Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Hospitality,
Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhlste

Academic Papers

A model of graduates' satisfaction and loyalty in tourism

higher education: The role of employability
Sofia Teixeira Eurico a,n, João Albino Matos da Silva b, Patrícia Oom do Valle b
a
Polytechnic Institute of Leiria, Portugal
b
University of Algarve, Portugal

a r t i c l e in f o abstract

This study seeks to examine the role of employability in the process of satisfaction and
Keywords: loyalty formation towards higher education institutions (HEI), when considering tourism
Tourism graduates. It explores how employability has been approached within HEIs and how
Satisfaction graduates' satisfaction and loyalty have been assessed in higher education. A structural
Employability equation model, including the employability construct, is proposed and validated, and the
Image results confirm that the HEIs' image is strongly influenced by employability. These results
ECSI might represent a valuable source of information for HEIs in the process of finding the
PLS-PM
balance between the service provided and the needs of the stakeholders.
& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The current competitiveness between countries is based not only on natural resources and/or the availability of cheap
labour but also on the knowledge and expertise of the workforce (Kohler, 2004). Therefore, the qualification of human
resources as an answer to the industry demands becomes a major aim for Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). These
institutions find themselves under greater pressure by political and educational frameworks to prepare students to be
employable individuals. HEIs are expected to use strategies that reinforce students' employability capacity. This includes
preparing them to cope with the shifting of skill requirements and the constantly evolving technological advances that
characterise the labour market (Harvey, 2010).
The tourism sector is no stranger to this situation. Its potential for growth, compared with other economic sectors, gives
it an undeniable importance (Lee-Ross & Pryce, 2010). In fact, the need for skilled human resources in this sector is growing
as companies seek to implement a culture of high quality in the provided services. One of the primary methods of
accomplishing this is by improving the educational standards of the workforce (Mayaka & King, 2002; Ballantyne, Packer, &
Axelsen, 2009). Since the Tourism industry is a complex system of an intensive workforce, requiring a significant number of
human resources, and since the lack of professional qualification necessarily compromises the achievement of quality
standards in services, several authors agree on the need for well-trained graduates, leaving this responsibility largely to the
HEIs (Ayres, 2006; Barron, 2007; Baum, 2007; Busby, 2003; Catramby & Costa, 2004; Charles, 1997; Choy, 1995; Engberg,
2007; Hjalager, 2003; Tribe, 2003).

n
Correspondence to: Instituto Politécnico de Leiria, Escola Superior de Turismo e Tecnologia do Mar, Santuário Nossa Senhora dos Remédios, 2520-641
Peniche, Portugal. Tel.: þ 351 262 783 607, þ 351 966408603 (Home); fax: þ351 262 783 088.
E-mail addresses: sofia.eurico@ipleiria.pt (S.T. Eurico), jsilva@ualg.pt (J.A.M. da Silva), pvalle@ualg.pt (P.O. do Valle).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2014.07.002
1473-8376/& 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 S.T. Eurico et al. / Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42 31

While tourism graduates have enjoyed higher employment rates than unskilled workers in the past, the last decade has
seen a considerable increase in the number of graduates wanting to enter the labour market, and finding employment is
now more difficult (OECD, 2006). Graduate unemployment, along with the increase in the number of HEIs, has led to intense
competition, and students' preparations for being employable individuals have become major and decisive elements in
obtaining suitable employment (De Vos, De Hauw, & Van der Heijden, 2011). In this context, identifying and satisfying the
needs and expectations of students, by providing better learning opportunities and enhancing employability skills, are
becoming key aims for HEIs (Butt & Rehman, 2010). The topic of employability in Tourism has only very recently attracted
HEIs and Tourism researchers. This is possibly due to the fact that Tourism graduates have, until recently, been able to easily
enter the labour market (Lockwood & Medlik, 2001), reflecting the receptivity of the sector itself and its high employment
rates in past decades (Ladkin, 2011). This study addresses a gap in the literature on the role of HE in Tourism by approaching
the relationship between the graduates' perception of the role of HEI in preparing students to be employable and succeed in
the labour market, as well as perceptions about the HEI and received qualifications (Table 1).
The baseline to this analysis is a well-known customer satisfaction index, the European Customer Satisfaction Index
(ECSI), which has already been applied to HE (Chiandotto, Bini, & Bertaccini, 2007; Martensen, Grønholdt, Eskildsen, &
Kristensen, 2000). It consists of a structural equation model with six latent variables (image, expectations, perceived quality,
value, satisfaction, and loyalty) which aim to provide a detailed and accurate description of the processes underlying
customer satisfaction and loyalty. When carefully analysed, this consideration will contribute to the efficient performance of

