CHAPTER 4 - DATA ANALYSIS
4.1 Company Profile
Mandarin Oriental Hotel has been in this industry for more than 50 years. Their mission is ‘to delight our guests each and everyday’. The Mandarin was first open in 1963, Hong Kong and The Oriental was first open in 1974, Bangkok (mandarinoriental.com). As they are growing, they were decided to join and create the brand Mandarin Oriental Hotel Group. As the time goes by, the Mandarin Oriental Hotel Group keeps growing and has many properties all around the world, including in Jakarta, Indonesia (mandarinoriental.com). According to the official website, Mandarin Oriental Jakarta has won a lot of awards. Since 2013, MO Jakarta won the TripAdvisor Travellers Choice Awards and now it has been their third consecutive win. Moreover, Mandarin Oriental Jakarta is one of the best green hotels in Jakarta. The Association of South East Asian Nations has honored them with the
“Green Hotel Award”, an award that recognizes hotels in ASEAN that adopt energy- conservation practices and are environment-friendly (mandarinoriental.com).
Hospitality Industry is the industry where it involves a lot of people. The employee must serve the service that is provided by the hotel. That is why in every hotel, there must be Human Resources Department that takes care of the employee. They have a lot of jobs including training and developing the employee. Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Jakarta also has this department and they also have Learning and Development Department specifically to train and develop the employee. There are 3 staffs that are under the Learning and Development Department. Most of the training that is provided is as follows: FLHSS&E (Fire, Life, Health, Safety, Security, and Environmental) Training and Guest Satisfaction Training (Guest Recognition Training, Handling Complaint, Guest Preference, Telephone Etiquette, and Culture Awareness). With an addition from the L&D Executive, which is the Leadership Training Programme (On The Job Training Technique, Group Training Technique, Move Up, Move Forward, Managing Leadership Programme, Interview for Success, and Presenting for Success).
4.2 Respondents Profile
This chapter will study and evaluate the results from the surveys and interviews. The surveys and interviews were executed from 8th April to 24th April 2015 through Google Docs, Email, and Skype Interviews. The results will be presented in a various ways such as, table, pie chart, and bar graph. After the data collection through all kind of methods, the collected data should be coded and tabulated in order to create relevant information for the final results and conclusion (Wiid & Diggines, 2010).
For this data collection, both qualitative and quantitative data was utilized. Both the surveys and the interviews were conducted in Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Jakarta. For the questionnaires were filled by the line employee because this research wants to know more about what they think about the training program that they usually get.
On the other hand, the interviews were answered by the managers in the Hotel.
During the data collection, a valid number of data was received, which is 100. It is valid because Saunders et al. (2012) states that 30 are the minimum number to get a valid data. Then, it gives a valid and reliable data to for this research. For this research, 125 surveys were sent and got 100 answers back from the respondents.
This chapter will explain about the demographic of the respondents, which will be explained in the next paragraph.
4.3 Demographics Data
The demographics of the respondents are looked upon in terms of gender, age, education, and department that they’re working. First, the gender of the respondents will be explained, see Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1 Gender data of the Survey Participants 46 54 46%
54%
Gender
Female Male
As can be seen from figure 4.1, the number of the male respondents (54%) is more than the female respondents (46%) with the total of 54 for male and 46 for female.
Based on the figure, the numbers of the male dominated the numbers of the female.
This shows that more male respondents participating on this research.
Figure 4.2 Age data of the Survey Participants
Figure 4.2 shows the age range of the participants. 51% of the respondents were between 18-25 years old, which holds the biggest amount out of the other range.
Meanwhile, 43% of the employees that participate in the surveys were 26-35 years old. Last but not least, employees with age 36-45 holds the lowest rank with only 6%. The reason why people with age 18-25 holds the biggest result is because the surveys were mostly filled by the line employee which they are still at the start of their career so they’re still young and still searching for more experience.
50 51%
43 43%
6 6%
Age
18-25 26-35 36-45
Figure 4.3 Education data of the Survey Participants
The bar chart gives the information about the level of education that the workers had.
The highest number of the results comes from employees with Diploma in 43%.
Diploma has the biggest proportion in the graph because there are a lot of people in Indonesia who’s studying only until Diploma and not pursuing more until Bachelor Degree because they think it is enough to work in hotel with that degree. The next one is the one that has Bachelor Degree as their last education level with 28%.
Moreover, the one with High School as their last education level is 27%. And the lowest one is Master Degree, which only get 2% from the total respondents.
27
43
28
2 0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
High School Diploma Bachelor Degree Master Degree
Education
Figure 4.4 Department data of the Survey Participants
Figure 4.4 shows the number of people that works in a certain department. The highest number comes from Housekeeping Department, which is 33% from all the respondents. The proportion of the graph gets smaller as it is only 26% from the Food and Beverages Department. The next one is from Front Office Department with 22% out of 100%. Moreover, there are 17% of respondents from the Kitchen Department. To complete the surveys, there are both 1% from both Finance and Human Resources Department. The possible reason why Housekeeping Department holds the biggest amount is because there are a lot of divisions under the Housekeeping Department and each of the divisions have a lot of employees. For example: Housekeeping Department has Linen, Laundry, Florist, and Public Area as their divisions.
