(1969) is one of the most commonly used scales, it was deemed somewhat inappropriate because
we focus on the services sector and JDI is better suited to manufacturing environments
(Hwang and Chi 2005). Spector’s (1985) Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS) offers more application to
the service industry but with a limited focus on culture. Our interview questions, accordingly,
incorporate elements from the three instruments in order to address issues relevant to
hospitality industry workers and to consider cultural factors. We include 13 factors, whereas JDS
incorporates four factors, JDI incorporates five factors and JSS incorporates ten factors. Sample
guidelines from the observation protocol and sample interview questions can be found in Box 1.
Translators were present during each interview to ensure that respondents fully understood
the questions.

Data analysis
Respondent data gathered during the observations and interviews were analysed by using a
comparative case method as suggested by Ragin (1994). Here, individual respondents were
deemed to be separate cases for evaluation purposes. Based on the Two-Factor theoretical
framework, key variables were identified from each case write up. Respondents’ key factors
were identified and coded (Miles and Domke-Damonte 2000; Zhang and Rajagopalan 2002)
using motivation theory and satisfaction theory frameworks. The initial analysis consisted
1674 S. Sledge et al.

Box 1. Sample observation protocol: sample survey questions.

Protocol
1. Note day of week, time of day, location, special events, number of staff on duty, job titles and shift
assignments
2. Note number of hotel guests present, number of hotel employees present, tasks of hotel worker,
requests of hotel guests, level of team work among hotel staff, references to operating manuals,
interactions between managers and employees, interactions among employees
3. Note staff behaviour and actions when guests are not present, staff behaviour and actions when
guests are present, autonomous behaviour, group behaviour

Survey
1. Describe tasks in your job.
a. Are you satisfied with tasks in your job?
b. Please explain why or why not.
2. Describe advancement in your workplace.
a. Are you satisfied with the advancement opportunities at your work?
b. Please explain why or why not.
3. Describe managerial relations at your workplace.
a. Are you dissatisfied with managerial relations at your work?
b. Please explain why or why not.
4. Describe working conditions in your workplace.
a. Are you dissatisfied with working conditions at your job?
b. Please explain why or why not.

of reading each transcribed observation and interview and then coding themes, motivators and
hygiene factors as well as levels of satisfaction or dissatisfaction as provided by the respondents.
This exercise was performed several times by each researcher in order to identify missed items,
to solidify interpretations and codes, and to facilitate validity (Miles and Domke-Damonte
2000). This process was incorporated to address House and Wigdor’s (1967) concerns about
Herzberg’s Theory and possible bias in coding.
Each respondent was coded alphabetically for tracking purposes, then by gender, job title
and location. This descriptive coding scheme is consistent with suggestions by Miles and
Huberman (1994). Next, hygiene and motivating job satisfaction factors were identified from
the subject responses using Herzberg’s (1966) classifications. Box 2 contains concise defini-
tions of the hygienes and the motivators which served as interview topics. These definitions
were used for clarification and consistency during the observation and interview processes.
To check for inter-rater reliability, participant responses as well as a list of dimensional
definitions, and coding categories from Box 2 were given to two assistants unfamiliar with the
study. The assistants were asked to classify each definition and response according to the coding
category to which it corresponded. The results indicated strong evidence for reliability of the
coding categories with inter-rater agreement of 80% and 81%, respectively and an interclass
correlation of .90 and .92, respectively between each of the assistants and the researchers
(p , .001) (Miles 2000).

Results
A table was devised utilizing the coded data to outline the satisfaction state for each respondent
and evaluated against the theoretical framework of Herzberg (1966). Satisfaction averages for
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 1675

Box 2. Description of job factors from Herzberg’s theory used as interview topics.

Motivators – Those elements of the job that lead to job satisfaction

Achievement – Success in achieving goals and objectives, may be individual or group.
Recognition – Public recognition by others, awards, evidence of a job well done.
Tasks – The work itself, tasks are involved in the job, activities required for the job.
Responsibility – Degree to which an employee is responsible for the accomplishment of work or goals.
Advancement – Opportunity to advance within the company, successive career moves.
Personal growth – Individual preferences for development, steps attained towards meaningful
individual growth.