Table 1
Items used to measure employability according to different authors.

Construct Dimensions/criteria Authors

Employability (ability to gain and retain work) Employability (having  Is the graduate employed? Harvey (2001)
the attributes employers consider necessary)  Is the employment linked to degree subject?
 Does it involve graduate skills?
 Does it have scope to grow?
 Team working:
– leading teams
– different roles in different teams simultaneously.

Employability  Enhancing employability through programme Knight and Yorke

learning environments. (2003)
 entrepreneurship in degree programmes.
 careers advice.
 producing elements such as portfolios and records of
achievements.

Employability  Critical analysis. Smith et al. (2007)

 Link between social theory/social policy discourse
and work/organisational experience.
 Using students' existing paid/voluntary work or
unpaid care work for academic purposes.
 Students’ ability to manage their own learning.
 Flexible mode of studying.
 Assessment strategy that encourages students to
reflect actively upon learning.

Employment capabilities  Time required to enter the labour market. Campostrini and
 Quality of work Gerzeli (2007)
 Coherence of the job with studies.

Match between education and employment  Relevance of the field of study. Schomburg and
 Use of knowledge and skills. Teichler (2006)
 Appropriateness of level of education.
 Reasons for inappropriate position.
 Fulfilled expectations.
 The proportion of graduates facing problems.

Differences between graduates' competences acquired upon  Knowledge. Kivinen and

graduation and those required some four years later  Methodical skills. Nurmi (2007)
 Intelligence.
 Socio-communicative skills.
 Organisational skills.
32 S.T. Eurico et al. / Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42

organisations (Cassel & Eklof, 2001). However, in its original form, this model does not consider the role of the HEI in the
process of preparing students to meet the needs of the Tourism industry and, thus, increase their employability. The
inclusion of the employability construct in the ECSI model and its application to HE in tourism are the main contributions of
the study.
In this context, the present study aims to investigate to what extent the ECSI model, when applied to HE in tourism, can
be successfully improved by incorporating the employability construct. More specifically, the proposed model analyses how
the graduates' perception of the HEI's ability to prepare students to be employable and well-integrated in the labour market
affects graduates' satisfaction and loyalty towards the attended HEI. We believe that this study can contribute to a better
understanding of the educational component of tourism and of consumers’ perceptions of HE in this area of knowledge.
Additionally, it may help HEIs to better achieve the aim of offering the kind of education that meets the expectations of both
the students and the workplace, considering that this may be fundamental for attracting and maintaining students in HEIs
(Gupta, 2010).

2. Literature review

2.1. Employability in tourism research

In general, the concept of employability is based on an individual's ability to adapt to the professional needs and recent
dynamics of new labour markets, and it is directly linked to the ability to find and maintain employment (Hillage & Pollard,
1998). The knowledge, skills, and attitudes of each individual and the way they use them for their own benefit are key
factors leading to employability (Rothwell, Jewell, & Hardie, 2009).
There has been extensive research on the development of the structure of the tourism sector itself and the jobs it
encompasses (Ladkin, 2011), but the issue of employability, especially when linked to tourism education, has only recently
gathered more focused attention (Baum, 2007; Biscomb, Wiscombe, & Judith, 2012; Huang, 2013; Li, 2011). Labour issues
have been analysed in tourism education research from different perspectives. The most frequent perspective is the
discussion of curriculum development and its potential implications for the labour market (Dhiman, 2012; Fidgeon, 2010;
Ladkin, 2011). Other studies have focused on the different factors influencing employability, as far as tourism jobs are
concerned (Airey, 1997; Harvey, Locke, & Morey, 2002; Lopez-Bonilla & Lopez-Bonilla, 2012), and others include the
employers' perception regarding the main skills needed for the tourism profession (Ayikoru, Tribe & Airey, 2009; Cuffy,
Tribe, & Airey, 2012; Fidgeon, 2010). However, a more general understanding of employability, including the perspective of
tourism graduates, has received scant research attention, and the great majority of HEIs responsible for tourism education
still do not consider their consumers' point of view for their strategies on how to develop employability skills. Thus, the
focus of this study is to try to understand the perception of graduates towards the importance of being prepared to meet the
tourism industry's needs.