26
33
22
17
1 1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
F&B Housekeeping Front Office Kitchen Finance Human
Resource
Department
4.4 Validity and Reliability
In this research, both validity and reliability test are important. In order to conduct further analysis, both tests must be done. The tables below are the result of validity and reliability in pre-testing and post testing.
4.4.1 Training Validity (Pre-testing)
The table below shows the result of validity test of Training using the Pearson Correlation Coefficient Method. The result reveals that all items under this variable meet the requirement of minimum critical value as determined by Pearson table of correlation (≥ for n=30). The minimum rtable for 30 samples is 0.349. In this case, if the rtable < rvalue, then the data is valid and if the rtable > rvalue then the data is not valid.
Correlations
X.1 X.2 X.3 X.4 X.5 X.6 X.7
Training (X) X.1 Pearson
Correlation 1 ,539** ,281 ,170 ,066 ,198 ,124 ,580**
Sig. (2-
tailed) ,002 ,133 ,370 ,728 ,294 ,513 ,001
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
X.2 Pearson
Correlation ,539** 1 ,272 ,059 ,064 ,215 ,130 ,547**
Sig. (2-
tailed) ,002 ,146 ,756 ,736 ,255 ,492 ,002
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
X.3 Pearson
Correlation ,281 ,272 1 ,384* ,187 ,204 ,149 ,541**
Sig. (2-
tailed) ,133 ,146 ,036 ,322 ,279 ,432 ,002
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
X.4 Pearson
Correlation ,170 ,059 ,384* 1 ,740** ,588** ,606** ,714**
Sig. (2-
tailed) ,370 ,756 ,036 ,000 ,001 ,000 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
X.5 Pearson
Correlation ,066 ,064 ,187 ,740** 1 ,848** ,855** ,742**
Sig. (2-
tailed) ,728 ,736 ,322 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 X.6 Pearson
Correlation ,198 ,215 ,204 ,588** ,848** 1 ,921** ,807**
Sig. (2-
tailed) ,294 ,255 ,279 ,001 ,000 ,000 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
X.7 Pearson
Correlation ,124 ,130 ,149 ,606** ,855** ,921** 1 ,755**
Sig. (2-
tailed) ,513 ,492 ,432 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Training (X)
Pearson
Correlation ,580** ,547** ,541** ,714** ,742** ,807** ,755** 1 Sig. (2-
tailed) ,001 ,002 ,002 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Table 4.1 Validity Result of Training Variable (Pre-test)
4.4.2 Productivity Validity (Pre-testing)
The table below shows the result of validity test of Training using the Pearson Correlation Coefficient Method. The result reveals that all items under this variable meet the requirement of minimum critical value as determined by Pearson table of correlation (≥ for n=30). Because of that, all the items are valid and qualified to be analyzed further. The minimum rtable for 30 samples is 0.349. In this case, if the rtable
< rvalue, then the data is valid and if the rtable > rvalue then the data is not valid.
Correlations
Y.1 Y.2 Y.3 Y.4 Y.5 Y.6 Y.7 Y.8 Y.9
Productiv ity (Y) Y.1 Pearson
Correlation 1 ,151 ,292 ,374
* ,310 ,129 ,490
** ,284 ,559
** ,603**
Sig. (2-tailed) ,426 ,117 ,042 ,096 ,497 ,006 ,129 ,001 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Y.2 Pearson
Correlation ,151 1 ,195 ,648
**
,402
*
,371
*
,419
*
,498
**
,478
** ,665**
Sig. (2-tailed) ,426 ,301 ,000 ,028 ,043 ,021 ,005 ,007 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Y.3 Pearson
Correlation ,292 ,195 1 ,543
**
,527
**
-
,017 ,220 ,462
* ,277 ,557**
Sig. (2-tailed) ,117 ,301 ,002 ,003 ,930 ,243 ,010 ,138 ,001
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Y.4 Pearson Correlation
,374
*
,648
**
,543
** 1 ,413
* ,172 ,393
*
,402
*
,466
** ,696**
Sig. (2-tailed) ,042 ,000 ,002 ,023 ,362 ,032 ,027 ,009 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Y.5 Pearson
Correlation ,310 ,402
*
,527
**
,413
* 1 ,547
**
,565
**
,579
** ,322 ,741**
Sig. (2-tailed) ,096 ,028 ,003 ,023 ,002 ,001 ,001 ,082 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Y.6 Pearson
Correlation ,129 ,371
*
-
,017 ,172 ,547
** 1 ,631
** ,313 ,250 ,534**
Sig. (2-tailed) ,497 ,043 ,930 ,362 ,002 ,000 ,092 ,183 ,002
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Y.7 Pearson Correlation
,490
**
,419
* ,220 ,393
*
,565
**
,631
** 1 ,606
**
,584
** ,796**
Sig. (2-tailed) ,006 ,021 ,243 ,032 ,001 ,000 ,000 ,001 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Y.8 Pearson
Correlation ,284 ,498
**
,462
*
,402
*
,579
** ,313 ,606
** 1 ,691
** ,793**
Sig. (2-tailed) ,129 ,005 ,010 ,027 ,001 ,092 ,000 ,000 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Y.9 Pearson Correlation
,559
**
,478
** ,277 ,466
** ,322 ,250 ,584
**
,691
** 1 ,779**
Sig. (2-tailed) ,001 ,007 ,138 ,009 ,082 ,183 ,001 ,000 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Produ ctivit y (Y)
Pearson Correlation
,603
**
,665
**
,557
**
,696
**
,741
**
,534
**
,796
**
,793
**
,779
** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,000 ,001 ,000 ,000 ,002 ,000 ,000 ,000
N 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Table 4.2 Validity Result of Productivity Variable (Pre-test)
4.4.3 Reliability (Pre-testing)
After all the variables are being tested for validity, the reliability test was conducted for both variables (Training and Productivity). The result of reliability must follow the rule of Cronbach’s Alpha Method (r value is ≥ 0.70). Therefore, the questionnaire is reliable and can be spread to the respondents.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's Alpha Based on
Standardized
Items N of Items
.874 .878 16
Table 4.3 Reliability Result of Variables (Pre-test)
4.4.4 Training Validity (Post testing)
The table below shows the result of validity test of training variable after the questionnaires were distributed with minimum number of sample required to be valid. The result indicates that all items under this variable meet the requirement of minimum critical value determined by Pearson table of correlation (≥ for n = 100).