Hygiene factors – Those elements of the job that lead to job dissatisfaction
Policy and administration – Procedures and operating standards used on the job, administration of such
guidelines by management.
Supervision/managerial relationships – Relationships with supervisor(s), boss(es) and manager(s).
Working conditions – Overall environment of workplace, includes employee comfort, both physically
and mentally. Includes equipment provided to make job easier and safety precautions evident in the
workplace.
Pay – Amount of salary and/or compensation for work performed.
Coworker relationships – Relationships with colleagues, includes gender equity.
Status – Position in the company with respect to hierarchy, respect from others as indicated by honoured
position.
Security – Includes elements of job security such as the ability to retain a job over the long term and also
feelings of personal security while at work.

the sample report the average levels of satisfaction and dissatisfaction for the 81 participants as
determined by interview questions. This information is presented in Table 2.
A cross-case analysis (Zhang and Rajagopalan 2002) was carried out where causal
conditions and satisfaction versus dissatisfaction outcomes were compared. Then similarities
and differences between the cases were recorded and compared to Herzberg’s (1966) theory.
Next emergent themes were documented by looking at the consistency of the results across the
cases. Commonalities between actual findings and theoretical arguments were also used to create
the themes and conclusions. Hofstede and Hofstede’s (2005) dimensions of culture were used to
explain divergence from and in some cases support of the Two-Factor Theory.

Factor revelation
In this section, factors that emerged during the interviews are revealed, and are presented in
terms of the 13 job-related factors that were included in the Two-Factor Theory. Common
sentiments and quotes from the participants are incorporated as evidence, and typical
observations are reported. Evidence of respondent concurrence with or divergence from the
Two-Factor Theory is also provided. As appropriate, references to Hofstede and Hofstede’s
(2005) cultural dimensions are included to add meaning to the findings.

Motivators
Achievement: Workers expressed a consistent desire to achieve on the job such as ‘I do my best’.
Some associated secular work with spiritual work: ‘I do God’s work, I achieve for God.’ This is
consistent with the 75% satisfaction level on this factor, supporting Herzberg’s theory. This was
also evident from the positive demeanour seen in almost all on-the-job observations.
1676 S. Sledge et al.

Table 2. Satisfaction ratings by factor (N ¼ 81).

Raw score %
Factor Topic (number expressing satisfaction)

Motivators
Achievement 61 75
Recognition 56 69
Tasks 68 84
Responsibility 59 73
Advancement 35 43
Personal growth 31 38
Average satisfaction rating 67
Hygienes
Policy and administration 60 74
Supervision/relationships with supervisor 27 33
Working conditions 24 30
Salary 70 87
Relationships with coworkers 10 12
Status 21 26
Security 64 79
Average dissatisfaction rating 49

Recognition: This did not seem to be an ultimate goal for the employees, but one that they
accepted readily. In addition to individual acknowledgement of a job well done, respondents
expressed fulfilment with teamwork and coworker collaboration. One manager replied, ‘I am
responsible for my employees’, almost in a familial way. Another supposed, ‘I treat my
coworkers with respect and we succeed together’ suggesting the assumption of joint
responsibility for recognition. Respondents showed a 69% satisfaction rating on this factor. This
finding supports the Two-Factor Theory, and it also indicates Brazilians’ preference for
collectivist collaboration to get the job done, as suggested by Hofstede and Hofstede (2005).
Tasks: Almost every respondent showed contentment with the job that they held. ‘I like my
job’ was a frequent response. Employees often arrived early and left late for their shifts in order
to ensure full coverage by the staff. Cheerful attitudes and dedication to fulfil job requirements
were commonplace. Several respondents stated, ‘I am happy with my job’. Accordingly, the task
variable had an 84% satisfaction rating. This high level of concordance supports the idea of work
being an intrinsic motivator. In the hospitality industry, a desire to serve others also acts as a
motivating force and an underlying bond.
Responsibility: Hotel employees were eager to perform tasks in a service capacity in order to
please their guests ‘How may I help you?’ was asked often and witnessed repeatedly during the
observations. Employees excitedly took on tasks when requested by customers as exemplified by
the comment: ‘My manager is not here but I can assist you with that problem.’ The workers
showed great self-reliance and ingenuity in pleasing the customer. For example, one worker
spent over half an hour locating a pizza delivery business in order to fulfil a special customer
request. Employees spoke of loyalty to their employer. Appropriately, this factor received a 73%
satisfaction rating and supports the Two-Factor Theory.
Advancement: Employees were somewhat vague in their view of career advancement and
future career plans. Observations revealed a focus on the present and the overriding outlook to
let the future take care of itself. Little evidence of long-term planning, either personal or
professional, was noted. A few workers showed the desire to move up within their own
organizational hierarchies with comments such as ‘I want to become a manager’, but not many
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 1677