2.2. Employability research within higher education institutions

The HEIs' response to the employability agenda usually includes strategies for enhancing the development of employ-
ability skills. Measures of their performance have been created, including indicators of graduate labour market outcomes
(Harvey, 2010; Mason, Williams, & Cranmer, 2009). The new understanding of the concept of employability, engaging key
skills sufficient to meet requirements for employability (OECD, 1993), differs from the one that is mostly associated with
obtaining a graduation certificate as a guarantee of getting a job (Harvey et al., 2002). Yet there has been a lack of empirical
work focusing on the way in which students and graduates are beginning to understand and manage their employability
and future work. This has resulted in the underestimation of the importance of graduates' achievements in attaining a
positional advantage in the labour market (Eurico, Oliveira, Gonçalves, & Pais, 2012).
Some previous studies have tried to point out indicators of employability within the HEIs' framework (Campostrini &
Gerzeli, 2007; Harvey, 2001; Kivinen & Nurmi, 2007; Knight & Yorke, 2003; Schomburg & Teichler, 2006; Smith, Clegg,
Lawrence, & Todd, 2007). In these studies the satisfaction of HE graduates with their preparation for the labour market is an
important element for the concept of employability. Good opportunities for entering the professional field seem to be a
prime factor for students when considering options for admission and choosing a particular programme. Based on these
studies, nine attributes were selected to measure employability. These were chosen because they were directly related with
the elapsed time period between graduating and entering the labour market, they addressed issues concerning the liaison
between HEIs and employers, or they were associated with the monitoring provided to students when starting their
professional career.

2.3. The ECSI in higher education

The use of customer satisfaction indices for the evaluation of business performance in different industries has become
increasingly important in recent decades as a means of measuring and explaining customer satisfaction and loyalty. They
therefore represent an important benchmarking tool for comparing and improving the economies of different countries
(Cassel & Eklof, 2001). The importance of graduates' satisfaction with the HEI that they attended as a way to promote the
 S.T. Eurico et al. / Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42 33

Fig. 1. Conceptual model and research hypotheses.

institution itself has led us to the ECSI model that measures customer satisfaction and was developed in 1998 by the ECSI
Technical Committee (ECSI Technical Committee, 1998). The customer satisfaction index methodology has already been used
in empirical studies of HEIs (Alves & Raposo, 2007b; Brown & Mazzarol, 2009; Chiandotto et al., 2007; Chitty & Soutar, 2004;
Martensen et al., 2000), and the ECSI has been shown to fit the educational context. The purpose of this study is to introduce
the employability construct in the ECSI model.