The minimum rtable for 100 samples is 0.195. In this case, if the rtable < rvalue, then the data is valid and if the rtable > rvalue then the data is not valid.
Correlations
X.1 X.2 X.3 X.4 X.5 X.6 X.7
Training (X) X.1 Pearson
Correlation 1 .305** .087 .274** .266** .072 -.123 .469**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .002 .390 .006 .008 .479 .222 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
X.2 Pearson
Correlation .305** 1 .188 .355** .203* .370** .088 .652**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .002 .061 .000 .043 .000 .383 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
X.3 Pearson
Correlation .087 .188 1 .197* .055 .145 .047 .438**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .390 .061 .049 .587 .150 .643 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
X.4 Pearson
Correlation .274** .355** .197* 1 .131 .300** .077 .603**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .006 .000 .049 .194 .002 .445 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
X.5 Pearson
Correlation .266** .203* .055 .131 1 .178 -.020 .542**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .008 .043 .587 .194 .077 .845 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
X.6 Pearson
Correlation .072 .370** .145 .300** .178 1 .248* .634**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .479 .000 .150 .002 .077 .013 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
X.7 Pearson
Correlation -.123 .088 .047 .077 -.020 .248* 1 .376**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .222 .383 .643 .445 .845 .013 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Training (X)
Pearson
Correlation .469** .652** .438** .603** .542** .634** .376** 1 Sig. (2-
tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Table 4.4 Validity Result of Productivity Variable (Post-test)
4.4.5 Productivity Validity (Post testing)
The table below shows the result of validity test of productivity variable after the questionnaires were distributed with minimum number of sample required to be valid. The result indicates that all items under this variable meet the requirement of minimum critical value determined by Pearson table of correlation (≥ for n = 100).
The minimum rtable for 100 samples is 0.195. In this case, if the rtable < rvalue, then the data is valid and if the rtable > rvalue then the data is not valid.
Correlations
Y.1 Y.2 Y.3 Y.4 Y.5 Y.6 Y.7 Y.8 Y.9
Productiv ity (Y)
Y.1 Pearson
Correlation 1 .220
*
.399
** .165 .213
* .189 .375
**
.219
*
.385
** .587**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .028 .000 .101 .033 .060 .000 .028 .000 .000 N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Y.2 Pearson
Correlation .220
* 1 .248
*
- .034
.340
**
.251
* .175 .191 .059 .486**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .028 .013 .737 .001 .012 .082 .056 .557 .000 N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Y.3 Pearson
Correlation .399
**
.248
* 1 .268
**
.266
**
.322
**
.348
** .163 .402
** .655**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .000 .013 .007 .007 .001 .000 .105 .000 .000 N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Y.4 Pearson
Correlation .165 - .034
.268
** 1 .313
** .039 .118 .043 .190 .453**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .101 .737 .007 .002 .698 .242 .673 .059 .000 N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Y.5 Pearson
Correlation .213
*
.340
**
.266
**
.313
** 1 .385
**
.315
**
.387
**
.206
* .662**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .033 .001 .007 .002 .000 .001 .000 .040 .000 N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Y.6 Pearson
Correlation .189 .251
*
.322
** .039 .385
** 1 .390
**
.218
*
.304
** .581**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .060 .012 .001 .698 .000 .000 .029 .002 .000 N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Y.7 Pearson
Correlation .375
** .175 .348
** .118 .315
**
.390
** 1 .462
**
.448
** .665**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .000 .082 .000 .242 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Y.8 Pearson
Correlation .219
* .191 .163 .043 .387
**
.218
*
.462
** 1 .135 .529**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .028 .056 .105 .673 .000 .029 .000 .181 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Y.9 Pearson
Correlation .385
** .059 .402
** .190 .206
*
.304
**
.448
** .135 1 .588**
Sig. (2-
tailed) .000 .557 .000 .059 .040 .002 .000 .181 .000 N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Produc
tivity (Y)
Pearson Correlation
.587
**
.486
**
.655
**
.453
**
.662
**
.581
**
.665
**
.529
**
.588
** 1
Sig. (2-
tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Table 4.5 Validity Result of Productivity Variable (Post-test)
4.4.6 Reliability (Post testing)
After all the variables are being tested for validity, the reliability test was conducted for both variables (Training and Productivity). The result of reliability must follow the rule of Cronbach’s Alpha Method (r value is ≥ 0.70). Therefore, the questionnaire is reliable and can be spread to the respondents.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's Alpha Based on
Standardized Items N of Items
.704 .726 16
Table 4.6 Reliability Result of Variables (Post-test)
4.5 Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics illustrate the description of the data used to generate the regression equation. In this descriptive statistics, the value of the minimum, maximum, mean and standard deviation will be shown. Here is a description of the statistical results obtained based on the data that is processed.