had definitive career goals. When queried about career plans, the most common response was a
smile and a look of bewilderment. Among younger respondents, the desire to ‘finish college to
get a better job’ was expressed. This variable had a lower satisfaction rating of 43%. According
to Hofstede and Hofstede (2005) Brazil’s cultural norm of a moderate long-term orientation can
explain this finding. With little societal focus on the long term, it is no surprise that the hotel
workers did not have specific long-term career objectives. Thus, culture may explain in this case,
why advancement was not considered a motivator.
Personal growth: Few participants expressed a desire for personal growth from a
professional career perspective. When asked about personal growth activities, many expressed
a desire to ‘grow spiritually’ and to ‘become a better person’. Likewise, pre-interview
observations also revealed little reference to the idea of personal development activities such as
learning a new skill, pursuing a hobby or taking a class for enjoyment. Participants exhibited a
38% satisfaction rating. Hence, this factor did not elicit motivation on the job as Herzberg (1966)
suggested it might. Utilizing the Hofstede and Hofstede (2005) framework, it is likely that a high
power distance frame of reference may deter employees from pursuing personal growth, given
that most do not have a high power-base within the society. Therefore, the cultural norm of low
power among the working class may impact individual aspiration for growth.

Hygienes
Policies and administration: Most comments regarding policies revolved around training and
scheduling. Reinforcing Herzberg’s contention that this factor falls into the hygiene category
74% of respondents were dissatisfied with some aspect of organizational policy. Comments
included: ‘Training is good here, but it is hard to get,’ indicating a scarcity of resources. Some
respondents were considering attending hotel school for continuing education. In reference to
schedules, ‘Sometimes I get the schedule I want’ summed up responses. One worker added: ‘I
have to work a lot of hours . . . I can get off when my children are sick,’ indicated that managers
tried to work with their subordinates on scheduling issues.
Supervision/managerial relations: With regard to work relationships, 67% of the employees
displayed no dissatisfaction with their manager. ‘I like my manager,’ [Our manager] treats us
well, [I have] ‘no problems’ [with my manager] were offered from participants. For those who
were dissatisfied, they wanted more individualized time with the manager to discuss problems.
This result, contrary to Herzberg’s hygiene hypothesis, can be explained by the Brazilian norm
of high power-distance in organizational relationships. As Hofstede and Hofstede (2005)
explained, the expectation on the part of the Brazilians that managers had significantly more
power in the workplace than their subordinates was anticipated. Accordingly, this reality did not
cause much dissatisfaction among the hotel workers.
Working conditions: Only 30% of respondents indicated dissatisfaction with their working
conditions, denoting a departure from the hygiene label. The majority of respondents had
positive comments on this factor such as: [Working conditions are] ‘nice – the office is clean
and we have a break room’. Others spoke of ‘sharing an office with the manager’. Complaints on
this factor were clustered around breaks. The fact that this hygiene factor promoted little
dissatisfaction as predicted by the theory is very likely due to the predominant mentality of
gratitude for having a job and a feminine-orientation (Hofstede and Hofstede 2005). Many
Brazilians exhibited the feminine value of honouring personal relationships over material items.
Hence, working conditions did not appear to be a significant source of dissatisfaction for those in
the study. During observations, the sharing of limited office equipment such as telephones,
phone books and computers, among several employees, confirmed this finding.
1678 S. Sledge et al.

