INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Employee Empowerment Across Functional Areas: A Profile-Based  
Analysis of Hotel Employees  
Estayo, John Edward S  
College of Business and Accountancy, Tarlac State University  
DOI: https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100492  
Received: 05 December 2025; Accepted: 10 December 2025; Published: 20 December 2025  
ABSTRACT  
Empowerment in organizations emphasizes the importance of a shared vision, clear communication, and mutual  
trust so that employees understand the goals and expectations of the organization. Without this common  
understanding, empowerment efforts risk creating confusion rather than improving performance. When  
employees feel trusted and are encouraged to take initiative without fear of punishment, they become more  
willing to take risks and contribute meaningfully to organizational goals.  
Employee empowerment has gained significant attention in both research and practice because of its strong  
relationship with improved job satisfaction, commitment, and overall performance. Empowered employees are  
able to make timely decisions, respond to environmental changes, and contribute to the organization’s flexibility  
and innovativeness. As globalization increases workplace demands, organizations that promote empowerment  
are better positioned to motivate, retain, and fully utilize their workforce. Empowerment involves breaking  
boundaries between management and employees, fostering trust, enhancing motivation, and enabling  
participation in decision-making.  
Scholars and practitioners highlight that empowerment is not simply a transfer of authority but also a leadership  
and motivational strategy. Effective empowerment involves leadership behaviors such as coaching, mentoring,  
valuing contributions, encouraging initiative, and supporting employees’ autonomy. Research shows that  
psychological empowerment—characterized by autonomy, competence, meaningfulness, and impact—  
positively influences employee performance, motivation, and willingness to exert extra effort, especially during  
organizational challenges.  
Although empowerment has been studied extensively worldwide, there remains a need to examine how it  
operates in specific local contexts. In the hotel and restaurant industry, where employees differ widely in  
background, education, culture, and personality, the dynamics of empowerment may vary significantly. This  
study thus seeks to explore the empowerment level of hotel employees in Tarlac City and determine whether  
demographic factors such as age, gender, educational attainment, length of employment, and number of trainings  
influence their sense of empowerment. Given the limited local research, this study is positioned as a relevant  
and timely contribution to understanding empowerment within the hospitality sector.  
Keywords: Autonomy, Empowerment, Hotel, Participation, Middle Management, Responsibility  
INTRODUCTION  
Employee empowerment has increasingly become a central theme in contemporary organizational management,  
grounded in the premise that employees must share a common understanding of organizational goals, strategies,  
and expectations. Establishing this shared vision is essential, as attempts to empower employees without clear  
communication can lead to confusion and weakened organizational cohesion. Effective empowerment requires  
management to articulate the direction of the organization and build an environment of mutual trust where  
employees feel confident to take initiative without fear of punishment. When trust is present, empowerment not  
only enhances decision-making but also encourages risk-taking, innovation, and a higher level of ownership  
among employees.  
Page 6269  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Across various sectors, empowerment is widely recognized as a key contributor to organizational success, with  
studies reporting strong linkages between empowerment and improved job satisfaction, commitment, and  
performance. As global competition intensifies, organizations increasingly rely on empowered employees who  
can act quickly, adapt to changing external conditions, and contribute to organizational flexibility. Empowerment  
further promotes motivation and engagement by breaking traditional hierarchical barriers and allowing  
employees to participate more actively in decisions that affect their work. Scholars argue that when implemented  
effectively, empowerment strengthens organizational innovativeness and enhances competitiveness in the global  
marketplace.  
Leadership plays a critical role in creating conditions for empowerment. Empowering leaders provide coaching,  
mentoring, and developmental opportunities; encourage initiative; recognize employee contributions; and offer  
autonomy in determining work methods. Research on psychological empowerment suggests that dimensions  
such as autonomy, competence, meaningfulness, and impact significantly enhance employee performance and  
intrinsic motivation. Employees who perceive higher levels of empowerment tend to demonstrate greater effort,  
creativity, and resilience, especially during periods of organizational turbulence. These findings underscore the  
importance of empowerment as both a management technique and a motivational strategy.  
While empowerment has been examined in numerous organizational contexts, gaps remain in understanding  
how empowerment emerges within specific cultural and industry settings. The hospitality industry, particularly  
hotel operations, presents unique dynamics due to its diverse workforce and the demanding nature of service  
delivery. Employees vary widely in terms of educational background, cultural orientation, personality, and work  
experiences, all of which may influence their perception of empowerment. In Tarlac City, limited empirical  
research has explored empowerment among hotel employees despite the sector's growing significance. This  
study therefore seeks to assess the empowerment levels of hotel employees in the locality and examine whether  
demographic factors—such as age, gender, educational attainment, length of employment, and number of  
trainings attended—significantly influence their sense of empowerment. Addressing this gap will contribute to  
a more nuanced understanding of empowerment within the Philippine hospitality industry and inform strategies  
for enhancing employee involvement, performance, and organizational effectiveness.  
Statement of the Problem  
The study aimed to determine the profile of the hotel employees in Tarlac City and their level of empowerment.  