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation Training (X) 100 13,00 35,00 25,5700 4,82472 Productivity (Y) 100 16,00 45,00 32,9700 5,92112 Valid N
(listwise)
100
Table 4.7 Descriptive Statistics
Based on the table above can be seen the average value of variable Training (X) is 25,5700 and the value of standard deviation is 4,82472. The average value of variable Productivity (Y) is 32,9700 and the value of standard deviation is 5,92112.
4.6 Data Analysis
4.6.1 Classical Assumption Test
To determine whether the result of regression model is the regression model that produces the best unbiased linear estimator, it is necessary to test the assumption of the classical model deviance symptoms. The first classical assumptions that must be met in order to obtain a good regression model is normality, non-multicollinearity, non-heteroscedasticity, and non-autocorrelation. From the four assumptions, multicollinearity and autocorrelation are not tested. Testing non-autocorrelation symptoms is used for time series data, while the data used in this study is a cross section because the data was captured at the time the questionnaires were distributed, so that non-autocorrelation symptoms is not tested.
4.6.1.1 Normality Test
This test is being conducted to see whether the data used in this study were normally distributed or not. Regression model is good when the data distribution is normal or near normal. In this study, Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test is being used to test the normality.
Criteria for decision making with Kolmogorov Smirnov test are:
• If the significance > 0.05, then the regression model has a standard normal error
• If the significance < 0.05, then the regression model has a standard error that is not normal
From the figure above, it is apparent that the points are scattered around the regression line, which indicated that the data is normally distributed.
One Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Unstandardized Residual
N 100
Normal Parametersa,b Mean ,0000000
Std. Deviation 4,43339103 Most Extreme Differences
Absolute ,079 Positive ,036 Negative -,079
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z ,787
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) ,565
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
Table 4.8 One Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
From the results above, the value of p-value for residual value is greater than 0,05. Due to the significance of the KS-Z value are > 0.05, it can be concluded that the data were normally distributed.
4.6.1.2 Heteroscedasticity Test
Heteroscedasticity test is being conducted to test whether the regression model occurs inequality of variance from one observation to other observation or not. If the residual variance from one observation to the other observation is constant, means that the regression model is homokedasticity. A good regression model should have homoscedasticity of variance.
Glejser test is done by regressing the independent variables to absolute value residual. Interpretation of heteroscedasticity is looking at the significance of the independent variables partially to ABS. Heteroscedasticity occurs when there is a significant relationship between the independent variables of the absolute residual.
Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1
(Constant) 4,464 1,492 2,991 ,004
Training (X)
-,039 ,057 -,069 -,682 ,497
a. Dependent Variable: ABS
Table 4.9 Heteroscedasticity Test Table
From the table above, significance values from independent variable is greater than 0.05, which means there is no significant relationship between the independent variable on the absolute value of residual. Thus the assumption of non- heteroscedasticity model is met.
4.7 Regression Analysis
In this phase, Linear Regression analysis will be conducted. Regression method is used to measure how Training (X1) variable influence toward Productivity (Y).
Coefficients
Model Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1
(Constant) 12,169 2,415 5,039 ,000
Training (X)
,813 ,093 ,663 8,764 ,000
a. Dependent Variable: Productivity (Y) Table 4.10 Regression Analysis
From the table were obtained regression equation as follows:
Y = 12,169 + 0,813 X In which :
• X : Training
• Y : Productivity
From the multiple linear regression equation above can be explained that the regression coefficient for Training variable is 0.813, it means that if the value of Training variable increases by one unit, then the value of Productivity variable will increase by 0.813 units.
4.8 Hypothesis Testing
The influence of independent variables on the dependent variable was analyzed using t-test, taking into account the level of 95% or 5% alpha. In this study, the t test is used to test whether the hypothesis proposed in this study is acceptable or not, to determine if the independent variable (X) affects the dependent variable (Y).