Salary: Not surprisingly, this factor indicated the greatest level of dissatisfaction at 87%.
Some comments were, ‘I work two jobs to support my family’ and ‘it could be better’. With a
high unemployment rate and an abundance of workers in the service sector, Brazilian hotel
managers have a tough time adjusting pay rates due to the competitive nature of the business. As
confirmed in most studies using the Two-Factor Theory, pay was a classic hygiene factor in the
workplace in this study.
Relationships with coworkers: The respondents demonstrated little dissatisfaction with this
factor. Actually, 88% considered colleague relationships as ‘good’ or ‘very good’, and most
reported that men and women were treated equally on the job. ‘I don’t see any differences in how
men and women are treated’ was a typical response. Observations revealed cordial coworker
interaction. A common occurrence was coworkers taking breaks or having meals together. These
positive results support management’s attitudes towards inclusion and gender equity. Brazil’s
feminine-based culture, where relationships are highly valued and the quality of life is
important, can explain this result and divergence from Herzberg’s prediction.
Status: ‘I have worked at this hotel for 15 years, and I don’t want to change jobs or locations’ was
a response given by a window washer and was typical of statements given by tenured employees.
Both workers and managers valued employee loyalty to the employer. Another sentiment, ‘I helped
build this hotel, and this is my home,’ reiterated the familial atmosphere of the workplace, where
members of the staff were valued, regardless of status or job title. The tenure variable showed a weak
dissatisfaction rating of 26%. As suggested by Hofstede and Hofstede (2005), the collectivist nature
of the people of Brazil, which emphasizes working together, along with their feminine-based
orientation, may explain why this hygiene factor did not lead to significant dissatisfaction among the
workers.

Security
The topic of job security elicited much dissatisfaction among the participants, at an average of
79%. Many were ‘not sure’ of what the future held in terms of their personal ability to retain their
position and some cited increasing crime statistics when the issue was broached. The tough
economic conditions in the country gave credence to these beliefs. Since the topic was broad,
and it was evident that respondents included several definitions of security, it is not surprising
that this factor yielded dissatisfaction as the theory proposed. Hofstede and Hofstede’s (2005)
finding that Brazilians by nature are high uncertainty avoidants reinforces this result of
dissatisfaction with job security among the hotel workers.
As evidenced from the topical categorizations of specific responses in Table 2, the data provide
partial support for Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory. Those elements of work identified by Herzberg
as motivators lead to satisfaction among the Brazilian hotel workers (38% to 84% of the time, with
an average satisfaction rating of 67%). Those factors identified by Herzberg as hygiene factors led to
dissatisfaction of 12% to 87% of the time with an average dissatisfaction rating of 49%. This result is
indicative of a workforce with much valuable information that would likely lead to organizational
improvements in operational efficiency and effectiveness. These results suggest that motivators are
important sources of satisfaction among Brazilian hotel employees. However, respondent
indication of hygiene factors promoting favourable influences suggests that cultural differences
impact their attitudes on the job. Thereby, these findings merit further cross-cultural analysis.

