Employee’s job performance plays a crucial role in an organization's overall performance, not to mention that employees with excellent performances will be able to help the organization accomplish its main objectives, thus enhancing its competitive advantages. In addition, understanding employee performance allows managers to choose among different options in terms of compensation, promotions, and bonuses in order to promote changes in employee’s job performance.

However, under the "Development of specific tourism products in the Mekong Delta" project, the direct labor force in the region's tourism industry consists of only 95,440 employees. These figures show that the shortage of human resources in the future will become a problem to be addressed. In addition, according to the study on the tourism workforce in the three Mekong Delta provinces (Can Tho, Kien Giang, and An Giang) of the European Union Project in 2015, the most serious issue in the field of ​​accommodation and tourism is the shortage of qualified labor. In particular, only about 15-20% of employees actually meet the requirements of the tourism industry while 50-60% are partly qualified, and the rest do not meet the job requirements. 

According to the Kien Giang Department of Tourism, during the period between 2016 and 2018, the number of visitors to Kien Giang Province increased steadily over the years. Specifically, the number of visitors reached 2,716,612 in 2017, which was an increase of 7.9% over the same period. By 2018, there were 3,359,683 visitors, exceeding 14.5% of the plan. Therefore, it is necessary to implement solutions with a view to improving the quality of human resources in the hospitality industry in Kien Giang Province. Specifically, this study aims to evaluate employee performance through the evaluation of factors affecting employee’s job performance, thus proposing some administrative implications to help businesses enhance the quality of employees' job performance.

Literature Review and Research Model

2.1 Definition and measurement methods of performance

Performance is a term commonly mentioned by many researchers in human resource management. However, employee's job performance is still a rather abstract and unpopular concept because there is very little research that proposes a complete definition [1].

Table 1. Performance Measurement Scale

Source: Authors’ synthesis, 2019

Figure 1: Factors that affect job performance by Carter, S., Shelton, M [6], Blumberg, M. and Pringle [5]

Sources: Carter, S., Shelton, M [4], Blumberg, M. và Pringle [5]

Figure 2: Factors that affect job performance by Korkaew Jankingthong, Suthinee Rurkkhum [8]

Sources: Korkaew Jankingthong, Suthinee Rurkkhum [8]

Bourguimon put forward a view on performance based on the three following meanings:

• performance is a success and that success depends on people or other factors in the organization

• performance is the result of an action whereby performance measurement is an activity that examines the results achieved

• performance is an action because it leads to success thanks to the management process, information on results, the process of building and testing the employees' working objectives in the organization

In addition, according to Elias and Scarbrough [2], employee’s job performance is determined as a criterion to evaluate the capacity and performance of employees in the construction of compensation, bonus and quality assurance systems within the organizations.

To sum up, in this study, the employee’s job performance within an organization is an indicator of work objective accomplishments that are geared towards employee and organizational benefits. Employee’s job performance in the hospitality industry is a criterion assessed by the mindset, capacity and level of work completion of each employee in accordance with requirements set out by the organization. Depending on the industry characteristics, job characteristics, and organizational characteristics, each organization has different ways and criteria to evaluate employee performance. From the above theories, the author proposes a measurement scale of performance, including four observed variables, denoted from KQCV1 to KQCV4. These variables are measured using a five-level Likert scale. The attributes of job performance are specified as follows:

Factors that affect job performance

In addition, empirical studies indicate that an employee’s job performance is influenced by a variety of factors. The study of Lim Kah Boon et al. [3] surveyed 170 employees working in different fields in Melaka and Kuala Lumpur. The research team proposed a model consisting of five factors that affect employee' job performance, namely income, reward and encouragement, working environment, teamwork, and personal characteristics. The research concluded that these factors create impacts on job performance; however, personal characteristics and teamwork are two factors that significantly influence employee’s job performance.

According to Carter and Shelton [4], Blumberg and Pringle [5], it was concluded that employee's job performance depends on three factors: personal competency, working environment (resources) and job motivation. In order for an individual to achieve high performance, it is necessary that all three requirements are met because once one of the three factors is not guaranteed, it might lead to a negative impact on an individual's or group’s performance.