Model Summary
Model R R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1 ,663a ,439 ,434 4,45595
a. Predictors: (Constant), Training (X) b. Dependent Variable: Productivity (Y) Table 4.11 Hypothesis Testing Table
From the table above, the result of R Square Value will be determined. It is used to find out how great the independent variable affecting the dependent variable. The result was determined in the table above. R Square Value for this hypothesis is 0.439 and that means 43.9% of the dependent variable (Productivitiy) affected by Training.
The other 56.1% caused by the other factors not mentioned in this study.
ANOVA
ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) is used to determine whether the linear model used for this analysis is accurate or not. This is shown by the value of sig. When sig.
value is less than 0.05 the the model is accurate.
Model Sum of
Squares
df Mean
Square
F Sig.
1
Regression 1525,069 1 1525,069 76,808 ,000b Residual 1945,841 98 19,856
Total 3470,910 99
a. Dependent Variable: Productivity (Y) b. Predictors: (Constant), Training (X) Table 4.12 ANOVA Table
Hypothesis
H1: Regression model can be used to determine the dependent variable H0: Regression model cannot be used to determine the dependent variable
Decision Making
If the Sig. value is > α (α = 0.05), H0 is not rejected, H1 is rejected If the Sig. value is < α (α = 0.05), H0 is rejected, H1 is not rejected
Result
The Sig. value of variable in ANOVA table shows the value of 0.000 (<α), which means that H0 is not rejected and H1 is rejected. Therefore, training can affect the employee productivity.
Coefficients
The coefficients table is used to determine whether the proposed hypothesis is approved or rejected.
Model Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1
(Constant) 12,169 2,415 5,039 ,000
Training (X)
,813 ,093 ,663 8,764 ,000
Dependent Variable: Productivity (Y)
Table 4.13 Coefficients Table Hypothesis
H1: Training Program will affect the Employee Productivity in Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Jakarta.
H0: Training Program will not affect the Employee Productivity in Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Jakarta.
Decision Making
If the Sig. value is > α (α = 0.05), H0 is not rejected, H1 is rejected If the Sig. value is < α (α = 0.05), H0 is rejected, H1 is not rejected
Result
From the SPSS output obtained that t-score = 8.764 with a significance value = 0,000. Since the significance value is 0.000, which is lower than α = 0.05, then the decision is H0 is rejected and H1 is not rejected. So, there is a significant influence between Training towards Productivity. The t-column or t-score shows a value of 8.764 and the t-table is 5.039. This shows that there is a realistic relationship between the two variables.
4.9 Results and Analysis 4.9.1 Surveys Analysis
The survey utilized both Multiple Choice and Likert-Style Rating Questions. This method was chosen because it can be easily answered by the participants and it is more effective to analyze. Likert-Style Rating Questions are mostly scale but it can be easily changed into numbers, so this method were used in the surveys (Kothari, 2004). The answer rate that were used in this surveys are as follows:
1: Strongly Disagree 2: Disagree
3: Neutral 4: Agree
5: Strongly Agree
First, this part will explain about all the answers from the multiple-choice questions, see Figure 4.5.
Figure 4.5 Did you have training when you started? (Orientation)
As can be seen from Figure 4.5, all of the employees in Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Jakarta got their training when they started (Orientation). To get training at the start of working will really help the employees, as it can introduce them to the department’s goals and how to achieve those goals. Moreover, to make the new employees feel more comfortable and welcome by all of the team (Root III, n.d.).
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
5. Did you have training when you started? (Orientation)
Yes
Figure 4.6 Does the organization conducts training for the employees?
In Figure 4.6, the result shows that 100% of the respondents give a positive answer, which is Yes. It means that the company always gives them training and that is a very good approach from the company. As has been mentioned in the literature review, Jackson (1989, cited in Thackwray, 2014) said that training could help to improve the efficiency, productivity, and effectiveness of a company by developing the skill and knowledge of the employees.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
7. Does the organization conducts an induction training program for its
employees?
Yes
Figure 4.7 How often do you get your training?
Figure 4.7 above shows about the frequency of the training that the hotel provided to the employees. ‘Once a week’ training gets a lot of results with 47%, so the hotel provide the employees the training every once a week. Competing with ‘Few times a month’ with 41%. Meanwhile, ‘Once a month’ training gets lesser results with 8%
and ‘Few times a week’ gets 4%. According to Kirkpatrick (2009), the best frequency on training is between once in two weeks and once a month. But, from the results, it can be seen that the employees get training every once a week, which is different from the theory. On the other hand, the second best results is close to the theory which is few times a month and that can be translated into once in two weeks.
4
47
41
8 0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Few times a week Once a week Few times a month Once a month
8. How often do you get your
training?
Figure 4.8 What methods were used in the training?