Emergent themes
Several themes emerged during the observation, interview and analysis process that are
noteworthy. First, respondents often referred to Brazilian ingenuity as ‘jeitinho’, meaning ‘a
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 1679

little way around’. They were proud of their problem-solving skills and creativity. Bahians
exhibited a great degree of comingling family life and professional life. Many of Hofstede’s
dimensions of culture surfaced during the study period. Bahians showed a preference for
collectivism via teamwork in decision-making. Assertiveness, masculinity, or the competitive
strive to achieve (Hickson and Pugh 1995) were rarely mentioned during interviews but family
and friends were discussed often. For many participants, personal relationships were highly
valued, an indicator of a feminine perspective with respect to the Hofstede framework. The
hierarchical culture was reinforced via law, policy and regulation. As Hickson and Pugh (1995)
alluded, Latins and Brazilians specifically manage uncertainty and prefer authority, routines and
rules. Furthermore, there appeared to be an overwhelming gratification in the performance of
service work. Many workers exhibited excitement regarding task completion. This high
reverence of service was noticeable in the absence of self-service operations and the constant
availability of customer service.

Discussion
Job satisfaction is a universal term, however; culture may play a role in its existence. In our
application of Herzberg’s (1966) Two-Factor Theory in Brazil, the results support the use of
motivators to promote job satisfaction levels among hotel employees. As expected, the workers
derived satisfaction from the factors labelled as motivators in many cases. Among the
motivators, Brazilian employees showed the highest levels of satisfaction with the work itself at
84% and achievement at 75%. This finding reinforces Herzberg’s notion of the importance of
work itself and the good feelings that work can engender among employees. This result also
underscores the observed common Brazilian values of personal dignity, family-orientation, and
making an honest living. Our findings were consistent with those of Au (1999), who found that
Brazilians scored 7.6 out of 10 on a job satisfaction ranking, where 10 is high. This was above
the 20-country average of 7.22. In his study, Brazilians scored above average for pride in work,
with a 1.85 out of 4, where the 20-country average was 1.82. The present sample also
demonstrated a proud presence on the job with the use of formal titles, protocols, tidy
workspaces and attention to uniforms and personal grooming.
The Brazilian sample indicated that some of the hygiene factors did promote dissatisfaction,
as expected. These primarily included the areas of salary, security, and policy and
administration. Other hygiene factors, such as supervision, working conditions, relationships
with coworkers and status did not elicit overwhelming dissatisfaction among the employees.
These results support the findings of Garibaldi de Hilal (2006), who noted that ambiguity,
hierarchy and relational networks permeate Brazilian organizational culture. It may be that these
workplace factors are important in service industries and in South American organizations. For
instance, the observed discomfort associated with queries regarding the degree of satisfaction
may explain this finding and may be indicative of cultural mores. Perhaps it is not acceptable to
exhibit dissatisfaction with work given the high reverence of service. Or perhaps, holding a job is
so valued that one dare not display dissatisfaction with work. Given the observed presence of
teamwork and employee loyalty, possibly commitment is the more pertinent precursor to
employee performance than job satisfaction in the environment assessed. These findings merit
further study in this area.
Limitations of this study include possible loss of meaning through interpretation and
translation. Furthermore, the Hawthorne Effect may have been a factor, although the use of
observation prior to interview solicitation was utilized to minimize its affect. Moreover, the
research may benefit from quantitative follow-up and further cross-cultural extensions. Given
the exploratory nature of this study, formal statistical non-parametric and parametric procedures
1680 S. Sledge et al.

