2 7? A/8 /d Ho. 37SS

2 7? A/8 /d

Ho. 37SS

PERSONAL VALUES SYSTEMS OF SENIOR CORPORATE

AND PARTNERSHIP RESTAURANT MANAGERS

AND HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS

IMPLICATIONS

DISSERTATION

Presented to the Graduate Council of the

University of North Texas in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

By

C. E. Vlisides, B.S., M.A.

Denton, Texas

May, 1993

2 7? A/8 /d

Ho. 37SS

PERSONAL VALUES SYSTEMS OF SENIOR CORPORATE

AND PARTNERSHIP RESTAURANT MANAGERS

AND HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS

IMPLICATIONS

DISSERTATION

Presented to the Graduate Council of the

University of North Texas in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

By

C. E. Vlisides, B.S., M.A.

Denton, Texas

May, 1993

H

Vlisides, Constantine Eleas, Personal Values Systems of

Senior Corporate and Partnership Restaurant Managers and

Higher Education Programs Implications. Doctor of

Philosophy, (Higher Education), May 1993, 179 pp, 91 tables

and 44 titles.

The purpose of this study is to determine the personal

values systems of senior restaurant managers and what

differences there are among the following values; gender,

marital status, level of education, country awarding the

highest degree, major field of study, income and size of

organization.

The following conclusions were drawn from the study.

(1) There is ample opportunity for females to move into and

within the ranks of senior management. (2) There is great

monetary compensation and personal satisfaction for many of

these senior managers. (3) The educational level attained

by most of these senior managers is impressive. (4) The

continued interaction between senior managers and educators

is needed to best serve the industry. (5) Some

statistically significant differences were found concerning

the variable "Managerial Experience."

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES V

Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION 1

Statement of the Problem Research Questions Hypotheses of the Study Definition of Terms Limitations of the Study Basic Assumptions Significance of the Study

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 10

Introduction Review of the Refereed Articles Review of the 23 Corporate Annual Reports Summary

3. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES 57

Introduction Population and Sample Description of Research Test Description of Research Instrument Validation of the Personal Value

Questionnaire Data Collection Procedures Statistical Analysis of the Data

4. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA 63

Research Question One Research Question Two Hypothesis One Hypothesis Two Hypothesis Three Hypothesis Four Hypothesis Five Hypothesis Six Hypothesis Seven

i n

Chaptesr Page

Hypothesis Eight Summary

5. SUMMARY, STATISTICAL SUMMARY, VALUES PROFILES OF MANAGERS, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 102

Introduction Summary Statistical Summary Values Profiles of Managers Conclusions Implications Recommendations

APPENDIX

A. LETTER REQUESTING PERMISSION TO USE ENGLAND'S PERSONAL VALUES SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . 110

B. LETTERS PERTAINING TO ENGLAND'S PERSONAL VALUES SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . 112

C. ENGLAND'S PERSONAL VALUE SYSTEMS

QUESTIONNAIRE 116

D. TABLES 124

E. PROFILES VALUES OF MANAGERS 164

F. RESPONDENT'S ORGANIZATION MANAGERIAL LEVEL. . . 166

G. DATES OF RESPONSES 168

H. MISSION STATEMENT VARIABLES IDENTIFIED . . . . 170

I. FREQUENCIES PERCENTAGES OF RESPONSES 173

J. CORPORATIONS AND STATES REPRESENTED 175 REFERENCES 177

IV

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Customers . . . 91

2. Tests for Homogeneity of Variances of Sample

for Customers 91

3. One-Way Analysis of Variance for My Assistant . 92


for My Assistant 92

5. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Tolerance . . . 93


for Tolerance 94

7. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Prejudice . . . 95


for Prejudice 95

9. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Skill 96


for Skill 96

11. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Managers . . . 97

12. Tests for Homogeneity of Variances of Sample for Managers 97

13. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Semi-Skilled Workers 98

14. Tests for Homogeneity of Variances of Sample for Semi-Skilled Workers 99

15. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Industrial Leadership 100

16. Tests for Homogeneity of Variances of Sample for Industrial Leadership 100

17. Employee Welfare . 125

v

Table Page

18. High Productivity 125

19. Industrial Leadership 126

20. Organizational Efficiency 126

21. Organizational Growth 127

22. Organizational Stability 127

23. Profit Maximization 128

24. Social Welfare 128

25. Achievement 129

26. Autonomy 129

27. Dignity 13 0

28. Individuality 130

29. Influence 131

30. Innovation 131

31. Job Satisfaction 132

32. Job Security 132

33. Leisure 133

34. Money 133

35. Power 134

36. Prestige 134

37. Success 135

38. Ability 135

39. Aggressive 136

40. Ambition 1 3 6

41. Compassion 137

42. Conformity 137

vi

Table Page

43. Cooperation 138

44. Honor 138

45. Loyalty 139

46. Obedience 139

47. Prejudice 140

48. Skill 140

49. Tolerance 141

50. Trust 141

51. All Employees 142

52. Customers 142

53. Highly Skilled Employees 143

54. Labor Unions 143

55. Managers 144

56. Me 144

57. My Supervisor 145

58. My Company 145

59. My Co-Workers 146

60. My Assets 146

61. Owners 147

62. Semi-Skilled Workers 147

63. Stockholders 148

64. Technical Staff 148

65. Unskilled Workers 149

66. White Collar Employees 149

67. Authority 150

vii

Table Page

68. Caution 150

69. Change 151

70. Competition 151

71. Compromise 152

72. Conflict 152

73. Conservation 153

74. Emotions 153

75. Equality 154

76. Force 154

77. Government 155

78. Liberalism 155

79. Property 156

80. Reasonable 156

81. Religion 157

82. Risk 157

83. Gender 158

84. Marital Status 158

85. Age 159

86. Formal Education 160

87. Country 160

88. Major Field of Study 161

89. Income 162

90. Management Experience 162

91. Size of Organization 163

Vlll

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

This study seeks to identify the personal value systems

of senior corporate and partnership restaurant managers.

The service industry has become the nation's leading

employer (Roach, 1989). The hospitality industry is the

largest employer within the service industry. According to

Aylward (1991), the restaurant industry alone employs more

than 9 million employees.

The identification of senior restaurant managers'

personal value systems to their respective organizations is

important. The value of the determination of managers'

personal value systems lies in the ability of corporate

leaders to define, defend, and delegate responsibilities,

and to carry out their duties so that the missions and goals

of their organizations are met. Corporate missions and

goals, and senior managers' personal values can be

identified by means of statistical analysis. Identifying a

company's mission statements and goals helps senior managers

manage their businesses. Clearly defined mission and goal

statements chart the course of a corporation.

Included within most corporations' mission and goal

statements are factors concerning the ethical use of

corporate resources. Human resources are also among the

resources included by most companies. Senior managers1

personal ethics affect corporate day-to-day business

operations (Hayajneh, 1990, Santos, 1990). Therefore,

personal value systems of senior managers affect corporate

day-to-day business. Ultimately, management's ethics affect

the corporation's final net profit and total operation.

Successful companies within the hospitality industry

can trace precisely their success to senior management. The

personal value systems that the managers of successful

companies employ affect their organizations—either

positively or negatively. By instilling the successful

traits of senior managers in other employees through

comprehensive training programs, company philosophy can

permeate additional levels of management. Both mid- and

lower-level management can be exposed to these traits of

successful managers through personal contact and continuous

training.

The interviewing of candidates for management level

positions can be more accurately implemented with the use of

the Personal Value Systems Questionnaire (England, 1967) .

By matching the candidates' personal values to those of

successful senior managers, employers can ensure a

continuation of company philosophy with minimized training

expense.

Hayajneh (1990) addressed the question, "Why should

managers be studied at all?" in the following manner:

Senior managers should be studied because their efforts affect the end result in the formulation and implementation of business strategies. Their personal value systems, beliefs, and attitudes affect the evaluation of information, decision-making process, motivation of subordinates, and general behavior in conducting routine business affairs (England, 1967, Hayajneh, 1990).

Personal value systems affect the managers' acceptance of

organizational change (England, 1975). Personal value

systems set limits on managers' ethical behavior. Because

of the tremendous impact that senior managers have upon an

organization, it is clear that their personal values also

have a great impact on the organization. The lack of

research conducted within the hospitality industry on this

subject makes this study especially important.

Statement of the Problem

The problem of this study concerned the identification of

senior corporate and partnership restaurant managers'

personal values and whether a significant difference exists

among them.

Research Questions

In order to determine if the personal value systems of

senior restaurant management are congruent with one another,

a survey of senior restaurant managers was conducted in an

effort to answer the following questions.

a survey of senior restaurant managers was conducted in an

effort to answer the following questions.

1. What are the personal values systems of senior

corporate and partnership restaurant managers?

2. What differences are there, if any, in senior

restaurant managers' personal value systems? (With respect

to gender, marital status, level of formal education,

country awarding highest degree, major field of study,

annual income level, and size of organization).

Hypotheses of the Study

1. Ho: The personal values systems of senior

restaurant managers are equal based on their gender.

Ha: The personal values systems of senior

restaurant managers are not equal based on their gender.


restaurant managers are equal based on their marital status,


restaurant managers are not equal based on their marital

status.


restaurant mangers are equal based on their level of formal

education.


restaureint managers are not equal based on their level of

formal education.


restaurant managers are equal based on their major field of

studies.


restaurant managers are not equal based on their major field

of studies.


restaurant managers are equal with based on the country

awarding the highest degree.


restaurant managers are not equal based on the country

awarding the highest degree.


restaurant managers are equal based on their annual incomes.


restaurant managers are not equal based on their annual

incomes.


restaurant managers are equal based on their number of years

of managerial experience.


restaurant managers are not equal based on their number of

years of managerial experience.


restaurant managers are equal based on the size of their

organizations.


restaurant managers are not equal based on the size of their

organizations.

Definition of Terms

Senior manager refers to all restaurant managers above

the level of supervisor. Inclusive in this group are

vice-presidents, controllers or comptrollers, presidents,

chief operating officers, chief executive officers, and

members of the board of directors (Henderson, 1989).

Personal value system refers to the system of beliefs

expressed by a respondent regarding emotional and behavioral

feelings about subjects that include, but are not limited

to, patriotism, organizational feelings about the work

environment, personnel, and government (England, 1967).

Organizational mission refers to the long-term

accomplishments of an organization and are expressed in

broad, value-laden terms with regard to products or services

that are intended to validate the existence of the

organization. Such statements provide a company philosophy

and can generate a corporate culture. Mission statements

can also be used as criteria to determine an organization's

long-term success and effectiveness. The success in

achieving the mission set forth by such statements suggests

the survival of the organization (Henderson, 1989) .

Organizational goal refers to the necessary and

detailed steps that must be taken in order to achieve the

organization's missions (Henderson, 1989, Schuler, 1987).

Aggressive or competitive company traits are identified

in the company's expansion plans or by a company's explicit

statement that it is competitive. Market share or market

segmentation is also used to identify a company's

competitive spirit (Lewis and Chambers, 1989).

Social responsibility is identified by a company's

expressed belief that any benefit to the community in which

they operate, benefits the societal structure. Increased

wages and increased training may or may not lead to better

citizenry within a community (Lewis & Chambers, 1989).

Customer concerns are identified as any attempt by a

company to identify products, services, or philosophy that

will attract or retain a customer base. Examples of such

concern include menu items, training, and expressly stated

goals within a company's mission (Lewis & Chambers, 1989).

Tradition is a variable that is readily identifiable by

most restaurants that began with a single proprietor or

limited partnership. Additionally, tradition includes a

company's stated position that it wishes to maintain the

status quo due to historical precedence in profits or

culture (Henderson, 1989).

8

Downsizing is a term describing the elimination of

personnel staffing through systematic procedures, such as

layoffs, early retirement, and termination (Schuler, 1987).

Limitations of the Study

This study had the following limitations:

1. Senior management was considered a representation

of the target organizations* culture.

2. A list of personnel obtained from the target

organizations* annual reports to shareholders was used.

Because such lists of personnel are not always up-dated on a

frequent basis, the response process was slowed, thus

affecting the timing of the study.

3. Incomplete or inaccurate data supplied by the

corporation affected the sample size and timing of the study

as senior corporate and partnership management personnel

were ever-changing and reduced the number of total sample

size.

Basic Assumptions

This study was based on the following assumptions:

1. The target organizations agreed to participate in

this study.

2. The target organizations had the necessary

parameters that are usually found within such corporations

(such as mission statements and goals that reflect personal

values responses to human resource management).

3„ The cooperation and support of the target

organizations was manifested by the return of completed

surveys by their top executives.

4. The target organizations' senior management

personnel were typical of a corporation in its size and

nature.

Significance of the Study

Based on a review of the literature, this study was

atypical—no other similar studies were found. The review

of literature also clearly supported basic business

principles that a senior managers' personal values and the

mission statement of a corporation are congruent. Senior

managers formulate the mission statements of an organization

into a formal document. However, the attrition of managers

who create the mission statements due to retirement or

termination of employment changes the composition of senior

management. Despite changes in personnel, however, a

corporation's mission statement rarely changes.

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Introduction

The following material was studied to form a basis for

the study. The material consisted of six refereed published

articles and 23 annual corporate reports.

Review of the Refereed Articles

In dealing with organizational literature, the term

"corporate culture" becomes obvious (Small, 1987, Tidball,

1988, Woods, 1989). Corporate culture is created and

influenced by management (Woods, 1989) . Woods suggested

that corporate culture can be dissected into three segments.

The first is the visible segment, which is identified as

company slogans or ceremonies. The second strategic segment

is created and identified by the capital and market

expectations set forth by senior management. The third is

the deep meaning, which becomes identifiable by the values

and assumptions that an organization determines to be most

important. According to Woods (1989), the success of a

company is associated with its company culture. Five

different unnamed restaurant chains were used in this study.

Only the geographic locations served to identify the

restaurant chains. Although, differences between the chains

10

11

were viewed as impressive, the similarities between the

chains were more remarkable.

The visible segment in all five subjects had symbolic

artifacts of their corporations such as paperweights that

embodied the use of company logos and corporate flags.

Additionally, a pattern of conduct was prescribed by all

five companies. The details of the conduct codes varied

between the subjects; however, all five supported the use of

such codes. Reward systems were used to encourage employees

to achieve higher levels of performance in all five

companies. The use of corporate lore was often used to

create an ambience of family and history. Although each of

the subjects utilized a company language to help establish a

corporate culture, each of the five subjects' languages were

dissimilar from that of the other four companies.

The strategic segment of company culture was not as

uniform as the previous segment. Included in the strategic

segment were terms such as "thinking company." It was

assumed that this unclear term meant that managers and

employees were to pattern their thinking after corporate

goals and preferred behavioral responses. A divergence of

opinions was expressed in the manner which the company was

described by its management. Internal or external

approaches to management were utilized. Differences between

the schools of thought in this matter were in how the

company reacted to problems. If a problem was large and

12

cumbersome, the organization either kept it closed within

their management ranks or spoke with the employees and asked

for their input on how to solve the problem.

The deep meaning segment included a statement such as

the "guest first" concept. Slogans such as "care and

deliver" to both the customer and employees was the

Northwest's (a pseudonym) motto for management behavior.

"Management is doing" was another slogan. Other phrases

included were "cleanliness," "truth," and "people are

important." Such phrases represented the broad spectrum of

the restaurants chosen.

In addressing personnel evaluation systems, Woods

(1989) mentioned that each company evaluated its employees,

but not in the same manner. Some of the companies took

considerable time in conducting individual performance

evaluations. Other organizations1 evaluations were done on

an inconsistent time basis. Reasoning for such variances

was not explained. Additionally, no mention of employee

reaction to the evaluation process was noted in either of

the methods.

Finally, Woods (1989) observed that despite the

differences in the five organizations, a harmonious culture

was noted within the restaurants. Substantiation of this

observation was provided by the fact that restaurant

employees can move from one entity to another without any

difficulty. The reason for this phenomenon is that

13

restaurant culture is virtually the same, only terminology

is different.

Although corporate culture is an often-used term, only

one definition was found in the review of literature

(Tidball, 1988). Tidball defined corporate culture as a set

of assumptions or an idealogy that is shared by members of

an organization. This definition allows for the

identification of what is important to the organization and

how the company works. In addition, an acceptable pattern

of behavior is formalized.

Company management often express their goals and expect

all subsequent energy to be expended on those goals.

Tidball (1988) suggested that there are two views of how

companies work: (a) an outside view which encompasses the

company's platitudes and expressions of grandeur, and (b) an

inside view. The latter view is described by Tidball as

"how the company really works." Tidball expressed this idea

as the Operating Ideology versus the Formal Ideology.

Indications are that employees operate under a different set

of rules in order to accomplish job tasks than do top

managers who work in a "theoretical" environment.

Woods (1989) believed that top management is in

agreement with the corporate culture (mission statement and

goals), and that a cadre of managers is needed to operate

any large organization. However, these managers were

selected by a set of criteria developed by a chosen few

14

within the organization. Woods also indicated that the

closer top management is in agreement to the corporate

culture, the greater the success of the company. Likewise,

the more in agreement top managers are with each other, the

greater the likelihood of information being disseminated to

all employees.

A contrasting article was written by an anonymous

author who described a fictitious entrepreneur named Small.

Small was top executive of the "City Club," a four-star

restaurant and athletic facility, located in the Worthington

Hotel of Fort Worth, Texas . A corporate culture was needed

for such an operation, so Small created one for the "City

Club." Human relations was the number one priority in his

scheme. Guest service was to become the top priority of all

employees and exemplified by additional service. This was

interpreted to mean that the employees and management were

to make every effort to satisfy the guests1 needs. The

organization should be community active. In addition, the

standards of acceptable performance were to be determined by

senior managers.

A divergent view was provided by Atkinson, Branch, &

LaHatte (1987) who described how companies operate and how

their operations justify their management techniques.

Companies are judged by the actions of their managers, not

their mission statements. Every business operates to make a

profit, but this cannot be the only long-term objective

15

unless that goal is wholly supported by the organization

with the assurance of product quality and customer

satisfaction. Atkinson et al. (1987) presented three

long-range goals, rather than one, as suggested previously.

