Dammika Samarakoon 

Why Some Stay and Others Leave? A Comparative 
Study of Retention Factors Affecting Ground-Level 
Housekeeping Staff among 3-Star Hotels in Finland 

and Sri Lanka 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
  

Vaasa 2025 

School of Management  

Master’s Thesis in Strategic Business Development  

Strategic Business Development 



2 
 

UNIVERSITY OF VAASA 
School of Management 

Author: Dammika Samarakoon 
Title of the thesis:  Why Some Stay and Others Leave? A Comparative Study of 

Retention Factors Affecting Ground-Level Housekeeping Staff 
among 3-Star Hotels in Finland and Sri Lanka 

Degree: Master of Economic Sciences  
Discipline: Strategic Business Development 
Supervisor: Jukka Partanen 
Year: 2025 Pages: 140 

 
ABSTRACT: 
The tourism & hospitality industry is one of the largest service-based sectors, contributing 
significantly to the global economy. The hospitality industry is an exciting business that provides 
a high-quality experience to guests when they visit particular destinations. Tourists expect a 
higher level of cleanliness and a better houskeeping atmosphere during their stay at hotels. 
Therefore, housekeeping services are critical and play a significant role in rendering high-quality 
service, ensuring guest satisfaction. Houskeeping is the largest workforce in the hospitality 
industry, with the lowest-paid employees. Housekeeping is regarded by lodging operators as 
one of the toughest roles in the hospitality sector, resulting in a persistently high turnover rate. 
While employees are concerned about low pay and bad working conditions, management faces 
challenges related to rising labour costs resulting from frequent staff turnover. Accordingly, it is 
important to understand the factors that influence employee retention in hotel housekeeping. 
However, there is limited research on the retention of ground-level housekeeping employees, 
particularly in 3-star hotels. Most of the exciting studies have concentrated on luxury hotels, 
managerial-level staff, and general labour issues in the hospitality sector. This leaves a notable 
gap in understanding factors that affect the retention of housekeeping staff in mid-range hotels. 
Although employee retention has been widely studied separately in developed and developing 
countries, it has not been extensively compared across different socio-economic and cultural 
settings. This study aims to address this gap by comparing a developed country (Finland) with a 
developing country (Sri Lanka). The objective of this study is to identify key factors influencing 
the retention of ground-level housekeeping staff in 3-star hotels and to examine how these 
factors vary across different contextual settings. This study involved eight 3-star hotels, with 
four selected from each country to ensure balanced representation. The study adopted a mixed-
methods and deductive approach. Likewise, the study followed a cross-sectional time horizon. 
The total population for this study was 140 participants, comprising 120 for the quantitative 
approach and 20 for the qualitative approach. A sample size consists of 100 for the quantitative 
analysis and 10 for the qualitative analysis. 61 survey responses were received from the 
quantitative analysis, and 6 individuals were interviewed as part of the qualitative approach. 
Data were analysed using SPSS and thematic analysis. Main hypotheses were developed based 
on identified key organizational factors influencing retention, including remuneration & 
rewards, training & development, work-life balance, supervisory support, and work stress (H1-
H5). To examine contextual influences, sub-hypotheses were also developed (H1a-H5b). In the 
primary model, training & development emerged as a significant predictor of retention. In the 
contextual models, remuneration & rewards were the only significant positive predictors in 
Finland, whereas in Sri Lanka, training & development had a significant impact. These findings 
suggest that the factors influencing housekeeping staff retention vary across contexts, reflecting 
variations in socioeconomic and cultural conditions.   

KEYWORDS:  labour turnover, housekeeping, tourism, hospitality, remunerations, training  



3 
 

 

Contents 

1. Introduction 7 

2. Literature Review 12 

2.1 Employee Retention 12 

2.2. Tourism & Hospitality Industry 15 

2.2.1. Tourism & Hospitality Industry in Finland 17 

2.2.2. Tourism & Hospitality Industry in Sri Lanka 20 

2.2.3. Hotel Housekeeping 22 

2.3. Key Factors Affecting Employee Retention 24 

2.3.1. Remuneration & Rewards as a Key Factor in Employee Retention 24 

2.3.2. Training & Development as a Key Factor in Employee Retention 25 

2.3.3. Work-life Balance as a Key Factor in Employee Retention 27 

2.3.4. Supervisory Support as a Key Factor in Employee Retention 29 

2.3.5. Work Stress as a Key Factor in Employee Retention 30 

2.4. Conceptual Framework 32 

3. Methodology 38 

3.1. Research Design 38 

3.2. Case Firms, Population & Sample 41 

3.3. Data Collection 43 

3.4. Measures 44 

3.5. Data Analysis 46 

3.6. The Assessment of the Quality Data 47 

4. Findings 50 

4.1. Quantitative Analysis 50 



4 
 

4.1.1. Descriptive Analysis 50 

4.1.2. Inferential Analysis 56 

4.1.3. Key Findings & Summary 61 

4.2. Qualitative Analysis 64 

4.2.1 Theme 1: Remuneration & Rewards 64 

4.2.2. Theme 2: Training & Development 66 

4.2.3. Theme 3: Work-life Balance 67 

4.2.4. Theme 4: Supervisory Support 69 

4.2.5. Theme 5: Work Stress 71 

4.2.6. Theme 6: Retention 73 

4.2.7. Key Findings & Summary 75 

4.3. Quantitative & Qualitative Triangulation 76 

5. Discussion 80 

5.1. Theoretical Contribution 80 

5.1.1. Theoretical Positioning 80 

5.1.2. Interaction with Existing Theories 81 

5.1.3. Novel Theoretical Contribution 82 

5.1.4. Summary 87 

5.2. Managerial Implications 87 

5.3. Limitations 90 

5.4. Suggestions for Future Research 91 

References 94 

Appendices 119 

Appendix 01 – Privacy Note 119 

Appendix 02 – Informed Consent 122 



5 
 

Appendix 03 – Survey Questionnaire (English) 123 

Appendix 04 – Survey Questionnaire (Sinhala) 125 

Appendix 05 – Survey Questionnaire (Finnish) 127 

Appendix 06 – Structured Interview Questionnaire 129 

Appendix 07 – Qualitative Data Analysis 131 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



6 
 

List of figures  

Figure 1. Conceptual framework 32 

Figure 2. Research Onion: Adopted from Saunders et al. (2023) 38 

Figure 3. Reliability Statistics (Cronbach's Alpha Value) 50 

Figure 4. Employee Representation by Countries 51 

Figure 5. Employee Representation by Gender: Finland 52 

Figure 6. Employee Representation by Gender: Sri Lanka 52 

Figure 7. Employee Representation by Type of Employment: Finland 53 

Figure 8. Employee Representation by Type of Employment: Sri Lanka 54 

Figure 9. Regression Model 58 

 

 

List of Tables  

Table 1. Employee Representation by Gender 51 

Table 2. Employee Representation by Type of Employment 53 

Table 3. Mean & Std. Deviation of Variables 54 

Table 4. Comparison of Mean & Std. Deviation between Finland & Sri Lanka 55 

Table 5. Pearson Correlation Analysis 56 

Table 6. Comparison of Pearson Correlation in Finland and Sri Lanka 57 

Table 7. ANOVA 59 

Table 8. Coefficient Analysis 59 

Table 9. Coefficient Analysis: Finland 60 

Table 10. Coefficient Analysis: Sri Lanka 61 

Table 11. Summary of Main Hypotheses 62 

Table 12. Summary of Sub-hypotheses 63 

 

 

 

 

file:///C:/Users/NILAN%20SAMARAKOON/Desktop/THESIS%20FINAL%204-11/New%20folder/THESIS_DAMMIKA_SAMARAKOON.docx%23_Toc213206107
file:///C:/Users/NILAN%20SAMARAKOON/Desktop/THESIS%20FINAL%204-11/New%20folder/THESIS_DAMMIKA_SAMARAKOON.docx%23_Toc213206108
file:///C:/Users/NILAN%20SAMARAKOON/Desktop/THESIS%20FINAL%204-11/New%20folder/THESIS_DAMMIKA_SAMARAKOON.docx%23_Toc213206109
file:///C:/Users/NILAN%20SAMARAKOON/Desktop/THESIS%20FINAL%204-11/THESIS_DAMMIKA_SAMARAKOON.docx%23_Toc213248283


7 
 

1. Introduction 

Tourism is one of the world's largest industries and a main contributor to the global 

service industry. People have been travelling for pleasure since the dawn of time, and 

tourism has become one of the fastest-expanding sectors in recent years (Deepthi & 

Shariff, 2024). Developing countries often promote tourism as a means of economic 

development, particularly when other options, such as manufacturing or exporting 

natural resources, are not commercially feasible (Ranasinghe et al., 2020). The 

hospitality sector is the largest and fastest-growing sector in tourism, which accounts 

for a considerable portion of the global economy (Morgan & Pritchard, 2018). A new 

position in hospitality is available every 2.5 seconds (Lüthy, 2025). The hospitality 

industry is an exciting business that aims to provide a high-quality experience to guests 

when they visit particular destinations (Perera et al., 2022). Hotels, also known as 

hospitality businesses, are the most resource-intensive businesses in the hospitality 

industry (Shantha, 2024). In 2024, the global hospitality market expanded to 

approximately $4.9 trillion, driven by increased leisure and pleasure travel, rising 

international tourism, and higher profits (Lüthy, 2025). Tourists' demand for hotel 

services includes well-equipped bedrooms, cleanliness, bars and lounges, stylish 

decorations, exercise facilities, excellent cuisine, and luxurious surroundings. Among 

these, cleanliness is one of the most important to them (Deepthi & Shariff, 2024). 

Therefore, housekeeping services are crucial in the hospitality industry, playing a 

significant role in delivering high-quality service. Generally, the housekeeping 

department is the largest department within a hotel, with the lowest-paid employees. 

Upright housekeeping is vital to guest satisfaction and operational success, yet hard for 

staff, which is why it is recognized as the most challenging department to manage in the 

hospitality industry (Andrade et al., 2021). Rosemberg (2018) states that the 

housekeeping employees represent the largest workforce within the hospitality 

industry, and they are the driving force behind customer loyalty, hotel ratings, and 

ultimately overall industry growth. However, according to a survey conducted by the 

American Hotel and Lodging Association (2024), hotels are struggling to find employees, 

with housekeeping staff experiencing the most acute shortage (Hsieh et al., 2025). 