Specifically, the researcher sought answers to the following questions:  
1.  
How are the respondents in Tarlac City described in terms of  
1.1  
1.2  
1.3  
1.4  
1.5  
2.  
highest educational attainment,  
length of employment,  
department/unit,  
number of trainings, and  
seminars attended?  
How are the respondents described in terms of employee empowerment along areas of  
2.1  
2.2  
2.3  
3.  
autonomy,  
participation, and  
responsibility?  
Is there a relationship between the respondents’ profile and their empowerment?  
Page 6270  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
4.  
5.  
What are the problems encountered by the respondents in terms of empowerment?  
What can be proposed or recommended based on the findings of the study?  
Hypothesis of the Study  
The hypothesis hereunder was tested at .05 level of significance:  
1.  
There is no significant relationship between the hotel employees’ profile and their level of empowerment.  
RELATED LITERATURE  
Employee empowerment has been widely examined in organizational and management literature as a strategic  
mechanism for enhancing employee motivation, performance, and organizational effectiveness. Rather than  
being viewed merely as the delegation of authority, empowerment is increasingly conceptualized as a  
multidimensional construct that encompasses psychological, structural, and relational components. Scholars  
argue that empowerment strengthens employees’ sense of meaning, competence, autonomy, and impact, thereby  
fostering intrinsic motivation and improved work outcomes (Conger & Kanungo, 1988; Spreitzer, 1995).  
Theoretical Foundations of Employee Empowerment  
Early empowerment theories emphasized structural arrangements, such as decentralization of authority and  
participative management practices. However, later scholarship shifted attention toward psychological  
empowerment, focusing on employees’ perceptions rather than formal structures. Spreitzer (1995) identified  
four core dimensions of psychological empowerment—meaningfulness, competence, self-determination, and  
impact—which collectively shape how empowered employees feel in their roles. These dimensions underscore  
that empowerment exists when employees believe their work is valuable, feel capable of performing it, have  
autonomy in execution, and perceive their actions as influential to organizational outcomes.  
Conger and Kanungo (1988) further argued that empowerment enhances intrinsic motivation by increasing self-  
efficacy, particularly when employees experience autonomy and responsibility. This theoretical shift suggests  
that empowerment outcomes depend not only on managerial intent but also on how employees interpret their  
work environment. In service-oriented industries such as hospitality, these perceptions are especially critical, as  
employees frequently make real-time decisions that directly affect customer satisfaction.  
Autonomy as a Dimension of Empowerment  
Autonomy refers to employees’ perceived freedom to determine how they perform their work and make  
decisions within their roles. Literature consistently links autonomy with improved performance, creativity, and  
job satisfaction. Singh (2003) emphasized that empowered organizations provide employees with discretion over  
task execution, allowing them to adapt to situational demands. Similarly, Venkat Ratnam (2006) viewed  
autonomy as central to empowerment, arguing that enriched jobs promote accountability and initiative.  
Empirical studies in hospitality settings support this perspective. Fulford and Enz (1995) found that granting  
autonomy to hotel employees enhances service speed and quality, while Kilon (2003) reported that autonomy  
enables frontline staff to respond effectively to customer needs. However, some scholars caution that excessive  
autonomy without adequate guidance may lead to role ambiguity or inconsistent service delivery (Ravichandran  
& Shirley, 2006). This highlights the importance of balancing autonomy with clear standards and accountability  
mechanisms.  
Participation and Shared Decision-Making  
Participation represents employees’ involvement in organizational decision-making, planning, and goal-setting.  
It is closely associated with the impact dimension of psychological empowerment, as employees feel empowered  
when they perceive their contributions influence organizational direction (Spreitzer, 1995). Numerous studies  
suggest that participatory practices enhance organizational commitment, trust, and innovation (Baird & Wang,  
Page 6271  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
2010; Ongori, 2009).  
Despite these benefits, participation remains unevenly implemented, particularly in hierarchical or owner-  
managed organizations. Heathfield (2012) noted that while many organizations espouse empowerment  
rhetorically, decision-making authority often remains centralized. In hospitality contexts, studies reveal that  
participation is frequently limited to operational matters, with strategic decisions retained by top management  
(Baumgartner, 2014). This restricted participation can undermine empowerment by diminishing employees’  
perceived value and influence, even when autonomy in task execution is present.  
Responsibility and Accountability  
Responsibility refers to employees’ sense of ownership over their work and accountability for outcomes.  
Scholars emphasize that empowerment is incomplete without responsibility, as autonomy without accountability  
may weaken performance standards (Roller, 1998). Responsibility aligns with the meaningfulness and  
competence dimensions of psychological empowerment, where employees view their work as important and  
believe their actions matter.  
Research consistently shows that empowered employees demonstrate higher responsibility, professionalism, and  
commitment to quality outcomes. Dessler (2011) argued that responsibility is reinforced through clear  
expectations, performance feedback, and professional development. In hospitality settings, responsibility is  
particularly salient due to the direct link between employee behavior and customer satisfaction (Briggs, 2008).  