were not considered appropriate for this data. The emergent data made possible by qualitative
analysis were considered an important component of this study. Further larger-sample analyses
should build on the themes identified in this study by measuring the applicability of these
attitudes and observations across other cultures.
In addressing the question: ‘What can Herzberg’s (1966) Two-Factor Theory of Motivation
reveal about job satisfaction among hotel workers in Brazil?’ we find usefulness in the theory
and a combination of factors that influence both job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction.
Herzberg’s contention on motivating factors appears to hold in this study in that motivators
promote attitudes of satisfaction in the workplace. Specifically, the work itself suggested high
degrees of satisfaction among workers. Herzberg’s contention on hygiene factors was not totally
upheld in this study as hygiene factors such as working conditions generated attitudes of
favourability. In answering the question ‘How do cultural factors impact job satisfaction among
hotel workers in Brazil?’ we find that culture can help explain why the classic motivators or
hygienes did not affect some employees. Initially, the Herzberg studies included an American
sample, which is almost the complete opposite of Brazil in the Hofstede (1980) context
(masculine, low power distance, individualistic, low uncertainty avoidance). Given the mixed
results relative to Herzberg applicability, cultural differences may be an important antecedent to
job satisfaction. The high reverence of service work in Brazil may highly influence attitudes
towards work.
It appears that job satisfaction for many employees is more complex than Herzberg’s (1966)
dichotomy suggests. There are likely many cultural, gender, institutional, socio-economic and
societal issues that must be taken into consideration. Many of these factors are not easily
discovered in a standard written survey and, therefore, lends support to the value of qualitative
study. Hence, more work is needed in this area to determine how such information might be
captured. This study is one step in that direction. Chiu and Lin (2004) reiterate that Herzberg’s
(1966) two groups of attributes are still relevant in today’s workplace. The findings generated
from this research add credence to the results of Stevens, Oddou, Furuya, Bird and Mendenhall
(2006), which emphasize the role that human resource practices can play in employee job
satisfaction. Employers need to be sure that motivators are directed and focused on meeting the
interests and concerns of others such as coworkers, customers and stakeholders of the company.
Accordingly, stakeholder theory would be another fruitful direction for future research.
Employers must also recognize the importance of culture in the workplace and adjust motivators
on the job accordingly. Oishi et al. (1999) showed that job satisfaction is correlated to life
satisfaction as well as intrinsic motivation. Spector et al. (2004) propose that job satisfaction
may not be merely an outcome of work, family and life factors, but in fact, may be a cause of
stress or happiness in these areas. They point out that it is likely that the concepts of family and
work are different across cultures. Investigating these ideas would broaden the research stream
and would provide new links to the topic as well.
The findings herein, coupled with previous work on motivation theory, illustrate the fact that
job satisfaction is both cogent and applicable in both domestic and global markets. It is our hope
that this research will continue and yield insights that will improve the quality of work life for
employees worldwide.

References
Adams, J. (1965), ‘Inequity in Social Exchanges,’ in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 2),
ed. L. Berkowitz, New York: Academic Press, pp. 267– 299.
Aksu, A., and Aktas, A. (2005), ‘Job Satisfaction of Managers in Tourism: Cases in the Antalya Region of
Turkey,’ Managerial Auditing Journal, 20, 479– 488.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 1681