Service companies must match their customers1

expectations (Atkinson et al., 1987). Indications are that,

in order to succeed at this goal, a continuous survey of

customers1 expectations is necessary. However such action

is not adequately detailed by Atkinson et al. (1987). For

example, education of employees to determine customer

expectations is an important aspect of corporate culture

only if top managers are in agreement with such a

philosophical approach.

As expressed in previous articles, Atkinson et al.

(1987) agreed with the premise that all managers must be in

harmony with the corporate ethic or culture in order for an

organization to succeed. They agreed with previous

researchers concerning the way corporate cultures operate.

Support for the principles outlined was provided by

Armistead (1989), who added several specific points.

Armistead stressed that an organization must formulate

policies that are in the best interest of its customers.

Furthermore, management must formulate such a policy.

Additionally, a trust is built between customers and a

service company; therefore, an appropriate corporate culture

should be formulated to ensure such a trust. Armistead also

16

indicated corporate culture is developed by senior

management. Resources must be managed effectively in order

to ensure delivery of the product or service.

Armistead's (1989) research survey focused on many of

the points of this study. Although, ethical issues were not

addressed, especially in the description of the management

responsibility, Armistead's description of appropriateness

within the confines of the service industry is interesting.

Armistead specified that customers should be treated

differently when being serviced by different service

organizations. Managers must determine what constitutes

appropriate service measures.

The underlying philosophy permeating all the literature

can be found in Maslow's book, Motivation and Personality

(1954). According to Maslow, personal value systems are

developed within each individual, formulating the ethics

that provide the guidance used to make decisions. Maslow

utilized his famous hierarchy of needs and explained that

the satisfaction of those needs allow individuals to

progress to a final step of self-actualization whereby they

are able to function and be fulfilled at an optimal level.

Included within his hierarchy are the following steps:

1. Physiological needs that are basic to personal

well-being, such as food and water.

2. Safety needs that include family and social

structures that ensure a personal sense of stability.

17

3. Love needs that are fulfilled by human

relationships and affection, which develop a further sense

of well being.

4. Esteem needs that are fulfilled with status or

domination, such as recognition and attention.

5. Self-actualization—the final step in which a

person can be what he or she wants to be.

Self-actualization is the only step of Maslow's steps

in which an individual controls his or her own destiny.

Each of the other steps is dependent upon the others or, in

the case of food and water, that which is supplied.

Maslow (1954) indicated that values are determined by

the culture and situation in which an individual is placed.

Culture can also relate to corporate cultures and

organizational situations. Actualization rarely occurs;

furthermore, the situations and persons with whom

individuals are commonly in close contact formulate their

behaviors. Therefore, within organizations, a personal

value system is developed and refined over time and creates

personality traits that affect others within the

organization. This point is underscored by Maslow's

indication that peoples1 desires are determined by culture.

Culture becomes a tool whereby more dependence is placed.

As a result, it becomes an adaptive tool to help formulate

actualization and like behavior.

18

Behavior within the restaurant industry can be linked

to the culture of the organization that has been developed.

Formulation of personal values is conclusively linked to the

corporate culture. Maslow (1954) described behavior as

being comprised of traits that are formed by association

with ideas and external stimuli provided by the environment.

Organizations, by their nature, are further linked to the

values that individuals form. Finally, Maslow stated that a

good environment fosters a good personality.

The use and basis of Maslow's (1954) theories indicate

that a study to determine the values of an organization, and

how those values are associated among the people within such

an organization, would be valuable. The value lies in the

preposition that organizations can improve individuals,

which then can improve society, which continue indefinitely.

Values are viewed as positive and self-sustaining. A

holistic approach is needed to ensure that the various parts

of the value system are in agreement with each other.

This review of literature represents a search of books,

periodicals, trade journals, dissertations, and six

databases. Included in the database group were Dissertation

Abstracts International, Abstracted Business Information

(ABI), Public Affairs Information Services (PAIS),

Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) Documents,

Work Related Abstracts, and Business Periodicals Index

(BPI) . However, the need for more information and more

19

research, underscored by the lack of literature, makes this

study more valuable.

Review of the 23 Corporate Annual Reports

The following paragraphs include reviews of corporate

mission statements and letters to corporate shareholders

from annual reports that are required by law to be filed

and, thus, are placed in public domain. The 23 reviews are

included as a part of this study to determine better the

corporate cultures in which the targeted senior restaurant

managers operate. The analysis of why these 2 3 companies

were chosen is discussed later in this dissertation.

Grand Metropolitan

The executives of Grand Metropolitan consider the

company to be a major world corporation (Grand Metropolitan,

1989) . They deem Grand Metropolitan to be respected for its

management, enterprise, and growth. Consumer businesses

constitute the structure of the company. Leadership is

maintained through marketing and operational skills.

Consumer businesses are identified as food, drink, and

retailing. Although only a few units form the company, each

component is large and has features that are integrated with

other units. Value to the corporation, as a whole, is

determined by the parts.

Grand Metropolitan is considered by its management team

to be restless in its innovative style and concerned about

20

winning with such a style. Its style includes concerns

about responsibilities toward the communities where its

operations exist. These concerns include being a "good

employer and a good neighbor" (Grand Metropolitan, 1989) .

In a letter to shareholders, Sheppard, the Chairman of

the Board, emphasized the corporate mission statement.

Social responsibilities were shown by charitable

contributions to people in need, the arts, sports, health,

and welfare. Further contributions were given to help

educational needs (Grand Metropolitan, 1989).

Sheppard reported that environmental concerns were

being met and standards were maintained. These

environmental concerns should continue to be maintained even

if annual audits had to be instituted. The company's most

important assets are its employees and business associates.

The labor market is critical. In order to maintain business

goals, Grand Metropolitan should target females, minorities,

and "school leavers" to fulfill their labor needs.

Employees, male and female, are to be given every

opportunity to maximize their potential (Grand Metropolitan,

1989).

Buffets. Inc.

Buffets, Inc., (1989) described a different approach in

their mission in a letter to the shareholders. Financial

results were expected to be superior and growth underscored

21

the competitive nature of the company. Standards explained

were those of high quality, value-oriented customers of all

ages, honesty and integrity (i.e., timely payments and "our

word is good"), value of the reputation that has been built

over the years of operation, and the clinging to the "golden

rule" (Buffets, Inc., 1989).

Old fashioned service is a motto adhered to by Buffets,

Inc. Managers believe that their customers will be

continually satisfied. Exceptional quality is equated with

giving the customers more than they expect, from fresh food

to a friendly clean environment. According to Buffets,

Inc.'s management, such care will win customer loyalty.

Top quality and lowest possible pricing equate to value

that will also help secure customer loyalty. Buffets stated

that maximizing customer values is directly correlated to

shareholders' values. Controlled growth based on research

into geographic areas that accept Buffets Inc.'s management

philosophy ensures growth and underscores a competitive

nature.

Employees are considered to be "partners in success."

Such a philosophy indicates that corporate management values

both hourly and salaried employees. Training is an

essential element to the success of the corporation because

the employees are the corporation and, thus, its "key to its

success." Open two-way communication, training, and an

22

environment that is warm and pleasant enable personal growth

to be maximized (Buffets, Inc., 1989).

Carl Karcher Enterprises. Inc.

Carl Karcher describes Carl Karcher Enterprises mission

in a succinct manner. Paraphrasing his statement, Carl

Karcher Enterprises' corporate philosophy is to strive to

maintain its position as a premier organization in the food

service industry by continually exceeding the expectations

of its guests, employees, and shareholders (Carl Karcher

Enterprises, Inc., 1990). Although the statement is brief,

it is easy to discern it's meaning. Carl Karcher

Enterprises must be competitive to remain an industry

leader. Additionally, the organization is concerned about

their employees (hourly as well as salaried), their guests,

and their shareholders. To exceed the expectations of the

shareholders would definitely require a substantial profit.

Furthermore, Karcher, the Chief Executive Officer, stated in

a letter to shareholders, that a "lite" menu was being

developed to meet customer demands and, thus, identify the

company's concern for their customers. Allowing customers

to make purchases using a debit card system is another

tangible effort by Carl Karcher Enterprises to help

customers and to facilitate product purchases by identifying

inventory preferences. Faster accessibility to available

23

funds is also procured for the company through electronic

banking.

At Carl Karcher Enterprises an entrepreneurial spirit

is a means to achieve corporate goals. Thus, management

style should allow for innovation and risk. Management

concerns are taken into consideration with such a

philosophy. The founder still believes in the vision that

was given birth at the company's inception. Tradition is

used as an appeal to keep the status quo. (Carl Karcher

Enterprises Inc., 1990).

Bob Evans Farms. Inc.

Another highly successful corporation which was founded

by an entrepreneur is Bob Evans Farms. The strategic

planning committee for Bob Evans Farms explained in the

annual report that the company is dedicated to being the

best in food service, thus showing a competitive attitude

(Bob Evans Farms, Inc., 1990). The mission of Bob Evans

Farms is to create and serve quality products and services

to meet customers1 needs. The profitability of the company

is dependent upon the success of fulfilling customers' needs

and quality specifications. Profitability concerns are

expressed directly. The strategic planning committee

believed that a reasonable return must be gained for their

stockholders (Bob Evans Farms, Inc., 1990).

24

Chairman of the Board, Daniel E. Evans, expressed

concern for Bob Evans Farm's 16,000 employees by wanting

them to grow professionally and personally (Bob Evans Farms,

Inc., 1990). Due to changing demographics, customers'

tastes are also changing. The corporation must be able to

react to those changes. Among changes in their customer

base were more elderly Americans and working mothers, who

are readily identified. New products are to be developed to

meet changes in the customer base and increase market share.

The entrepreneurial spirit is to be kept alive at Bob

Evans Farms through maturity and creativity (Bob Evans

Farms, Inc., 1990). Maturity is interpreted as experience

and the avoidance of making old mistakes. Creativity allows

for the entrepreneurial spirit to continue, but creativity

assumes that an amount of risk must be taken within the

status quo. Within the confines of a large corporation such

creativity may result in a large amount of risk. However,

that element of risk must be carefully balanced with proven

results in order to meet changing customer demands.

Consequently, managers and employees with entrepreneurial

styles must be allowed to work within the framework of the

corporation in order for such a plan to succeed.

The need to recruit and retain employees is a vital

concern throughout the hospitality industry. Job

satisfaction, management skills training, compensation

packages inclusive of employee benefits, and business

25

planning were specifically identified by Mr. Evans (Bob

Evans Farms, Inc., 1990). Such emphasis on human resource

concerns indicates the involvement of a social

responsibility factor. The compensation and benefits

packages discussed also helps the local communities and

citizens, while at the same time retaining employees. Evans

expressed the attitude that Bob Evans Farms has for people,

(employees and guests), without them there is no business.

Finally, Evans discussed six points that needed to be

considered. Quality, people, service integrity, heritage

(which is built from honesty, pride, and a strong work

ethic), and profit are the keys for on-going success at Bob

Evans Farms (Bob Evans Farms, Inc., 1990).

General Mills International, Inc.

Innovation, speed, and commitment are the three

elements that will allow General Mills to succeed in their

strategic plans (General Mills International, Inc., 1990).

They must become a driving force in market segment growth,

new business development, and improved efficiency if their

goals are to succeed. By attaining these goals, General

Mills will be able to reach a profitability factor

acceptable to its shareholders. Success will be measured

only by achieving the top 10% in their competitive business

ventures. Innovation is needed to attain such success;

thus, an entrepreneurial spirit within the confines of the

26

corporation must be found and nurtured. Global competition

is expressed as General Mills managers consider it a global

corporation. Speed to the marketplace is essential for

competitive success, according to the General Mills

philosophy. Commitment is the glue that holds the corporate

philosophy together. Without the tenacity that commitment

creates, neither of the other two elements can succeed when

inevitable difficulties occur.

Tradition and heritage are expressed positively in that

the three key elements, innovation, speed and commitment,

have always been the driving forces behind General Mills'

success (General Mills International, Inc., 1990).

Operational excellence is a hallmark for how well the three

elements are being integrated into the fabric of the

corporation. Quality is also an end product of such an

operation.

Social responsibility is a major concern for General

Mills. Egual employment opportunities for all employees and

applicants are noted. Affirmative action programs are

equally weighted (General Mills International, Inc., 1990).

Equal pay and benefits being offered to women in the work

force are of a great concern to General Mills. Social

responsibility is furthered evidenced by the production of

safe and wholesome products. Children's viewing of General

Mills' products through advertising is an important concern

of management. The need for truth in advertising is

27

espoused by General Mills because of the effects such

advertising has on children. Education is served by

corporate grants given by General Mills, and individuals are

encouraged to volunteer within their communities. Such

beliefs, like those of Grand Metropolitan, constitute

General Mills' concern for social responsibility.

Finally, environmental concerns are addressed through

the utilization of recycling programs whenever possible

(General Mills International, Inc., 1990). General Mills,

being a global corporation is concerned with the global

environment.

Gilbert-Robinson Holding Company

The Gilbert-Robinson Holding Company operates at least

two separate restaurant chains. Both Houlihan's and Daryl's

are theme restaurants that are comprised of company-owned

and franchise-owned units. The corporation's main mission

statements were outlined by management in the annual report

of 1989. Specialized employee training is considered

essential for continued growth and operational success.

Continual management training is provided to keep management

abreast of employee training. Social responsibility is

limited to encouraging all of its employees to gain more

knowledge. Training is optimized with a ratio of one of

trainer to each employee. Because knowledge was not

identified as "company only" or "work related knowledge," a

28

general interpretation of knowledge is assumed. Sanitation

and safety are key concerns for the restaurants' success.

Efficient and accurate record-keeping is needed in order to

determine profitability.

The 1989 Gilbert-Robinson Holding Company Annual Report

also specified a need for good working relations within the

company. Competitive compensation packages were identified

as essential for maintaining good working relations.

Compensation packages are at the upper level of market

compensation packages, thus ensuring Gilbert-Robinson

employees an adequate income and providing a better standard

of living than employees at other restaurant chains.

Another concerns for the employees of Gilbert-Robinson

includes a retraining program so that their employees are

better suited for the ever changing business environment

that Gilbert-Robinson wishes to create.

Locations of units are crucial to the success of the

company. Careful selection of sites demonstrate that the

company is competitive in striving for better locations.

Quality and service are considered to be elements that will

lead to success for Gilbert-Robinson in the future and are

critical factors in their present standing as one of the

best 100 restaurants in the United States (Restaurant

Business, 1991).

Attractive facilities are needed to capture the

customer base desired (Gilbert-Robinson Holding Company,

29

1990). Attractive does not refer to only the aesthetic

quality and physical beauty of the site. Attractive is

interpreted to also mean a clean, well ordered facility.

Competition is inherent in the restaurant business, and

Gilbert-Robinson Holding Company recognizes that such an

environment exists. Recognition of the competitive nature

of the business necessitates Gilbert-Robinson Holding

Company's utilization of the aforementioned philosophy in

order to remain in the restaurant business.

Godfather's Pizza

Senior managers at Godfather's Pizza attribute its

success to quality and excellence (Godfather Pizza, 1982).

Their commitment has allowed Godfather's Pizza to become the

26th largest restaurant chain in America. Criteria credited

to the success of Godfather's Pizza are friendliness, value

in portions and aesthetics.

Employee and management training programs instituted

allowed for continued success (Godfather's Pizza, 1982).

Employees are encouraged to perform their tasks with

"STYLE." STYLE, an award-winning training program in which

Godfather's Pizza takes considerable pride, consists of a

series of 15 videos that inform Godfather's Pizza employees

what they are expected to do.

Pride is a corporate tradition that Godfather's Pizza

expects to be continued (Godfather's Pizza, 1982). Great

30

pride creates enthusiastic employees and satisfied loyal

customers.

Godfather's Pizza, with very few words, promotes many

of the values that are expressed by a variety corporations.

The brevity of the company's statements indicate that they

are concerned with value, quality, tradition, employee and

management training, customer concerns, competition, and

internal and external environment (aesthetics) which would

extend to cleanliness.

Furr's/Bishop's Cafeterias

Furr's/Bishop's Cafeterias' Annual Report includes an

operating philosophy which also contained few words, but

expresses much. "Serve quality food in pleasant surroundings

at moderate prices" (Furr's/Bishop's Cafeterias LP, 1989).

The report indicates a customer guaranteed satisfaction

policy in which a monetary refund is given for any customer

displeasure. Competitiveness and innovation leading to

additional revenue was an equation added in by Michael

Levensen and Donald W. Fritz in their report to the

shareholders (Furr's/Bishop's Cafeterias LP, 1989).

Maintenance of a strong ethical environment, as shown

through personal and corporate conduct, were included in

their report as well. Such a strong statement indicates

that Furr's/Bishop's is conscientious in all dealings,

including social responsibility to the community in which

they serve.

31

Furr's/Bishop's Cafeterias' corporate beliefs can be

summarized as value, competitiveness, employee and

management concerns, internal and external environment,

profitability, customer concerns, quality, and cleanliness.

Furr's/Bishop's has the right criteria to be successful, as

indicated by their listing in the top 100 restaurants in

America (Restaurant Business, 1991).

IMASCO Ltd.

IMASCO Ltd. is a Canadian company that has acquired a

number of Hardee's hamburger outlets. "Serving the best

food and products in a pleasant environment" is their

corporate philosophy (IMASCO Ltd., 1987). While such a

statement may appear to be over simplistic at first glance,

quite a few variables are identified. For example, quality

is essential to make this statement a reality. Cleanliness,

and harmony within the building are necessary in order to

create pleasant surroundings. The external environment must

also be appealing in order to be pleasant. Customer

concerns are noted because the best food and products can

only be utilized in an appealing environment.

P. Crawford, CEO, addressing the shareholders in a

letter that explained that IMASCO is "proud for competition"

(IMASCO Ltd., 1987). Advertizing was linked to a marketing

approach that appealed to children. A promotion that

included giving away popular children's stuffed animals made

32

IMASCO's Hardee's more appealing to women and children and

attracted millions of additional customers within a 1-month

time frame. Revenues dramatically increased due to the

tremendous influx of customers from that promotion.