However, responsibility may also be reinforced by external pressures—such as customer expectations—rather  
than organizational empowerment structures alone, suggesting a complex interaction between personal ethics  
and organizational practices.  
Empowerment and Employee Performance in Hospitality  
A substantial body of research establishes a positive relationship between employee empowerment and  
performance outcomes, including productivity, service quality, and customer satisfaction. Zeglat et al. (2014)  
found that psychological empowerment significantly predicts customer-oriented behavior among hotel  
employees, surpassing the influence of structural empowerment. Similarly, Dhevabanchachai and  
Wattanacharoensil (2013) emphasized the role of training and skill development in strengthening empowerment  
and service performance.  
However, scholars also note that empowerment outcomes vary across contexts. Cultural norms, leadership styles,  
and organizational structures influence how empowerment is enacted and experienced. In collectivist cultures,  
employees may value harmony and job security over participation, potentially limiting empowerment’s impact  
(Hechanova & Franco). These findings suggest that empowerment cannot be universally applied without  
considering contextual and cultural factors.  
Local Studies on Employee Empowerment  
Local Philippine studies generally support international findings, highlighting empowerment’s positive effects  
on job satisfaction and performance. Palo (2009) reported that empowerment enhances motivation among service  
employees, while Frialde (2011) identified gaps in participatory decision-making within local hotels. Tolenada  
(2009) further noted that manpower and structural challenges in Philippine hotels often limit employee  
involvement in organizational planning.  
Despite these contributions, local studies tend to focus on empowerment outcomes rather than examining  
empowerment dimensions in relation to employee profile characteristics. Moreover, many studies do not  
explicitly integrate psychological empowerment theory, resulting in descriptive rather than theory-driven  
analyses.  
Page 6272  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Research Gap  
While extensive international and local literature confirms the importance of employee empowerment, several  
gaps remain evident. First, limited empirical research has examined empowerment among hotel employees in  
provincial Philippine contexts, particularly in emerging hospitality destinations such as Tarlac City. Second,  
existing studies often treat empowerment as a general construct, without systematically analyzing its core  
dimensions—autonomy, participation, and responsibility—and how these dimensions vary across employee  
profile characteristics. Finally, few studies explicitly integrate psychological empowerment theory to explain  
why certain empowerment dimensions are stronger or weaker within specific organizational settings. Addressing  
these gaps, the present study examines the level of empowerment among hotel employees in Tarlac City across  
autonomy, participation, and responsibility, and investigates how employee profile variables relate to these  
empowerment dimensions.  
Research Method  
This study employed a descriptive-correlational research design to examine the profile of hotel employees in  
Tarlac City and determine their level of empowerment. The descriptive component enabled the researcher to  
characterize participants in terms of highest educational attainment, length of employment, department  
assignment, and the number of trainings and seminars attended, while the correlational component was used to  
identify whether these profile variables were associated with empowerment levels. A total of 43 middle-  
management employees from four Department of Tourism–accredited hotels—Central Park Hotel, L Square  
Hotel, La Majarica Hotel, and Microtel—participated in the study. These employees represented key functional  
departments such as housekeeping, front office, food and beverage, and accounting, making them suitable  
respondents due to their involvement in operational and supervisory tasks where empowerment is enacted.  
Data were gathered using two instruments. The first was a structured profile survey that collected demographic  
and employment information. The second was the Perception of Empowerment Instrument (PEI) developed by  
Roller (1998), a 15-item tool measuring autonomy, participation, and responsibility as dimensions of  
empowerment. Each item was rated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “never” to “always,” enabling  
classification of empowerment levels from not empowered to highly empowered. The instrument underwent  
pilot testing among hotel employees in Clark, Pampanga, and reliability assessment using Cronbach’s alpha,  
which confirmed satisfactory internal consistency across all constructs. Its content validity was further  
strengthened through the review of four experts in management, research, and hotel operations.  
Prior to the administration of the instruments, formal permission to conduct the study was secured from hotel  
managers and administrators. The researcher coordinated with designated contact persons in each hotel to  
distribute and retrieve questionnaires, ensuring that employees were able to answer them within their available  
schedules. Follow-ups were conducted to achieve full retrieval, and all responses were handled with  
confidentiality and used solely for academic purposes. The data collected were analyzed using both descriptive  
and inferential statistics. Frequencies and percentages were computed to summarize the respondents’ profiles,  
while weighted means were used to assess empowerment levels according to the interpretation scale provided  
by Roller (1998). To determine whether empowerment was significantly related to any of the profile variables,  
Pearson’s Chi-Square Test of Association was employed at a 0.05 level of significance. This statistical technique  
was appropriate for identifying relationships among categorical variables without manipulating conditions,  
thereby aligning with the natural setting of the study.  
Figure 1. Paradigm of the study  
Page 6273  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
This study is anchored on psychological empowerment theory, which posits that empowerment is reflected in  
employees’ perceptions of autonomy, participation, and responsibility within their work environment (Conger  
& Kanungo, 1988; Spreitzer, 1995).  