Alderfer, C. (1972), Existence, Relatedness and Growth: Human Needs in Organizational Settings, New
York: Free Press.
Al-Mekhlafie, M. (1991), ‘A Study of Job Satisfaction of Faculty Members at Sana’a University in the
Republic of Yemen: A Systematic Analysis Based on Herzberg’s Two-factor Theory,’ unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
Au, K. (1999), ‘Intra-cultural Variation: Evidence and Implications for International Business,’ Journal of
International Business Studies, 30, 799– 812.
Barreto, E. (2005), ‘Tourism: Community Development Pays Back,’ International Trade Forum, 2, 24– 25.
Barsky, J., and Nash, L. (2004), ‘Employed Satisfaction Tied to Emotions: Company Beliefs,’ Hotel and
Motel Management, 20, 12.
Black, B. (2005), ‘Comparative Industrial Relations Theory: The Role of National Culture,’ International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 16, 1137– 1190.
Brislin, R., MacNab, B., Worthley, R., Kabigting, F., and Zukis, B. (2005), ‘Evolving Perceptions of
Japanese Workplace Motivation: An Employee-manager Comparison,’ International Journal of Cross
Cultural Management: CCM, 5, 87 – 104.
Brown, A. (1995), ‘Brazil Beefs up its Meetings Business,’ Hotel and Motel Management, 210, 16 – 17.
Bushe, G., Havlovic, S., and Coetzer, G. (1996), ‘Exploring Empowerment from the Inside-out,’ The
Journal for Quality and Participation, 19, 2, 36 – 45.
Chiu, H., and Lin, N. (2004), ‘A Service Quality Measurement Derived from the Theory of Needs,’ The
Service Industries Journal, 24, 187– 195.
Chyung, S., and Vachon, M. (2005), ‘An Investigation of the Profiles of Satisfying and Dissatisfying
Factors in e-Learning,’ Performance Improvement Quarterly, 18, 97 – 113.
Crompton, J. (2003), ‘Adapting Herzberg: A Conceptualization of the Effects of Hygiene and Motivator
Attributes on Perceptions of Event Quality,’ Journal of Travel Research, 41, 305– 310.
DaMatta, R. (1979), ‘Ritual in Complex and Tribal Societies,’ Current Anthropology, 20, 589– 590.
DeShields, O., Kara, A., and Kaynak, E. (2005), ‘Determinants of Business Student Satisfaction and
Retention in Higher Education: Applying Herzberg’s Two-factor Theory,’ International Journal of
Educational Management, 19, 128– 139.
Galang, M. (2004), ‘The Transferability Question: Comparing HRM Practices in the Philippines with the
US and Canada,’ International Journal of Human Resource Management, 15, 1207– 1225.
Garibaldi de Hilal, A. (2006), ‘Brazilian National Culture, Organizational Culture and Cultural Agreement:
Findings from a Multinational Company,’ International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 6,
139– 167.
Gerhart, B., and Fang, M. (2005), ‘National Culture and Human Resource Management: Assumptions and
Evidence,’ International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16, 971– 1002.
Glaser, B., and Strauss, A. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research,
Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company.
Hackman, J., and Oldham, G. (1980), Work Redesign, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., and Snyderman, B. (1959), The Motivation to Work, New York: Wiley.
Herzberg, F. (1966), Work and the Nature of Man, New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.
Hess, D., and DaMatta, R. (1995), The Brazilian Puzzle: Culture on the Borderlands of the Western World,
New York: Columbia University Press.
Hickson, D., and Pugh, D. (1995), Management Worldwide: The Impact of Societal Culture on
Organizations around the Globe, New York: Penguin Books.
Hofstede, G. (1980), Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values, Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage.
Hofstede, G., and Hofstede, G.J. (2005), Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, New York:
McGraw Hill.
House, R., and Wigdor, L. (1967), ‘Herzberg’s Dual-factor Theory of Job Satisfaction and Motivation: A
Review of the Evidence and a Criticism,’ Personnel Psychology, 20, 369–389.
Hwang, I., and Chi, D. (2005), ‘Relationships among Internal Marketing, Employee Job Satisfaction and
International Hotel Performance: An Empirical Study,’ International Journal of Management, 22,
285– 293.
Kalliny, M., Cruthirds, K., and Minor, M. (2006), ‘Differences between American, Egyptian and Lebanese
Humor Styles: Implications for International Management,’ International Journal of Cross Cultural
Management, 6, 121– 135.
Maslow, A. (1954), Motivation and Personality, New York: Harper, and Row.
McClelland, D. (1961), The Achieving Society, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
1682 S. Sledge et al.