8 
 

Hence, housekeeping is considered by lodging operators to be among the toughest roles 

in the hospitality sector, resulting in a persistently high turnover rate. Certainly, high 

employee turnover in housekeeping is a costly phenomenon in hospitality operations 

(Huo, 2019, p. 32). While employees are concerned about low pay and bad working 

conditions, management inevitably worries about increasing labour expenses due to 

high employee turnover (Davidson et al., 2011, p. 512). Liu et al. (2024) found that 

employee turnover has many negative effects on organizations.  Jayasinghe (2020) 

states that one of the greatest challenges faced by hotel housekeeping is employee 

retention. Ma et al. (2025), in an article published in the Human Resource Management 

Review, a leading conceptual journal in the HRM field, highlighted that employee 

retention is a central concern for scholars and practitioners. Lundberg and Karlsson 

(2011) further highlight that hotel cleaners often have low salaries, work under poor 

conditions, and experience higher workplace injuries. Moreover, recent studies indicate 

that hoteliers struggle to recruit and find it challenging to hire housekeeping staff, even 

in major cities, and retaining skilled housekeeping staff has become a primary concern 

of hospitality operations (Huo, 2019).  

 

However, there was not much research conducted on the retention of ground-level 

housekeeping employees, particularly in 3-star hotels. Most of the exciting studies 

focused on luxury hotels, management-level staff, and general labor issues in the 

hospitality industry. This leaves a significant gap in understanding factors influencing the 

retention of ground-level housekeeping staff, who often face the highest employee 

turnover in the hospitality industry. Employee retention has been widely studied 

separately in developed and developing countries, but it has not been extensively 

compared across different socio-economic and cultural settings. Particularly, studies 

that contrast a developed Nordic country (Finland) with an emerging country like Sri 

Lanka are rare. Yet, such comparative studies are significant for identifying retention 

factors that work universally and in each context.  A review of “Challenges and Strategies 

for Employee Retention in the Hospitality Industry” by Ghani et al. (2022) emphasized 

that the concept of employee retention is broad and many hospitality retention studies 



9 
 

are context-bound. Accordingly, the authors call for research that better accounts for 

differing contexts, a comparison of the local and the international hospitality industries. 

Likewise, Han (2020) highlighted the importance of cross-cultural studies in the 

hospitality industry, and he further mentioned factors predicting turnover such as 

relationship quality, which works differently in different cultures; it matters in some 

places but not in China or India. Together, these studies justify the need for research 

that investigates employee retention across contrasting diverse socio-economic and 

cultural settings to gain a better understanding of both universal and context-specific 

determinants. Henceforth, this study answers the call of Presbitero et al. (2016): “future 

research may consider using more objective measures of retention to ascertain whether 

employees do stay or not, and track which factors influence employee intention to leave 

the organization. Equally, this study is answering the call of Huo (2019) who state that 

“future empirical research could shed light on determining the correlation between 

demographics such as ethnicity, age, gender, years of experience, and retention factors 

and defining and constructing the multiple regression analysis by identifying how the 

weight of each factor contributes to the reasons to stay in the same organization for a 

long period”. In the same vein, this study responds in part to the call of Andrade, Miller, 

and Westover (2020) who stated that the “future research should address in more detail 

the impact pay has on job satisfaction for hotel housekeepers across countries”. 

 

This study is motivated by the need to fill this gap by investigating and contrasting the 

key factors that influence the retention of ground-level housekeeping staff in 3-star 

hotels in both countries, Finland and Sri Lanka. The purpose of this study is to tap into 

this research opportunity by answering "What are the key factors influencing retention 

of ground-level housekeeping staff in 3-star hotels, and how do these factors similar/ 

differ between Finland and Sri Lanka?" By examining organizational, managerial, socio-

cultural, and economic influences in both countries, the study identifies how these 

variables affect staff retention differently in diverse settings. Most housekeeping staff 

are represented by ground-level employees, namely room attendants and porters. For 

this reason, this study primarily focuses on understanding the factors influencing the 



10 
 

retention of ground-level housekeeping staff. Practically, the study findings help hotel 

management and policymakers to tailor HR practices accordingly. Improving staff 

retention benefits not only businesses but also employee well-being, particularly their 

economic security. It is also essential to understand the diverse values and expectations 

of employees as the world transitions into a more diverse workforce. Academically, a 

comparative approach contributes a valuable dimension to hospitality research by 

addressing gaps in cross-cultural labor studies, particularly in mid-range (3-star) hotels, 

which are often neglected in favor of luxury or budget hotels. Thus, Saehya et al. (2023) 

acknowledged that housekeeping is an invisible department and, as a result, it has not 

received such attention from researchers. The study follows a comparative mixed-

methods approach combining quantitative and qualitative methods. A cross-sectional 

design aims to collect data at a single point in time. The study employs survey 

questionnaires among the housekeeping staff and conducts semi-structured interviews 

with housekeeping supervisors, managers, and hotel managers. The study will employ a 

simple random sampling method for the quantitative phase and snowball sampling for 

the qualitative phase. Quantitative data will be analyzed using SPSS software, followed 

by descriptive statistics, inferential statistics, and comparative analysis. Braun and 

Clarke's (2006) thematic analysis will be followed to evaluate qualitative data. Then, 

quantitative and qualitative findings will be triangulated. Ethical considerations of this 

study include distributing a privacy note, obtaining informed consent from participants, 

ensuring anonymity and confidentiality, and ensuring voluntary participation.  

 

This study makes three distinct contributions to the literature. First, this study provides 

comparative cross-cultural insights. Most existing literature has often focused on the 

context of a single country. For example, Huo (2019) studied employee retention only 

in the USA, and Aufa et al. (2023) in Indonesia. This inclusive study centralizes novel 

comparative insights into factors influencing retention of ground-level housekeeping 

staff in 3-star hotels across Finland and Sri Lanka, in two diverse socio-cultural and 

economic settings. By contrasting similarities and different causes, the study will provide 

valuable global cross-cultural insights into employee retention in the hospitality 



11 
 

industry. This comparison will lead beyond the specific local contexts and potentially 

reveal specific cultural factors that past research has not identified. Secondly, this study 

addresses a gap in the literature by focusing on ground-level housekeeping staff, 

including both part-time and full-time staff. In contrast, most existing studies have 

primarily focused on other hotel departments and full-time staff. For example, Silva and 

Perera (2020) studied retention of food & beverage staff, and Streeter et al. (2021) 

studied front office staff. This study addresses the challenges and unique problems faced 

by ground-level housekeeping staff, a significant but often ignored group among hotel 

workers. Hence, by examining why ground-level housekeeping staff chose to stay or 

leave their jobs, the study will provide a better understanding of factors affecting 

employee turnover in hospitality operations. Likewise, it provides guidelines on how 

employees can be satisfied and kept in their roles. Thirdly, this study offers 

contextualized recommendations for 3-star hotels, while most existing studies have 

focused on employee retention in larger and higher-level hotels. For example, Streeter 

et al. (2021) studied based on resorts & conventional hotels, and Kumar & Singh (2015) 

studied selected five-star hotels in Delhi. This study specifically focuses on 3-star hotels, 

which are an important sector of the hospitality industry and economy, with limited 

resources. By exploring this particular sector, the study findings provide more tailored 

and practical recommendations accordingly. Furthermore, this thesis is organized into 

five main chapters. Chapter one is the introduction, which provides a snapshot of the 

overall thesis and its structure. Chapter two illustrates relevant literature, key theories, 

and the developed conceptual framework. Chapter three outlines the methodology for 

this study, including research approach, design, data collection methods, analysis 

techniques, and assessment of data quality. Hence, this section provides the necessary 

information for another researcher to replicate the same, ensuring the reliability and 

transparency of the current study. Chapter four illustrates findings and results, including 

data analysis, interpretation, and the identification of patterns and themes. Finally, 

chapter five discusses theoretical implications, practical Implications, limitations, and 

suggestions for future research. 

 



12 
 

2. Literature Review  

The literature review of the study consists of four main topics. The first topic, employee 

retention, covers its definitions, significance, and challenges. The second topic focuses 

on the tourism and hospitality industry, with subtopics exploring the industry in Finland, 

Sri Lanka, and houskeeping operations. The third topic addresses factors affecting 

employee retention, followed by five major factors that are identified and discussed as 

individual subtopics. Finally, the fourth topic, the developed conceptual framework, is 

presented for this study. 

 

2.1 Employee Retention  

Yamamoto (2013) stated that employee retention is the central idea in Human Resource 

Management. In the field of Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM), 

competence retention is recognised as a key area to focus on (Ortlieb & Sieben, 2012). 

In every industry, employee retention is a significant challenge because high employee 

turnover leads to failures in achieving organizational objectives (Khalid & Nawab, 2018). 

Employee retention can be defined as the employer's effort to keep desirable workers 

to meet business objectives (Fredric et al., 2004). Yamamoto (2009, as cited in 

Yamamoto, 2013, pp. 14-15) defines retention management as “the entire human 

resource management policies for retaining the current or expected high-performing 

employees within organizations for long periods of time, enabling them to exercise or 

develop their capabilities”. Phillips and Connell (2004) defined retention as the 

percentage of employees remaining in the organization. Gorde (2019) noted that 

employee retention is an organization’s ability to retain its employees. He further 

classified employee retention as a process that aims to motivate and encourage 

employees to remain with the organization for a longer period. According to him, the 

ultimate goal of employee retention is to make stakeholders and the employer happier 

and benefit. Employee retention is essentially the inverse of turnover (Moscelli et al., 

2025). Employee turnover is the percentage of employees leaving the organization for 



13 
 

whatever reason(s), which is not a new challenge in today’s context, though even 

greater in the future (Phillips & Connell, 2004).  

 

Retaining employees is central to an organization's long-term success (Khalid & Nawab, 

2018). Smith (2011) recognized that employee retention is a crucial element in 

improving an organization’s overall performance. Devi (2023) acknowledged that 

organizations should strive for employee retention for long-term success. The author 

further noted that employee retention helps in reducing turnover while minimizing 

expenses associated with hiring, recruiting, training, and orientation for new employees. 

Dechawatanapaisal (2017) emphasized that organizations invest heavily in recruiting, 

selecting, training, and developing employees over time. To maximize the return on 

these investments, organizations need to retain employees for as long as possible. 