The independent variables consist of selected employee profile characteristics, namely age, gender, highest  
educational attainment, length of employment, department or unit assignment, number of trainings attended, and  
number of seminars attended. The dependent variables are the three dimensions of employee empowerment:  
autonomy, participation, and responsibility. Autonomy refers to employees’ perceived freedom in carrying out  
work tasks and making decisions within their job scope.  
The framework assumes that employee profile characteristics may influence each empowerment dimension to  
varying degrees. While autonomy and responsibility may be embedded in job design and professional norms,  
participation is expected to be more sensitive to organizational structures and managerial practices.  
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS  
The respondents consisted primarily of young to early middle-aged hotel employees, with most falling within  
the 20–34 age range. The workforce was predominantly female, college-educated, and employed for six to eight  
years, with a large proportion assigned to housekeeping and front-office departments. Most respondents had  
attended multiple trainings and seminars, indicating exposure to continuous professional development. This  
profile suggests a relatively experienced and trainable workforce, consistent with the operational demands of the  
hospitality industry, where service quality, accountability, and adaptability are critical.  
From a human capital perspective, this demographic composition aligns with hospitality labor patterns reported  
in regional and international studies, where hotels rely heavily on younger, formally educated employees for  
service-oriented roles (Zeglat et al., 2014; Baumgartner, 2014). However, while experience and training are  
expected to enhance empowerment, empowerment outcomes depend not only on individual characteristics but  
also on organizational structures and leadership practices.  
Level of Employee Empowerment:  
Table IAutonomy  
Indicators  
wm  
Description  
Agree  
I am my own boss most of the time.  
I have freedom to decide how to do my job.  
I can be creative in finding solutions to problems.  
I have a lot of autonomy in my job.  
I make my own decisions about how to do my work.  
Grand Mean  
4.35  
4.19  
4.05  
3.88  
3.86  
4.07  
Agree  
Agree  
Agree  
Agree  
Empowered  
The results show that hotel employees generally perceive themselves as empowered in terms of autonomy, with  
a mean score of 4.07 indicating agreement across all indicators. Respondents reported feeling like “their own  
boss,” noting that they understand their job expectations and can work responsibly without constant supervision.  
They also expressed having sufficient freedom to decide how to perform their tasks, although this freedom  
operates within the boundaries of their job descriptions and operational requirements. Employees further agreed  
that they can be creative in solving problems and make decisions related to their work, demonstrating practical  
problem-solving skills appropriate to their departments. Despite this autonomy, respondents acknowledged that  
decision-making still operates within a “span of control,” and they seek supervisory guidance when issues exceed  
Page 6274  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
their job scope. Overall, findings suggest that employees experience a strong sense of independence and  
accountability, reflecting an empowered work environment in terms of autonomy.  
Results indicate that hotel employees are generally empowered in terms of autonomy, with respondents agreeing  
that they have freedom in deciding how to perform their tasks, make work-related decisions, and creatively solve  
problems within their job scope. This finding suggests that employees perceive a substantial level of self-  
direction and independence in daily operations.  
From the lens of psychological empowerment theory (Spreitzer, 1995), autonomy reflects the self-determination  
dimension, wherein employees experience control over how they carry out their work. The high autonomy scores  
imply that employees possess clarity in role expectations and confidence in task execution, allowing them to  
function effectively without constant supervision. This aligns with Conger and Kanungo’s (1988) assertion that  
empowerment enhances intrinsic motivation when employees perceive meaning and competence in their roles.  
Comparatively, similar findings have been reported in hospitality settings in other countries, where operational  
autonomy is granted to frontline and middle-management staff to ensure quick service recovery and customer  
satisfaction (Fulford & Enz, 1995; Kilon, 2003). Local studies likewise suggest that Filipino hotel employees  
often enjoy task-level autonomy due to trust developed through experience and tenure (Palo, 2009). However,  
this autonomy remains bounded by organizational policies and standards, indicating that empowerment is  
operational rather than strategic in nature.  
Table II Participation  
Indicators  
wm  
Description  
Neutral  
I am involved when changes are planned.  
I am involved in creating our vision of the future.  
I am involved in determining organizational goals.  
I am involved in decisions that affect me.  
My input is solicited in planning changes.  
Grand Mean  
2.61  
2.54  
2.47  
2.42  
2.26  
2.46  
Neutral  
Disagree  
Disagree  
Disagree  
Somewhat Empowered  
The findings indicate that hotel employees feel only somewhat empowered in terms of participation, as reflected  
by a grand mean of 2.46. Respondents expressed a neutral stance regarding their involvement in planning  
changes or creating the organization’s vision, and they generally disagreed that they participate in setting goals,  
influencing decisions, or providing input on organizational changes. Interviews confirmed that major  
decisions—including planning, goal-setting, and policy development—are made exclusively by top management  
or hotel owners, leaving middle-management employees with limited influence beyond their assigned tasks.  