Jankingthong and Rurkkhum [7] test the impact of 3 factors with specific measurement criteria on employee’s job performance, including:

• leadership (the degree of influence of leadership style on employees, the ability to motivate employees, the ability to solve personal issues related to employees, and the ability to stimulate employees’ creativity)

• organizational fairness (fairness in performance distribution, fairness in regulations, and fairness in employee evaluation)

• work effort (the ability to accomplish objectives, the ability to contribute, and the ability to try). The implications of the studies confirmed that all factors have a significant impact on employee’s job performance. This is a specific illustration of the model (Figure 2)

Besides, Nguyen Quoc Nghi [9] has also launched a research model that predicts personal competency, job motivation, working environment, and leadership style positively influence employee’s job performance in the field of tourism.

Based on the conclusions of those studies, the proposed model of this study is shown in Figure 2. The research proposes four factors that affect an employee’s job performance, including job motivation, working environment, leadership style, and personal competency. If there is a lack of one of the three requirements, which are personal competency, job motivation, and working environment, it will negatively affect employee’s job  performance. Meanwhile, leadership style is a factor of great importance to the employee’s job performance [7].

Research Area and Subject

In 2018, Kien Giang Province has approximately 710 tourist accommodations (these accommodations have been rated at over 68%), accounting for over 25% of the number of tourist accommodations in the Mekong Delta. Therefore, the survey was conducted at 112 hotels in the private sector and 8 hotels in the foreign sector in Kien Giang Province.

Data Collection Method 

The data were collected via direct interviews through a questionnaire with a sample size of 120 observations. According to Hair et al. [10], the number of observations in the Exploratory Factor Analysis method usually must be at least 4 or 5 times the number of observed variables in the factor analysis. The research proposes 18 variables affecting the employee’s job performance, so the sample size was determined as follows: 5˟18 = 90. For this reason, the number of observations is demonstrated to meet the requirements for data analysis.

Data Nalysis Method 

The research aims to test the reliability of the job performance scale and factors affecting job performance using the Crombach’s Alpha analysis method and the Exploratory Factor Analysis method. To analyze the relationships and the impact of these factors on job performance, the study has used the multivariate linear regression analysis method.

Work Characteristics of the Hotel Employees in Kien Giang Province

Survey results from 120 respondents showed that the number of Kien Giang's hotel employees working in private enterprises were 112, accounting for 93.3%, while the number of employees working for foreign enterprises is 8, accounting for 6.7%. As state-owned enterprises are relatively rare in Kien Giang Province and the research scope is limited, hotel employees working in this type of enterprise cannot be accessed.

Table 2: Work characteristics of hotel employees in Kien Giang Province

Source: Survey responses from 120 hotel staff in Kien Giang Province, 2019

Table 3: Level of work completion of hotel employees Kien Giang province

Source: Survey responses from 120 hotel staff in Kien Giang Province, 2019

Table 4: Cronbach’s Alpha Test Results

Source: Survey responses from 120 hotel staff in Kien Giang Province, 2019 Cumulative of variance = 50,528; KMO =  0,673; Sig. = 0,000

Table 5: Exploratory Factor Analysis results regarding factors that affect job performance

Source: Survey responses from 120 hotel staff in Kien Giang Province, 2019 KMO = 0,787; Sig. = 0,000; Total Eigenvalues = 1,064; Cumulative of variance = 59,102

Table 6: Multivariate linear regression analysis results

Source: Survey responses from 120 hotel staff in Kien Giang Province, 2019 Adjusted R² = 0,517 Sig. = 0,000 Durbin – Watson test coefficient = 1,938

The sample of 120 employees working at the hotels, which is equally distributed in 5 groups of departments, is shown in detail in Table 2. Particularly, there are 41 employees working in reception (accounting for 34.2%), 28 employees working in the restaurant department (accounting for 23.3%). Likewise, the number of employees in the finance, business development, and human resources departments is 17 (14.2%), followed by the room service department with the number of employees being 19, accounting for 15.8%. There are 15 employees in the supporting departments, including security, technical, and entertainment, accounting for 12.5%. Considering the degree of engagement of hotel employees at the surveyed enterprises, the proportion of under 5 years accounted for the highest rate (85.8%), followed by the level of engagement from 5 years to 10 years accounting for 14,2%.