In order to control such an operation, Crawford

recommended that a formalized training approach be taken,

especially in the area of management training (IMASCO Ltd.,

1987). A caring attitude toward employees was also

suggested by Crawford so that upward mobility could be

achieved. Upward mobility indicates that social

responsibility is also encouraged to better the employees'

standard of living through increased compensation. Finally,

IMASCOfs concern about profitability and assets was

expressed in Crawford's statement. It stated that

management must safeguard those assets through prudent

management.

International Dairy Queen

International Dairy Queen (Dairy Queen) is a large,

vibrant organization that is developing, licensing, and

serving a system of more than 5,200 International Dairy

Queen stores throughout the world (International Dairy

Queen, 1989). Dairy Queen is very competitive. Expanding

market size and increasing market segmentation is a

continual process to which Dairy Queen is dedicated. Their

33

customer base is large enough, with 5,200 outlets to assume

that customers perceive value in Dairy Queen.

Managers at Dairy Queen are concerned about the

environment (International Dairy Queen, 1989). As a part of

that concern, the recycling of all paper products is

mandated wherever possible. Being a good neighbor, which is

also mentioned, includes maintenance of a clean environment

both internally and externally on their property sites.

Compliance with all laws indicates an honesty and integrity

factor that also demonstrates some social responsibility

regarding current equal employment opportunity and

affirmative action program laws.

Employee concern is also indicated in the annual report

which declares that employee recognition is needed to

maintain operating standards. "Employee recognition" is

broadly interpreted in this case to include both hourly and

salaried employees (International Dairy Queen, 1989).

Dairy Queen discussed their corporate image in their

annual report (International Dairy Queen, 1989). A

reflection on reputation and image was noted, thus

indicating that both corporate and franchised entities must

keep their operations ethical in all dealings.

Profitability was not specifically addressed, however,

a 4% franchise fee is invoked. Such a franchise fee is

necessary to off-set advertising costs and mutually-agreed

upon costs. Therefore, corporate profit is taken into

34

consideration and utilized as a variable in this instance

(International Dairy Queen, 1989).

Kettle Restaurants. Inc.

Kettle Restaurants, Inc. (Kettle) is a system of

corporate and franchise restaurants headquartered in

Houston, Texas. An operational policy statement issued in

the corporate annual report dated 1989 (Kettle Restaurants,

Inc., 1989), included the following provisions: (a) provide

the best service to the customer, (b) prepare the best food,

(c) utilize the best quality food, and (d) provide food at

competitive prices. The policy statement contained insight

into the Kettle's corporate philosophy. Kettle's managers

are concerned with quality, profitability, customer concerns

and competition.

Kettle's 1989 Annual Report also included concerns that

reflected the company's attitude about management. It

stated that the compensation packages offered to management

must be competitive and adequate. Inclusive within such

compensation were incentives that aid managers. Incentives

were described as monthly bonuses that could be attained,

but no details were given as to how the bonuses were made

possible. There were no statements made with regard to

employees. Cleanliness was specified as a necessity for

operations, as was courtesy and timeliness. Timeliness in

the payment of bills was noted, suggesting the need for

35

prudent bookkeeping procedures (Kettle Restaurants, Inc.

1989). Such procedures would indicate a profit motivation

as well as a high regard for Kettle's reputation and social

responsibility to its purveyors and the surrounding

community.

Piccadilly's Cafeterias Inc.

"Customers are our business" is one of the first

statements made in the Piccadilly Cafeteria's Annual Report

(Piccadilly's Cafeterias Inc., 1989). The statement

indicated the high degree to which Piccadilly's values its

customers and how its business is operated. Issues of

concern included the looming minimum wage increase, the need

for health care benefits for employees, the rising costs

associated with such benefits, and increased food costs

(Piccadilly Cafeterias Inc., 1989).

Piccadilly's Cafeteria's 1989 Annual Report indicated

that excellent food (quality) is served to a customer base

daily. Tradition, as expressed by a "home cooking style,"

value for customers, and well-trained employees and

management staffs are critical to Piccadilly's success

(Piccadilly's Cafeterias Inc., 1989). Those elements are

consistent in the statement of Piccadilly's philosophy at

the beginning of this review. Cross-training of employees

is an important practice because such a philosophy indicates

a shrewd management technique that helps to retain hourly

36

employees and reduces the impact of minimum hourly wage

increases. The reasoning behind such a technique is that

the operation will be more efficient. A more efficiently

run operation will lead to greater profits. Employee

retention is deemed critical to the labor costs that

Piccadilly's will encounter (Piccadilly's Cafeterias Inc.,

1989) .

The cleanliness of the cafeterias was described as a

"passion" (Piccadilly's Cafeterias Inc., 1989). The

description of the ambience of the cafeterias was inviting

and pleasant, which indicated a concern for the internal

environment within each unit. Friendliness and courtesy

were considered necessary in order to maintain customer

service and the traditional values mentioned earlier.

Children and physically impaired persons were designated as

two groups needing special attention. Such concerns

indicated the social awareness and the responsibilities that

Piccadilly had for its clientele and community.

Rally's Inc.

An innovative and new "fast" or "quick" service food

establishment is the double-windowed drive through

restaurant. Usually a limited menu is offered such as

hamburgers or seafood items. Customers are able to drive up

to either side of the building and order their food and have

it served to them more quickly than the competition. One

37

restaurant chain that is capitalizing on this market segment

is Rally's. The mission statement offered by Rally's in

1990 reflects the purpose of the business (Rally's, Inc.,

1990). Service to their customers is extremely important as

is the time elapsed between an order placed and received by

the customer. At Rally's, the time from when the customer

places his or her order, the cooking time, and the receipt

of the finished order, should take no longer than 45 seconds

(Rally's Inc., 1990). As described previously, the

restaurants are double-sided drive-throughs that offer a

very limited menu. Competitors include McDonald's,

Hardee's, Burger King and Wendy's (Rally's, Inc., 1990).

The Rally's corporate goal is to maintain their menu prices

at 25% below the stated competition. Constant surveys and

market studies are necessary in order for Rally's to

maintain such a goal.

Corporate strategy, as expressed in the annual report,

specifies that speed is needed in the delivery of product to

customers (Rally's, Inc., 1990). Quality and freshness of

the products used are essential to success. Compensation

packages for employees must be fair, and training for those

employees is emphasized. A broad interpretation of

"employees" is used to include both management and hourly

employees because hourly employees are not otherwise

specifically mentioned. Additionally, Rally's, Inc. Annual

Report indicates that working conditions and wages are to be

38

kept at favorable comparisons to their competition (Rally's,

Inc., 1990). Cleanliness, courtesy and consistency formulate

a "three Cs" philosophy that underscores Rally's customer

concern. Finally, Rally's report emphasizes the belief that

the company must be "good stewards" of the environment and

indicates a good neighbor policy as well as an expressed

concern for the external environment.

TPI Enterprises. Inc.

TPI Enterprises consists of restaurant operations that

include Shoney's and Captain D's Seafood Restaurants. The

number of units was not specified, but is estimated to be

several hundred individual units. The TPI Enterprises

Annual Report indicates that the company is a traditional

corporation. Traditional is explained atypically Southern

in its style of customer service and food preparation. The

geographical area in which the restaurants are congregated

also seems to support this explanation. Additional concerns

described in the report include the need for excellent

restaurant site locations. Indications are that TPI is

concerned with its competition, customer identification of

its properties, market share growth, and profitability. The

restaurant units must be attractive and clean, indicating a

concern for internal and external environment both from a

corporate and customer viewpoint. The mention of quality

and value in the report is a further indication of TPI' s

39

customer concern. Management and employees are expected to

be courteous to the customers and to each other; thus, some

degree of employee and management concern is noted. The

ability of management to meet successfully the set of

criteria as stated will lead TPI to profitability (TPI

Enterprises, Inc., 1989).

TW Services Inc.

The fourth largest restaurant chain, as identified in

their 1989 Annual Report, is TW Services. This restaurant

chain encompasses a variety of restaurants, including

Hardee's, Denny's, El Polio Loco (a quick service chicken

restaurant) and a dinner house restaurant called Quincey's.

By identifying themselves as the fourth largest food service

company in the United States, TW Services indicates its

competitive corporate spirit. Contained within the strategy

section of their annual statement, TW Services indicated the

need to refurbish their restaurants. Indications within the

report that such a strategy was a continual process. Based

on the refurbishing of their restaurants, the company

demonstrates concern about the image their restaurant units

portray to their customers. Such a demonstration indicated

that TW Services is customer conscious. Continual

reevaluation of menu selections is done to keep abreast with

changing customer trends (TW Services, Inc., 1989).

40

Bookkeeping and employee-management concerns are

identified with a self-professed need to upgrade information

systems within the units (TW Services, Inc., 1989). Because

upgrades are costly for a restaurant chain of this size, the

expenditures must be justified to shareholders. Such

justification includes better financial retrieval,

establishment of better management controls, and easier

employee work functions through customer ordering

techniques. TW Services recognizes that labor can be better

and more-fairly organized via employee scheduling with such

a system; thus, indicating a concern for both management and

employees. Management within the individual units will

likely recognize the benefit of reduced paperwork processing

time, and result in increased management efficiency.

Menu changes are made to reflect the trends perceived

by a restaurant chain in its customers1 tastes. The

customers1 tastes are changing according to TW Services.

Inc. 1989 Annual Report. Evaluation of changes are

necessary to determine how closely the restaurants1 menus

match the customers' tastes. These evaluations are

interpreted as customer concern.

Concern for customer appeal is underscored by the

emphasis to refurbish the chains1 restaurant units. An

added benefit to such refurbishing is that safer working

conditions are also included. Safer, cleaner, and more

appealing environments constitute a concern for employees

41

and customers. Expansion of restaurant interests at TW

Services indicates a competitive spirit within the company

to succeed. Management of newly refurbished and safer units

requires hands-on operational techniques (TW Services, Inc.,

1989). Better operational techniques enable management to

meet customers1 needs, work alongside employees, and ensure

that the proper quality standards of the restaurants'

products are met. Another advantage of these management

techniques is better rapport between management and hourly

employees. The statements and techniques espoused by TW

Services, indicate that past management practices are not

effective and that a dynamic new approach is needed to

increase TW Services market share and increase its

profitability.

Profitability is the result, in part, of management's

ability to control costs. This statement was made by TW

Services* managers, thus expressing a need for financial

prudence (TW Services, Inc., 1989). TW Services management

believes that a competitive reaction to changing customer

menu preferences is the underlying factor that underscores

the philosophy they espouse.

Uno Restaurant Corporation

T h e Uno Restaurant Corporation 1989 Annual Report

indicates the belief that employees must be recognized for

their efforts. Details of employee recognition include

42

advancement and attainable success. A broad interpretation

of "employees" is used to include both management and hourly

workers. Concern for employees extends to a training

program with the acronym TOP. "T" is for training, "0" is

for operating and finally, "P" represents promoting.

Corporate concern was expressed for employees with the

creation of "TOP." Uno's managers are concerned that their

employees have the skills necessary to meet or exceed their

customers' expectations. Courtesy is also noted within the

report which contains the suggestion that courtesy should

not only be extended to the Uno customers, but to management

and employees as well. Tradition is part of the Uno

philosophy, and the annual report contains a reference to

the fact the chain was founded from a single restaurant unit

in Chicago (Uno Restaurant Corporation, 1989).

Tradition also leads to guality, which is a key part

of Uno's philosophy. A standard of excellence must be

maintained. Customer satisfaction is a goal that the

corporation considers necessary for success. Customer

satisfaction indicates a value that the customer perceives,

especially in the highly competitive pizza business.

Atmosphere is indicated as an important ingredient in the

Uno philosophy, and is interpreted to indicate an

aesthetically pleasing internal environment (Uno Restaurant

Corporation, 1989). "A value driven menu" is the term used

to express the conditions for profitability within the

43

chain's corporate structure (Uno Restaurant Corporation,

1989.

Wendy's International, Inc.

Values, prudent financial responsibility, quality

products, and reliability are the key terms used to begin

Wendy's International. Inc.'s 1989 Annual Report. The key

phrase that ties the customer to the shareholders is, "At

Wendy's the relationship between the shareholder value and

the customer value is a direct one." (Wendy's

International, Inc., 1989). The terms expressed and this

sentence indicate that Wendy's shareholders and customers

may not have the same ends in mind, but the two are

necessarily inter-linked to be satisfied in respective

desired-end-results.

Wendy's demonstrates its competitive spirit by planning

locations that are convenient to its customers (Wendy's

International, Inc., 1989). The traditional values and the

atmosphere needed to enhance customer satisfaction are noted

directly in the report. Images of quality were also

expressed with the customer in mind.

Social and employee concern issues are addressed by

Wendy's with the indication that women are valued employees.

Technological changes reflect Wendy's planning process by

the indication that the company is aware of such advances

and plans to use technology to succeed in business. A

44

cleaner global environment mentioned previously noted that

Wendy1s is an international corporation. The company's

international stature also indicates the competitive drive

that helps sustain Wendy's (Wendy's International, Inc.,

1989).

Management and employee training techniques are

emphasized as a way to allow Wendy's to pursue its corporate

goals. Included within the training techniques are employee

empowerment, which allows employees an opportunity to

satisfy customer needs within local geographic areas, and

training, which improves employee-management working

relationships (Wendy's international, Inc., 1989). This

seems to indicate a need for a double training program—one

training program designed for hourly employees to discuss

prevalent problems within the units, and another training

program designed especially for management. Rewarding

employees and creating enjoyable working conditions were

specifically mentioned in Wendy's 1989 Annual Report. This

further supports the evidence mentioned previously of

problems with employee and management communication within

restaurant units. Innovative employee recruitment and

retention programs are being planned in order to maintain

Wendy's competitive edge.

45

TGIF of Texas Inc.

TGIF of Texas, Inc. is a large and growing restaurant

operation. The 1986 Annual Report is the most current

report available. In a letter to the shareholders within

that report, Courtelia and Wiener provide the basis for the

TGIF operating philosophy (TGIF of Texas Inc., 1986) .

Concern for customers is emphasized by the extensive menu

served. In one part of the report TGIF claims to offer more

than 100 different items from their menu. In a letter to

shareholders within the same report, the chief executive

officer claims that TGIF's menu contains more than 200

different menu items. Whether the menu has more than 100 or

200 menu items is immaterial, the point is that the

corporation wants to satisfy their customers' needs for

variety. By offering such an extensive menu, TGIF strives

to provide something for everyone.

Driven by the menu, TGIF managers insist upon

maintaining high operational standards (TGIF of Texas Inc.,

1986) . Maintenance of high standards is considered a

management concern and a quality issue. The standards are

controlled, and perhaps enhanced, by management. Service to

guests is identified as a standard that must be maintained.

The maintenance of high service standards entails the

continual training of both management and employees which

TGIF describes within their 1986 Annual Report. The conduct

46

of all employees reflects on TGIF as a corporate entity and

is also mentioned in the report (TGIF of Texas Inc., 1986).

Quality of food products is based on the freshness of

the products used by the TGIF restaurant units (TGIF of

Texas Inc., 1986). The adherence of standards is also

indicated with respect to corporate fiscal responsibility.

Managers are instructed that payment of invoices is to be

made on a timely basis. Because the individual stores are

allowed to purchase foodstuffs from a commissary and from

independent purveyors, each TGIF restaurant must maintain

its good standing for their own profitability and for the

sake of the purveyors who are within the community. The

importance of reputation and community opinion is implied.

As indicated by many of the aforementioned statements

describing other restaurant entities, TGIF is competitive in

the marketplace. The competition aspect is not specifically

identified or targeted, but rather an assumption is made

clear that TGIF must remain competitive in order to survive

(TGIF of Texas Inc., 1986). Finally, the importance of

restaurants' environment is noted by reference to

maintenance of premises. The theme seems to be very

consistent within the TGIF report that the maintenance of

standards that have already been established is crucial to

success. Such a tradition of standards is believed to keep

TGIF competitive and ever-expanding.

47

Frischfs Inc.

"Our mission is to be a respected leader in the food

service and hospitality industry. We guarantee our

customers quality products, good service, and clean and

pleasant surroundings." (Frisch's Inc., 1990). In a few

words the Frisch's corporate view point encompasses a great

many areas. Customer concern is evidenced by the importance

placed on clean and pleasant surroundings and the need for

quality products. Quality is identified as such but the

competitive spirit is identifiable by the desire to be a

"leader" in food service and hospitality. Value is a result

of the combination of guaranteed customer satisfaction and

quality products. If the customers are happy with the

quality but not the price, dissatisfaction prevails.

Likewise if the price is reasonable but the quality of the

product is not, dissatisfaction will occur. Thus, quality

and price together must be aligned and mutually perceived by

the customer as positive elements to create a value which is

judged acceptable by the customer.

Concern for the environment, both internal and

external, is exhibited by the customers being provided with

clean and pleasant "surroundings" (Frisch's Inc., 1990).

Surroundings refer to the internal and external areas of the

restaurant unit. Effective human relations, noted in the

report, indicated the need for management and employee

relations as well as relations between employees and

48

management and customers to be sound and mutually

satisfactory. Concern, then, is expressed for both

management and employees in a broad statement. These human

relations lead to various activities that help fellow human

beings and remain consistent with Frisch's overall company

philosophy.

The last two elements contained in Frischfs Inc.'s 1990

Annual Report were sound management practices and

profitability. Profitability was expressed as an important

criterion in Frisch's success formula. Sound management

practices are needed to ensure continued and profitable

operation of Frisch's (Frisch Inc., 1990).

Cracker Barrel Old Country Store

A traditional restaurant should have a traditional

name, and the Cracker Barrel Old Country Store fulfills that

criterion. According to Cracker Barrel Old Country Stores'

1990 Annual Report, tradition is an important element in

their mission. Speed of service, quality of service, and

courtesy identify traditional elements that demonstrate

concern for customers. Quality of products offered to

Cracker Barrel's customers is identified as a necessary

criterion of satisfaction to those customers (Cracker Barrel

Old Country Store, 1990).