Matters such as salary adjustments, incentives, and working conditions are likewise determined at higher  
managerial levels. As a result, employees feel they have minimal opportunity to contribute to organizational  
direction or workplace improvement, although they comply with existing rules to maintain job security and  
stability.  
In contrast, respondents were found to be only somewhat empowered in terms of participation, particularly in  
areas involving organizational planning, goal-setting, and decision-making that affect them directly. Employees  
reported limited involvement in planning changes, shaping organizational vision, and contributing inputs to  
management decisions.  
Theoretically, participation reflects the impact dimension of psychological empowerment (Spreitzer, 1995),  
where employees perceive that their actions can influence organizational outcomes. The low participation scores  
Page 6275  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
suggest a disconnect between task autonomy and strategic inclusion, indicating a predominantly centralized  
management structure. While employees are trusted to execute tasks independently, they are excluded from  
higher-level decision-making processes.  
This pattern is consistent with findings in developing-country hospitality contexts, where decision-making  
authority is often retained by owners and top management (Ongori, 2009; Ravichandran & Shirley, 2006).  
International studies emphasize that limited participation can weaken empowerment despite high autonomy, as  
employees may feel undervalued or disengaged from organizational direction (Baird & Wang, 2010). Local  
research similarly notes that Filipino employees tend to accept hierarchical decision-making structures, even  
when participation is restricted, due to cultural norms and job security concerns (Hechanova & Franco).  
Table III Responsibility  
Indicators  
wm  
Description  
Strongly Agree  
Strongly Agree  
Agree  
I take responsibility for what I do.  
I am responsible for the outcomes of my actions.  
I am personally responsible for the work I do.  
I am responsible for the outcomes of my decision.  
My ideas and inputs are valued.  
Grand Mean  
4.59  
4.54  
4.54  
4.47  
4.40  
4.50  
Agree  
Agree  
Highly Empowered  
The results show that employees feel highly empowered in terms of responsibility, with a grand mean of 4.50.  
Respondents strongly agreed that they take responsibility for their actions and the outcomes of their work,  
recognizing that meeting standards and performing tasks effectively are essential to maintaining service quality  
and avoiding customer dissatisfaction or supervisory reprimands. Interviews further illustrated this sense of  
accountability, with employees describing situations in which they assumed additional duties to support  
colleagues and ensure operational continuity. Respondents also agreed that they are accountable for their  
decisions and that their ideas are valued, suggesting a strong sense of personal commitment and dedication to  
their roles. Overall, these findings portray a workforce that demonstrates high levels of ownership,  
professionalism, and reliability in carrying out their responsibilities.  
Results further reveal that respondents are highly empowered in terms of responsibility, with strong agreement  
that they take accountability for their work and the outcomes of their decisions. This suggests a deeply ingrained  
sense of ownership and professional commitment among hotel employees.  
Responsibility corresponds to the meaningfulness and competence dimensions of psychological empowerment  
(Spreitzer, 1995), where employees perceive their work as important and believe they are capable of performing  
it well. High responsibility scores indicate that employees internalize service standards and recognize the direct  
link between their performance and customer satisfaction. This is particularly critical in hospitality, where  
service failures are immediately visible to guests.  
Comparable findings have been reported in both international and local studies, where hotel employees  
demonstrate high responsibility even in environments with limited participation (Dessler, 2011; Briggs, 2008).  
This phenomenon suggests that responsibility may be reinforced more by professional norms and customer  
expectations than by formal empowerment structures.  
Relationship Between Employee Profile and Empowerment:  
Analysis of the relationship between profile variables and empowerment dimensions reveals nuanced patterns.  
Page 6276  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
No significant relationships were found between employee profile variables and autonomy, indicating that  
perceptions of task-level independence are consistent across age, gender, education, tenure, and department. This  
suggests that autonomy is embedded in job design rather than influenced by individual characteristics.  
In terms of participation, significant relationships were observed with age, length of employment, number of  
trainings, and number of seminars attended. Employees with longer tenure and greater exposure to training  
appeared more aware of organizational processes and, consequently, more sensitive to their exclusion from  
decision-making. This finding supports the argument that as employees gain experience and knowledge, their  
expectations for involvement increase (Avolio & Bass, 2004).  
For responsibility, significant relationships emerged only with the number of trainings and seminars attended.  
This underscores the role of continuous learning in reinforcing accountability and professional maturity. Training  
and seminars may strengthen employees’ understanding of standards, ethics, and service quality, thereby  
enhancing their sense of responsibility regardless of demographic characteristics.  
Table IV Profile and Autonomy  
Profile Variables  
df  
10  
2
X2  
p-value  
0.087  
0.372  
0.491  
0.753  
.0511  
0.770  
0.527  
Interpretation  
Not Significant  
Not Significant  
Not Significant  
Not Significant  
Not Significant  
Not Significant  
Not Significant  
Age  
16.478  
1.978  
7.426  
5.043  
5.259  
3.299  
5.128  
Gender  
Highest Educational Attainment  
Length of Employment  
Department/Unit  
8
8
4
Number of Trainings Attended  
Number of Seminars Attended  
6
6
Table IV shows the statistical relationship between profile and empowerment. Data computed show that no  
significant relationship was registered between age (X2 = 16.478, p=0.087); gender (X2 = 1.978, p=0.372);  
highest educational attainment (X2 = 7.426, p=0.491); length of employment (X2 = 5.043, p=0.753);  
department/unit (X2 = 5.259, p=.0511); number of trainings attended (X2 = 3.299, p=0.770); and number of  
seminars attended (X2 = 5.128, p=0.527) and the level of employee empowerment of the respondents in terms  
of autonomy.  