Chaudhary and Sharma (2023) argued that employee retention reduces turnover costs 

and prevents the loss of the organization’s knowledge, disruption of customer service, 

and thus increases the organization's reputation and efficiency. Ahammad et al. (2014) 

highlighted that employee retention is also important for sharing knowledge within a 

company, particularly, people with special skills or expertise help the company stay 

ahead of its competitors over time. Cegarra-Leiva et al. (2012) highlighted that business 

leaders are increasingly aware of employee retention, recognizing it as crucial for 

achieving a competitive advantage. Hence, Costa and Loureiro (2019) acknowledged 

that present-day organizations are greatly focused on employees by designing and 

delivering a better internal experience to retain more talent. 

 

Costa and Loureiro (2019) stated that happy and recognized employees work well and 

show a higher level of ownership. Thus, they further state that once employees are 

happy and have good work conditions in terms of financial, physical, and technological 

aspects, they will go above and beyond to deliver their tasks. Equally, employees will 

engage and cooperate well with their teammates and other departments. Khan (2020) 

noted that a dynamic and flexible work culture can be a powerful tool of attraction and 

retention. 



14 
 

Gorde (2019) identified certain circumstances that lead to employees leaving the 

organization, including job and person mismatches, lack of appreciation and trust, stress 

from overwork, work-life imbalance, and a new job offer. He further noted that 

employee retention does not mean managing retention; it is all about managing people. 

Hence, if an organization manages its employees well, employee retention takes care of 

itself. He also recommends that organizations must first understand employee turnover 

rates over a particular period and benchmark competitors' retention rates. Likewise, 

Gorde emphasizes the 3Rs of retention. This includes “Respect”, “Recognition”, and 

“Rewards”. Respect is the admiration, special attention, or thoughtful consideration 

shown toward people. Respect is a key foundation of retaining employees in an 

organization, and compared to “Respect” and “Recognition,” the “Rewards” have little 

effect. Recognition provides special attention and the ability to perceive or identify 

something. Often, retention and morale issues arise due to a lack of attention by 

management. Rewards are extra perks that an organization offers beyond the 

fundamentals of “Recognition” and “Respect,” expecting to go further than the call of 

duty. Although “Rewards” represent a small portion of the retention equation, it is still 

significant.   

 

Basic strategies for employee retention include: hire the right people, trust and respect, 

empowering, consider employees as the most valuable asset of the organization, equip 

employees with information and knowledge, provide feedback on employee 

performance, recognition and appreciation, motivation, and create a comfortable 

working environment (Gorde, 2019). Igbinoba et al. (2022) identified that job 

satisfaction, employee training, rewards, and supervisory support are key components 

of employee retention strategies. Wahyudi et al. (2023) emphasize that excellent 

leadership and management help create a positive workplace while encouraging 

employees to stay. The same study further acknowledged that organizational supports 

and employee work-life balance led to employee retention; similarly, the contemporary 

workforce demands opportunities for personal and professional growth over job 

security. However, Labro & Omartian (2025) stated that employers often respond to 



15 
 

retention concerns by increasing pay and benefits. As noted by Wahyudi et al. (2023), 

employee retention is a complex challenge with no single solution that works for 

everyone. Therefore, organizations need to tailor their retention strategies to align with 

industry demands, workforce demographics, and organizational cultures. 

 

2.2. Tourism & Hospitality Industry  

Tourism supports a country’s socioeconomic growth and plays a significant role in 

generating foreign exchange and direct & indirect employment (Thommandru et al., 

2023). It has existed since the beginning of human civilization. By the time tourism has 

taken many different forms, phases, modes, and practices. Although tourism has faced 

numerous challenges, it has recovered and is playing a significant role in the global 

economy. The United Nations World Tourism Organization states that tourism has made 

sustainable growth over the past fifty years, significantly contributing to global 

economic growth. This includes the national, regional, and international levels. The 

UNWTO also forecasts that tourism growth will be strong in years when the global 

economy grows by more than 4%, with tourism typically expanding at a rate 1 to 3 times 

faster than global GDP (Ranasinghe et al., 2020).  

 

Since the emergence of commercial tourism in the late 1880s, the industry has been 

facing numerous natural and man-made challenges. However, the global tourism 

industry was able to grow despite these obstacles. The travel and tourism industry 

represents the service sector, and it is the world’s largest and most diverse industry. 

Many countries rely on the tourism industry as a primary source for generating 

revenues, employment, private sector growth, and infrastructure development. 

Particularly, developing countries encourage tourism development when other forms of 

economic development, such as manufacturing or the exportation of natural resources, 

are not commercially viable (Ranasinghe et al., 2020). However, Bunghez (2016) states 

that tourism encompasses a diversity of activities and showcases the multiplier effect 

on the economy. Therefore, it is complex links between tourism and other parts of the 

economy. As claimed by Ranasinghe et al. (2020), mass travel became possible due to a 



16 
 

combination of desire, the ability to move, easy access, and affordable options. In the 

20th century, modern technologies, including aviation, computers, robots, and satellite 

communications, changed the way people live, work, and enjoy their free time. It helped 

grow mass tourism by giving people more free time, extra money to spend, better ways 

to communicate, and faster, easier transportation.  

 

Following the severe disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, international 

tourism showcased a strong recovery in 2023, becoming a key driver of economic 

growth, job creation, and support for tourism destinations. In 2023, 1.3 billion arrivals 

were recorded worldwide, 89% recovery from 2019, when arrivals reached 1.5 billion. 

Likewise, tourism output was USD 3.4 trillion in 2023, accounting for 3% of world GDP 

(International Tourism Highlights, 2024). Travel & Tourism's contribution to global GDP 

was US$10.9 trillion in 2024. This includes direct, indirect, and induced impacts of the 

sector. Thus, as a share, travel & tourism represented 10% of the global economy. The 

travel & tourism sector supported a total of 357 million jobs globally in 2024, which is 

approximately 1 in 10 jobs. Domestic visitors spent US$5.3 trillion in 2024, and 

international visitors increased 11.6% annually to reach US$1.9 trillion (World Travel & 

Tourism Council, 2025). Moreover, international tourist arrivals increased by 5% in the 

first quarter of 2025 compared to the same period in 2024. Around 300 million tourists 

(international) traveled in the first quarter of 2025, about 14 million more than in 2024 

(Global Tourism Statistics, 2025). 

 

Morgan and Pritchard (2018) noted that the hospitality industry is one of the largest and 

fastest-growing sectors in tourism, which accounts for a considerable portion of the 

global economy. Hence, it has become an increasingly competitive sector in the global 

economy (Maryam et al., 2025). In 2024, the global hospitality market expanded to 

approximately $4.9 trillion, driven by increased leisure and pleasure travel, rising 

international tourism, and higher profits in line with demand recovery in key regions 

such as the Middle East and Europe. The World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) 

projected that the sector's global economic contribution would reach an all-time high of 



17 
 

$11.1 trillion in 2024, representing 10% of global GDP.  Moreover, in the hospitality 

industry, a new job opens up every 2.5 seconds. WTTC predicts that by 2034, the sector 

will employ 449 million people worldwide, representing 12.2 of % global workforce. As 

per data from THP, there are currently a total of 8,011 hotel opening projects in the 

pipeline globally, with 2,771 (35%) scheduled to debut in 2025, adding over 514,000 new 

rooms worldwide (Lüthy, 2025). 

 

As evidenced by Shantha (2024), hotels are the most resource-intensive businesses in 

the hospitality industry. Frequent changes in global hotel occupancy rates, economic 

shifts, and evolving consumer preferences underscore the strategic importance of 

customer retention (Maryam et al., 2025). To provide professional service for guests, 

destinations, and organizations, a qualified and intelligent workforce is required (Perera 

et al., 2022). Ranatunga and Dahanayake (2020) noted that the hospitality industry is 

unpredictable and, therefore, hotel human resources have become crucial to achieving 

business goals. They further state that the hospitality industry is a highly labor-intensive 

industry, and retaining non-executive employees is vital as they contribute the highest 

productivity by directly engaging with guests. Likewise, Perera et al. (2022) noted that 

the most difficult challenge in the hospitality industry is recruiting and retaining staff 

due to the high demand for competent individuals and the industry's labor-intensive 

nature.  

 

 

2.2.1. Tourism & Hospitality Industry in Finland  

Finland’s national tourism strategy for 2022–2028 is named ‘Achieving more together – 

sustainable growth and renewal in Finnish tourism’. Finland plans to become the most 

sustainable tourism destination in the Nordic region, while supporting the economy and 

creating job opportunities (More together – sustainable growth and renewal for Finnish 

tourism: Finnish Tourism Strategy 2022–2028 and measures 2022–2023, 2022). 

Clausnitzer (2024) highlighted that Finland is a growing travel destination in Northern 

Europe, attracting and increasing the number of international visitors with pristine 



18 
 

nature and distinct regions. International tourist arrivals in Finland more than doubled 

since 2000, recording 8.9 million visitors in 2019. However, the tourism growth trends 

have been affected dramatically by the pandemic, but domestic tourism has recovered 

well. In 2019, tourism generated 16.3 billion euros, and it declined to 15,3 billion euros 

in 2023. The Finnish hospitality industry contributed 1.8 % of GDP in 2022, compared to 

2.7 % in 2019 (MaRa, n.d.). Consistent with the Ministry of Economic Affairs and 

Employment of Finland, in 2022, total tourism spending was 14.8 billion euros. This was 

31 percent (€3.5 billion) more compared to 2021, but still 9 percent (€1.5 billion) less 

than in 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic. Similarly, international tourists spent 3.4 

billion euros (23% of the total) in 2022, while Finnish tourists spent 11.4 billion euros 

(77%). Of that, 9.4 billion euros (65%) came from Finns traveling within Finland.  

 

Clausnitzer (2024) noted that the travel and tourism industry is significant for the growth 

of the Finnish economy, contributing a share of four percent to the GDP. He further 

states that the revenue generated by tourism is forecast to exceed 25 billion euros in 

2025. The Finnish accommodation sector recorded over 22.83 million overnight stays in 

2023, comprising 17 million domestic tourists and 5 million international tourists. Since 

2022, the number of international tourists in Finland has considerably grown, especially 

in Lapland and the capital region. Most of the international tourists visited Finland from 

Germany, followed by the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Estonia.  