Miles, A.K. (2000), ‘The Ergonomics and Organizational Stress Relationship,’ unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Florida State University.
Miles, A.K., and Domke-Damonte, D.J. (2000), ‘Bed and Breakfast Homes: A Life of Leisure or a Stressful
Encounter?’ New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 3, 1, 57 – 66.
Miles, M.B., and Huberman, A.M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis, London: Sage Publications.
Miles, A., Sledge, S., and Coppage, S. (2005), ‘Linking Spirituality to Workplace Performance: A
Qualitative Study of the Brazilian Candomble,’ in Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings,
ed. K.M. Weaver, Pace, NY: Academy of Management Press, p. 63.
O’Keefe, H., and O’Keefe, W. (2004), ‘Business Behaviors in Brazil and the USA: Understanding the
Gaps,’ International Journal of Social Economics, 31, 614– 624.
Oishi, S., Diener, E., Lucas, R., and Eunkook, S. (1999), ‘Cross-cultural Variations in Predictors of Life
Satisfaction: Perspectives from Needs and Values,’ Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25,
980– 990.
Park, C. (1988), ‘Testing Herzberg’s Motivation Theory in a Comparative Study of US and Korean Public
Employees,’ Review of Public Personnel Administration, 8, 40 –60.
Ragin, C. (1994), Constructing Social Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Ritter, J., and Anker, R. (2002), ‘Good Jobs, Bad Jobs: Workers’ Evaluations in Five Countries,’
International Labour Review, 141, 331– 345.
Ross, D. (1999), ‘Culture as a Context for Multinational Business: A Framework for Assessing the
Strategy-culture Fit,’ Multinational Business Review, 7, 13 – 19.
Ruthankoon, R., and Ogunlana, S. (2003), ‘Testing Herzberg’s Two-factor Theory in the Thai Construction
Industry,’ Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 10, 333– 342.
Savery, L., and Lucks, A. (2001), ‘The Relationship between Empowerment, Job Satisfaction and Reported
Stress Levels: Some Australian Evidence,’ Leadership, and Organizational Development Journal,
97 – 107.
Saxton, T., and Dollinger, M. (2004), ‘Target Reputation and Appropriability: Picking and Deploying
Resources in Acquisitions,’ Journal of Management, 30, 123– 148.
Schneider, B. (1985), ‘Organizational Behaviour,’ Annual Review of Psychology, 36, 573– 611.
Sizoo, S., Plank, R., Iskat, W., and Serrie, H. (2005), ‘The Effect of Intercultural Sensitivity on Employee
Performance in Cross-cultural Service Encounters,’ The Journal of Services Marketing, 19, 245– 255.
Smith, P., Kendall, L., and Hulin, C. (1969), The Measurement of Satisfaction in Work and Retirement,
Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Smith, T. (2003), ‘Brazil is Unhappy about its Uncrowded Beaches,’ New York Times, 1 January, W1.
Spector, P. (1985), ‘Measurement of Human Service Staff Satisfaction: Development of the Job
Satisfaction Survey,’ American Journal of Community Psychology, 13, 693– 713.
Spector, P., Cooper, C., Poelmans, S., and Allen, T. (2004), ‘A Cross-national Comparative Study of Work
Family Stressors, Working Hours, and Well-being: China and Latin America versus the Anglo World,’
Personnel Psychology, 57, 119– 142.
Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. (1998), Basic Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing
Grounded Theory (2nd ed.), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Stevens, M., Oddou, G., Furuya, N., Bird, A., and Mendenhall, M. (2006), ‘HR Factors Affecting
Repatriate Job Satisfaction and Job Attachment for Japanese Managers,’ International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 17, 831– 856.
Thierry, H. (1998), ‘Motivation and Satisfaction,’ in Handbook of Work and Organizational Psychology:
Volume 4 Organizational Psychology, eds. P. Drenth, H. Thierry and C. de Wolff, London: Psychology
Press, pp. 253– 289.
Thomas, D., and Au, K. (2002), ‘The Effect of Cultural Differences on Behavioral Responses to Low Job
Satisfaction,’ Journal of International Business Studies, 33, 309– 326.
Thomas, R., and Dunkerley, D. (1999), ‘Careering Downwards? Middle Managers’ Experiences in the
Downsizing Organization,’ Journal of Management, 10, 157– 169.
Tietjen, M., and Myers, R. (1998), ‘Motivation and Job Satisfaction,’ Management Decision, 36, 226– 232.
Timmreck, T. (2001), ‘Managing Motivation and Developing Job Satisfaction in the Health Care Work
Environment,’ The Health Care Manager, 20, 42 –58.
Williams, O. (1992), ‘Job Satisfaction and Job Dissatisfaction Experiences by Teachers in the Detroit
Public School System,’ unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University.
World Tourism Organization (2006), UNWTO World Tourism Barometer, 4, 1– 8.
Zhang, Y., and Rajagopalan, N. (2002), ‘Inter-partner Credible Threat in International Joint Ventures: An
Infinitely Repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma,’ Journal of International Business Studies, 33, 457– 478.