Satisfaction of customers leads to profitability

(Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, 1990). The fact that

49

profitability is a key ingredient in Cracker Barrel's future

plans is indicated by the corporation's plans to build 15

new units and expand their market share. While such growth

is controlled and limited, research for Cracker Barrel's

concept is needed to ensure that their concept will be

successful because of their specialized restaurant concept.

Implementation of that growth planning suggests that Cracker

Barrel expects to remain competitive in the targeted market

segments, thus indicating a competitive yet cautious spirit.

Much of the Cracker Barrel Old Country Stores' 1990

Annual Report details management concerns for improvement in

store operations. Indicators are that training programs and

follow-up procedures are to be initiated in order to

increase communication among all segments of management

(Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, 1990). It is logical

that this concern for improvement in store operations will

also include employee concerns and that training programs to

help the employees will be forthcoming. Speed of service,

courtesy, and quality of food, are identified areas needing

to improve in store operations which will make Cracker

Barrel a success. Those areas require that employee

concerns be addressed. The correct handling of management

and employee concerns would lead to improved operations on

the unit level.

Value is another criterion addressed by Cracker Barrel

(Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, 1990). Value is

50

determined by the customers' confidence that quality food is

being served at reasonable prices. Such a concept is not

new and has been identified by other restaurant chains.

A pleasant environment is a reasonable expectation of

Cracker Barrel's customers. The ambience of the restaurant

is an important element within the Cracker Barrel concept.

Tradition also specifies that the environment be clean and

inviting to customers, and Cracker Barrel identifies this

concept in its 1990 annual report.

International Proteins Corporation

International Proteins, a non-traditional corporation

that purchased a restaurant chain to increase its

profitability, reports that their acquisition of The Ground

Round Restaurant chain increased their bottom line profits

(International Proteins Corporation, 1989). Much of the

corporation's 1989 annual report is devoted to the business

practices of Ground Round. According to the president of

Ground Round, Michael O'Donnell, many of the values that

other restaurant chains consider important are also

considered important by Ground Round. Deviating from

traditional restaurant chains, Ground Round has plotted a

course of business practices that include the dividing of

restaurants into two distinct areas. The first area caters

to families. In these areas the children are catered to

with promotions that include meals sold for a penny per

51

pound of a child's weight. "Bingo the Clown," special

birthday party areas, and favors are also used to entice

children and their families to eat at Ground Round.

Old-time movies and cartoons and a reasonably priced

children's menu are offered. Thus, the concern for the

internal environment is shown as the decor and ambience is

geared toward the family. The Ground Round considers family

trade essential to greater profitability.

The other side of Ground Round restaurants caters to

adult-only dining (International Proteins Corporation,

1989). Alcoholic beverages are served and the atmosphere is

more formal. Lower lighting and upscale furniture are used

to induce the adult market segment to dine at Ground Round.

Attention to details and other concerns are also identified

by 0'Donne11 in the report.

Expansion of the chain into different market share

settings is identified as necessary for Ground Round's

growth and success (International Proteins Corporation,

1989). Expansion entails the competitive spirit noted in

the discussion of other restaurant chains. Quality and

service are again key Ingredients to a successful formula

for Ground Round. Value, especially in the children and

family segment, is a vital concern for the Ground Round

restaurants. Employee and managerial training become

imperative when trying to forge two diverse concepts into

one edifice as noted by O'Donnell in the annual report.

52

O'Donnell related that technological advancements,

especially in the computer areas, would be of great

assistance to Ground Round senior and unit managers

(International Proteins Corporation, 1989). The information

that needs to be processed is essential in order for the

Ground Round to compete successfully within the marketplace.

Thus, management concerns included the ability to find the

best possible employees and to use all resources to attain

the Ground Round standards. Finally, the Ground Round

expects all their facilities to be attractive on the outside

in order to entice prospective customers to enter their

restaurants (International Proteins Corporation, 1989).

Sonic Industries. Inc.

Two individuals who had separate drive-in restaurants

had the same idea and decided to merge their efforts and

their restaurants. The concept was to deliver food to their

customers at the "speed of sound"; thus, the Sonic Drive-In

chain was born. Owned and operated by Sonic Industries this

restaurant chain is growing at a rapid pace. The belief

that innovation and creativity are necessary was expressed

in Sonic Industries. Inc.'s 1985 Annual Report. Quality and

service were mentioned as keys to success and to the

standards that are to be met (Sonic Industries, Inc.,

1985).

53

The drive-in concept dates back to the 1940s as

indicated in Sonic Industries. Inc.'s 1985 Annual Report.

Internal and external environmental concerns are mentioned

and individual units are expected to remain attractive to

customers. The design of Sonic restaurants is critical to

the success of attaining their market share. Newer and more

creative designs are needed to ensure continued expansion

(Sonic Industries, Inc., 1985).

Expansion and growth are goals set by the corporation

in their 1985 annual report. These goals indicate that the

customers still desire good food and speed of service.

Growth indicates the competitive spirit of the corporation

as it tries to embrace its niche in the market.

Training of management and employees are of concern to

the senior management (Sonic Industries, Inc., 1985). To

operate better their restaurant units, Sonic is convinced

that a centralized training program is needed for its

continued corporate success. The corporation's concern and

commitment expressed in the annual report indicates that

past training efforts had not accomplished the corporate

goals set forth and that a new and innovative program is

needed to reverse that trend. Increased profitability to

shareholders is also stated as a goal within the 1985 annual

report. All of the factors mentioned are keys to Sonic1s

continued growth and increasing profit picture.

54

Morrison Cafeterias

One of the oldest restaurant chains included in the

review was founded in the early 1900s. From the description

contained in the annual report, a cafeteria was built on the

first floor of the busiest office building in the center of

a town in middle America for the comfort of clients; thus,

Morrison Cafeterias was created (Morrison Cafeterias, 1990).

Tradition is understated by the annual report as an old

picture of the first Morrison Cafeterias was silhouetted in

the background. The present-day standards that Morrison

Cafeterias wishes to attain begin with a clean and sanitary

environment. Employee concerns are noted by the details of

a training program which is outlined and discussed. The

values of the founder still remain constant—or perhaps the

values that were established are universal in their

consistency.

Quality of food products is noted as the ability to

serve "fine" food (Morrison Cafeterias, 1990). The

connotation of fine food creates the impression of old

fashioned eateries that catered to their customers. The

customers at Morrison Cafeterias are considered to be of

great importance, and the serving of fine food is a standard

that meets or exceeds customers' expectations.

Meeting or exceeding customers' needs forms the basis

of training programs that encompass both managers and hourly

employees of Morrison Cafeterias (Morrison Cafeterias,

55

1990). A need for increased training for both management

and employees is noted within the report. It seems likely

that such action is the result of a corporate view that

Morrison Cafeterias' present training methods do not meet

the standards that have been established in the past or

newly set standards. Retention of stable employees and

recruitment of new employees in this specific restaurant

concept is crucial for the continual success of Morrison

Cafeterias.

A goal of opening 50 or more new stores per year is

also stated in the Morrison Cafeterias' 1990 Annual Report.

(Morrison Cafeterias, 1990). The increased emphasis on

training may be partly due to this goal. However, the

competitive nature of Morrison Cafeterias is more likely the

reason. Opening 50 new cafeterias per year is certainly

aggressive. The existing cafeterias would have to generate

enormous revenues to support such a goal. The lack of

discussion within the annual report regarding profitability

indicates that all profits generated will be utilized for

the building of new units for Morrison Cafeterias.

Summary

The review of literature suggests that material

discussed to any degree on the subject matter of corporate

and management values is limited. The 23 restaurant chains

included represent a wide spectrum of the restaurant

56

industry. The service represented ranges from

double-windowed drive-ins to intimate adult settings.

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES

Introduction

Individual personal value systems have led to a work

ethic and interpersonal skills that lead to success. After

initial managerial success, managers who continue to be

successful have a pattern of such behavior (Kotter, 1982).

As mentioned earlier, Maslow's theories suggest that

self-actualization may never occur, but successful

individuals continue to seek that level of fulfillment

(Maslow, 1954). These two theories help formulate the basis

of this investigation.

The proposed investigation was designed to determine

the personal values systems of senior corporate and

partnership managers of 23 restaurants. However, after

numerous contacts, five of these companies were eliminated

from the survey. This chapter includes a description of the

research methods and procedures used for this study under

the following headings: (a) the population and sample; (b) a

description of research test; (c) a description of the

research instrument; (d) the data collection procedures; and

(e) statistical analysis of the data.

57

58

Population and Sample

The population consisted of the top executives or

senior managers of the 23 target restaurants. The target

restaurants were chosen from a list of the top 100

restaurants as designated by Restaurant Business (1991).

Restaurant Business selects the fastest growing restaurants

and identifies them by volume of sales, and categorizes them

as the top 50 growth companies, the top 50 public

restaurants, and the top 100 restaurants as determined by

sales revenue. Inclusive within that list are public

corporations, partnerships, closed corporations, and limited

partnerships. Domestic and international restaurant chains

were also represented. A table of random numbers was used

from the text of Tables for Statisticians (Arkin & Colton,

1950). Each of the 200 restaurants were numbered and a

starting point was selected from the tables at random. A

list of 200 restaurants was comprised by using Restaurant

Business (1991) and, using an arbitrary selection process 47

were chosen to fit the criteria of the chief investigator.

However, only 23 (48.9%) of the restaurants through the

random process qualified. As a restaurant was selected, the

necessary information was recorded and so that data could be

obtained from the Q Data files.

Q Data Files are a series of microfiche records that

contain the annual reports of companies that are required or

desire to list their annual reports with the Securities

59

Exchange Commission, a government agency of the United

States. Careful scrutiny of the selected companies' reports

indicated that the amount of information chosen to be

disclosed varied widely among the companies. Not all

companies conducting business in the United States are

represented in the Q Data Files; however, all types of

companies are represented, not just hospitality or service

companies.

After a review of the information presented within the

annual reports, it was determined that only 18 of the first

34 companies selected included a broad selection of

variables. Another eight companies were randomly selected

using the same tables and continuing from the previous

ending point. Again, approximately 50% of those chosen were

not suited for the study. An additional five companies were

chosen during the third random selection process, resulting

in a total of 23 companies selected.

Two reasons for rejecting more than 50% of the randomly

selected companies included, a lack of mission statements in

the reports, and fewer than five identifiable top

executives. In some instances, only financial information

was reported, and there was no indication of company

management's other concerns such as employee and social

welfare.

The managers selected for the receipt of the

questionnaire survey were the top senior hospitality

60

managers employed by the 23 restaurants listed in the review

of literature. The initial senior restaurant manager sample

size was 212. Permission from the University of North Texas

as to the use of human subjects being surveyed was obtained

prior to any actual studies conducted.

Description of Research Test

One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) statistical model

was used to test the personal values systems of the managers

surveyed.

Description of Research Instrument

The personal values systems guestionnaire developed by

George England was chosen to gather data from the subjects

because of its success in the past in this type of data

gathering (England, 1967). The use of a factual,

unoffensive, and unbiased data gathering instrument, such as

the one chosen, was critical to this study.

The questionnaire provided short questions with related

short responses. The instrument was most appropriate to be

used in this type of research because of its simplicity and

purpose. Time requirements for completing the instrument

and returning it were minimal. The ability to gather a

large amount of data was expedited by the user of this

instrument. Permission to use the questionnaire was

obtained prior to its use.

61

Validation of the Personal Value Questionnaire

After the inception of England*s Personal Value

Questionnaire, an independent study was done to determine

the construct validity of the instrument by Lusk and Oliver

(1974). Lusk and Oliver replicated England*s 1967 study and

found it to be highly valid at the alpha rating of .001.

Within the 66 measurements, Lusk and Oliver found only four

cells that were significantly different. These four cells

included, money, rational, equality, and autonomy. An

explanation for the shift in the four cells could be

explained by the selection process used and the continual

development of senior management. England's original

survey was validated at .66, based on a return rate of 35%.

Thus, two separate validations have been completed on the

instrument used. England's instrument has also been used in

research studies such as Hayajneh (1990) and Santos (1990)

(see Appendix C).

Data Collection Procedures

An explanatory letter, the instrument, and a stamped,

self-addressed envelope were mailed to the specified sample.

All questionnaires were coded so that confidentiality was

maintained.

The first mailing of the questionnaire took place

May 27, 1992 to the 212 senior restaurant managers

representing 23 companies. After only seven responses were

62

received from the initial mailing, follow-up telephone calls

verifying the 23 corporations, addresses and top executives

were made. A second mailing of the questionnaire, which

included the insertion of a one dollar bill, took place on

June 27, 1992. An adequate number of responses were still

not achieved so executives were contacted by telephone and

by personal visit resulting in a response rate of 45 of the

remaining identified 159 senior managers or 28.3%. The

telephone calls and personal visits concentrated on the

business entities that were not adequately represented. The

data collection concluded on August 27, 1992, 90 days after

inception.

Statistical Analysis of the Data

The data was analyzed by tallying each item on the

demographic section of the questionnaire. Data was then

appropriately converted for analysis according to the one-

way analysis of variance statistical test used. Data was

coded and submitted to a computer programmer for analysis.

An alpha level of . 05 was selected to determine the level of

significance.

CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

The purpose of this chapter is to report the findings

of the survey and the analysis of the research data that was

collected. The responses to the survey questionnaire are in

answer to the two research questions posed in Chapter 1.

The eight research hypotheses in Chapter 1 form the basis of

the analysis to be reported in this chapter.

Research Question One

The values of the restaurant managers are represented

in Tables 17 through 82. A profile of a typical restaurant

senior manager can be identified from these tables.

Employee Welfare

Forty-four senior restaurant managers responded to the

value of employee welfare. Thirty-six (81.8%) of the

respondents valued employee welfare "High." Seven or 15.9%

of the respondents rated employee welfare "Medium" while one

respondent (2.3%) rated this value "Low." The Mean for this

value was 1.205 and the standard deviation was .462 (see

Appendix D).

63

64

High Productivity

Thirty-nine of the senior restaurant mangers,

representing 88.6% of the respondents, valued "High

Productivity" at the top of the ratings. Five respondents

(11.4%) rated this value as "Medium." None of the mangers

rated "High Productivity" "Low." One respondent did not

assign a value to this variable. The Mean was 1.14 and the

standard deviation was .321 (see Appendix D).

Industrial Leadership

"Industrial Leadership" split the respondents in their

value assessment with one non-respondent. Twenty-two of the

managers (or 50%) rated "Industrial Leadership" "High."

Sixteen managers (36.4%) valued this variable as "Medium."

Six respondents (13.6%) rated it "Low." The Mean equated to

1.636 with a standard deviation of .718 (see Appendix D).

Organizational Efficiency

Only two ratings were submitted for this variable,

"High" and "Medium." Thirty-five (79.5%) of the managers

surveyed rated "Organizational Leadership" "High." Nine

(20.5%) rated it "Medium" and no manager valued this

variable "Low." One manger did not rate this variable. The

Mean was 1.205 with a standard deviation of .408 (see

Appendix D).

65

Organizational Growth

Twenty-seven (61.4%) of the managers rated

"Organizational Stability" "High"; while 16 (36.4%)

respondents valued this variable as "Medium." Only one

manager (2.2%) rated it "Low" and manager did not respond.

The Mean for this variable was 1.477 with a standard

deviation of .549 (see Appendix D).

Organizational Stability

Twenty-four (54.5%) of the managers rated

"Organizational Stability" "High"; while 19 (43.2%)

respondents valued this variable as "Medium." Only one

manager (2.3%) rated it "Low" and one manager did not

respond. The Mean for this variable was 1.477 with a

standard deviation of .549 (see Appendix D).

Profit Maximization

An even split occurred between the respondents as 22

(50%) rated this variable "High" and another 22 (50%)

respondents rated it "Medium." One respondent did not rate

this variable. The Mean was 1.50 with a standard deviation

of .506 (see Appendix D).

Social Welfare

As a variable, "Social Welfare" did not rate as highly

in this sample compared to the other variables already

discussed. Only seven managers representing 15.9% of those

66

responding valued "Social Welfare" "High." Twenty-nine

(65.9%) of the senior restaurant managers elected to rate

this variable as "Medium." Eight managers or 18.2% valued

"Social Welfare" as "Low." One manager did not place a

value on the variable The Mean was 2.023 with a standard


Achievement

An overwhelming majority of the managers rated this

variable "High" (39 individual managers or 88.6%). Four

(9.1%) rated this variable "Medium." One (2.3%) respondent

valued "Achievement" "Low"; one manager did not respond.

The Mean was 1.136 with a standard deviation of .409 (see

Appendix D).

Autonomy

Autonomy was rated in all three categories. Thirteen

(29.5%) managers rated "Autonomy" "High"; while 26

respondents (59.1%) rated it "Medium." Only five senior

managers (11.4%) valued this variable "Low." One manager

did rate "Autonomy." The Mean was 1.818; standard deviation

was .620 (see Appendix D).

Dignity

Dignity was rated in only two categories with one

respondent not placing a value. Thirty-nine (88.6%) senior

restaurant managers ranked this variable as "High"; while

67

five (11.4%) respondents valued "Dignity" as "Medium." The


Appendix D).

Individuality

Nineteen (43.2%) of the senior restaurant managers

rated this variable "High." Twenty-two (50%) of the

respondents valued "Individuality" as "Medium." Three

(6.8%) valued this variable as "Low." One manager did not

respond. The Mean for this variable was 1.636 with a


Influence

Fifteen (34.1%) managers rated "Influence "High"; while

the majority, 27 (61.4%) valued this variable "Medium." Two

managers representing 4.5% of the respondents valued

"Influence" as "Low." One manager did not rate the

variable. The Mean equated to 1.705 with a standard


Innovation

The majority of managers, 26 or 59.1% valued

"Innovation" as "High," 15 (34.1%) rated it "Medium," and

only 3 (6.8%) valued the variable as "Low." One non-

responded is noted. The Mean for this variable is 1.477

with a standard deviation of .628 (see Appendix D).

68

Job Satisfaction

Only "High" and "Medium" values were selected for this

variable with one non-respondent. An almost unanimous

"High" value was chosen by the 43 (97.7%) senior managers.

One respondent (2.3%) rated this variable "Medium." The


Appendix D).