 

The Finnish tourism sector’s contribution to GDP was expected to grow by 1.7 

percentage points from 2023 to 2028. However, it's predicted to go down slightly in 

2026, 2027, and 2028. By 2028, the expected contribution to GDP by tourism is 7.07%. 

Although tourism is forecast to grow in the coming years, the pace of growth is likely to 

slow down in the later years (Statista, 2025). Clausnitzer (2025) noted that there were 

approximately 1,200 travel accommodations in Finland. Out of these, 650 were hotels 

and 540 other accommodation establishments. The number of accommodation 

establishments was slightly increased in 2023 compared to the previous year, 2022. 

Moreover, the overall accommodation occupancy rate in Finland gradually increased 



19 
 

from 2013 to 2023. In 2023, the occupancy rate of bed places in hotels and similar 

establishments was 39.93% compared to 38.04% in 2022, an increase.    

 

Examined by the tourism industry, 52% employees work in the food & beverage sector, 

23% work in passenger transport services, and the remaining 25% represent cultural, 

sport, recreational services, accommodation services, travel agencies, and similar 

services (Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment of Finland, n.d.). The Finnish 

hospitality sector reported 140,600 employees in 2022, of whom 30% were under 26 

years of age. The Finnish hospitality industry’s workforce increased by 21 % between 

2006 and 2019, while traditional manufacturing industries reduced their workforce 

(MaRa, n.d.). Based on statistics (January-May 2024), 7,000 job vacancies are open each 

month in accommodation, food and beverage services, and tourism services. However, 

Russia's war against Ukraine, the COVID-19 pandemic, and general geopolitical and 

economic uncertainty have increased the tourism sector labor shortage and the 

challenge of matching supply and demand in occupations. The unemployment rate in 

the tourism sector was recorded as 13%. Similarly, 15,000 unemployed job seekers were 

verified per month. The accommodation and restaurant sectors were recorded with 

atypical employment (part-time & short fixed-term work for less than 3 months) of open 

vacancies at 57% in 2023, and 69% 2022. This indicates that more than half of all open 

vacancies in the accommodation and restaurant sectors were temporary agency work. 

In comparison to available job vacancies in the tourism sector, 98% occupations have 

earnings under 16 euros per hour, which is lower than the median wage of employees, 

18.41 euros per hour in 2020. Hence, 46% of available occupations have an hourly salary 

of less than 16 euros. Approximately 70% of employees in the accommodation and food 

& beverage service sector were women, and foreign employees in the sector were 23% 

in 2022 (Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment of Finland, n.d.).  

 

The Confederation of Finnish Industries stated that staff turnover in tourism and 

restaurant services is higher than in other sectors. The gross turnover percentage in 

tourism and restaurant services was 35 % in 2020–2021 (Ministry of Economic Affairs 



20 
 

and Employment of Finland, n.d.). During 2019 - 2020, the tourism sector turnover was 

recorded at 34.3%. Moreover, in the tourism sector, the number of people leaving was 

higher than the number of people entering, 37% and 33.6% respectively (Mankki, 2022).  

 

 

2.2.2. Tourism & Hospitality Industry in Sri Lanka  

Sri Lankan tourism industry figures significant tourist arrivals in 2024, welcoming 

2,053,465 international tourists compared to 2023.  January recorded the most 

substantial growth rate in terms of tourist arrivals, soaring by 103.08% from the previous 

year. As September is off-peak season, it recorded the lowest tourist arrivals growth 

rate, indicating 9.11%. December recorded 248,592 visitors, the highest number of 

arrivals, likely influenced by winter vacations and other favorable conditions. In 

comparison of tourist arrivals by region, Europe accounts for 50.67% of total arrivals, 

which is the highest proportion. The Asia Pacific region is the second-largest source 

market, accounting for 41.91% of arrivals. Similarly, the Americas accounted for 5.29% 

of the arrivals, and the Middle East and Africa recorded smaller shares of 1.42% and 

0.7%, respectively (Year in Review 2024, 2025). However, SLTDA expected 2,676,596 

tourist arrivals in 2025 and, in an optimistic situation, up to 3,000,000 (Growth Scenarios 

for Tourism to Sri Lanka 2025, 2025). Moreover, from January to June 2025, Sri Lanka 

recorded 1,168,044 tourist arrivals (Monthly Tourist Arrivals Reports 2025, 2025)  

 

In 2024, the top ten tourism source markets for Sri Lanka were led by India, which 

contributed 20.3% of total tourist arrivals, followed by the Russian Federation with a 

9.8% share. The United Kingdom, Germany, and China contributed 8.6%, 6.6%, and 6.4% 

respectively. Australia contributed 4.4% while France and the United States contributed 

4.3% and 2.9% respectively. The Netherlands contributed 2.4% and the Maldives 2.3%. 

The majority of tourists visiting Sri Lanka are on pleasure and vacation purposes. In 

numbers, 50.8% of the United Kingdom, 41.5% of Russians, 37.9% of Germans, 37.9% of 

Chinese, and 33.9% of Indians. In addition to leisure purposes, a notable number of 

tourists visited friends and relatives, for instance, 19.8% of Australian tourists, 11.8% of 

Americans, and 10.9% Britons. The MICE (Meetings, Incentives, Conferences, and 



21 
 

Exhibitions) sector also contributes to Sri Lanka's tourism, with of 9.2% Russian tourists, 

5.7% of French tourists, and 3% of Indian tourists. Wellness tourism is also an emerging 

sector in Sri Lankan tourism, and the majority of German tourists visit for wellness, such 

as Ayurveda and spa retreats (Year in Review 2024, 2025).  

 

In terms of tourist stay duration, tourists from the Netherlands exhibit the longest 

average stay, approximately 14.47 nights, followed by tourists from Switzerland and 

Israel. Similarly, Russian tourists tend to stay longer, with an average of 9.93 nights. 

Indian tourists, who contribute the largest market to Sri Lankan tourism, occupy an 

average of 5.27 nights. In contrast, Bangladeshi tourists recorded the shortest average 

stay in Sri Lanka, around 4.89 nights. Yet, the average duration of stay for Sri Lanka is 

recorded as 8.42 nights. Sri Lankan tourism attracts a nearly equal proportion of male 

and female tourists. It figured 51% and 49% respectively. Moreover, the 31-40 age group 

represented the largest segment (22.5%) of tourist arrivals in Sri Lanka. Tourists aged 60 

and above accounted for a notable 17.2% of total arrivals, and the 41-50 age group 

represented 17.7%. Tourists, aged 51-60, made up 15.2% of arrivals, and the 20-30 age 

group constituted 16.4% of arrivals (Year in Review 2024, 2025).  

 

In 2024, Sri Lanka’s tourism revenue was recorded as 3,168.601 USD Mn. Receipt per 

tourist per day/ average expenditure per day accounted for 181.15 USD (Year in Review 

2024, 2025). The direct contribution to the GDP by travel & tourism in 2023 was LKR 

690.3 billion (2.2% of GDP) and is expected to grow by 7.1% pa to LKR 1,808.7 billion 

(3.6% of GDP) from 2024 to 2034. Travel & Tourism generated 209,174 jobs directly in 

2023, which was 2.6% of total employment. However, by 2034, it is expected to account 

for 425,224 jobs directly, 5.1% of total employment. In 2023, domestic travel spending 

was 46.4% of total internal spending (LKR 807.7 billion). In comparison, foreign visitors 

spent more, making up 53.6% or LKR 934.1 billion. By 2034, international visitor 

spending is expected to account for LKR 3.02 trillion and domestic visitor spending for 

LKR 1.49 trillion (Travel & Tourism Economic Impact 2024, 2024).  

 



22 
 

The Sri Lankan Hospitality market size is valued at USD 470.76 million. It is expected to 

grow by a CAGR of 7.5% during the forecast period. The hospitality sector is a key 

component of the Sri Lankan tourism industry, and thus, a wide variety of hospitality 

options are available. The third largest revenue source in Sri Lanka is tourism, and hence, 

the hospitality sector significantly contributes to generating foreign earnings (Hospitality 

Industry In Sri Lanka - Market Share Analysis, Industry Trends & Statistics, Growth 

Forecasts 2020 - 2029, 2024). By the end of 2024, the total number of SLTDA-registered 

accommodation establishments in Sri Lanka was 4,519, which accounts for a total of 

55,455 rooms. Among them, 169 were “Classified Tourist Hotels”, which contributed 

17,182 rooms to the industry. Out of 169 classified tourist hotels, 31 are designated as 

five-star establishments. The hospitality accommodation sector is predominantly 

subsidized by small and medium businesses (SMEs). These included 1,687 guest houses, 

1,122 homestays, and 1,111 bungalows. Guest houses contributed the largest share at 

37.3%, followed by homestays at 24.8%, and bungalows at 24.5%. However, the 

classified tourist hotels showcase only 3.7% of the total (Year in Review 2024, 2025). 

 

 

2.2.3. Hotel Housekeeping  

The main responsibility of hotel housekeeping is to clean and maintain the hotel’s guest 

rooms and other areas. The size and setup of the housekeeping department can vary 

depending on the hotel’s type, size, services offered, category, and level of occupancy 

(Batinić, 2015). Hotel housekeeping is one of the most critical functions in any lodging 

operation. While guests often take a clean room for granted, hospitality managers 

understand that poor housekeeping is one of the leading causes of guest dissatisfaction 

(Lourdes & Hadi, 2025). Andrade et al. (2021) state that generally, the housekeeping 

department is the largest department within a hotel, followed by the lowest-paid 

department. They further acknowledged that housekeeping is vital to guest satisfaction 

and operational success, yet tough to staff, which is why it is recognized as the most 

challenging department to manage in the hospitality industry. Rosemberg (2018) states 

that the housekeeping employees represent the largest workforce within the hospitality 



23 
 

industry, and they are the driving force behind customer loyalty, hotel ratings, and 

ultimately overall industry growth. However, as per a survey conducted by the American 

Hotel and Lodging Association (2024), hotels are struggling to find employees, with 

housekeeping staff experiencing the most acute shortage (Hsieh et al., 2025). 

 

The hotel's housekeeping is operating 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, all year round. 

Apart from the hotels, trained housekeeping staff are also needed on cruise ships and 

in other luxury places. Nowadays, many of these organizations prefer to hire 

housekeeping from outside companies, so contract housekeeping has become popular 

(Chatterjee, 2022). The efficiency of the housekeeping department ensures cleanliness, 

preservation, and the aesthetic appeal of a hotel. The housekeeping daily tasks are vital 

to the smooth day-to-day functioning of a lodging establishment. In today’s highly 

competitive hospitality industry, housekeeping operations present significant 

challenges, and meeting guest expectations consistently is even more demanding 

(Jayasinghe, 2020).  