Thus, the null hypothesis that there is no significant relationship between the employees’ profile in all areas and  
the level of empowerment is accepted. It could therefore be deduced that the profile of the respondents does not  
in any way contribute to the generally “empowered” level of respondents in terms of autonomy, particularly in  
terms of being their own boss most of the time, having freedom to decide how to do their job, and being creative  
in finding solutions to problems.  
Table V Profile and Participation  
Profile Variables  
Age  
df  
10  
2
X2  
p-value  
0.039  
Interpretation  
Significant  
19.086  
2.237  
Gender  
0.327  
Not Significant  
Page 6277  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Highest Educational Attainment  
Length of Employment  
8
8
4
6
6
9.933  
0.270  
0.042  
0.435  
0.043  
0.010  
Not Significant  
Significant  
18.224  
5.898  
Department/Unit  
Not Significant  
Significant  
Number of Trainings Attended  
Number of Seminars Attended  
18.046  
24.497  
Significant  
The analysis shows that gender, highest educational attainment, and department or unit assignment do not have  
a significant relationship with employees’ level of empowerment in terms of participation. This means that these  
profile variables do not meaningfully influence how involved employees feel in organizational planning, goal-  
setting, or shaping the hotel’s future direction. Regardless of differences in gender, educational background, or  
departmental placement, respondents consistently reported limited participation in decision-making processes.  
These results reinforce earlier findings that middle-management employees are seldom included in planning  
changes or determining goals, and that key decisions remain under the control of top management or hotel  
owners. Overall, employees’ demographic and work characteristics did not account for their generally  
“somewhat empowered” status in the area of participation.  
Table VI Profile and Responsibility  
Profile Variables  
df  
5
1
4
4
4
3
3
X2  
p-value  
0.455  
0.252  
0.417  
0.291  
0.800  
0.005  
0.038  
Interpretation  
Not Significant  
Not Significant  
Not Significant  
Not Significant  
Not Significant  
Significant  
Age  
4.686  
1.311  
3.920  
4.961  
1.007  
11.403  
8.419  
Gender  
Highest Educational Attainment  
Length of Employment  
Department/Unit  
Number of Trainings Attended  
Number of Seminars Attended  
Significant  
The results show that age, gender, educational attainment, length of employment, and department assignment  
have no significant relationship with employees’ sense of responsibility, indicating that these characteristics do  
not influence the generally high levels of responsibility reported by the respondents. Employees across different  
demographic and job categories similarly demonstrated strong perceptions of being accountable for their actions  
and the outcomes of their work. In contrast, the number of trainings and seminars attended showed a significant  
relationship with responsibility, suggesting that professional development experiences contribute to employees’  
heightened sense of accountability and commitment to their tasks. Overall, while most profile variables do not  
affect responsibility, exposure to more trainings and seminars appears to strengthen employees’ empowerment  
in this area.  
Problems Encountered by the Respondents on Employee Empowerment:  
Table VII Problems Encountered by the Hotel Employees  
Problems  
n
%
I am seldom involved on planning changes and determining goals.  
31  
72.09%  
Page 6278  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Ineffective communication.  
26  
24  
23  
22  
20  
19  
17  
16  
60.47%  
55.81%  
53.49%  
51.16%  
46.51%  
44.19%  
39.53%  
37.21%  
My ideas and inputs are never solicited.  
There is no clear plan on achievement or advancement.  
My superiors abdicate all responsibility and accountability for decision making.  
I feel under-compensated and under-titled for the responsibilities.  
I feel under-noticed, under-praised and under-appreciated.  
Insufficient training/coaching/mentoring.  
My superiors don’t really understand what employee empowerment means.  
The findings show several recurring problems encountered by hotel employees, the most prominent of which is  
their minimal involvement in planning changes and determining organizational goals, reported by 72.09% of  
respondents. Employees shared that major operational decisions are predetermined by top management, leaving  
them with little influence over the hotel’s direction and resulting in a generally low sense of empowerment in  
participation.  
This lack of involvement is compounded by ineffective communication (60.47%) and the perception that their  
ideas and inputs are rarely solicited (55.81%). Respondents also noted unclear pathways for advancement  
(53.49%) and instances where supervisors avoid responsibility in decision-making (51.16%), creating further  
disconnect between management and staff.  
Interviews affirmed that limited communication often leads to misunderstandings and poor working conditions.  
Employees explained that while their suggestions may be heard, these are seldom integrated into formal plans,  
and key decisions—such as shift assignments, salary adjustments, and organizational policies—remain strictly  
under top management’s discretion.  