Job Security

The sample split more evenly than the previous variable

in their value assessment of this variable. Twenty-three

(52.3%) valued "Job Satisfaction" as "High." Twenty (44.4%)

rated the variable as "Medium"; while one manager (2.3%)

rated it "Low." There was one manager who did participate.


Appendix D).

Leisure

Two values were assigned to "Leisure"; "High" or

"Medium." "High" was valued by eight (17.8%) of the senior

restaurant managers and 27 (61.4%) valued it as "Medium."

There was, again, one manager who did not respond to this

variable. The Mean equated to 2.023 with a standard


69

Money

Money was rated almost equally between "High" and

"Medium." Twenty-one (47.7%) of the managers selected

"Money" as a "High" value. Twenty-two (50%) valued the

variable as "Medium." Only one manager (2.3%) rated the

variable "Low", and there was one non-respondent. The Mean

was 1.545 with a standard deviation of .548 (see Appendix

D) .

Power

Power was valued by six managers (13.6%) as "High."

Twenty-nine (65.9%) of the sample rated it "Medium"; while

nine (20.5%) valued "Power" as "Low." The Mean was 2.068


Prestige

"High" or "Medium" were the only two values selected

for this variable with one non-respondent. Seven of the

sample, representing 15.9% of the respondents selected

"High"; while 37 (84.1%) selected "Medium." The Mean was


Success

"Success" was a variable that was only rated either

"High" or "Medium." Unlike "Prestige" 37 of the restaurant

managers (or 88.6%) selected "High" as the assigned value;

while five managers (11.4%) selected "Medium" as their

70

value. There was one non-respondent. The Mean was 1.14

with a standard deviation of .321 (see Appendix D) .

Ability

Thirty-seven (84.1%) of the sample valued "Ability" as

"High." Seven (15.9%) of the respondents selected "Medium"

as their chosen value for this variable. There was one non-

respondent. The Mean for this variable was 1.159 with a


Aggressive

Forty-four respondents rated the variable "Aggressive"

and there was one non-respondent. Twelve (27.3%) valued

this variable as "High," 30 (68.2%) rated it "Medium", and

only two (4.5%) rated "Aggressive" as "Low." The Mean was


Ambition

Twenty-nine (65.9%) of the respondents rated "Ambition"

as "High," 14 (31.8%) rated it "Medium," and "Low" was rated

by one respondent (2.3%). There was one non-respondent.

The Mean for this variable was 1.364 with a standard


Compassion

The ratings for "Ambition" were either "High" or

"Medium" with one manager not choosing a value. Twenty-

eight or 63.6% of the senior restaurant managers valued

71

"Compassion" as "High" and 16 or 36.4% rated it "Medium."


Appendix D).

Conformity

All three ratings were selected as values for this

variable. Only five managers (11.3%) selected "High" as

their choice. Nineteen (43.2%) selected "Medium" as their

value; while 20 (45.5%) chose "Low" as their value. The

Mean was 2.341 and the standard deviation equated to .680

(see Appendix D).

Cooperation

"Cooperation" was either rated "High" or "Medium" by

the sample with one manger not selecting a value. Thirty

mangers or 68.2% chose "High" and 14 (31.8%) selected

"Medium" as their values. The Mean was 1.318 and the

standard deviation was .471 (see Appendix D).

Honor

Forty (90.9%) of the senior managers valued "Honor" as

"High"; while only four or 9.1% selected "Medium" as their

preferred value. Again, there was one non-respondent. The

Mean was 1.091 and a standard deviation was determined to be

.291 (see Appendix D).

72

Lovaltv

Selection choices for "Loyalty" were either "High" or

"Medium" with one manager not selecting. Thirty-five or

79.5% managers valued "Loyalty" as "High" and nine (20.5%)

rated the variable as "Medium." The Mean was 1.205 with a


Obedience

All three categories were selected by the sample for

this variable. Eight (18.2%) valued "Obedience" as "High,"

29 (65.9%) selected "Medium" and seven (15.9%) chose "Low"

as their perceived value. There was one non-respondent.


Appendix D).

Prejudice

This variable's value was selected by seven (15.9%) of

the sample as "High." Eight (18.2%) of the sample selected

the value "Medium," and 29 (65.9%) valued it as "Low." The

Mean was 2.500 with a standard deviation of .762. There was

one non-respondent (see Appendix D).

Skill

There was one non-respondent. The only values

selected for this variable were either "High" or "Medium."

Thirty-three of the senior restaurant managers, representing

75.0% of the respondents selected "High" as their value.

73

Eleven or 25% chose "Medium" as their representative value

for "Skill." The Mean was 1.25 and the standard deviation

was .438 (see Appendix D).

Tolerance

Seventeen (38.6%) of the sample valued this variable as

"High," 25 or 56.9% of the sample selected "Medium," and two

or 4.5% selected "Low." There was one non-respondent. The

Mean was 1.659 and the standard deviation was .568 (see

Appendix D).

Trust

Only one response or 2.3% from the sample rated this

variable "Medium", all the other 43 responses or 97.7%

valued "Trust" as "High." There was one non-respondent.


Appendix D).

All Employees

The majority of the sample, 35 representing 77.8%

selected the value "High" for this variable. Nine (20.0%)

respondents selected "Medium and one (2.3%) valued "All

Employees" as "Low". There was one non-respondent. The

Mean was 1.044 and the standard deviation was .208 (see

Appendix D).

74

Customers

All of the sample responded to this variable and only

the "High" or "Medium" values were selected. Forty-three or

95.6% selected "High"; while two (4.4%) chose "Medium" for

this variable. The Mean was 1.044 and the standard

deviation was .208 (see Appendix D).

Highly Skilled Employees

The complete sample responded to this variable.

Twenty-four or 53.3% valued "Highly Skilled Employees" as

"High", 20 or 44.4% selected "Medium," and one (2.3%) chose

"Low" to represent their value. The Mean was 1.489 with a


Labor Unions

Four senior restaurant managers or 8.9% rated "Labor

Unions" "High" as a value. Three (6.7%) selected "Medium"

as their representative value. Thirty-eight or 84.4% of the

sample valued "Labor Unions" as "Low." The Mean was 2.756


Managers

Two values were selected for this variable, either

"High" or "Medium." Thirty-two or 72.7% of the sample

selected "High" as their value. Only 12 chose "Medium"

representing 27.3% of the sample. There was one non-

75

respondent. The Mean was 1.273 with a standard deviation of


Me

Thirty-four or 77.3% of the senior restaurant managers

rated this variable "High." Another eight managers (18.2%)

rated "Me" as "Medium" and the remaining two (4.5%)

respondents selected "Low" as their value. There was one

non-respondent. The Mean for this variable was 1.273 and

the standard deviation was .544 (see Appendix D).

Mv Supervisor

The values of "High" and "Medium" were the only choices

selected by the sample. Forty managers representing 88.9%

rated "My Supervisor" as "High" and the remaining five

(11.1%) valued the variable as "Medium." There was one non-

respondent. The Mean was 1.111 with a standard deviation of


Mv Company

All the sample participated in their value assessment

of this variable. Forty or 88.9% of the respondents

selected as "High" their value for this variable. Only five

managers representing the remaining 11.1% chose "Medium" for

their value. The Mean was 1.111 with a standard deviation

of .318 (see Appendix D).

76

Mv Co-Workers

The sample split their choices between the values of

"High" and "Medium." Thirty-four selected "High" which

represents 75.6% of the sample. "Medium" was chosen by 11

or 24.4% of the managers for this variable. The Mean was

1.244 and the standard deviation was .435 (see Appendix D) .

Mv Assets

The sample split their choices between the values of

"High" and "Medium." Thirty-four selected "High" which

represents 75.6% of the sample. "Medium" was chosen by 11

or 24.4% of the managers for this variable. The Mean was

1.244 and the standard deviation was .435. The exact same

results as the preceding variable (see Appendix D).

Owners

Twenty-four of the sample selected "High" as the value

placed the variable "Owners." This represented 54.5% of the

senior restaurant managers. "Medium" was selected by 18 of

the sample, which represented 41.0%. The remaining two

(4.5%) respondents chose to value "Owners" as "Low." There

was one non-respondent. The Mean was 1.689 with a standard

deviation of.668 (see Appendix D).

Semi-Skilied Workers

Nineteen or 42.2% of the managers selected "High" for

their chosen value for this variable. Twenty-one (46.7%) of

77

the sample selected "Medium" and five (11.1%) selected

"Low." The entire sample responded to this variable. The

mean was 1.689 with a standard deviation of .668 (see

Appendix D).

Stockholders

Stockholders as a value, split the responses among the

three values. Twenty-two or 50% of the respondents selected

"High" for their chosen value, 17 selected "Medium"

representing 38.6%, and the remaining five or 11.4% chose

"Low." There was one non-respondent. The Mean was 1.614


Technical Staff

The entire sample responded to this variable.

Technical Staff as a value, split the responses among the

three values. Twenty-two or 48.9% of the respondents

selected "High" for their chosen value, 21 selected "Medium"

representing 46.7%, and the remaining two or 4.4% chose

"Low." The Mean was 1.556 with a standard deviation of .586

(see Appendix D).

Unskilled Workers

The sample was again split as to the value of this

variable. Nineteen chose "Unskilled Workers" as a "High"

value representing 40.0% of the sample. Twenty-four (42.2%)

selected "Medium" as their value, and eight (17.8%) selected

78

"Low" for their value of this variable. The Mean was 1.778


White-Collar Employees

The sample was split as to the value of this variable.

Nineteen chose "Unskilled Workers" as a "High" value

representing 42.2% of the sample. Twenty-four (53.4%)

selected "Medium" as their value, and two (4.4%) selected

"Low" for their value of this variable. The Mean was 1.622


Authority

"Authority" as a value was split among the three value

choices in the following manner by the sample. "High" was

chosen by 16 or 35.6% of the managers, 27 or 60.0% chose

"Medium," and two or 4.4% selected "Low." The mean was

1.689; the standard deviation was .557 (see Appendix D).

Caution

Three of the senior restaurant managers selected this

value as a "High" value, which represented only 6.7% of the

sample. The majority of managers (30) selected "Caution" as

a "Medium" value, representing 66.6% of the sample. The

remaining 12 managers chose "Low" as their value,

representing the final 26.7%. The Mean was 2.20 with a


79

Change

The sample was split among "High" and "Medium" as to

the value of this variable. Twenty-nine or 64.4% of the

sample chose "Change" as a "High" value. Sixteen (35.6%)

selected "Medium" as their value. The Mean was 1.356 with a


Competition

Thirty-two of the managers representing 71.1% of the

sample selected "High" as their value for this variable.

The remaining 13 or 28.9% of the managers selected "Medium"

for their value. The Mean was 1.289 with a standard


Compromise

The variable was divided into each of the three value

choices. Eleven of the sample selected "High" as their

value choice representing 24.4%. "Medium" was selected by

30 managers representing 66.7% of the sample as there

preferred value. The remaining four managers chose "Low"

representing 8.9% of the sample. The Mean was 1.844 with a


Conflict

"Conflict" was selected by five the senior restaurant

managers as a "High" value representing 11.1% of the sample.

"Medium" was selected by 25 of the managers as their

80

preferred value, representing 55.6%. The remaining 15

(33.3%) managers selected "Low" as their preferred value

choice. The Mean was 2.222 and the standard deviation was


Conservation

Only three selected a "High" value which represented

6.7% of the sample. Twenty-five of the restaurant managers,

which represented 55.6% of the sample, chose "Medium" as

their choice. The remaining 17 managers or 37.8% preferred

"Low" as their value choice. The Mean was 2.311 with a


Emotions

The three value choices selected by the entire sample

were as follows. "High" was selected by nine managers or

20% of the sample, "Medium" was selected by 26 or 57.8% of

the managers, and "Low" was selected by 10 or 22.2% of the

managers. The Mean was 2.022 with a standard deviation of


Equality

The three value choices selected by the entire sample

were as follows. "High" was selected by 29 managers or

64.4% of the sample, "Medium" was selected by 24 or 31.1% of

the managers, and "Low" was selected by two or 4.4% of the

81

managers. The Mean was 1.400 with a standard deviation of


Force

Only two of the sample chose "High" in their value

preference of this variable representing 4.4%. "Medium" was

selected by 16 or 35.6% of the managers and "Low" was

selected by 27 or 60.0% of the mangers as their value

choice. The Mean was 2.556 with a standard deviation of


Government

The value choices for this variable were divided as

follows. "High" was chosen by 11 managers or 24.5%,

"Medium" was selected by 15 managers or 33.3%, and "Low" was

chosen by 19 managers or 42.2%. The Mean was 2.178 with a


Liberalism

The value choices for this variable were divided as

follows. "High" was chosen by four managers or 8.9%,

"Medium" was selected by 17 managers or 37.8%, and "Low" was

chosen by 24 managers or 53.3%. The Mean was 2.178 with a


Property

"Property" as a value choice was preferred by the

sample in the following manner. "High" was selected by 20

82

of the managers or 44.4%, "Medium" was chosen by 19 managers

or 42.3% of the sample, and "Low" was selected by six

managers representing 13.3% of the sample. The Mean was

1.356 and the standard deviation was .529 (see Appendix D).

Reasonable

Thirty of the senior restaurant managers preferred

"High" as their value choice for this variable. This

represents 66.7% of the sample. "Medium" was selected by 14

managers as their value choice, representing 31.1% of the

sample. There was only one manager or 2.2% who selected

"Low" as the preferred value. The Mean for this variable

was 1.356 with a standard deviation of .529 (see Appendix

D) .

Religion

"Religion" as a value choice was preferred by the

sample in the following manner. "High" was selected by 17

of the managers or 37.8%, "Medium" was chosen by 21 managers

or 4.7% of the sample, and "Low" was selected by seven

managers representing 15.6% of the sample. The Mean was

1.778 and the standard deviation was .704 (see Appendix D).

Risk

Seventeen of the senior restaurant managers preferred

"High" as their value choice for this variable. This

represents 40.5% of the sample. "Medium" was selected by 23

83

managers as their value choice, representing 54.8% of the

sample. There were only two managers or 4.7% who selected

"Low" as their preferred value. There were three non-

respondents. The Mean for this variable was 1.643 with a


All 66 variables on England's Survey Questionnaire have

been described statistically in answer to Research Question

One.

Research Question Two

Question Two attempted to discern any differences in

the sample based on differences in gender, marital status,

level of formal education, country awarding the highest

degree, major field of study, annual income level, and size

of organization. Tables 83 through 92 help to answer

Research Question Two.

Gender

Table 83 indicates that of the 45 respondents only five

were female. In percentages, male respondents represented

88.9% of the sample. Females represented only 11.1% of the

sample. The Mean was l.lll with a standard deviation of

.318 (see Appendix D) .

Marital Status

"Marital Status" as a variable was divided into two

categories, "married" or "non-married." "Married"

84

respondents numbered 39 or 85.8% of the sample.

"Non-married" respondents numbered six and represented the

remaining 11.1% of the sample (see Table 84).

"Age" of the senior-level restaurant managers surveyed

ranged from 29 to 69 years of age. There were only two non-

respondents, both of whom were female. For statistical

purposes, "Age" was broken down into four categories and

those categories were as follows. Group I's ages ranged

from 29 to 40 which totaled 10 respondents. Group IIfs ages

ranged from 41 to 44 which totaled 11 respondents. Group

Ill's ages ranged from 45 to 47 and totaled 11 respondents.

Group IV1s ages ranged from 49 to 69 and totaled 11

respondents. The Mean was 45.744 with a standard deviation

of 8.421 (see Table 85).

Formal Education

Six categories were identified from the responses of

the managers. The majority of the mangers have a Bachelor

Degree (24 representing 53.3% of the sample). Master Degree

graduates number 14 (31.1%), followed by "Some College"

(three of the managers or 6.7%). Managers having doctoral

degrees (two respondents identified themselves as

attorneys), "Technical Degree" holders and "High School"

respondents numbered one each, representing 4.4% of the

85

sample. The Mean was 3.356 with a standard deviation of

.857 (see Table 86).

Country

All 45 (or 100%) respondents received their final

educational degrees or diplomas from the U.S.A. or Canada.


Table 87).

Maior Field of Study

Seven different categories are represented in "Major

Filed of Study" by the respondents. The field with the

majority of individuals (33 or 75.0%) was "Business

Administration." Second to "Business Administration" was

"Other" in which three managers responded, representing 6.8%

of the sample. "Humanities," "Fine Arts," and "Social

Science" each had two of the sample representing a combined

percentage of 13.2%. "Engineering" and "Biological

Sciences" each had one respondent or 4.4% of the sample.

There was one non-respondent. The Mean was 4.705 with a

standard deviation of 1.173 (See Table 88).

Income

Five categories were identified from the survey with

regard to income. The majority of the respondents were

earning over $101,000 (27 individuals representing 61.4%),

which is category three in the survey. The second largest

86

category responded to was the $76,000 to $100,000 range with

eight managers (or 18.2%). Four managers selected the range

of $36,000 to $50,000 (or 9.1%) to best identify their

annual income. Three managers selected $51,000 to $75,000

(or 6.8%) as representing their income level. Only two of

the sample (or 4.5%) indicated that their income level was

from $25,000 to $35,000. Both those individuals were

female. There was one non-respondent. The Mean was 3.455

with a standard deviation of 1.022 (See Table 89).

Management Experience

Four groups represent "Management Experience." Group 1

represents those managers who have held their positions from

3 to 10 years. Group 1 had 11 managers and represented

18.5% of the sample. Group 2 was represented by nine

managers (or 20.9%) and ranged from 11 to 15 years of

management experience. Group 3 management's experience

ranged from 16 to 20 years and numbered 13 (or 30.3%) of the

sample. Group 4 numbered 13 (or 30.3%) of the sample and

represents management experience ranging from 21 to 45

years. There were two non-respondents. The Mean was 2.41

with a standard deviation of 2.551 (See Table 90).

Size of Organization

Five separate groups were formed for this variable.