 

A housekeeper's job is significantly harder compared to other jobs in the tourism 

industry. It involves tough working conditions, a high risk of accidents and work-related 

illnesses, low pay, and meagre respect or recognition from society (Alcalde-González et 

al., 2021). Rosemberg (2018) states that the housekeeping staff often recorded high 

rates of occupational health risks, unstable employment conditions, and adverse health 

outcomes. He further acknowledged that the hotel housekeeping employees experience 

a significant imbalance between the effort they invest and the rewards they receive, 

which is accompanied by reduced work productivity.  

 

At present, hotel executive housekeepers face challenges that require a high level of 

professionalism. The role of the housekeeping department has changed; in the past, 

housekeeping primarily focused on preparing clean guest rooms. But today, 

housekeeping encompasses a broader set of responsibilities aligned with modern 

hospitality standards. At the same time, the most pressing issue is employee retention. 



24 
 

Many hotels now invest more time and resources in retaining housekeeping staff, as 

they understand the costs associated with high turnover, recruitment, and training 

(Jayasinghe, 2020). The common perception of housekeeping often leads to a ‘dirty’ or 

undesirable job, following ongoing labour shortages. This highlights the importance of 

exploring how housekeepers see their work, including what they value and the 

challenges they face in the profession (Hsieh et al., 2025).  

 

 

2.3. Key Factors Affecting Employee Retention 

Identified key employee retention factors include remuneration & rewards, training & 

development, work-life balance, supervisory support, and work stress. The following 

literature review examines each of the retention factors separately.  

 

 

2.3.1. Remuneration & Rewards as a Key Factor in Employee Retention 

As explained by Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory (1959), salary is a hygiene factor, 

indicating that better pay avoids employee dissatisfaction, turnover, and increases 

retention (Shinde, 2025). Huang (2016, as cited in Milkovich, Newman, & Gerhart, 2014, 

p. 10) defines pay as “all forms of financial returns and tangible services and benefits 

employees receive as part of an employment relationship”. A review of the HRM 

literature recognized that better remuneration, including pay packages and benefits, 

contributes to employee retention. An overall remuneration package that includes a 

base salary and benefits such as bonuses, hospitalisation insurance, and health club 

membership seems to be attractive when it matches or exceeds what is common in the 

industry (Presbitero et al., 2016). Hence, organizations adopt various pay systems to 

enhance productivity and competitiveness (Sweins et al., 2009). Krishna et al. (2022) 

acknowledged that compensation packages provide basic features of employee 

satisfaction and retention, including wages, benefits, and promotions. Došenović (2016) 

noted that employee rewards are key resources that involve money, goods, and services 



25 
 

employees receive in return for their work. He further stated that a well-designed 

employee reward system is vital to effective job performance and business stability.  

 

The study on “Understanding Factors Influencing Employees’ Retention in an 

Organization Today” found that 77% of respondents agreed that employees often leave 

their current jobs in search of better compensation packages. Therefore, organizations 

must recognize this as a key push factor; if ignored, it can lead to the loss of valuable 

and reliable staff (Lagu, 2019). Syahreza et al. (2017) acknowledged that compensation 

has a higher effect on employee retention because when employees receive satisfactory 

compensation, they feel the organization cares about them. “A study on compensation's 

impact on employee retention” showcases that a structured and transparent 

compensation system is essential for retaining employees. However, the study further 

states that the monetary benefits on their own do not guarantee employee loyalty 

(Kavika & Kumar, 2025). 

 

As outlined by Sorn et al. (2023), employee retention is a significant challenge for both 

large and small businesses. Although numerous factors influence employee retention, 

compensation is one of the most crucial. To improve employee retention, organizations 

should take a comprehensive approach by offering competitive pay while also 

addressing other factors that are important to employees. Ojediran and Adebayo (2023) 

stated that adequate and sustainable remuneration has a stronger impact on employee 

retention than high compensation alone. Moreover, Krishna et al. (2022) identified that 

compensation practices have a strong influence on employee performance and 

retention. They further noted that compensation practices provide employers with 

various ways to reward employees, serving as a key motivator. 

 

 

2.3.2. Training & Development as a Key Factor in Employee Retention 

Today, organizations are increasingly investing in training & development programs to 

enhance employees' skills, knowledge, and competencies. In return, this leads to higher 



26 
 

employee engagement, greater job satisfaction, and ultimately employee retention 

(Mishra, 2023). Ng and Dastmalchian (2011) claimed that, although training is a key HRM 

area, literature has been largely overlooked. From the Social Exchange Theory (1964) 

view, when organizations provide training & development opportunities, employees 

feel that the company is investing in them. Therefore, they feel a sense of obligation to 

give something back, including loyalty, commitment, and retention (Xuecheng et al., 

2022). Likewise, Herzberg’s theory suggests achievement and personal growth as 

motivators, which are consequently central to job satisfaction and employee retention 

(Shinde, 2025). Recent research highlights the important role of organizational 

identification in connecting training and development to employee retention. Effective 

training not only enhances skills and job satisfaction but also strengthens employees’ 

sense of belonging to the organization, which maximizes employee retention 

(Farrossabilla & Maksum, 2025).  Continuing employee development and training 

opportunities are associated with employees' intention to stay in their current job, 

avoiding job changes, and delaying early retirement (Shiri et al., 2023).   

 

Mishra (2023) stated that learning & development programmes have a favourable effect 

on employee retention. Thus, learning and development activities advance employee 

happiness and engagement, which ultimately results in a higher retention rate. He 

further acknowledged that learning and development programmes can be used as a 

successful tactic for increasing staff retention. Dietz and Zwick's (2022) study confirmed 

a significant positive effect of training and retention. Likewise, Fletcher (2018) found 

that perceived training & development is positively associated with employee retention. 

The study by Presbitero et al. (2016) identified a positive and significant relationship 

between training and development and employee retention. Equally, Farrossabilla and 

Maksum (2025) acknowledged that training development positively and significantly 

influences employee retention. The study on “Relationship between perceived training 

and development and employee retention: the mediating role of work attitudes” found 

that training & development are positively associated with employees' intention to stay 

(Fletcher et al., 2016). Nonetheless, Finegold et al. (2005) go beyond and found that less 



27 
 

than 25% of temporary workers receive training, and lower-skilled workers are more 

willing to attend training, while educated and experienced individuals are more likely to 

be offered training.  

 

Training & development programs make employees feel obligated and loyal to the 

organization. When employees are obliged and committed, they are more likely to stay 

for a long time. Training & development also shows employees that the organization 

trusts and supports them, which decreases their desire to leave (Muhammad & Bowra, 

2020). Furthermore, Merican et al. (2022) stated that career planning, training, 

development, and talent management are significant and positively correlated with 

employee retention.  

 

 

2.3.3. Work-life Balance as a Key Factor in Employee Retention 

Work-life balance is becoming a significant factor in workplaces in line with today's busy 

environment. When organizations neglect the importance of work-life balance, it can 

lead to negative impacts on employees, including employee turnover. Therefore, 

organizations must practice work-life balance, which helps keep their employees with 

themselves (Hashim et al., 2016). As observed by Sumanarathna and Samarakoon 

(2019), work-life balance is a compulsory practice in today’s business organizations to 

motivate employees, retain them, and sustain profitability. They further stated that 

people work to earn money to live and to fulfil the needs and wishes of their loved ones. 

But if they do not have enough time to spend with their loved ones due to their 

employment, it creates a gap between work life and personal life. Likewise, Gimpal 

(2024) highlighted the importance of work-life from the perspective of Herzberg's 

Motivation-Hygiene theory and further emphasized that it promotes both satisfaction 

and retention in today's workforce. However, there is substantial debate about how 

management practices affect work–life balance (Heywood et al., 2010).  

 



28 
 

Today, organizations recognise that work-life balance (WLB) programs are an essential 

tool for retaining talented employees, increasing job satisfaction, and reducing 

employee turnover. However, their success depends on how well they are designed, 

communicated, and fit the organization's culture (Rajkumar et al., 2025). Cegarra-Leiva 

et al. (2012) found that work-life balance improves retention while contributing to job 

satisfaction.  Likewise, Sheshadri et al. (2024) noted a significant positive relationship 

between work-life balance (WLB) and employee retention. They further acknowledged 

that organizations' practices of work-life balance tend to have lower turnover rates. 

Gbajumo-Sheriff et al. (2024) stated that there is a consequential connection between 

employee retention and work-life balance. However, the connection is based on factors 

such as policy support, awareness of programs, flexibility of schedules, support for 

family responsibilities, communication policies, recommendations for changes, and 

contribution to job satisfaction. Thereby, organizations should focus on these initiatives 

if they need to improve both work-life balance and employee retention. Moreover, 

Lamane-Harim et al. (2023) noted that organizations should create various strategies to 

promote better work-life balance beyond legal requirements. The authors further 

emphasized the importance of encouraging men's work-life balance practices as they 

often experience higher work–family conflict. 

 

The study of Montaño (2025) confirms a strong relationship between work-life balance 

and employee retention intention. Hence, as modern workplaces become more 

complex, organizations focus on work-life balance practices as a key strategy. 

Furthermore, the study recognised that when employees feel they have a balance 

between work and personal life, they are more satisfied, loyal, and less likely to quit. 

Similarly, the study by Hashim et al. (2016) confirmed a positive relationship between 

work-life balance and employee retention. Tumati and Al-Salmi (2023) stated that work-

life balance practices support employee retention and career growth. According to 

them, work-life balance initiatives are vital for hotel businesses, and they help manage 

employees’ personal and working lives. Flexible working hours are striking a balance 

between hotel employees' jobs and their personal lives. Henceforth, career breaks are 



29 
 

another useful work-life balance practice that encourages employees to stay with the 

company. However, Chandra (2012) goes further and argues that most existing studies 

on work–life balance (WLB) come from Western countries, where views and practices 

differ; in contrast, Asian countries often treat WLB mainly as a women’s issue. The 

author further emphasized the need for a flexible WLB model that fits various 

individuals’ needs.  