Hotel Employee’s Job Performance Evaluation In Kien Giang Province 

Although self-assessment regarding job performances from employees will be highly subjective, it is also an interesting reference channel. The survey results demonstrate that the proportion of employees who self-assessed as having an excellent level of work completion, often exceeding the requirements, accounted for a very small rate of only 4.2%. In contrast, those whose levels of work completion are considered good or highly appreciated, often meeting the requirements and sometimes exceeding the requirements, are relatively high with 49.2%, equivalent to 59 employees. Finally, the number of employees who have a relatively good level of work completion, regularly meeting the requirements, is 56 employees (less than 46.6%).

Testing the Job Performance Scale and Factors Affecting Job Performance

Through the proposed research model, job performance is influenced by job motivation, working environment, leadership style, and personal competency. However, the factors included in this research model are made up of variables taken from previous studies’ definitions, so it is necessary to test the reliability and suitability of the measurement scales.

Testing these scales was conducted through the use of Cronbach’s Alpha reliability coefficient to eliminate variables tgat are not appropriate. If the observed variable has a total correlation coefficient of less than 0.3, it will be rejected. Similarly, Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients that are greater than or equal to 0.6 will be retained.

Before conducting factor analysis, it is necessary to verify the suitability of the research model through the KMO index (0.5<KMO<1) and evaluate the correlations within the population through Bartlett's Test (when Sig. <0.05). We also perform similar steps for the job performance measurement scale. The test results in Table 4 indicate that KMO = 0.673, which is in the range of 0.5 - 1, satisfies the conditions of factor analysis. Moreover, Sig. value of Bartlett’s test of 0.000 demonstrates that the observed variables are correlated in the population. In addition, the factor loading of observed variables in the scale is greater than 0.5 (0.660-0.786). The cumulative of variance from the job performance scale is equal to 50.52%, which is over 50%. This figure illustrates that 50.52% of the variation in the job performance scale is explained with the observed variables in the study. Therefore, the observed variables in the job performance scale are retained for conducting multivariate linear regression analysis.

Furthermore, the KMO test is performed in the case that the remaining 4 groups of factors reach 0.787, satisfying the conditions of factor analysis. Besides, Sig value. equals 0.000, which is less than 0.05, showing that the observed variables are correlated with each other. The extraction method used in factor analysis of this study is the Principal Component Analysis, with an Eigenvalues ​​value greater than 1. Moreover, it is combined with the Varimax rotation method to identify variables that explain others. The results of factor analysis in Table 5 show that the factor loading of the observed variables in the scale is greater than 0.5 and the total Eigenvalues ​​is 1,064, which is greater than 1. Furthermore, the cumulative of variance of the research model is 59,102%, indicating that the model is appropriate and reliable. In other words, 59,102% of the variability of the scale of factors is explained with the observed variables in the current model.

Multivariate Linear Regression Analysis

Multivariate regression analysis was performed between the dependent variable (Y), job performance, and 4 independent variables (X), including job motivation, working environment, leadership style, and personal competency. Based on the aforementioned theories and analysis, the author has put the research model into regression analysis using the Enter method in order to select the influencing factors with a significance level of less than 0.05.

Multivariate linear regression results prove that R² is 0.533 and adjusted R² has a value of 0.517. These figures mean the model explains 51.7% of the impact of the factors included in the model on employee’s job performance. Additionally, the results show that there is no collinearity phenomenon among the proposed variables in the model as the VIF coefficients of variables are less than 10. Therefore, it was concluded that there was no hypothetical violation.

The Durbin - Watson coefficient test shows a value of 1,938, which satisfies the condition that it has to be greater than 1 and less than 3. Consequently, there is no autocorrelation phenomenon. Simultaneously, the Sig coefficient. Through the ANOVA test is equal to 0.000 and less than 0.05, illustrating that the model is established in accordance with the practical meaning.

From the regression analysis results, the following regression equation is proposed:

Y (Job performance) = 0,312 (Job motivation) + 0,323 (Working environment) + 0,502 (Leadership style) + 0,283 (Personal competency)

Beta is used to assess the impact of these factors on the employee’s job performance. The higher the Beta is, the more these factors affect job performance. Accordingly, there are some specific conclusions derived from the above equation:

“Job motivation” has a Sig. value of 0,000, less than the 0.05 significance level, which suggests that this factor is significant in the research model. With the regression coefficient reaching the value of 0.312, it indicates that job motivation has a positive impact on the performance of hotel employees in Kien Giang province. Moreover, a number of other studies have also affirmed that motivation is one of the factors that directly affect the performance of employees, including Le Tran Thach Thao and Chiou-shu J. Hwang [11], Nguyen Quoc Nghi [9], Nguyen Thi Phuong Dung and Nguyen Hoang Nhu Ngoc [12]. If the enterprise has the ability to create motivation for employees, the job performance is likely to be satisfactory; otherwise, the productivity will be expectedly low. For that reason, it is recommended that companies focus on motivating employees to do their best in order to achieve pleasant results for themselves and the organizations.