The over-whelming majority of 37 (or 82.2%) of the sample

were managing in companies that had in excess of 1,000

87

employees. Groups 1, 3, and 4 each had two of the sample

representing from 100-199, 400-499, and 500-599 employees

respectively for a total of 13.3%. Groups 1 and 2 each had

one of the sample representing from 200-299 employees and

300-399 employees respectively for a total of 4.5%. The

Mean was 6.489 with a standard deviation of 1.290 (See Table

91) .

All the demographic information relating to Research

Question Two has been analyzed and presented.

Hypothesis One

Ho: The personal values systems of senior restaurant

managers are equal based on their gender.

A one-way analysis of variance statistical test was

done to determine if any statistical significance could be

found. No test for significance could be used due to the

lack of cell size for the female gender. As stated

previously, only five female managers responded to the

survey. Those five represent 38.46% response rate of the 13

overall targeted female managers. However, female

management represented only 3.144%. of the overall sample of

159 (See Table 83).

Hypothesis Two


managers are equal based on their marital status.

88



found. Marital status was divided into two cell groups;

married or non-married. Married management represented by

39 or 86.6% of the sample. This skewed the cell size so

that it was impossible to determine if significance exists

or not (See Table 84).

Hypothesis Three


managers are equal based on their level of formal education.



found. Insignificant data was obtained to adequately

respond to Hypothesis Three. Formal education from the

Bachelor degree and the Master degree, totaling 38

respondents and representing 84.4% of the sample. Again, no

test for significance could be used as there were unequal

statistical cell (See Table 86).

Hypothesis Four


managers are equal based on their level of major fields of

studies.



found. The overwhelming number of respondents had a

89

business education background which did not allow for

objective statistical analysis. Thirty-three or 75% of the

sample indicated that business education was their main

field of study. Therefore, no testing for statistical

significance could be done (See Table 88).

Hypothesis Five


managers are equal based on the country awarding the highest

degree.



found,. As all respondents received their final degree or

diploma from the United States of America or Canada; there

was no statistical analysis that could be performed.

Therefore, no test for significance was performed for this

hypothesis (See Table 87).

Hypothesis Six


managers are equal based on their annual income.

A. one-way analysis of variance statistical test was


found. As previously mentioned, 27 or 61.4% of the sample

were discovered to be earning over $101,000 per year.

Testing for statistical analysis was negated due to this

single factor (See Table 89).

90

Hypothesis Seven

Ha: The personal values systems of senior restaurant

managers are not equal based on their number of years of

managerial experience.

Of the 66 variables statistically tested by a one-way

analysis of variance, four showed significant differences

among the four managerial groups. They were, "Customers,"

"My Assistant," "Tolerance," and "Industrial Leadership."

Another four variables indicated near significant

differences among the managerial groups and they were;

"Prejudice," "Skill," "Managers," and "Semi-Skilled

Workers." Tables are listed for the statistically

significant different and nearly-significant different

variables within the text.

A one-way analysis of variance was done to determine if

any statistical significance could be made. Significance

was determined between the groups. Group Two differed from

their opinion with the other three groups. There were nine

managers within this cell and rated the dependent variable

"Customers" as "Medium." The other three manager groups

rated "Customers" as "High." The computed F probability was

determined to be .0451 which is under the .05 probability

level of significance as set forth in Chapter 1. The Mean

for this variable was 1.0465 with a standard deviation of

.2131 (see Table 1 and Table 2).

Table 1

One-wav Analysis of Variance for "Customers"

91

Source Degrees of Freedom

Sum of Squares

Mean Squares

Between groups

Within groups

Total

3

39

42

.3514

1.5556

1.9070

.1171

.0399

Table 2

Tests for homogeneity of variances of sample for "Customers"

95% Int. Min. Max. Group N Mean SD SE LC Mean Rank. Rank.

1 8 1.0000 .0000 .0000 1. 0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

2 9 1.2222 .4410 .1470 • 8833 1.5612 1.0000 2.0000

3 13 1.0000 .0000 .0000 1. 0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

4 13 1.0000 .0000 .0000 1. 0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

Total 43 1.0465 .2131 .0325 • 9809 1.1121 1.0000 2.0000

Note. SE = Standard Error; 95% LC = 95% Level of Confidence; Int. Mean = Internal for the Mean; Min. Rank. = Minimum Ranking; Max. Rank. = Maximum Ranking.

Further differences appeared with the One-way Analysis

of Variance within this variable. "My Assistant" was

determined to be rated as "High" by Group Two and all other

groups rated this dependent variable as "Medium."

92

Table 3

One-way Analysis of Variance for "Mv Assistant"

Degrees of Sum of Mean Source Freedom Squares Squares

Between groups 3 1.6744 .5581

Within groups 39 6.0000 .1538

Total 42 7.6744

Table 4

Tests for homogeneity of variances of sample for "My Assistant"


1 8 1.5000 .5345 .1890 1.0531 1.9469 1.0000 2.0000

2 9 1.0000 .0000 .0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

3 13 1.3846 .5064 .1404 1.0786 1.6906 1.0000 2.0000

4 13 1.0769 .2774 .0769 .9093 1.2445 1.0000 2.0000

Total 43 1.2326 .4275 .0652 1.1010 1.3641 1.0000 2.0000

Note. SE - Standard Error; 95% LC = 95% Level of Confidence; Int. Mean = Internal for the Mean; Min. Rank. = Minimum Ranking; Max. Rank. = Maximum Ranking.

There is significance in this difference as the computed F

probability was found to be .0211. The Mean for this

93

variable was 1.2326 with a standard deviation of .4275 (see

Table 3 and Table 4).

"Tolerance" showed another significant difference among

the cells. Group Two differed from the other groups as they

valued "Tolerance" as "Low." The other three groups

assigned "Medium" as their value to "Tolerance."

Statistical significance was determined by the one-way

analysis of variance as the computed F probability was

determined to be .0436. The Mean was 1.6429 with a standard

deviation of .5329 (see Table 5 and Table 6).

Table 5

One-wav Analysis of Variance for "Tolerance"

Degrees of Sum of Mean Source Freedom Squares Squares

Between groups 3 2.2143 .7381

Within groups 38 9.4286 .2481

Total 41 11.6429

One-way analysis of variance could not determine

significance in three other dependent variables within the

section "Groups of People," however, they were nearly

significant enough to be noted. The first dependent

variable was "Prejudice." Group Two valued this dependent

94

variable as "Medium" while all other groups assigned a value

Table 6


1 7 1.2857 .4880 1. 1844 . 8344 1.7370 1.0000 2.0000

2 9 2.0000 .5000 . 1667 1. 6157 2.3843 1.0000 3.0000

3 13 1.6923 .480-41. 1332 1. 4020 1.9826 1.0000 2.0000

4 13 1.5385 .5189 . 1439 1. 2249 1.8520 1.0000 3.0000

Total 42 1.6429 .5329 . 0822 1. 4768 1.8089 1.0000 3.0000


of "High." The computed F probability factor was determined

to be .0847. The Mean was 2.4762 with a standard deviation

of .7726 (see Table 7 and Table 8).

Near-significance was determined by use of a one-way

analysis of variance for the dependent variable "Skill."

However, Group Two again showed a variance in their

valuation of "Skill" as opposed to the other three groups.

The computed F probability was determined to be .0986 with a

Mean of 1.2381. The standard deviation was determined to be

.4311 (see Table 9 and Table 10).

Table 7

One-wav Analysis of Variance for "Prejudice"

95


Sum of Squares

Mean Squares

Between groups

Within groups

Total

3

38

41

3.8730

20.6032

24.4762

1.2910

.5422

Table 8

Tests for homogeneity of variances of sample for "Prejudice"

Group N Mean SD SE 95% Int. Min. Max. LC Mean Rank. Rank

1 7 2 .4286 .7868 .2974 1. 7009 3 .1562 1. 0000 3 .0000

2 9 2 .8889 .3333 .1111 2. 6327 3 .1451 2. 0000 3 .0000

3 13 2 .6154 .7679 .2130 2. 1513 3 .0795 1. 0000 3 .0000

4 13 2 .0769 .8623 .2392 1. 5558 2 .5980 1. 0000 3 .0000

Total 42 2 .4762 .7726 .1192 2. 2354 2 .7170 1. 0000 3 .0000


Table 9

One-wav Analysis of Variance for "Skill"

96


Sum of Squares

Mean Squares

Between groups

Within groups

Total

3

38

41

1.1477

6.4713

7.6190

.3826

.1703

Table 10

Tests for homogeneity of variances of sample for "Skill"

95% Int. Min. Max. Group M Mean SD SE LC Mean Rank. Rank.

1 7 1.2857 .4880 .1844 .8344 1.7370 1.0000 2.0000

2 9 1.1111 .3333 .1111 .8549 1.3673 1.0000 2.0000

3 13 1.4615 .5189 .1439 1.1480 1.7751 1.0000 2.0000

4 13 1.0769 .2774 .0769 .9093 1.2445 1.0000 2.0000

Total 42 1.2381 .4311 .0665 1.1038 1.3724 1.0000 2.0000

Note. SE = Standard Error; 95% LC = 95% Level of Confidence; Int. Mean = Internal for the Mean; Min. Rank. Minimum Ranking; Max. Rank. = Maximum Ranking.

97

Group One showed a nearly significant difference in

their value assignment of the dependent variable "Managers"

within the section of "Groups of People" from the other

three groups. A one-way analysis of variance determined a

computed F probability of .0885. The Mean was 1.285 with a

standard deviation of .4572 (see Table 11 and Table 12).

Table 11

One-way Analysis of Variance for "Managers"


Sum of Squares

Mean Squares

Between groups

Within groups

Total

3

38

41

1.3375

7.2340

8.5714

.4458

.1904

Table 12

Tests for homogeneity of variances of sample for "Managers"

Group N Mean SD SE 95% Int. Min. Max. LC Mean Rank. Rank.

8 1.6250 .5175 .1830 1.1923 2.0577 1.0000 2.0000

9 1.3333 .5000 1.1667 .9490 1.7177 1.0000 2.0000

12 1.1667 .3892 .1124 .9193 1.4140 1.0000 2.0000

13 1.1538 .3755 .1042 .9269 1.3808 1.0000 2.0000

Total 42 1.2857 .4572 .0706 1.1432 1.4282 1.0000 2.0000

98


Group Four showed a difference in their value of "Semi-

skilled Workers" within the section of "Groups of People."

A computed F probability factor of .0903 was determined with

a Mean of 1.6512 and standard deviation of .6504 (see Table

13 and Table 14).

Table 13

One-way Analysis of Variance for "Semi-skilled Workers"


Sum of Squares

Mean Squares

Between groups

Within groups

Total

3

39

42

2.6905

15.0769

17.7674

.8968

.3866

Further differences appeared with the one-way analysis

of variance within this variable. "Industrial Leadership"

was determined to be significantly different among the

groups. Group One rated this variable as "Medium" to "Low,"

while the other three groups rated it "High" to "Medium."

The computed F probability was .0204 with a Mean of 1.619.

99

The computed F ratio was .0204 with a Mean of 1.619. The

standard deviation was .7309 (see Table 15 and Table 16).

No other significant or near significant factors were

determined in Hypothesis Seven.

Table 14

Tests for homogeneity of variances of sample for "Semi-skilled Workers11

95% Int. Min. Max. Group M Mean SD SE LC Mean Rank. Rank.

1 8 2.0000 .5345 .1890 1. 5531 2.4469 1.0000 3.0000

2 9 1.6667 .7071 .2357 1. 1231 2.2102 1.0000 3.0000

3 13 1.7692 .7250 .2011 1. 3311 2.2074 1.0000 3.0000

4 13 1.3077 .4804 .1332 1. 0174 1.5980 1.0000 2.0000

Total 43 1.6512 .6504 .0992 1. 4510 1.8513 1.0000 3.0000


100

Table 15

One-way Analysis of Variance for "Industrial Leadership"


Sum of Squares

Mean Squares

Between groups

Within groups

Total

3

38

41

4.9206

16.9841

21.9048

1.6402

.4470

Table 16

Tests for homogeneity of variances of sample for industrial leadership

Group N Mean SD SE 95% LC

Int. Mean

Min. Rank.

Max. Rank.

7 2.2857 .7559

9 1.2222 .4410

13 1.4615 .6602

13 1.6923 .7511

.2857 1.5866 2.9848 1.0000 3.0000

.1470 .8833 1.5612 1.0000 2.0000

.1831 1.0626 1.8605 1.0000 3.0000

.2083 1.2384 2.1462 1.0000 3.0000

Total 42 1.6190 .7309 .1128 1.3913 1.8468 1.0000 3.0000


101

Hypothesis Eight


managers are equal based on the size of their organization.

No significance was determined using the one-way

analysis of variance. The group sizes were not equivalent

enough to perform a valid statistical analysis. The

majority of responses were reported by 37 managers (or

82.2%) as the size of their organizations were in excess of

1,000 employees (See Table 91).

The statistical analysis of all eight hypothesis were

determined by use of the SPSS/PC+ Studentware 4.0 (Norusis,

1988). All hypothesis have been addressed as outlined in

Chapter 1.

Summary

The analysis of the sample and their responses as

outlined in Chapter 1 has been completed. While much of the

statistics detailed were descriptive in nature, there was

significance found in Hypothesis Seven. A closer look as to

what conclusions may be drawn will take place in Chapter 5.

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY, STATISTICAL SUMMARY, VALUES PROFILES OF MANAGERS,

CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, IMPLICATIONS,

AND IMPLICATIONS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

Introduction

This chapter presents the summary of the problems,

purposes, methods and procedures, analysis of data, and

findings of this study. Discussion and conclusions based on

the findings are also included.

Summary

This study addressed the personal values systems of

senior restaurant managers of 23 corporations or

partnerships representing 12 states. The personal values of

these managers determine the way their companies are run as

expressed in previous studies by Hayajneh (1990), and Santos

(1990). In accordance with theories espoused by Maslow in

1954 and Hotter in 1982, managers have a great impact on

their respective organizations. If success breeds success

as Kotter indicated in 1982, what better way to determine

what makes a successful manager than by analyzing the

personal values of senior management? If managers are to be

fulfilled in their careers by means of recognition, praise,

and personality traits that breed success as suggested by

102

103

Maslow, a study such as this can help to identify values

ascribed to by successful managers.

The initial 212 identified senior restaurant managers

were mailed a survey questionnaire in May, 1992. After

three weeks only seven responses were received (See Table

93). Re-verification of all corporate and partnership

officers and addresses revealed that 53 senior level

restaurant managers were no longer active in their companies

due to the following factors: (a) death or retirement, and

(b) downsizing of companies. The effects of these factors

reduced the sample size to 159. The reduction of senior

level restaurant mangers is noteworthy in this study because

entire levels of management are being eliminated.

Statistical Summary

Of the 66 variables that England's Questionnaire uses

(See Appendix C), 25 have a majority of the respondents

reacting to them. "Job Satisfaction" and "Trust" were

valued by all but one manager as "High" with a percentage of

97.7%. Forty senior managers or 88.6% valued "Dignity,"

"Achievement," "High Productivity," and "Success," as "High"

(See Appendix D).

"High," as the sole criterion for the dependent

variable "Employee Welfare," was selected by 37 senior

restaurant managers or 81.8%. "Organizational Efficiency"

was deemed an important value by 36 or 79.5% of the

104

respondents. "Skill" was selected as an important value by

33 managers representing 75% of the sample as marked "High"

on the survey (See Appendix D).

"My Company," "Competition," and "Managers" were

important values as 100% of those responding to the survey

indicated either "High" or "Medium" as their choices for

these dependent variables (See Appendix D).

Combined values of "High" and "Medium" represented

"Money," "All Employees," and "Reasonable" as important

values for 44 or 97.7% of all surveyed senior managers (See

Appendix D).

"Customers," "Risk," and "Me" were valued as important

by 95.2% or 43 senior managers. "Honor" was valued as

important by 41 or 90.9% of all surveyed managers.

"Religion" was also valued as important by 84.5% of surveyed

managers (See Appendix D).

"Medium" and "Low" selections were indicated in the

following manner. "Force" represented low in importance of

value by 95.6% of those responding. "Labor Unions" followed

in low importance as 91.1% of the sample responded as such.

"Conformity" was third lowest of the 66 variables as 87.7%

of the respondents selected either "Medium" or "Low" for its

importance. Thirty-eight senior level managers or 84.1%

selected "Prejudice" as their fourth lowest value. Finally,

68.1% or 31 of the managers indicated that "Social Welfare"

was of low importance to them (See Appendix D).

105

Values Profiles Of Managers

The values profiles of managers are provided in

Appendix E. This illustrates the range of values managers

have from "High," "Medium," and "Low" as determined from

their responses.

Conclusions

The following conclusions are drawn from this study.

1. There is ample opportunity for females to move into

and within senior level management in the corporate

restaurant industry.

2. There is great monetary compensation and personal

satisfaction for those managers who can sustain their

careers into their mid-forties.

3. The educational level attained by most senior

restaurant managers is impressive and is shown by the

preponderance of business degrees earned.

4. The continued interaction between industry leaders

and educators would help to resolve any differences that

each may have toward the philosophy of how to best serve the

industry.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, the following

recommendations are warranted:

1. The study should be replicated with the advantage of

knowing the limitations of this study.

106

2. Placing a small gratuity in the second mailing of

the surveys dramatically increased the responses.

3. Verification of individuals and their corporate

addresses before the first mailing will save time, effort,

and cost.

4. Future studies should include a demographic listing

that would include ethnic data. Such data would be

important to gauge the progress of various ethnic group's

assimilation into senior level management.

5. Replication of this study could determine if

further downsizing is occurring within the restaurant

industry. The restaurant industry, being the largest

segment of the service industry, would then serve as a

barometer for national economic trends.

6. Assessment of how females move within the ranks of

senior level management should be determined. The

determination of success or failure could provide analysis

regarding how the system could better assimilate females

into senior management.

7. Identification of senior level managers1 values and

value systems would be beneficial for management training

programs. Additionally, the possibility of greater future

success of mid-level managers could be attained through such

training programs based on this and other studies.

8. Future studies should determine the benefits of a

law degree in the restaurant industry. This study found

107

that the two most senior managers in terms of both age and

years of service were attorneys.