 

 

2.3.4. Supervisory Support as a Key Factor in Employee Retention 

A successful implementation of HR policies rests largely on supervisors being actively 

involved in the process (Straub et al., 2018). Supervisors play a significant role in the 

organization by guiding employee behaviour, managing work processes, and acting as a 

connection between different teams and departments. Supervisory support enhances 

employee retention in organizations by making them feel more confident and 

motivated. Appropriate supervisory support and resources lead employees to feel 

empowered, capable in their roles, and increase retention intention. Hence, positive 

supervisory support also encourages employees to go above and beyond their regular 

duties to benefit the organization (Mittala & Kaur, 2022). Consistent with social 

exchange theory, when employees recognize that their supervisors care and support 

their well-being, they feel more connected with the organization. As a result, employees 

are more likely to retain and remain loyal to the organization (Gentry et al., 2006). 

 

As revealed by Khan (2021), supervisory support reduces employee turnover and 

improves their chances of staying with the company, such as retention intention. He 

further acknowledged that supportive supervisors often use a 360° performance 

appraisal. Meacham et al. (2023) confirmed that supervisory support drops turnover 

intention. Likewise, Malik et al. (2020) state that if supervisors support employees and 

treat them well, it is beneficial for the organization, as perceived supervisor support and 

retention have a strong positive relationship. The study on “Understanding the role of 

supervisor support in retaining employees and enhancing their satisfaction with life” 



30 
 

found that supervisor support was positively related to quality of work life (QWL). 

Accordingly, a better QWL was linked to higher commitment to the organization and 

greater life satisfaction, and finally to lower turnover intentions (Rathi & Lee, 2017). 

Hence, Park and Jang (2017) found that greater supervisory support maximizes 

employee mental health, which consequently leads to retention.  

 

Gentry et al. (2006) acknowledged that supervisory support is significant in retaining 

part-time employees (PTEs) in the organization. Furthermore, the study by 

Modaresnezhad et al. (2021) indicates that supervisor support weakened the job 

dissatisfaction-turnover relationship. However, the study “Supportive supervisors: the 

key to employee retention?” (2020) found that perceived supervisor support does not 

have a significant direct effect on turnover intention. Yet it found an indirect significant 

relationship between perceived supervisor support and turnover intention.  

 

 

2.3.5. Work Stress as a Key Factor in Employee Retention 

Work-related stress has risen significantly in recent years. Hence, it increases 

organizations’ costs and economic costs while reducing employee well-being (Weiß, 

2020). Workplace stress has become a significant challenge for organizations globally 

due to its negative impact on employee health, productivity, and organizational 

sustainability. People experience stress at work in different ways based on their job role, 

employment duration, management relationship, and expectations. For instance, front-

of-house employees face higher emotional stress as they often interact with customers. 

In contrast, the back-of-house employees may feel pressure to be efficient and meet 

deadlines. Particularly, the hotel industry is exposed to high levels of occupational stress 

as it is a service-intensive and labor-dependent sector (Asier et al., 2025). Moreover, Kim 

et al. (2022) identified that working ‘over time’ is a key contributor to employee work 

stress. Masood (2013) acknowledged three types of stress that occur at the workplace, 

including physical stress, emotional or mental stress, and behavioral stress. Physical 

stress arises when aligning with ergonomics, such as providing space for work, 



31 
 

equipment, comfort, lighting, and ventilation. Emotional and mental stress is unique for 

each individual's personality, attitude, preferences, perceptions, and mindset, and thus 

it is complex and even confusing. Behavioral stress is the stress that results from the 

behavior of oneself or others. However, the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) model can 

be used to identify which job stressors and which supports affect burnout and employee 

retention (Scanlan & Still, 2019). The JDR model proposes that every job has two 

features, job demands and job resources (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2018).  

 

The study on “Workplace Stressors and the Intention to Quit: The Role of Psychological 

Distress and Psychological Flexibility Among Hospitality Employees” acknowledged that 

higher stress at work is linked to feeling more mentally distressed and a stronger 

intention to quit employment (Asier et al., 2025). Liu et al. (2019) noted that work stress 

showcases a positive and ancillary impact on employee turnover intentions.  As reported 

by Masood (2013), the outcome of job stress is negative and results in absenteeism, 

ineffectiveness, dissatisfaction, and turnover. Likewise, Yu (2023) found a strong 

correlation between job stress and job burnout. Similarly, he further identified a strong 

correlation between job stress and the employee's intention to leave. 

 

Salama et al. (2022) noted that work stress arises when workers are unable to handle 

ongoing pressure, which leads to job burnout. This is a serious occupational health issue 

leading to job dissatisfaction, emotional imbalance, and lower productivity. Over time, 

these fallouts include boredom, depression, and employee turnover. A study, “A Threat 

of Customer Incivility and Job Stress to Hotel Employee Retention: Do Supervisor and 

Co-Worker Supports Reduce Turnover Rates?” identified that job stress is a significant 

influence on increasing turnover intention (Chung et al., 2021). Moreover, Lan et al.'s 

(2019) study showed a significant correlation between organizational job stress, 

workplace burnout, and employee retention.  

 

 

 



32 
 

Figure 1. Conceptual framework 

2.4. Conceptual Framework  

Based on the literature review, key factors influencing employee retention were 

identified. The key employee retention factors, serving as independent variables, 

include remuneration & rewards, work stress, training & development, work-life 

balance, and supervisor support. Employee retention, covering both full-time and part-

time staff, serves as the dependent variable. The study also incorporates moderating 

variables, representing the contextual comparison between Finland (Developed) and Sri 

Lanka (Developing). Accordingly, the conceptual framework (Figure 01) was developed 

to examine the factors affecting the retention of full-time and part-time housekeeping 

staff in 3-star hotels across Finland and Sri Lanka. The relationships are first 

hypothesized in a general form (Main), and then extended to sub-hypotheses that 

consider cross-country differences between Finland and Sri Lanka. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

Remuneration & Rewards towards Retention 

Compensation is widely recognized as a key factor influencing employee retention. 

Employees who receive satisfactory rewards & remuneration are more likely to be 



33 
 

retained in current employment. Fair remuneration & rewards satisfy both economic 

and psychological needs. However, the degree to which remuneration & rewards 

influence retention may differ across countries or contexts. 

Main hypothesis:  

▪ H1: Higher perceived remuneration & rewards are positively associated with 

ground-level housekeeping staff retention. (β₁ > 0) 

▪ H1₀: Remuneration & rewards are not positively associated with ground-level 

housekeeping staff retention. (β₁ ≤ 0) 

Sub-contextual hypothesis:  

In a developed country like Finland, where remuneration & rewards are often higher 

and standard labour laws are regulated, remuneration may serve as an important factor. 

Yet, it may not be an exclusive determinant of employee retention. By contrast, in Sri 

Lanka, remuneration & rewards are more critical in terms of employee financial security, 

which is a primary driver of employment decisions and retention. Given these contextual 

distinctions, this study empirically examines whether perceived remuneration & 

rewards are positively associated with staff retention in both countries, or whether the 

relationship differs between the two contexts. 

▪ H1a: In Finland, higher perceived remuneration & rewards are positively 

associated with staff retention. 

▪ H1b: In Sri Lanka, higher perceived remuneration & rewards are positively 

associated with staff retention. 

 

Training & Development towards Retention 

Employee training & development often strengthen employees’ organizational 

commitment. It improves employee performance, enhances employability, loyalty, and 

retention. Although this is commonly believed, it may still vary depending on an 

individual's perception, experience, culture, and context.  

Main hypothesis:  

▪ H2: Greater training & development are positively associated with ground-level 

housekeeping staff retention. (β₃ > 0) 



34 
 

▪ H2₀: Training & development are not positively associated with ground-level 

housekeeping staff retention. (β₃ ≤ 0) 

Sub-contextual hypothesis:  

In developed countries such as Finland, training & development are identified as key 

components of career and professional development. Therefore, the absence of 

development programs may lead to turnover intention and reduce retention. 

Conversely, Sri Lanka performs relatively limited training & development programs, and 

offering such programs can have a positive and strong effect on employee retention. 

Accordingly, this study empirically explores the extent to which perceived training & 

development opportunities are linked to employee retention in each context and 

examines whether the strength of this association varies across the two countries.  

▪ H2a: In Finland, greater training & development are positively associated with 

staff retention. 

▪ H2b: In Sri Lanka, greater training & development are positively associated with 

staff retention. 

 

Work–Life Balance towards Retention 

Work–life balance is a crucial factor in today’s busy environment. This is significant in a 

service-based industry like hospitality, as the industry is dominated by shift work and 

24/7 operations. It is commonly recognised that the work-life balance influences 

employee satisfaction, and those who can balance personal obligations with work 

requirements are more likely to remain in their jobs. However, this may be affected 

differently in various contexts, depending on employees’ culture, values, and lifestyles.  

Main hypothesis:  

▪ H3: Better work–life balance is positively associated with ground-level 

housekeeping staff retention. (β₄ > 0) 

▪ H3₀: Work–life balance is not positively associated with ground-level 

housekeeping staff retention. (β₄ ≤ 0) 

 

 



35 
 

Sub-contextual hypothesis:   

Work-life balance in Finland is strongly encouraged by the working culture. Any 

imbalance is likely to limit employee retention. In a developing country like Sri Lanka, 

work-life balance is still expected to have a positive effect on retention; however, 

employees may prioritize their financial security over work-life balance. Therefore, this 

study empirically examines whether perceived work-life balance is positively associated 

with staff retention in both Finland and Sri Lanka, and whether the strength of this 

association varies across the two countries. 

▪ H3a: In Finland, a better work–life balance is positively associated with staff 

retention. 

▪ H3b: In Sri Lanka, a better work–life balance is positively associated with staff 

retention. 

 

Supervisory Support towards Retention 

Supervisory support enhances employee engagement, motivation, and a sense of 

belonging. This consequently leads to reduced employee turnover intention and fosters 

retention. It is widely recognised that staff who receive strong support from their 

supervisors are more likely to retain their employment and are often more committed 

to the organization. However, the rationale and importance of supervisory support may 

differ among employees in different contexts.  

Main hypothesis:  

▪ H4: Stronger supervisory support is positively associated with ground-level 

housekeeping staff retention. (β₅ > 0) 

▪ H4₀: Supervisory support is not positively associated with ground-level 

housekeeping staff retention. (β₅ ≤ 0) 

Sub-contextual hypothesis:   

Supervisory support is a significant factor for both contexts, Sri Lanka and Finland. It 

really does not matter whether the context is developed or emerging. Supportive 

supervision in Finland can further strengthen the work culture and employee well-being. 

