4.6 Article

Effect of perceived job risk on organizational conflict in tourism organizations: Examining the roles of employee responsible behavior and employee silence

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhtm.2022.08.009

关键词

Perceived job risk; Organizational conflict; Employee responsible behavior; Employee silence; Conservation of resources theory

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41971182/42271243]
  2. Humanities and Social Science Foundation of Ministry of Education of China [19YJAZH097]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines the relationship between perceived job risk and organizational conflict in the tourism industry. The results suggest that in both hotel and tourist attraction contexts, perceived job risk is positively related to organizational conflict.
Job risk and organizational conflict create pervasive dilemmas within the tourism industry that significantly concern managers and practitioners. However, little research has informed the relationship between job risk and organizational conflict. Based on conservation of resources theory, this study adopted a multi-study design and examined the effect of perceived job risk on organizational conflict in the tourism industry in both tourist hotels (Study 1, n = 495) and tourist attractions (Study 2, n = 401). In addition, the roles of employee responsible behavior and employee silence in moderating the effect of job risk on organizational conflict were examined. Study 1 and study 2 results indicate that in the hotel and tourist attractions context perceived job risk is positively related to organizational conflict but neither employee responsible behavior nor employee silence has significant moderating role in the relationship between perceived job risk and organizational conflict. This study provides empirical support for the effect of perceived job risk on organizational conflict, and offers implications on organizational conflict management in hotels and tourist attractions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据