Implications

The fact that only 13 females were available to be

surveyed raises the question of how female managers can

access senior-level management? Two of the thirteen females

had surnames that made them identifiable with their

organizations. Another two were listed as Executive

Secretary on the Board of Directors, suggesting that four of

the 13 or 30.77% of all senior level female managers were on

the boards of directors of their companies either by

nepotism or traditional female role-modeling.

Participation by industry management in surveys such as

this one is crucial in defining those personal values that

enable successful managers to lead their companies. If

Kotter (1982) was correct in his assertion that "success

breeds success"; corporate management should try and

identify individual successful mangers' values. Such

activity would help perpetuate success within their

corporate cultures. There is no better way to identify

themselves than to participate in surveys of this nature.

Downsizing of major proportions is taking place and

appears that it will continue in the foreseeable future

within the restaurant industry. Logic dictates that net

profit will increase with a decrease in the overall salary

108

structure. The salary structure is greatly influenced by

the number of senior-level management and the salaries of

those managers. As indicated by the survey results, most

senior managers are earning in excess of $101,000 per year.

The elimination of a few of those positions would create a

more accessible pool of cash for other business uses such as

expansion or new product development.

The profile of a successful senior level manager within

the restaurant industry, according to the results of this

study, is a male between the ages of 41 and 44 who has been

in management for a minimum of 11 years and has at least a

four year degree in business administration.

As shown in Hypothesis Seven, significance must be

noted as to how managers that are in their 11th through 15th

years view their jobs. Speculation is that this group of

managers are busy trying to establish themselves within the

corporate structure politically. This is one possible

explanation of the differences among the four groups.

Based on the above information, assistants are viewed

as allies by those trying to establish themselves within a

political organization. The assistants are then deemed as

necessary "eyes" and "ears" within the organization in order

to provide valuable information for promotions and the

solidification of positions for their superiors.

Furthermore, as managers in their 11th through 15th years

try to establish themselves within their corporate

109

organizations, the interaction with customers is reduced as

suggested by the significance of Hypothesis Seven.

Hypothesis Seven also suggests that "Tolerance" becomes

a "Low" priority when stress levels increase. As senior

managers establish themselves as an integral part of an

organization their stress levels rise, therefore reducing

their level of tolerance.

Implications For Higher Education Programs

Selective implications for higher education for the

study are:

1. That the hotel/restaurant administration programs

teach a course on values of managers and their adverse

affects on the industry.

2. That hotel/restaurant administration programs

survey their students, in their programs and counsel them on

their values as they negatively impact their future.

This study has helped to identify and show some

significance in the personal values systems of restaurant

management. Future studies should be able to provide even

more information that would be beneficial to those who care

about this industry.

APPENDIX A

LETTER REQUESTING PERMISSION TO USE ENGLAND'S

PERSONAL VALUE SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE

110

Ill

May 6, 1991

Dr. George England School of Business Administration University of Oklahoma Norman, OK 73069

Dear Dr. England:

The effects of personal value systems by senior level managers on their organizations has not been studied in the hospitality industry. Utilizing previous studies done by you in different arenas of management on the international management level and cross-culture studies seems to be a natural cross-over into the hospitality sphere. For the distinct purpose of completing my Ph.D. program here at the University of North Texas, I am requesting your permission to use your "Personal Value Systems Survey Questionnaire" as developed in 1965 and revised in 1975.

Any suggestions or recommendations for the use of your survey will be greatly appreciated. The use of the instrument itself will be of great benefit now and in the future. I am looking forward to your reply in this matter. Please feel free to drop a line at any time requesting information as to the progress of this endeavor.

Very truly yours,

C. E. Vlisides

APPENDIX B

LETTERS PERTAINING TO ENGLAND'S PERSONAL

VALUE SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE

112

1 1 3

f-1 y

rJSi>0 * The University of Oktafwma CENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND MANAGEMENT RESEARCH COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 307 West Brooks Street, Room 4 Norman, Oklahoma 73019-0450 (405) 325-2931

January 23, 1992

Mr. C. E. VIIs Ides

University of North Texas

School of Human Resource Management P. 0. Box 5248

Denton, TX 76203-5248

Dear Mr. Vlisides;

Sorry your letter got put under a stack of work. You have ray permission to use the PVQ in your dissertation research and I would request that you send me a copy of the dissertation when it is completed. Best wishes in your research.

Sincerely,

UrJ.

George W . Englan^/

Professor Emeritus of Management

114

Dear

I was an owner and manager of different restaurants in several states. I am still active and enter my 27th year in the business. I love it and I used to get this mail on my desk too. Some of it I responded to, and some of it was pitched in ye olde circular file. If you have read my letter to this point, I am honored. Please read on and I promise you that you won't be disappointed.

Many of your colleagues in the restaurant field have already responded to the survey sent to you in May. However, I need only 50 more to complete this important study. Some of you have put the survey aside and forgot about it. Some of you have been on vacation and have not as yet seen it. Others have just thrown it out. Well, I remain persistent and hopeful that there are 50 of you that are not short-sighted and will complete the survey and send it back to me.

This is the first study of its kind to address the personal values of senior hospitality leaders. It is international in scope and takes LESS THAN 10 MINUTES TO COMPLETE. I guarantee your anonymity and I will send you a summary of the results, if you so desire. Hey, I even jpay the postage!! What more can I do??

Well, I'll throw in a buck so you can buy a soft drink, or a cup of coffee, or whatever, if you send me back the completed form. I am so sure of your integrity that the dollar is already enclosed. So, now you can be part of a historical survey, I pay the postage, you get a buck, and all this for less than 10 minutes of your time!! Give me a break and help me out. Your response will make you feel GOOD. So, PLEASE do it TODAY and fill my mail box!! If you have any questions PLEASE call me at 1-817-565-4696. Thank you in advance for your cooperation, it is most appreciated.

Sincerely,

C.E. (Dean) Vlisides Researcher

115

May 21, 1992

Dear Hospitality Industry leader,

Academic research is needed to better our industry and provide for a better future. Your assistance is critical in determining how the restaurant industry is being run. Research has shown that your personal values affect your business. By spending just a few minutes, you will be contributing to the future of the industry that you have helped create. I promise that completing the enclosed survey will take no more than 15 minutes of your time. Ethics, values, and the opportunity to improve our industry should be motivation enough. But, I know how busy you are and all I can say for further motivation is that with your help history can be made.

Confidentiality is assured as only the researcher will know to whom these few letters are being sent. A copy of a summary of the data will be made available to you, if you so desire. Another benefit will be that your company may be cited in any future publications. You are part of an international survey that can be of benefit to ydu today and in the future.

Please take the few minutes and send back the pre-stamped form as soon as possible. Without your immediate assistance, no one will benefit. Please accept my personal gratitude for the time that you spent reading this letter and filling out the short survey form.

Sincerely,

C.E. Vlisides Researcher University of North Texas

APPENDIX C

ENGLAND'S PERSONAL VALUE SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE

116

117

ENGLAND'S PERSONAL VALUES SYSTEMS QUESTIONNAIRE

This questionnaire is a part of a personal values study. The object of this study

is to have individuals evaluate various concepts which are about 1) groups of people, 2)

personal goals, 3) goals of organizations, 4) ideas associated with people, and 5) ideas

about general topics.

You will be asked to determine the degree of importance of each concept to you

and to rank the descriptions (pleasant, right, successful) as they best determine the

meaning of each concept to you.

Please be satisfied that your individual answers will never be disclosed to anyone

except the researcher. The data that I am trying to collect is only for this research

project on personal values of senior hospitality managers.

In advance, I would like to thank you for your participation in this research study.

It might be important to indicate that the progress in understanding managers' behavior

comes from your cooperation and participation in studies such as this one.

DIRECTIONS

Please determine the degree of importance for each concept by circling the

appropriate letter. The three lines after each concept indicate the degree of importance

for each concept. The "H" equals high importance, the "M" equals medium importance,

or the "L" equals low importance to indicate the degree of importance for each concept.

Then rank the three descriptions (pleasant, right, successful) on the right-hand

side as follows. On any of the three small lines following the specific concept, put a

113

number one f 1) on the line under the description that best fits the meaning or the specific

concept to you. Then put a number three (3) under the description that least fits the

meaning of the same specific concept to you. Finally, put a number twa (2) on the small

line under the remaining description for the same specific concept. Please notice how

you must assign an appropriate number to each description.

SAMPLES

Consider the concept "Patriotism", for example. Lf you believe that this concept

is of "high importance" CIRCLE the letter "H\ Here, you may choose only one degree

of importance (high, medium, low).

With respect to the three descriptions, if you believe that the description "right"

best fits the meaning of "Patriotism" to you, please put a number one (1) on the line

under "right" on the right-hand side. And if you believe that the description "successful"

least fits the meaning of "Patriotism" to you, please put a number three (3) on the small

line under the description "successful" in the same area. Then put the number two (2)

on the small line under the last description "right" as it appears in the drawn sample.

However, you might feel that none of the three descriptions apply for certain

concepts. The concept "dishonesty", for example, might be the concept that fits none

of the descriptions (pleasant, right, successful).

In this case, you may choose the description that least fits the meaning of the

concept to you. If you believe that the description "right" least fits the meaning of this

concept, then put a number three (3) on the small line under that description. Then do

1 1 9

the same for the other two descriptions (pleasant, successful) as shown in the sample

below.

CONCEPT

Patriotism

Dishonesty

SAMPLE

Degree of Importance

HIGH MEDIUM LOW Pleasant Right Successful

H M L 1 2 3

H M L 2 3 1

CONCEPT

GOALS OF BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS


HIGH MEDIUM LOW Pleasant

Employee Welfare H M L

High Productivity H M L

Industrial Leadership H M L

Organizational Efficiency H M L

Organizational Growth H M L

Organizational Stability H

*

M. L

Profit Maximization H M L

Social Welfare H M L

Right Successful

PERSONAL GOALS OF INDIVIDUALS


CONCEPT HIGH MEDIUM LOW Pleasant Right

Achievement H M L

Autonomy H M L

Dignity H M L • • i. Individuality H M L

Influence H M L

Successful

120

Innovation H M L

Job Satisfaction H M L

Job Security H M L

Leisure H M L

Money H M L ___

Power H M L -

Prestige H M L „ — ___

Success H M L

IDEAS ASSOCIATED WITH PEOPLE


CONCEPT HIGH MEDIUM LOW Pleasant Right Successful

Ability H M L

Aggressiveness H M L

Ambition H M L

Compassion H M L

Conformity H M L •

Cooperation H M L . "

Honor H M L

Loyalty H M L - —

Obedience H M L

Prejudice H M L •• -

Skill H M L ___ i Tolerance H M L ____ — —

Trust H M L

IDEAS ABOUT GENERAL TOPICS



Authority H M L • — _ —

Caution H M L ,

Change H M L

121

Competition H M L

Compromise H M L —

Conflict H M L — — — —

Conservatism H M L - ___

Emotions H M L - ____

Equality H M L •• Ml

Force H M L ___

Government H M L _ _

Liberalism H M L . ____

Property H M L I.

Reasonable H M L

Religion H M L M in. ___

Risk H M L

GROUPS OF PEOPLE



All Employees H M L , ,

Customers H M L

Government H M L

Highly-Skilled Workers H M L

Labor Unions H M L

Managers H M L . 1 1 M •

Me H M L

My Superior H M L

My Company H M L

My Co-Workers H M L • •n

My Assistants H M L • m .

Owners H M L — —

Semi-Skilled Workers H M L

122

Stockholders H M L

Technical Staff H M L

Unskilled Workers H M L

White-Co liar Workers H M L

PERSONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL INFORMATION

DIRECTIONS: Please respond to each of the following items:

1. Your gender: a) male b) female

2. Your Marital Status:

a) Single b) Married

c) Divorced d) Remarried

e) Widow f) Widower

g) Other (please specify)

3. Your age:

4. Your formal education (check the highest one)

a) Some high school e) Bachelor's degree

b) High school degree f) Master's degree

c) Some college g) Doctorate

d) Technical training h) Other (please specify)

5. Your major field of study:

a) Humanities e) Biological Sciences

b) Fine Arts f) Social Science

c) Engineering g) Business Administration

d) Physical Sciences h) Other (please specify)

1 2 3

Country awarding your highest education degree-

a)

b)

Middle East

Europe

c) USA Canada

d) Other (please >pecify)

Your annual income:

a ) $25,000 - 35.000

b) 536,000 - 50,000

c)

d)

e)

$51,000 - 75.000

$76,000 - 100,000

$101,000 and above

8. Number of years of managerial experience:

9. Size of your organization (number of employees)

a) 0-49 f) 400-499

b) 50-99 g) 500-599

c) 100-199 h) 600-699

d) 200-299 i) 700-1000

e) 300-399 j) Over 1000

10. Would you like to receive a summary of this research?

Yes No

APPENDIX D

TABLES

124

Table 17

Employee Welfare

125

Valid Cum Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

High 1 36 80.0 81.8 81.8

Medium 2 7 15.6 15.9 97.7

Low 3 1 2.2 2.3 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 1.205; standard deviation = .462.

Table 18

Hiah Productivity

Value Label Value Frequency Percent Valid

Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 39 86.7 88.6 88.6

Medium 2 5 11.1 11.4 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


126

Table 19

Industrial Leadership


High 1 22 48.9 50.0 50.0

Medium 2 16 35.6 36.4 86.4

Low 3 6 13.3 13.6 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 1.636; standard deviation » .718.

Table 20

Oraanizational Efficiency


High 1 35

00 • 79.5 79.5

Medium 2 9 20.0 20.5 100.0

1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


127

Table 21

Organizational Growth


High 1 27 60.0 61.4 61.4

Medium 2 16 35.6 36.4 97.7

Low 3 1 2.2 2.3 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean - 1.409; standard deviation = .542.

Table 22

Organizational Stability


High 1 24 53.3 54.5 54.5

Medium 2 19 42.2 43.2 97.7

Low 3 1 2.2 2.3 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean « 1.477; standard deviation = .549.

128

Table 23

Profit Maximization

Value Label Value Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cum Percent

High 1 22 48.9 50.0 50.0

Medium 2 22 48.9 50.0 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 1 .500; standard deviation = .506.

Table 24

Social Welfare


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 7 15.6 15.9 15.9

Medium 2 29 64.4 65.9 81.8

Low 3 8 17.8 18.2 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 2 .023; standard deviation * .590.

129

Table 25

Achievement


High 1 39 86.7 88.6 88.6

Medium 2 4 8.9 9.1 97.7

Low 3 1 2.2 2.3 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 1.136; standard deviation » .409.

Table 26

Autonomy


High 1 13 28.9 29.5 29.5

Medium 2 26 57.8 59.1 88.6

Low 3 5 11.1 11.4 100.0

9 1 2.2

Total 45 100.0 100.0


130

Table 27

Dignity


Cum Percent

High 1 39 86.7 88.6 88.6

Medium 2 5 11.1 11.4 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 28

Individuality


Cum Percent

High 1 19 42.2 43.2 43.2

Medium 2 22 48.9 50.0 93.2

Low 3 3 6.7 6.8 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


131

Table 29

Influence


Cum Percent

High 1 15 33.3 34.1 34.1

Medium 2 27 60.0 61.4 95.5

Low 3 2 4.4 4.5 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 30

Innovation


Cum Percent

High 1 26 57.8 59.1 59.1

Medium 2 15 33.3 34.1 93.2

Low 3 3 6.7 6.8 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


132

Table 31

Job Satisfaction


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 43 95.6 97.7 97.7

Medium 2 1 2.2 2.3 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total • 45 100.0 100.0


Table 32

Job Securitv


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 23 51.1 52.3 52.3

Medium 2 20 44.4 45.5 97.7

Low 3 1 2.2 2.3 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

N o t e M e a n = 1.500; standard deviation • .550.

133

Table 3 3

Leisure


Cum Percent

High 1 8 17.8 18.2 18.2

Medium 2 27 60.0 61.4 79.5

Low 3 9 20.0 20.5 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean » 2.023; standard* deviation = .628.

Table 34

Monev


Cum Percent

High 1 21 46.7 47.7 47.7

Medium 2 22 48.9 50.0 97.7

Low 3 1 2.2 2.3 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


134

Table 35

Power


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 6 13.3 13.6 13.6

Medium 2 29 64.4 65.9 79.5

Low 3 9 20.0 20.5 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 36

Prestiae


Cum Percent

High 1 7 15.6 15.9 15.9

Medium 2 37 82.2 84.1 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


135

Table 37

Success


Cum Percent

High 1 39 86.7 88.6 88.6

Medium 2 5 11.1 11.4 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 38

Abilitv


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 37 82.2 84.1 84.1

Medium 2 7 15.6 15.9 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


136

Table 39

Aggressive


Cum Percent

High 1 12 26.7 27.3 27.3

Medium 2 30 66.7 68.2 95.5

Low 3 2 4.4 4.5 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 40

Ambition


Cum Percent

High 1 29 64.4 65.9 65.9

Medium 2 14 31.1 31.8 97.7

Low 3 1 2.2 2.3 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 1.364; standard deviation • .532.

137

Table 41

Compassion


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 28 62.2 63.6 63.6

Medium 2 16 35.6 36.4 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean » 1.364; standard deviation = .487.

Table 42

Conformity


Cum Percent

High 1 5 11.1 11.4 11.4

Medium 2 19 42.2 43.2 54.5

Low 3 20 44.4 45.5 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


138

Table 4 3

Cooperation


Cum Percent

High 1 30 66.7 68.2 68.2

Medium 2 14 31.1 31.8 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note„ Mean = 1.318; standard deviation = .471.

Table 44

Honor


Cum Percent

High 1 40 88.9 90.9 90.9

Medium 2 4 8.9 9.1 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean » 1.091; standard deviation = .291.

139

Table 45

Lovaltv


Cum Percent

High 1 35 77.8 79.5 79.5

Medium 2 9 20.0 20.5 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 46

Obedience


Cum Percent

High 1 8 17.8 18.2 18.2

Medium 2 29 64.4 65.9 84.1

Low 3 7 15.6 15.9 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 1.977; standard deviation * .590.