Additional concerns included feeling under-compensated or under-recognized for their responsibilities,  
insufficient coaching or mentoring, and a belief that some supervisors do not fully understand the concept of  
empowerment. Collectively, these issues reinforce employees’ perception of being only “somewhat  
empowered,” particularly in areas requiring participation and shared decision-making.  
Table VIII Proposed recommendation  
Areas/Problems  
Strategies  
Activities  
Means of Verification  
Less involvement of Establishment of employee Conference/meeting  
employees on union groups  
of Percentage of Attendance of  
employees to elect Union employees  
planning changes and  
determining goals  
Officers  
Involvement of employees  
By-laws of the union  
Corporate  
involving top, middle and  
rank and file employees  
meetings  
during corporate meetings  
and conferences, at least  
represented by a president  
of the union group  
Memorandum of Agreement  
Vote/involvement  
union president (representing  
all employees) on  
organizational changes  
of  
the  
Ineffective  
communication  
Framing of a practical Conference/training/semina Actual communication plan,  
communication plan r to frame communication monitoring sheet, supervisory  
plan  
plans  
Page 6279  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Use  
of  
bulletins, Regular  
dissemination  
information Regularized  
information  
memoranda, etc.  
through dissemination using bulletins,  
posting in bulletins, memo, memo, etc.  
etc.  
Conference  
organizational changes  
on  
Percentage of attendance of  
of the employees in the  
on trainings/seminars  
Holding  
seminars/trainings  
organizational changes  
Non-solicitation  
of Involvement of employees Corporate  
meetings Percentage of Attendance of  
employees’ ideas and in corporate planning and involving top, middle and employees  
inputs  
decision-making  
rank and file employees  
Unclear  
achievement  
advancement.  
plan  
on Involvement of employees Orientation/seminar/trainin  
or in Orientation/ seminar/ g of employees on plans and employees  
training of employees on development before  
plans and development implementation  
before implementation  
Percentage of Attendance of  
Accomplishment reports  
Abdication  
superiors  
responsibility  
accountability  
decision making.  
of Revisit of existing job Conference/training/semina Percentage of Attendance of  
all descriptions which should r on existing job employees  
and incorporate employee descriptions which should  
for empowerment, particularly incorporate employee  
of  
Revised job descriptions onto  
which tenets of employee  
focusing on participation  
empowerment, particularly  
focusing on participation  
empowerment  
are  
incorporated and improved  
performance rating criteria  
The most prominent problem identified was employees’ minimal involvement in planning changes and  
determining organizational goals, followed by ineffective communication and lack of solicitation of employee  
inputs. These issues further explain the low participation scores observed earlier and highlight structural barriers  
to empowerment.  
From an organizational perspective, ineffective communication and centralized decision-making undermine  
empowerment by restricting information flow and limiting employees’ perceived impact (Bushe et al., 1996).  
While employees accept management authority, persistent exclusion from decision-making may lead to  
disengagement over time, particularly among experienced staff.  
These findings reinforce the need to view empowerment as a balanced system, where autonomy and  
responsibility must be complemented by meaningful participation. Without participatory mechanisms,  
empowerment remains incomplete and may fail to achieve its full potential in improving organizational  
commitment and innovation.  
CONCLUSIONS  
The results of the study provide a clearer understanding of the profile and empowerment levels of hotel  
employees in Tarlac City. The majority of the respondents were females aged 20–34 years, most of whom were  
college graduates with six to eight years of work experience in the hotel industry. A significant portion were  
assigned to housekeeping departments and had participated in multiple professional development activities,  
typically attending four to six trainings and seven to nine seminars. These profile characteristics reflect a  
relatively young yet experienced workforce with substantial exposure to both academic and skill-based  
preparation.  
In terms of empowerment, employees reported feeling highly empowered in responsibility, indicating strong  
personal accountability and commitment to their work and its outcomes. They also expressed being empowered  
Page 6280  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
in autonomy, reflecting their ability to make decisions and perform tasks independently within their assigned  
roles. However, they felt only somewhat empowered in participation, highlighting a limited sense of involvement  
in organizational planning, goal setting, and major decision-making processes. This imbalance suggests that  
while employees feel confident and responsible in their individual tasks, they experience constraints when it  
comes to influencing broader organizational directions.  
The correlational analysis revealed that certain profile variables, specifically gender, highest educational  
attainment, and department or unit assignment, showed significant relationships with employees’ levels of  
participation. This suggests that these personal and organizational attributes may shape the extent to which  
employees perceive themselves as included in decision-making processes. Additionally, the number of trainings  
and seminars attended had a significant association with responsibility, indicating that continuous learning and  
development contribute to stronger feelings of accountability and empowerment in work-related responsibilities.  
The findings emphasize that a large majority of hotel employees feel seldom involved in planning changes and  
determining organizational goals. This limited participation appears to contribute to their overall lower  
empowerment in this area and reinforces the perception that strategic decisions remain highly centralized among  
top management. Overall, the study concludes that while employees demonstrate a strong sense of responsibility  
and autonomy, their empowerment is constrained by restricted opportunities to participate in organizational  
planning and decision-making.  