By contrast, in Sri Lanka, strong supervisory support can mitigate work stress and may 



36 
 

reduce employees’ intentions to seek other job opportunities. Considering these 

contextual differences, this study empirically investigates whether perceived 

supervisory support is positively related to staff retention both in Finland and Sri Lanka, 

and whether the strength of this association varies across the two contexts.  

▪ H4a: In Finland, stronger supervisory support is positively associated with staff 

retention. 

▪ H4b: In Sri Lanka, stronger supervisory support is positively associated with staff 

retention. 

 

Work Stress towards Retention 

Higher levels of work stress are often associated with poor employee well-being and, 

consequently, increase employee turnover intentions. Particularly, industries like 

hospitality experience higher work stress at work due to irregular working hours, heavy 

workloads, and customer service pressures. Hence, the housekeeping department is the 

worst among all departments. However, the impact of work stress may still vary 

depending on context and the employee’s perception. For example, some employees 

may view stress as a normal part of working in the hospitality industry.  

Main hypothesis: 

▪ H5: Higher perceived work stress is negatively associated with ground-level 

housekeeping staff retention. (β₂ < 0) 

▪ H5₀: Work stress is not negatively associated with ground-level housekeeping 

staff retention. (β₂ ≥ 0) 

Sub-contextual hypothesis:   

In developed countries like Finland, employees are prioritized with a balanced workload 

and psychological needs. Therefore, work stress is likely to have a strong negative impact 

on employee retention. However, employees in emerging countries like Sri Lanka may 

tolerate higher stress due to a lack of job opportunities and economic challenges, yet 

can also experience negative consequences such as turnover intention. Taking these 

contextual differences into account, this study empirically examines the relationship 



37 
 

between perceived work stress and retention in both Finland and Sri Lanka, and 

evaluates how the strength of this connection differs between the two contexts.  

▪ H5a: In Finland, higher perceived work stress is negatively associated with staff 

retention. 

▪ H5b: In Sri Lanka, higher perceived work stress is negatively associated with staff 

retention. 

 

Summary  

The hypothesis outlined above combines the general relationships (H1 to H5) and the 

country-specific hypotheses (H1a to H5a and H1b to H5b).  This structure allows the 

study to understand not only how organizational factors affect retention, but also how 

those effects vary across different contexts (Finland versus Sri Lanka or Developed 

versus Emerging). Likewise, it provides a deeper understanding of how cultural, 

institutional, and economic differences shape employee retention in hotel ground-level 

housekeeping staff.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



38 
 

Figure 2. Research Onion: Adopted from Saunders et al. (2023) 

3. Methodology  

This chapter discusses the research methods employed in the study, including the 

research philosophy, approach, methodological choices, strategy, time frame, 

procedures, and techniques. The chapter is organized under the following headings: 

research design, case firms, population and sample, data collection, measures, data 

analysis, and an evaluation of data quality.  

 

3.1. Research Design  

The study followed the business research model, namely the research union (Figure 02), 

developed by Saunders et al. (2019). The research onion comprises various layers or 

steps in the research design process, together with research philosophy, approach to 

developing theory, methodological choice, strategy, time horizon, procedures, and 

techniques (Saunders et al., 2023). Designed a research onion for this study, as shown 

in Figure 02.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



39 
 

Research philosophy 

The study followed pragmatist philosophy. The idea of adopting a pragmatist research 

philosophy is that it allows focus on what works best in solving a problem, rather than 

being stuck with one method or theory. Hence, the phenomenon of employee retention 

of ground-level housekeeping staff cannot be fully understood through a single lens. 

Retention may depend on both quantifiable factors, such as remuneration, work stress, 

and career growth, as well as subjective factors, including work relationships and 

cultural norms. Pragmatism permitted integration of both objective measurement and 

subjective interpretation. This allowed for a holistic examination of the retention factors 

of ground-level housekeeping staff in two distinct national contexts: Sri Lanka and 

Finland. Saunders et al. (2023) acknowledged that the pragmatist philosophy is an 

appropriate method that aligns with a range of techniques, qualitative and quantitative, 

and focuses on practical solutions and results. 

 

Research approach  

The study adopted a deductive approach. The identified main hypotheses and sub-

hypotheses were tested. In other words, recognized theory/concept moves toward 

testing the ideas with gathered data. This aligns with Saunders et al. (2023), who 

acknowledged that the deductive approach is particularly suitable for theory 

falsification and verification.  

 

Research method  

The study adopted a mixed-methods design. Both quantitative and qualitative methods 

were integrated. The quantitative strand used survey questionnaires to identify 

statistically significant retention factors.  The qualitative strand conducted semi-

structured interviews to explore individual (management) perceptions and real-life 

experiences in greater depth. Creswell & Clark (2018) state that mixed methods are 

more appropriate when a single data source may be insufficient to understand a 

complex problem. The current study found difficulties, particularly from a quantitative 

perspective, due to a lower population and response rate in Finland. With the adoption 



40 
 

of qualitative interviews, the study enabled methodological triangulation, thereby 

increasing the validity of the findings.  Likewise, understanding of organizational factors 

affecting retention is a complex process as it involves both quantifiable and subjective 

factors. Fetters et al. (2010) acknowledged that the mixed-method approach is a 

powerful tool in investigating complex processes. Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004) 

recognized that mixed-method design can add insights and understanding that might be 

missed when only a single method is used.  He further states that a mixed-method 

approach increases the generalizability of results and produces more complete 

knowledge necessary to inform theory and practice.  

 

Research strategy  

Two complementary strategies were adopted in this study: a survey and a multiple-case 

study. The survey strategy was employed to collect data from a large sample of 

housekeeping staff in two different contexts, Sri Lanka and Finland, facilitating 

comparative statistical analysis. The multiple-case study strategy was followed to select 

representative hotels from each country. This helped to understand the housekeeping 

staff's different perceptions and similarities in retention between the two cultural 

settings. Overall, the dual strategy allowed for both breadth and depth in understanding 

the factors influencing retention. 

 

Time horizon  

The study followed a cross-sectional time horizon, collecting data at a single point in 

time in each country, Sri Lanka and Finland. The cross-sectional design is appropriate for 

this study as it provides a snapshot of a situation and relationship in the present day 

(Wang & Cheng, 2020). 

 

 

 

 



41 
 

3.2. Case Firms, Population & Sample        

Case firms 

Eight 3-star hotels were selected for this study to evade bias, maximize transparency, 

and enhance reliability. Each country, Sri Lanka and Finland, is represented by four 

hotels. The study adopted a purposive sampling method, selecting 3-star hotels. Three-

star hotels were selected based on rankings from major third-party platforms and 

independent hotel standings. Note that Finland has no official hotel star classification 

system, whereas Sri Lanka has a classification system managed by the SLTDA. However, 

in Sri Lanka, only a limited number of hotels have been officially categorized by SLTDA 

yet, and many hotels operate with third-party rankings and independent classifications. 

Since Finland does not have official rating systems and the majority of hotels in Sri Lanka 

were rated by third-party platforms or independently classified, this study selected 3-

star hotels based on third-party and independent classification to ensure a fair selection 

process.   

 

Selected four hotels for this study in Finland: Omena Hotel, Green Star Hotel, Astro 

Hotel, and Vallonia Hotel, Vaasa. However, out of those hotels, two are outsourcing 

housekeeping staff from an external company. Selected hotels in Sri Lanka include 

Hevan Seven Hotel, Kandy & Nuwaraeliya, Hotel Cassendra, Kandy, and Oakray Regency, 

Gatabe. Compared to Finland, 3-star hotels in Sri Lanka have more rooms, which 

represents a higher number of housekeeping staff, and thus the majority of staff are in-

house. They follow staff outsourcing according to seasonality and train interns.  

 

Population & Sample  

The population of this study consisted of 120 ground-level housekeeping staff and 20 

managers/supervisors employed in the selected hotel. The total population is 140. Of 

these, 120 staff members were considered the population for the quantitative study, 

with approximately 40 based in Finland and 80 based in Sri Lanka. The lower population 

in Finland reflects the structural difference between Sri Lanka and Finland's 3-star 

hotels. Finland's 3-star hotels are smaller in size than those in Sri Lanka and employ 



42 
 

fewer housekeeping staff. The sample included 100 participants for the quantitative 

study, while 10 managers were purposively selected for the qualitative phase of the 

study.  

 

With the derived quantitative population, a total of 61 valid survey responses were 

obtained, including 20 from Finland and 41 from Sri Lanka. While the Finnish subsample 

is smaller in absolute terms, it represented approximately 50% of the total available 

population in the selected Finnish 3-star hotels. It was a proportionally strong coverage. 

Babbie (1973) and Kidder (1981) confirmed that a 50% response rate in a survey is an 

acceptable and sufficient rate, especially in social research (Nulty, 2008). Likewise, the 

Sri Lankan sample represented approximately 50% of the population. The same situation 

was reflected in interviews, such as a lower response rate from Finland. Out of the 

sample (10), the response rate was 6, 2 from Finland, and 4 from Sri Lanka. In this case, 

needs to be noted that an interviewed supervisor in Finland represented two hotels. The 

supervisor “X” is from an outsourced company and works as a supervisor for two hotels 

at the same time. Accordingly, it can be claimed that 3 hotels were represented in 

qualitative interviews out of 4 hotels in Finland. Hence, some managers in Finland 

refused to participate in interviews due to language barriers.  Although the interview 

groups are not equal in size, proportional sampling enhanced comparability and 

supports the validity of cross-country analysis. 

 

Sampling approaches differed between the two stands. For selecting housekeeping 

staff, simple random sampling was employed. It enables an equal chance for every 

person in the population. Simple random sampling is a probability method, whereas 

participants are chosen completely at random and are not biased. It is an appropriate 

method in quantitative research because it provides a fair and representative sample 

while reducing the influence of other factors (Noor et al., 2022). Snowball sampling was 

adopted in selecting managers because housekeeping supervisors, managers, and other 

executives have specific characteristics, knowledge, or experiences relevant to this 

study. Likewise, this population is relatively small and not easily accessible through 



43 
 

conventional sampling methods. Naderifar et al. (2017) stated that the snowball 

sampling method is appropriate for accessing hard-to-reach populations, particularly 

when the research requires participants with specialized characteristics or insights. 