.40

Table 47

Prejudice


Cum Percent

High 1 7 15.6 15.9 15.9

Medium 2 8 17.8 18.2 34.1

Low 3 29 64.4 65.9 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 48

Skill


Cum Percent

High 1 33 73.3 75.0 75.0

Medium 2 11 24.4 25.0 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


141

Table 49

Tolerance

Value Label Value Freauency Percent Valid Percent

Cum Percent

High 1 17 37.8 38.6 38.6

Medium 2 25 55.6 56.8 95.5

Low 3 2 4.4 4.5 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 50

Trust


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 43 95.6 97.7 97.7

Medium 2 1 2.2 2.3 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


142

Table 51

All Employees


Cum Percent

High 1 35 77.8 77.8 77.8

Medium 2 9 20.0 20.0 97.8

Low 3 1 2.2 2.2 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 52

Customers


Cum Percent

High 1 43 95.6 95.6 95.6

Medium 2 2 4.4 4.4 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


143

Table 53

Highly Skilled Employees


Cum Percent

High 1 24 53.3 53.3 53.3

Medium 2 20 44.4 44.4 97.8

Low 3 1 2.2 2.2 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 54

Labor Unions


Cum Percent

High 1 4 8.9 8.9 8.9

Medium 2 3 6.7 6.7 15.6

Low 3 38 84.4 84.4 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 2.756; standard deviation « .609.

144

Table 55

Managers


Cum Percent

High 1 32 7 1 . 1 7 2 . 7 7 2 . 7

Medium 2 12 2 6 . 7 2 7 . 3 1 0 0 . 0

9 1 2 . 2 Missing

Total 45 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Note. Mean = 1 . 2 7 3 ; standard deviation = . 4 5 1 .

Table 56

Me


Cum Percent

High 1 34 7 5 . 6 7 7 . 3 7 7 . 3

Medium 2 8 1 7 . 8 1 8 . 2 9 5 . 5

Low 3 2 4 . 4 4 . 5 1 0 0 . 0

9 1 2 . 2 Missing

Total 45 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0

Note. Mean » 1 . 2 7 3 ; standard deviation = . 5 4 4 .

145

Table 57

Mv Supervisor


Cum Percent

High 1 34 75.6 75.6 75.6

Medium 2 11 24.4 24.4 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 58

Mv ComiDanv


Cum Percent

High 1 40 88.9 88.9 88.9

Medium 2 5 11.1 11.1 110.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


146

Table 59

Mv Co-Workers


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 34 75.6 75.6 75.6

Medium 2 11 24.4 24.4 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 60

Mv Assets


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 34 75.6 75.6 75.6

Medium 2 11 24.4 24.4 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


147

Table 6

Owners


High 1 24 53.3 54.5 54.5

Medium 2 18 40.0 40.9 95.5

Low 3 2 4.4 4.5 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 62

Semi-Skilled Workers


High 1 19 42.2 42.2 42.2

Medium 2 21 46.7 46.7 88.9

Low 3 5 11.2 11.1 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


148

Table 63

Stockholders


Cum Percent

High 1 22 48.9 50.0 50.0

Medium 2 17 37.8 38.6 88.6

Low 3 5 11.1 11.4 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 64

Technical Staff


Cum Percent

High 1 22 48.9 48.9 48.9

Medium 2 21 46.7 46.7 95.6

Low 3 2 4.4 4.4 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 1.556; standard deviation « .586

149

Table 65

Unskilled Workers


High 1 18 40.0 40.0 40.0

Medium 2 19 42.2 42.2 82.2

Low 3 8 17.8 17.8 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 66

White Collar Emolovees


High 1 19 42.2 42.2 42.2

Medium 2 24 53.3 53.3 95.6

Low 3 2 4.4 4.4 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 1.622; standard deviation « .576.

150

Table 67

Authority


High 1 16 35.6 35.6 35.6

Medium 2 27 60.0 60.0 95.6

Low 3 2 4.4 4.4 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 68

Caution


High 1 3 6.7 6.7 6.7

Medium 2 30 66.7 66.7 73.3

Low 3 12 26.7 26.7 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


151

Table 69

Change

Value label Value Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cum Percent

High 1 29 64.4 64.4 64.4

Medium 2 16 35.6 35.6 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 70

ComDetition


Cum Percent

High 1 32 71.1 71.1 71.1

Medium • 2 13 28.9 28.9 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean » 1.289; standard deviation « .458.

152

Table 71

Compromise


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 11 24.4 24.4 24.4

Medium 2 30 66.7 66.7 91.1

Low 3 4 8.9 8.9 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 72

Conflict


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 5 11.1 11.1 11.1

Medium 2 25 55.6 55.6 66.7

Low 3 15 33.3 33.3 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 2.222; standard deviation = .636

153

Table 73

Conservation


Cum Percent

High 1 3 6.7 6.7 6.7

Medium 2 25 55.6 55.6 62.2

Low 3 17 37.8 37.8 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 74

Emotions


Cum Percent

High 1 9 2Q.0 20.0 20.0

Medium 2 26 57.8 57.8 77.8

Low 3 10 22.2 22.2 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


154

Table 75

Equality


Cum Percent

High 1 29 64.4 64.4 64.4

Medium 2 14 31.1 31.1 95.6

Low 3 2 4.4 4.4 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 76

Force


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 2 4.4 4.4 4.4

Medium 2 16 35.6 35.6 40.0

Low 3 27 60.0 60.0 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


155

Table 7 7

Government

Value Label Va lue Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cum Percent

High 1 11 24.4 24.4 24.4

Medium 2 15 33.3 33.3 57.8

Low 3 19 42.2 42.2 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 2.178; standard deviation - .806.

Table 78

Liberalism


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 4 8.9 8.9 8.9

Medium 2 17 37.8 37.8 46.7

Low 3 24 53.3 53.3 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


156

Table 79

Property


Cum Percent

High 1 20 44.4 44.4 44.4

Medium 2 19 42.2 42.2 86.7

Low 3 6 13.3 13.3 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 80

Reasonable


Cum Percent

High 1 30 66.7 66.7 . 66.7

Medium 2 14 31.1 31.1 97.8

Low 3 1 2.2 2.2 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


157

Table 81

Religion


Percent Cum

Percent

High 1 17 37.8 37.8 37.8

Medium 2 21 46.7 46.7 84.4

Low 3 7 15.6 15.6 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


Table 82

Risk


Cum Percent

High 1 37.8 40.5 40.5

Medium 2 23 51.1 54.8 95.2

Low 3 2

3

4.4

6.7

4.8

Missing

100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


158

Table 83

Gender

Gender Value Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cum Percent

Male 1 40 88.9 88.9 88.9

Female 2 5 11.1 11.1 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 1 . Ill; standard deviation = .318.

Table 84

Marital Status

Status Value Frequency Percent Valid

Percent Cum

Percent

Not Married 1 6 13.2 13.2

Married 2 39 85.8 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


159

Table 85

Age

Range of Age

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cum Percent

29 1 2.2 2.4 2.4

34 1 2.2 2.3 4.7

35 1 2.2 2.3 7.0

36 1 2.2 2.3 9.3

38 3 6.7 7.0 16.3

40 3 6.7 7.0 23.3

41 2 4.4 4.7 27.9

42 5 11.1 11.6 39.5

43 2 4.4 4.7 44.2

44 2 4.4 4.7 48.8

45 4 8.9 9.3 58.1

46 4 8.9 9.3 67.4

47 3 6.7 7.0 74.4

49 1 2.2 2.3 76.7

50 2 4.4 4.7 81.4

51 I 2.2 2.3 83.7

52 1 2.2 2.3 86.0

58 1 2.2 2.3 88.4

60 2 4.4 4.7 93.0

62 1 2.2 2.3 95.3

67 1 2.2 2.3 97.7

69 1 2.2 2.3 100.0

99 2 4.4 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 45.744; standard deviation ® 8.421.

160

Table 86

Formal Education

Type of School Value Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cum Percent

High School 1 1 2.2 2.2 2.2

Some College 2 3 6.7 6.7 8.9

Bachelor degree

3 24 53.3 53.3 62.2

Master degree 4 14 31.1 31.1 93.3

Doctorate 5 2 4.4 4.4 97.8

Tech degree 6 1 2.2 2.2 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 3 .356; standard deviation » .857.

Table 87

Country

Country Awarding Degree

Value Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cum Percent

USA/Canada 1 45 100.0 100.0 100.0

Total 45 100.0 100.0


161

Table 88

Maior Field of Study

Areas Where Degreed Value Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cum Percent

Humanities 1 2 4.4 4.5 4.5

Fine arts 2 2 4.4 4.5 9.1

Engineering 3 1 2.2 2.3 11.4

Social science 4 2 4.4 4.5 15.9

Business 5 33 73.3 75.0 90.9

Other 6 3 6.7 6.8 97.7

Bio Science 7 1 2.2 2.3 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 4.705; standard deviation = 1.173.

162

Table 89

Income

Range of Valid Cum Income Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

36K to 5OK 1 4 8.9 9.1 9.1

5IK to 75K 2 3 6.7 6.8 15.9

76K to 100K 3 8 17.8 18.2 34.1

101K+ 4 27 60.0 61.4 95.5

25K to 35K 5 2 4.4 • 4.5 100.0

9 1 2.2 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean » 3.455; standard deviation = 1.022.

Table 90

Manacrement Experience

Range of Valid Cum Years Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

Experience

Group 1 1-10 8 18.6 18.6 18.6

Group 2 11-15 9 11.1 20.9 39.5

Group 3 16-20 13 30.3 30.3 69.8

Group 4 20+ 13 30.2 30.2 100.0

2 4.4 Missing

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note. Mean = 2.41; standard deviation = 2.551.

Table 91

Size of Organization

163

Range of Number of Employees

Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

100 - 199 2 2 4.4 4.4 4.4

200 - 299 3 1 2.2 2.2 6.7

300 - 399 4 1 2.2 2.2 8.9

400 - 499 5 2 4.4 4.4 13.3

500 - 599 6 2 4.4 4.4 17.8

over 1,000 7 37 82.2 82.2 100.0

Total 45 100.0 82.2

Note, Mean = 6.489; standard deviation = 1.290.

APPENDIX E

PROFILES VALUES OF MANAGERS

164

165

PROFILES VALUES OF MANAGERS

"HIGH" RATED MANAGERS

VARIABLES NUMBER OF MANAGERS VALID PERCENTAGE

Trust

Job Satisfaction

Customers

Honor

My Company

43

43

43

40

40

9 7 . 7

9 7 . 7

9 5 . 6

9 0 . 9

8 8 . 9

"MEDIUM" RATED MANAGERS

Prestige

Compromise

Caution

Power

Obediance

37

30

30

29

29

8 4 . 1

6 6 . 7

6 6 . 7

6 5 . 9

6 5 . 9

"LOW" RATED MANAGERS

Labor Unions

Force

Liberalism

Conformity

Government

38

27

24

2 0

19

8 4 . 4

60 .0

5 3 . 3

4 5 . 5

4 2 . 2

APPENDIX F

RESPONDENT'S ORGANIZATION MANAGERIAL LEVEL

166

167

Position Number

Board of Directors 4

Chief Executive Officer 3

Chief Financial Officer 2

Executive Vice President of Operations . . 8

President 3

Vice President of Finance 3

Vice President of Management Development . 2

Vice President of Marketing 5

Vice President of Operations 13

Total . 45

APPENDIX G

DATES OF RESPONSES

168

169

Date Received Refused

6/9/92 1

6/10/92 2

6/13/92 2

6/20/92 2

6/29/92 2

7/7/92 2

7/9/92 3

7/10/92 1

7/11/92 13 3

7/13/92 2 2

7/15/92 2

7/17/92 5

7/18/92 3 3

7/20/92 5

7/21/92 4

7/25/92 1

7/29/92 2

7/30/92 3

8/12/92 1

8/13/92 1

8/28/92 1

Total 45 26

APPENDIX H

MISSION STATEMENT VARIABLES IDENTIFIED

170

171

Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Grand Metro X X X X X X X

Buffet, Inc.

X X X X X X X X X X

TPI X X X X X X X X X X

TWS X X X X X X X X X

Karcher Ent.

X X X X X X X X

Wendy1s Int'l

X X X X X X X X X X X

Bob Evans X X X X X X X X X

General Mills

X X X X X X X X X X X

Gilbert Robinson

X X X X X X X X X X

Furr's/ Bishops

X X X X X X X X X

Diary Queen X X X X X X X X X X X

Kettle X X X X X X X X X

Rally's X X X X X X X X X X X

IMASCO X X X X X X X X X

TGIF X X X X X X X X X

Frisch X X X X X X X X X X

Cracker Barrel

X X X X X X X X X X

Ground Round

X X X X X X X X X X

Sonic X X X X X X X X X X

Morrison Cafes

X X X X X X X X X

Uno Rest.

X X X X X X X X

17 2

Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Godfather X X X X X X X X X

Picadilly X X X X X X X X X X

Total 21 18 14 21 20 20 22 20 18 23 20

Note. 1 = aggressiveness; 2 = value; 3 = sac. res; 4 = employee concerns; 5 = environment; 6 = profit; 7 = customer concerns; 8 = quality; 9 = tradition; 10 = management concerns; 11 = cleanliness. .

APPENDIX I

FREQUENCIES PERCENTAGES OF RESPONSES

173

174

Category Percentage

Aggressiveness 91.30

Value 78.26

Social Responsibility . . . 60.86

Employee Concerns 91.30

Environment . . . . . . . 86.96

Profit 86.96 \

Customer Concerns . . 95.65

Quality . 86.96

Tradition 78.26

Management Concerns 100.00

Cleanliness 86.96

Note. N = 23.

APPENDIX J

CORPORATIONS AND STATES REPRESENTED

175

176

Corporation States

1. Buffets, Inc Minnesota

2. Carl Karcher California

3. Cracker Barrel Tennessee

4. Frisch's, Inc Ohio

5. Furr's/Bishop's Texas

6. General Mills Minnesota

7. Gilbert-Robinson . . . . . Missouri

8. Godfather *s Nebraska

9. Ground Round Massachusetts

10. International Dairy Queen Minnesota

11. Kettle Texas

12. Morrison1s Alabama

13. Piccadilly's Louisiana

14. Rally's, Inc Kentucky

15. Sonic, Inc Oklahoma

16. TGIF, Inc Texas

17. UNO, Inc Massachusetts

18. Wendy's, Inc Ohio

REFERENCES

Arkin, H., & Colton, R. R. (1950). Tables for statisticians. New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc.

Armistead, C. B. (1989). Customer service and operations in service business. The Service Industries Journal, 9(2), 247-260.

Atkinson, A., Branch, C., & LaHatte, G. (1987, August). Training for excellence. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 28(1), 15-17.

Aylward, S. (1991). An employee of the National Restaurant Association: Washington, D.C. Telephone interview conducted by the author in April.

Bob Evans Farms, Inc. (1990). Annual report (90-5024-C). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Buffets, Inc. (1989). Annual report (89-5850-C). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Carl Karcher Enterprises, Inc. (1990). Annual report (90-5020—D). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc. (1990). Annual report (90-5231-B). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

England, G. W. (1967, March). Personal value systems of American managers. Academy of Management Journal. io, 53-68.

England, G. W. (1975). The manager and his values: An international perspective. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

Frisch's. (1990). Annual report (90-1028-B). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Furr's/Bishop's Cafeterias LP. (1989). Annual report (89—1360-C). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

General Mills International, Inc. (1990). Annual report (90-1035-A). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

177

178

Gilbert-Robinson Holding Company. (1989). Annual report (89-5674-B). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Godfather's Pizza, Inc. (1982). Annual report (82-1167-D). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Grand Metropolitan PLC. (1989). Annual report (90-5020-D). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Hayajneh, A. F. (1990). Personal value systems of American and Jordanian managers: A cross-cultural study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas, Denton, TX.

Henderson, R. I. (1989). Compensation management: Rewarding performance (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

IMASCO, Ltd. (1987). Annual report (87-5878-C). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

International Dairy Queen, Inc. (1989). Annual report (89-5480-D). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

International Proteins Corporation. (1989). Annual report (89-1498-E). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Kettle Restaurants, Inc. (1989). Annual report (89-5474-D). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Kotter, J. (1982). The general managers. New York: The Free Press.

Lewis, R. C., & Chambers, R. E. (1989). Marketing and leadership in hospitality. New York: VanNostrand Reinhold.

Lusk, E. J., & Oliver, B. L. (1974). American managers' personal value systems revisited. Academy of Management Journal. 17(3), 549-554.

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality (2d ed.). New York: Harper Brothers.

Morrison, Inc. (1990). Annual report (90-5102-H). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Norusis, M.J., (1988). SPSS/PC+, studentware. Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.

179

Piccadilly Cafeterias, Inc. (1989). Annual report (89-5178-1). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Rally's, Inc. (1990). Annual report (90-6265-D). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Roach, D. (1989). Washington Report: Restauranteurs—a key part of the debate. Restaurant USA. 9(1), 8.

Santos, R. D. (1990). Faculty and administrators' job preferential and job satisfaction factors at the University of Guam. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas, Denton, TX.

Schuler, R. S. (1987). Personnel and human resource management (3rd ed.). St. Paul, MN: West.

Small, R. (1987). Small, Robert: Excellence and employees. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 28(2), 73-76.

Sonic Industries, Inc. (1985). Annual report (85-5119-J). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

TGIF Texas, Inc. (1986). Annual report (86-1175-H). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Tidball, K. H. (1988). Creating a culture that builds your bottom line. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 29(1), 63-69.

The Top 50 Growth Restaurants. (1991). Restaurant Business. 90(H), 118-119 & 124.

The Top 50 Public Restaurants. (1991). Restaurant Business. 90(11), 118-119.

The Top 100 Restaurants. (1991). Restaurant Business. 90(17), 115-138.

TPI Enterprises, Inc. (1989). Annual report (89-5553(1)).

TW Services, Inc. (1989). Annual report (89-1373-E). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Wendy's International, Inc. (1989). Annual report (89-1387-H). St. Petersburg, FL: Q Data Corporation.

Woods, R. H. (1989). More alike than different: The culture of the restaurant industry. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 30(2), 92-97.

Date post:	06-Apr-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times