As can be seen from Figure 4.8, there are a lot of methods that were used in the training. Out of all methods, the highest results goes to Demonstration and Simulation with 66%. Not far behind from the first one is On-the-job Training with 60%. Moreover, Seminar gets 31% from 100%. The next results can be get from Off- the-job Training with only 2% and others with 1%. Internal Department Sharing were used in the hotel as the answer for the Others. According to Tapomoy (2006), Demonstration and Simulation is one of the training methods where the trainer shows the employees on how to do things and will apply it in a situation that is similar to real-life condition. While On-the-job training is where the employees get guidance from the trainers on how to do their job (Geet et al., 2009). It’s basically the same to each other but On-the-job training is more to Individual Training while Demonstration and Simulation is more to Group Training. That is why the results are not so far behind (Tapomoy, 2006).
31
60
2
66
9 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
9. What methods were used in the
training?
Top Impacts of Training for Employees in Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Jakarta
Impacts of Training Mean
Standard Deviation (SD)
Rank
“Training Programs enhance my capability as an employee of this company”
4.24 0.588 1
“Training programs provide me with the
knowledge to complete the job accurately” 4.12 0.556 2
“Training programs result in faster performance
rate” 3.94 0.664 3
“It induces better cooperation and teamwork
between each other” 3.84 0.631 4
“Proper training programs reduce the possibility
of accidents” 3.81 0.734 5
“I am motivated by training programs to work
harder in the company” 3.79 0.782 6
“Staff Trainings can create more satisfaction
and security to accomplish the job” 3.72 0.683 7
“With proper training program, I don’t need a
lot of supervision” 3.27 0.886 8
Table 4.14 Impacts of Training for Employees in Mandarin Oriental, Jakarta
Table 4.14 above explained a clearer idea of what impacts that the employees think the most as caused by training programs. There are 8 main impacts that are being analyzed during the surveys. According to the table, enhancing their capability has been ranked one with standard deviation 0.588 and mean of 4.24. It looks like trainings really help them in moving forward in their job and producing more productive results. Proper training program can help boost the productivity for the employee to do a better job and make fewer errors and actually training program is
one of the causes that can increase job productivity (Saks et al., 2010). As can be seen from the table, trainings can motivate the employees to work harder in the company has ranked sixth with mean of 3.79 and standard deviation of 0.782. It seems like the employee needs more than just a training to increase their productivity because according to Lipman (2013), the employee needs to feel like the company is loyal to them by giving them bonuses and incentives.
However, less supervision from the employee has ranked last with the mean of 3.27 and standard deviation of 0.886. The mean is the smallest with the number closer to the ‘neutral’ and not ‘agree’. Even though training program can increase their skills and abilities to make them can work alone. But the employees don’t feel the same way, as they still need supervision from their supervisors or managers. According to Sommerville (2007), trainings can benefit the organization as it can help to increase profitability with the employees know their job better and need less supervision. It means that the supervisors can work on something else and not watching their subordinates all the time.
Effective Training Programs according to the Employees of Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Jakarta
Effective Training Program Mean
Standard Deviation (SD)
Rank
“Training Program should implement the
organizational culture of the company” 4.37 0.580 1
“Training plan should be a continuous
learning process for personnel” 4.32 0.634 2
“The training instructors should be from
inside of the company” 3.98 0.70 3
“Training should be divided into stages
of delivery” 3.97 0.643 4
“It should ensure the health and safety of
the employees” 3.92 0.720 5
“Staff Training should pay special attention to the technical competency of the personnel of the company”
3.88 0.729 6
“In a training program, good
performances must be rewarded” 3.87 0.734 7
Table 4.15 Effective Training Programs according to the employees
Based on table 4.15, the employees have answered the surveys and there are 7 factors to be analyzed. As calculated from the surveys, the employees think that the effective training program should implement the organizational culture of the company, as it ranks first. As stated by Wang & King (2009), in analyzing the topic of learning then it has to match with the company’s goals and objectives. The reason is because training program has the ability to increase the knowledge of the employees and the knowledge that they get should represent the company itself, so it can produce the highest results. To explain more, the employees like to have a continuous process of learning, where the statement received the average of 4.32 and standard deviation of 0.634, which means the employees want more and more training as it can boost their quality for their own benefits and also the company. In accordance to ADDIE Model, the letter itself stands for a continuous process in giving an effective training (Wang
& King, 2009). For the availability of the trainers, the employees ranked them as the third with the mean of 3.98 and standard deviation of 0.70. This means that the employee doesn’t really care about who the trainer is as long as they have the quality to be one and can help them enhance their ability to produce better service quality.
Because according to DeNisi & Griffin (2015), in-the-house trainer knows more about the employee and the company very well but somehow outsourced trainer can draw upon expertise that is not available inside.
However, the employees think that a good performance in a training program doesn’t need to be rewarded. It ranked last out of all the statement above. The benefits of training itself are actually a good reward for them as trainings have a lot of advantages to the employees. In relation to this, Mullins (2007) stated that by having
staff trainings then the employee will increase in skills and knowledge. That can improve their requirement and capability they need for their further job promotion, and promotion is actually the goals of every employees in the company.