“Working environment" has a Sig. value of 0.000, less than 0.05, which means this factor is significant for the research model. The regression coefficient reaches a value of 0.323, higher than that of job motivation, showing that working environment has a more positive impact on job performance than working motivation. This outcome is consistent with the research of Nguyen Quoc Nghi [9] in which the author stated that working environment has the strongest influence on the performance of hotel employees in Phu Quoc District, Kien Giang Province.

"Leadership style" has a Sig. value of 0.000, less than 0.05, which means that leadership style is statistically significant in the model. A regression coefficient of 0.52 indicates that this factor also has a positive impact on the employee’s job performance. This demonstrates that leadership style has a more positive impact on job performance compared to the three other factors (job motivation, working environment, and personal competency). In addition, a study by Rashid et al. [13] also showed that management attitude is the most influential on employee’s job performance at Sahiwal bank. Another study stated that leadership style has the second most positive influence on the performance of tourism employees [9], thereby proving the importance of leadership style to employee’s job performance. The results of the detailed analysis showed that most of the respondents agreed that timely observation, support, and guidance from managers when needed have the highest average value on the leadership style scale. Besides, employees must be treated equally without bias from their managers. Their performance must receive feedback from their managers, thus acknowledging their positive contribution to the organization. 

"Personal capacity" has a Sig. value of 0.000, which less than the 0.05 significance level, so this factor is also significant in the research model. Personal competency has the largest regression coefficient with a value of 0.283. Although this factor has the lowest positive impact on the performance of hotel employees, the Beta coefficient is also quite high. Personal competency, in this case, is demonstrated through handling work-related issues such as urgent situation reactions; employees' skills such as hospitality-related knowledge, foreign languages, and communication at work. Indeed, when employees have hospitality-related knowledge, flexible communication skills, the ability to handle urgent situations, especially good foreign language skills, they will feel more confident as handling work in a flexible way will result in a much better job.

Based on data from secondary sources and a survey of 120 hotel employees working in Kien Giang Province, the study shows the current job performance of employees working in the field of hospitality. The results of Cronbach's Alpha coefficient analysis and Exploratory Factor Analysis have divided the factors into 4 groups with 16 observed variables, including "Job motivation" (5 observed variables), "Working environment" (3 observed variables), “Leadership style” (4 observed variables), and “Personal competency” (4 observed variables). Furthermore, regarding the results of multivariate linear regression analysis, it was found that these 4 factors all have a positive effect on the performance of the Kien Giang hotel employees. Particularly, leadership style has the most positive impact on job performance, followed by working environment, job motivation, and personal competence.

The research shows that the majority of hotel employees have relatively good job performance. However, job performances by some other employees are not as good. Based on the job characteristics of the hotel staff, the current employee’s job performance, combined with multivariate regression analysis, indicates that there are four factors that affect the performance of the hotel employees, including "Personal competency", "Job motivation", "Working environment", and "Leadership style" (in order of level of influence). As a result, the author contributes some practical recommendations to improve hotel employees’ job performance, as well as help business owners and managers acknowledge factors they should focus on to enhance their employee’s performances.

Firstly, in terms of personal competency, hotels in the area should provide policies and professional skill training for employees. Regarding the training content, soft skills should be focused on. For example, in a comparative study by Baum [14] on the competencies of hotel employees which need to be trained in the U.K. and the U.S.  Baum demonstrated that soft skills such as guest care, employee relations, professionalism and communication skills are a group of competencies that are highly appreciated by managers.

Secondly, in terms of job motivation, managers should check employees’ qualifications in the recruitment and reallocation process. Besides, it is necessary to create equal opportunities for promotion for all members of the organization. 