ACKNOWLEDGMENT  
The researcher extends sincere gratitude to everyone who contributed to the successful completion of this study.  
Deep appreciation is given to the hotel administrators and employees in Tarlac City who generously shared their  
time and insights as respondents, making this research possible. Special thanks are also extended to the faculty  
and mentors of the Graduate School of Tarlac State University for their guidance, expertise, and unwavering  
support throughout the research process. Their constructive feedback strengthened the quality and direction of  
this work. The researcher likewise expresses heartfelt appreciation to colleagues, friends, and family members  
who offered encouragement, understanding, and motivation during the entire undertaking. Their presence and  
support provided the inspiration needed to complete this study. Above all, the researcher is profoundly grateful  
to the Almighty God for the wisdom, strength, and opportunities that made this scholarly endeavor achievable.  
REFERENCES  
1. Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire: Manual and sampler set (3rd  
ed.). Mind Garden.  
2. Baird, K., & Wang, H. (2010). Employee empowerment: Extent of adoption and influential factors.  
Personnel Review, 39(5), 574–599. https://doi.org/10.1108/00483481011064154  
3. Baumgartner, J. (2014). Empowerment: How to improve performance and customer satisfaction in  
hotels.  
International  
Journal  
of  
Hospitality  
Management,  
42,  
14–23.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.05.003  
4. Bourke, J. (1998). Employee empowerment and customer satisfaction in the service sector. Journal of  
Management Development, 17(1), 56–67.  
5. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621719810199370  
6. Briggs, E. (2008). The influence of employee empowerment on hotel performance. Journal of Hospitality  
& Tourism Research, 32(2), 171–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348007313260  
7. Bushe, G. R., Havlovic, S. J., & Coetzer, G. H. (1996). Exploring empowerment from a managerial  
perspective.  
Journal  
of  
Applied  
Behavioral  
Science,  
32(1),  
63–79.  
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886396321005  
8. Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice.  
Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1988.4306983  
9. Dessler, G. (2011). Human resource management (12th ed.). Pearson.  
10. Dhevabanchachai, N., & Wattanacharoensil, W. (2013). Employee development and service  
performance in hotel training centers. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 25(3), 120–132.  
Page 6281  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2013.826941  
11. Fulford, M. D., & Enz, C. A. (1995). The impact of empowerment on service employees. Cornell Hotel  
and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 36(5), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/001088049503600517  
12. Gilaninia, S. (2012). Employee empowerment as a strategy for improving organizational performance.  
African Journal of Business Management, 6(11), 4303–4311.  
13. Heathfield,  
S.  
M.  
(2012).  
What  
is  
employee  
empowerment?  
The  
Balance  
Careers.  
https://www.thebalancecareers.com/employee-empowerment-definition-1918102  
14. Kilon, F. (2003). Employee empowerment and service quality in hotel operations. International Journal  
of Hospitality Management, 22(3), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-4319(03)00023-2  
15. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership challenge (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass.  
16. Ongori, H. (2009). Managing behind the scenes: Employee empowerment. Research Journal of Business  
Management, 3(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3923/rjbm.2009.1.7  
17. Palo, J. P. (2009). Empowerment and job satisfaction among service workers in the Philippines.  
Philippine Journal of Psychology, 42(2), 85–102.  
18. Pitts, D. W. (2005). Leadership, empowerment, and public organizations. Review of Public Personnel  
Administration, 25(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X04272319  
19. Potochny, J. (1998). Building empowerment in hospitality employees. Hospitality Research Journal,  
21(2), 97–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/109634809802100208  
20. Ravichandran, T., & Shirley, S. (2006). Types of empowerment in organizational settings. Journal of  
Organizational Change Management, 19(2), 188–200. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534810610648938  
21. Roller, S. A. (1998). Perception of Empowerment Instrument (PEI): Development and validation of a  
multidimensional measure (Doctoral dissertation). University of North Carolina.  
22. Singh, A. (2003). Empowerment and organizational excellence. International Journal of Management,  
20(3), 369–379.  
23. Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and  
validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442–1465. https://doi.org/10.5465/256865  
24. Tolenada, A. A. (2009). Organizational structure and manpower issues in Philippine hotels. Asia Pacific  
Journal of Tourism Research, 14(4), 375–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941660903112590  
25. Tzafrir, S. S., Harel, G. H., Baruch, Y., & Dolan, S. L. (2004). The consequences of emerging HRM  
practices for employees’ trust in their managers. Personnel  
Review, 33(6), 628–646.  
https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480410561529  
26. Venkat Ratnam, C. S. (2006). Employee empowerment: Approaches and implications. Sage Publications.  
27. Zeglat, D., Aljaber, M., & Alrawabdeh, W. (2014). Understanding the impact of employee empowerment  
on customer-oriented behavior in the hotel industry. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 6(3),  
121–129. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v6n3p121  
Page 6282  
www.rsisinternational.org