Question 11:
“I am motivated by training programs to work harder in the company”
Mean
Standard Deviation
(SD) Rank
18-25 3.88 0.746 1
26-35 3.86 0.593 2
36-45 3.28 1.139 3
Overall 3.67 0.826
Table 4.16 Comparison between question 11 and age
According to Table 4.16, the statement states that training programs can motivate the employees to work harder in a company. Most respondents with age 18-25 (Generation Y and Z) ranks highest out of the 3 categories and mostly agree that training programs that the company provided can motivate them. The reason is because at their age, they’re still looking for development for their career. Supported by Reynolds (2005, cited in harbott.com, 2011), he said that most Generations Y and Z are getting motivated by their skill development to excel more in their career.
Moreover, respondents with age 36-45 ranks last because as they’re all mostly in the highest position of their career and they’re actually the ones who provides the training to the employees. As mentioned by Axelsson & Bokedal (2009), they said that all Baby Boomers with mostly age 36-45 gets motivated by their salary and the perks of working there, such as health insurance and company cars.
Question 17:
“With proper training program, I don’t need a lot of supervision”
Mean Standard Deviation
(SD) Rank
Few times a week 3.57 0.514 1
Once a week 3.35 0.770 2
Few times a month 3.12 0.946 3
Once a month 2.67 1.155 4
Overall 3.18 0.846
Table 4.17 Comparison of question 17 and the frequency of training
Table 4.17 above explains about the frequency of training in the company and question number 17. The statement shows that with a proper training program then the employees won’t need a lot of supervision. According to Sommerville (2007) in the literature review, employees that receive more training will help to improve the profitability as it also means less supervision from the managers. But, in this case most of the employees who get once in month training disagree with the statement.
Because the frequency of the training is slightly lesser than the others and that is why the employees still need more supervision from the managers.
Question 21:
“The training instructors should be from inside of the company”
Mean Standard Deviation
(SD) Rank
Others 4.5 0.707 1
Food & Beverage 3.92 0.688 2
Front Office 3.91 0.668 3
Housekeeping 3.73 0.631 4
Kitchen 3.29 1.047 5
Overall 3.87 0.748
Table 4.18 Comparison of different departments to question 21
According to Table 4.18, the results from the different department in the hotel show that most of them agree that the instructors should be from inside the company.
Based on Cassidy & Kreitner (2009), there are 2 kinds of trainers, which are from the inside and outsourced. The trainers should be qualified with sufficient skills and knowledge about the company (Meifert et al., 2014). To explain the table, other departments gained from Finance and Human Resource, which they like to have an inside training instructors as they will know more about the condition of the company. Moreover, Finance department deals with money and accounting that connected to the company and so it might be best to have the trainer from inside.
Both F&B and Front Office respondents agree that the trainer should be from the inside. Housekeeping employees agree that the trainers should be from inside of the company, as they know more about all parts of the hotel and especially machines for laundry division. It is known that outsourced trainers tend to be more general and there will be less applicability to what the company and employee need (DeNisi &
Griffin, 2015). Lastly, Kitchen holds the last rank as Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Jakarta likes to invite international chef from around the world to cook and feature in the hotel. Most of the international chefs would train and introduce the employees to a new approach of cooking.
4.9.2 Interviews Analysis
Secondly, the following tables and paragraphs will explain the analysis from the interviews conducted from Email and Skype from 16th April 2015 to 23rd April 2015 with 3 Mandarin Oriental, Jakarta managers from various departments. For this study, the abbreviation of A, B, C was used to keep interviewees anonymous.
DEMOGRAPHICS TABLE
No Question A B C
1 What is your current position?
Executive Housekeeper
Laundry and Linen Manager
Learning &
Development Executive
2
How many years have you been working in the
industry?
20 years 23 years 6 years
3
How many years have you worked in Mandarin
Oriental Hotel, Jakarta?
4 years 6 years 6 years
4 What is your last education?
Diploma of Hotel School
High School plus 1 year Hotel Course
3rd Diploma Hotel Management
(Higher Diploma) Table 4.19 Interviewees Demographic Data
Based on table 4.19, the interviewees are mostly from Housekeeping Department and Human Resources Department. The reason is to know more about the insight and view from the one who gives the training in person, which is why Learning and Development Executive was chosen. Moreover, the other 2 interviewees are from Housekeeping Department because mostly in different hotels there are different approaches on how they provide the training to the employees and the choices were random. To explain more, all the interviewees are seniors in the hotel industry with an average of 17 years experience in hotel industry and they have been working with Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Jakarta for an average of 5 years. Last but not least, all the interviewees are graduated from a Diploma or Higher Diploma. The results of the interviews can be seen on the next page.
No Question A B C
5
How many kinds of training are there in the
Hotel? Can you please name them?
FLHSS and Guest Satisfaction
Training
Employees Cross Training
and Student Trainee
FLHSS&E (Fire, Life, Health, Safety,
Security, and Environmental),
Guest Satisfaction
Training, Leadership
Training Program
6
Have you ever conducted the training program? Are there any
levels of training?
Yes Yes Yes
7
What are your considerations before implementing a training
scheme?