 
 

3.3. Data Collection  

The quantitative phase involved a structured survey questionnaire (Appendix 03: Survey 

questionnaire-English, Appendix 04: Survey questionnaire-Sinhala, and Appendix 05: 

Survey questionnaire-Finnish). The instrument consists of sections on demographic 

information, organisational factors, and personal motivations for retention. The survey 

questionnaire has been distributed in a paper version, with the expectation of a higher 

response rate. Nulty (2008) justified that the response rate of paper surveys is higher 

than that of online surveys. Participants were ground-level housekeeping staff in both 

countries, Finland and Sri Lanka. The qualitative phase involved semi-structured 

interviews. The structured interview questionnaire is listed in Appendix 06. The time 

duration ranged from 10 to 20 minutes, but in some cases ran up to 30 minutes. It 

depended on the amount of information and interaction. Interviews were recorded with 

permission. Interviews were conducted in English in Finland and in Sri Lanka, both 

English and the Sinhala language, due to communication barriers. Participants included 

hotel managers, housekeeping managers, and supervisors. Interviews focused on staff 

remuneration, work stress culture, perceived supervisory support, training and 

development, retention, and challenges faced by housekeeping staff. The purpose of 

interviews is to gain an in-depth understanding of retention factors, complementing the 

survey. Ethical integrity was a key concern of this study. Privacy Note (Appendix 01) has 

been shared with all participants, and informed consent (Appendix 02) has been 

obtained. By signing informed consent, all participants assured that their participation 

was voluntary. Data has been collected and processed in accordance with the 

requirements of the General Data Protection Regulation of the European Union, the 

Finnish Data Protection Act, and the Sri Lankan Personal Data Protection Act, No. 9 of 

2022 (PDPA). Data were stored on secure computers and servers at the University of 

Vaasa. When reporting the results, subjects of interest and companies were 



44 
 

anonymised. Similarly, potentially identifiable parts were omitted from examples. In all 

communications, cultural sensitivity is observed, particularly during interviews, to 

ensure that questions are appropriate for both Sri Lankan and Finnish contexts. 

 

 

3.4. Measures  

Following validated measurement instruments used with the quantitative phase to 

examine the influence of remuneration & rewards, training & development, work–life 

balance, supervisory support, and work stress towards employee retention. Minor 

wording changes were made to fit the hotel context in Sri Lanka and Finland.   

 

Remuneration & Rewards 

Employee perceptions of remuneration & rewards were measured using a 5-point Likert 

scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), adapted from Presbitero 

et al. (2016). The construct was measured using three items, including “rewards and 

recognition I receive from this job are attractive”, “I am satisfied with the income I 

receive”, and “I am satisfied with the benefits I receive”.     

 

Training & Development 

Perceptions of training & development opportunities were measured using the 5-point 

Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), adapted from 

Presbitero et al. (2016). Three items were included: “When people start new jobs here, 

they are given enough guidance and training.”, “There is a commitment to ongoing 

training and development of staff.”, and “The training and development I’ve received 

have improved my performance.”  

 

Work–Life Balance.  

Work–life balance was measured using the 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly 

disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), adapted from Presbitero et al. (2016), which captures 

employees’ ability to balance work and personal responsibilities. Three items were listed 



45 
 

in the questionnaire. For example, sample item, “I can be involved in both work and non-

work-related activities”.   

 

Supervisory Support 

Supervisory support was measured using three items derived from Presbitero et al. 

(2016) and Zhu et al. (2025). The 5-point Likert scale was used, ranging from 1 (strongly 

disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Sample item, “Supervisors are protective of and 

generous to loyal workers”. 

 

Work Stress 

Work stress was assessed using the 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly 

disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), adapted from Asier et al. (2025).  The scale consists of 

three questions, such as “I find it difficult to do my job because of conflicting demands.”, 

“I feel uncertain about the exact scope of my duties and responsibilities at work.”, and 

“Personality conflicts or strained relationships interfere with my ability to get quality 

work done.” 

 

Employee Retention  

The dependent variable, employee retention, was operationalized through employees’ 

intention to remain with the organization. A 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly 

disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), adapted from Presbitero et al. (2016). Three items were 

used, including “I am likely to still be working in this organisation in 2 years”, “I would 

like to still be working in this organisation in 5 years”, and “I can see a future for me in 

this organisation”.  

 

From a qualitative perspective, the structured interview questions were developed 

based on the constructs measured in the survey instrument. The interview aimed to 

explore the measures included in the survey questionnaire. Hence, the interview 

allowed a deep analysis of measures, permitting participants to elaborate on their 

experiences and provide contextual explanations. The interview questionnaire was 



46 
 

guided, piloted, and reviewed by experts to ensure clarity and alignment with the 

research objectives. 

 

 

3.5. Data Analysis  

Quantitative data were analysed using SPSS software. First, the quantitative phase was 

summarized by descriptive statistics. This helped to summarise the dataset and provide 

an overview of the distribution of responses. Accordingly, charts and tables were 

presented. Similarly, Mean and Standard Deviation were examined for each factor at 

the general model and separately for both countries. This allowed an initial 

understanding of trends and variations across the two samples. Secondly, inferential 

analysis was conducted to test hypotheses. Pearson correlation analysis was employed 

to examine the relationship between organizational factors (IVs) and employee 

retention (DV), at both general and contextual levels. Following, a regression analysis 

was conducted to examine how strongly each factor could predict staff retention. An 

ANOVA test was conducted to determine whether there were significant differences 

among the groups, with particular attention to comparisons between the two contexts. 

Regression coefficient analysis was employed in line with the general model and the 

country-specific models to understand the most influential variable influencing 

employee retention. 

 

Qualitative data were analysed using the thematic analysis introduced by Braun and 

Clarke (2006). The method consists of a six-step framework: familiarisation with the 

data, generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, defining and 

naming themes, and producing the report (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Byrne (2021) noted 

that thematic analysis offers a systematic and rigorous technique for identifying, 

analyzing, and reporting patterns within qualitative data. The analysis started with 

familiarisation with the data. All interview recordings were listened to multiple times to 

gain an in-depth understanding of the content. The initial codes were then generated 

manually, giving descriptive labels to important parts of the text. In this study, manual 

coding is preferred as it allows the researcher to engage closely with the data and notice 



47 
 

small details that may be missed by automated software. Nelson et al. (2021) noted that 

automated coding methods, such as SML, can partially do what humans do, but humans 

are essential for accurate qualitative analysis. Accordingly, an open coding approach was 

adopted, allowing the data to reveal first-order concepts, which represent participants’ 

own words and expressions. Thus, Blair (2015) argued that neither open coding nor 

template coding was definitely better. These first-order concepts were then examined 

and grouped into second-order themes, reflecting patterns, similarities, or relationships 

identified by the researcher. Then, the second-order themes were aggregated into new 

forms of exploitation and exploration (Key themes), establishing a hierarchical data 

structure that systematically links raw data to the study’s key findings. Themes were 

further reviewed and refined to ensure that they accurately reflect the data and are 

distinct from one another. Each theme was defined and named, highlighting its 

relevance to the research objectives. All interviews were transcribed verbatim. 

Expecting better readability, minor grammatical corrections have been made in the 

quoted text without altering the meaning. Finally, the findings were reported 

systematically, with illustrative quotes from participants included to support the themes 

and demonstrate how the data structure connects raw participant statements to the 

overarching dimensions (Appendix 07: Qualitative Data Analysis).  

 
 

3.6. The Assessment of the Quality Data 

Assessing the quality of data is important in research because it is the foundation for 

trustworthy results. The assessment method in quality of data varies between 

qualitative and quantitative research due to the nature of the data. Since this study 

adopted a mixed-methods design, data quality was tested using diverse techniques and 

ultimately strengthened through triangulation.  Gibbert et al. (2008) acknowledged that 

in the positivist tradition, four main criteria commonly used to assess the rigor of field 

research include internal validity, construct validity, external validity, and reliability.  

 

 



48 
 

Internal validity  

The conceptual framework is guided by theories such as Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory, 

Social Exchange Theory, and Job Demand Theory, which provide a lens for examining 

the factors affecting employee retention.  After analyzing the data, the findings were 

interpreted using these theories to ensure that they are credible and logical. Use of 

multiple theories strengthened the study’s validity by demonstrating that the results are 

reliable, theory-based, and accurately reflect the relationships found in the data. 

Moreover, in terms of the quantitative phase, the conceptual framework guided the 

development of the questionnaire. The relationships between the variables were 

analyzed statistically to ensure that the patterns observed were logical and consistent 

with the research questions. In the qualitative phase, thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 

2006) was adopted to analyze interview data. Thus, findings were interpreted in light of 

the conceptual framework, ensuring patterns and relationships were logically 

consistent. 

 

Construct Validity  

In the quantitative phase, the questionnaire items were adapted from validated 

instruments (Presbitero et al., 2016; Zhu et al., 2025; Asier et al., 2025). Instrument’s 

content validity verified by academics and industry experts, and criterion validity was 

checked using actual retention and turnover data. Hence, the pilot testing and reliability 

testing (Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.834) further assured construct validity. In the qualitative 

phase, the data were collected through semi-structured interviews with managers and 

supervisors across countries.  A transparent coding and systematic data analysis ensured 

alignment with research objectives. A transparent approach employed from participant 

quotes → codes → themes → overarching dimensions. Member checks were conducted 

to enhance trustworthiness. Also, the study triangulated by collecting and analyzing 

qualitative and quantitative data, which strengthened the construct validity of the 

findings.  

 

 



49 
 

External Validity 

From a quantitative perspective, sample selection across Finland and Sri Lanka allows 

comparisons and supports theoretical generalization. In the qualitative phase, cases 

were selected purposefully through so-called theoretical sampling to provide 

contextually rich insights, and contextual information was provided to support analytical 

generalization. 

 

Reliability 

In the quantitative phase, the questionnaire process, scoring, and data entry were 

consistent and standardized. Reliability was confirmed using Cronbach’s alpha and pilot 

testing. From the qualitative perspective, interviews were transcribed verbatim, and 

coding was performed systematically and documented. Clear interview protocols were 

followed consistently for all participants, and detailed reporting was provided to ensure 

dependability and transparency. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



50 
 

Figure 3. Reliability Statistics (Cronbach's Alpha Value) 

4.  Findings 

This chapter illustrates the findings of both quantitative and qualitative