Thirdly, with regard to the working environment, the detailed analysis of working environment factors indicates that there are 3 variables affecting job performance. The first one is “My colleagues and I are always open to each other” with an average value of 3.83 whereas “My colleagues and I help each other when having difficulties” reaches the highest average value of 3.98. Finally, “My colleagues and I are willing to share experiences” has the lowest average value of 3.69. Therefore, it is recommended that companies create opportunities for employees to share work experiences, as well as apply teamwork elements to strengthen the spirit of cooperation and mutual assistance. This means that business owners and managers need to be proactive in building and encouraging employees to support each other in their work, to coordinate and unite to solve organizational problems without blaming each other.

Finally, according to the research results, leadership style has the strongest influence on hotel employees’ job performance, which is demonstrated through fairness, respect, willingness to listen, help and support in dealing with jobs, as well as trust in the capacity of subordinates. Enterprises need to create opportunities for employees to provide feedback to their managers directly by organizing meetings with the participation of subordinates, encouraging employees to freely express their ideas and opinions. At the same time, managers should acquire their opinions so that employees can feel the importance of their role in the organization.

In general, the study has contributed to identifying factors affecting an employee’s job performance in the field of hospitality in Kien Giang Province. Nevertheless, the research has some specific limitations. First of all, due to the limitations in the relationships and the diverse approaches to the respondents, this study uses the snowball sampling method. Therefore, the data set of the study is not highly representative for all hotel staff in Kien Giang Province, which is the reason why the analysis shows that the majority of employees have experience of under 5 years, the rest are from 5 to 10 years while the author was not able to access the group of respondents with experience of over 10 years. Secondly, because the number of observations of the sample was 120 respondents, it was not large enough to gain confidence in measuring the scale. Thirdly, the approach of this study only focuses on the self-assessment of hotel employees.

1. Anh, M.D. Organizational redesign to improve human performance in the context of institutional change: The case of SOEs in Vietnam. Paris: ESSEC Business School and Paris West University Nanterre La Défense, 2010. Unpublished doctoral thesis.

2. Elias, J. and H. Scarbrough. Evaluating human capital: An exploratory study of management practice. Human Resource Management Journal, vol. 14, no. 4, 2004, pp. 21–40.

3. Lim Kah Boon, Y. et al. Factors affecting individual job performance. International Conference on Management, Economics and Finance, Faculty of Business & Law-Multimedia University, 2012, pp. 661–676.

4. Carter, S. and M. Shelton. The performance equation: What makes truly great sustainable performance. 2009. http://apterdevelopment.com/wp-content/uploads/ 2019/01/The-Performance-Equation-what-makes-truly-great-sustainable-performanc

5. Blumberg, M. and C.D. Pringle. The missing opportunity in organizational research: Some implications for a theory of work performance. Academy of Management Review, vol. 7, no. 4, 1982, pp. 560–569.

6. Carter, S. and M. Shelton. The performance equation: What makes truly great, sustainable performance. Apter Development LLP, 2009. http://www.apterinternational. com/articles/PerformanceEquationArticle0609.pdf

7. Jankingthong, K. and S. Rurkkhum. Factors affecting job performance: A review of literature. Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences Studies, vol. 12, no. 2, 2012, pp. 115–128.

8. Jankingthong, K. and S. Rurkkhum. Factors affecting job performance: A review of literature. Silpakorn University Journal of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts, vol. 12, no. 2, 2012, pp. 115–127.

9. Nguyen, Quoc Nghi. Implication for improving job performance of tourism employees in Phú Quốc District, Kien Giang Province. Van Hien University Journal of Science, vol. 6, no. 2, 2018, pp. 79–85.

10. Hair, J.F. Jr. et al. Multivariate data analysis. 5th ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998.

11. Le Tran et al. Factors affecting employee performance – Evidence from Petro Viet Nam Engineering Consultancy J.S.C. 2015. http://euacademic.org/UploadArticle/273 2.pdf

12. Nguyen, et al. Factors of job motivation to work behaviors of office staff in Can Tho city. Can Tho University Journal of Science, vol. 24b, 2012, pp. 91–99.

13. Rashid, S. et al. Factors influencing the performance of employees at workplace in the banking sector of Pakistan. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, vol. 17, no. 9, 2013, pp. 1200–1208.

14. Baum, T. Competencies for hotel management: Industry expectations of education. Contemporary Hospitality Management, vol. 2, no. 4, 1990, pp. 13–18.