Number of people, Handouts, Training Tools
Duration, Level of Participants,
Topic
Training needs, Date & Time, Venue, Number
of Participants, Training Tools
8 What are the advantages of training program?
As a refresher, to standardize
of doing something
The employee can do better even without less supervision
Increased efficiency of
employees, Reduced supervision,
Reduced turnover, Improve self-
confidence, Increase motivation
levels
9 Are there any
disadvantages? No No No
10
As an eco-friendly hotel, are there any differences on the training program
rather than the usual hotel? What are they
No, there is no difference
Yes, learning how to work productively
while maintaining the environment and
comply with government’s
regulation
Yes, by using recycle paper for the training
tools
11
Do you think the purposes are achieved after the training? What
are the results of training?
Yes, as the people will get
better understanding of the standard
Yes, they can get a big picture
and knowledge of the task and responsibility
Yes, the employees will
be more confident, can
adjust well to the working environment,
and leads to chances of better effort
from them
12
Do you have any opinion or general thoughts about training?
Or maybe recommendations?
Training is a key to achieve
better customer satisfaction
No
Training program is vital to the long-term
success.
Moreover, it can increase motivation, morale, and productivity,
also higher profit.
Table 4.20 Managers Interviews Results
According to Table 4.20, question 4 tells about what kinds of training that Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Jakarta give to their employee. Most of the interviewees answered the same answer which is they provide the FLHSS&E (Fire, Life, Health, Safety, Security, and Environmental) Training and Guest Satisfaction Training (Guest Recognition Training, Handling Complaint, Guest Preference, Telephone Etiquette, and Culture Awareness). With an addition from the L&D Executive, which is the Leadership Training Programme (On The Job Training Technique, Group Training Technique, Move Up, Move Forward, Managing Leadership Programme, Interview for Success, and Presenting for Success). To explain more, There are only 3 staffs under the Learning and Development Department. They are the one that is taking care the employee for the training. As can be seen from the explanation from the training above, the hotel provides the employees with a lot of kind of training, which is very important to them. As what Price (2007) said that the aim of HRM is to increase organization’s development and capability by utilizing their people.
Moreover, the company wants to make the best use of their employees and that way it can increase the economic returns (Armstrong, 2010). That is why most of the company provides training to their employees, as it is very important. It is important for both the company and the employees. If the employees can excel more then it can benefits the company as well.
From the question 7, it is known that there are pretty much a lot of considerations before conducting the training. Most of the interviewees answered the same thing, which is number of participants and training tools. Both of them are very important in conducting training. As been explained by Wang & King (2009), in ADDIE Model there is one process, which called ‘Analyze’. In this stage, the trainer should consider about the learning environment, how to deliver it, and timeline for the training.
Moreover, in question 8, the interviewees were all asked about the advantages of training program. 2 out of 3 managers answered that with training programs then the employees will need less supervision for them. As supported by Hayes & Ninemeier (2008), training programs give them new ability to do things and so the employees can do their work effectively. Moreover, they can become value-added employees who can achieve the best results for the company. Besides reducing the level of supervision, the trainings also produce a lot of benefits according to the L&D
Executive as it can increase the efficiency of the employees, improve self- confidence, and increasing their motivation level while they’re working. According to Stone (2008, cited in Lee-Ross & Pryce, 2010), trainings can encourage self- development and self-confidence as the employees receive more trainings then they can have more skills and knowledge that will impact their confidence to produce service quality. Based on table 4.13, all 3 managers said that there are no disadvantages of trainings program and it shows some differences from what Saks et al., (2010) has said. He said that trainings have 3 disadvantages such as, time, qualifications, and cost. But according to the managers’ answer, the staff training doesn’t produce any disadvantages for them because the benefits are much bigger than the loss. Because of training programs, the employees gain more ability to perform better and that means increase the service and also profit from the guests.
As an Eco-Friendly Hotel, Mandarin Oriental Jakarta provides the employee with green training as 2 out of 3 managers answered that there are some differences with the regular training. The manager said that using recycle paper for the training is one of the examples. Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Jakarta is one of the hotels that are using the green approach (mandarinoriental.com). That is why Mandarin Oriental Jakarta is using recycle paper as their training tools to support the 3R (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle).
Last but not least is question number 11, which is most important as all 3 managers agree that the purposes of training are achieved after getting it. This research concluded that trainings could produce a good result as all 3 managers were agreeing to that. Because of training programs, the employees can get a better understanding on the company, better knowledge of their task and responsibility, and leads to a better effort from the employees to create the best performance from them. And adequate training program is a must for all the employees as trained employees can produce higher job productivity and performance (Saks et al., 2010).
Based on the quantitative and qualitative data, it appears that training program holds an important role in their job, especially in increasing the job productivity and performance. Both the employees and managers are agreeing that training programs really contribute to the quality of the employees, thus can aid in reducing the supervision from the employers. Mostly, both of their answers are correlating with each other as they both agree that the training should be for a long time and as a
continuous process in a company. In a nutshell, the employers need to give the employees training programs as they feel that by having staff trainings can really boost their ability in producing the best service quality.