3. Conceptual model and research hypotheses

The success of graduates, as end users of HEIs, in obtaining employment is an essential aspect of the assessment of HEIs'
educational programmes and services. In this study, we have extended and adjusted the ECSI to the HE in tourism
framework. Therefore, a conceptual model for testing is proposed in Fig. 1.
The model examines the role of employability in the relationships between the antecedents of graduates' satisfaction and
loyalty. Based on the literature review and on consideration of the research model, twelve research hypotheses will be
tested.
Hypotheses related to employability. According to studies on employability, which are few in number, employability is said
to have a positive effect on graduates' satisfaction (Mason, Williams, Cranmer, & Guile, 2003; Mason et al., 2009; Yorke,
2004). Therefore, factors indicating a high level of employability may have a positive effect on graduates' satisfaction with
the attended HEI. As far as the image of the HEI is concerned, authors such as Anctil (2008), Brown and Mazzarol (2009),
Belanger et al. (2010), and Pampaloni (2010) suggest that the overall image of the institution influences potential students at
the time of choosing where to study. However, few empirical studies have considered employability as an antecedent of
image. To assist in this connection, it is worth mentioning the studies of Soutar and Turner (2002), Cetin (2010), Duarte,
Alves, and Raposo (2010) and Landrum, Turrisi, and Harless (2010).
The interest in graduate employability has increased among all the stakeholders, and achievements in this area are an
increasingly crucial aspect of students' expectations. Therefore, HEIs perceive that they have been forced to focus on
graduates' employability and promote their related accomplishments to society in general, as a way of gaining a competitive
advantage (HEFCE, 2002; Chitty & Soutar, 2004; Gedye, Fender, and Chalkley, 2004). Due to the fact that employability is the
new construct now added to the ECSI model, it is also our aim to verify the way in which this affects the original model,
giving consideration to the professional position of the respondents. Accordingly, the following research hypotheses are
formulated:

H1: Employability has a direct effect on satisfaction concerning the HEI attended.

H2: Employability has a direct effect on the image of the HEI attended.

H3: Employability has a direct effect on expectations.

Hypotheses related to image. Image has been studied as a management strategy within studies that are carried out using the
ECSI methodology, and its influence on expectations has been confirmed (Kurtz, Clow, Ozment, & Ong, 1997; Cassel & Eklof, 2001;
34 S.T. Eurico et al. / Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42

Johnson et al., 2001). As for the education field, image has been shown to be one of the variables with the greatest impact on the
formation of students' satisfaction and loyalty (Alves & Raposo, 2007b; Belanger et al., 2010; Brown & Mazzarol, 2009; Martensen
et al., 2000). Hence, we have hypothesised:

H4: The image of the HEI has a positive and direct effect on expectations.

H5: The image of the HEI has a positive and direct effect on satisfaction.

H6: The image of the HEI has a positive and direct effect on loyalty.

Hypotheses related to expectations. In research studies, expectations have been shown to have a positive, a negative, or
simply no influence on satisfaction in the education framework (Eskildsen, Martensen, Gronholdt, & Kristensen, 2000;
Kristensen, Martensen, & Gronholdt, 1999; Martensen et al., 2000; Ostergaard, 2005). According to Kristensen et al. (1999)
and Anderson and Sullivan (1993), this influence is indirect and via perceived quality. With H7 and H8 we aim to add
empirical value to this issue regarding the HE perspective.

H7: Expectations have a direct effect on satisfaction.

H8: The effect of expectations on satisfaction is indirect through quality.

Hypotheses related to quality. According to Kristensen et al. (1999), quality is the most important antecedent of satisfaction,
and the split of quality into “hardware” and “humanware” has been adopted when studying HEIs (Chiandotto et al., 2007;
Chitty & Soutar, 2004; Martensen et al., 2000). The effect of the quality of non-human elements (hardware) on satisfaction is
via perceived value, according to Zeithaml (1987), for whom services and products are assessed by the user taking into account
these two main aspects. In the educational field, non-human elements bond directly to “provided study programmes and
courses” and “support functions”; in contrast, human elements are represented by teaching and administrative staff
(Martensen et al., 2000: 375). Consequently, we have established the following hypotheses:

H9: The perceived quality of non-human elements has an indirect effect on satisfaction through perceived value.

H10: The perceived quality of human elements has a positive and direct effect on satisfaction.

Hypotheses related to perceived value. Perceived value is directly related to student satisfaction, as students expect that
time and money invested in education will yield returns (Fabra & Camisón, 2009; Hartman & Schmidt, 1995; Ostergaard &
Kristensen, 2005; Webb & Jagun, 1997). If this is the case, the variable value will influence the formation of satisfaction,
justifying the subsequent hypothesis:

H11: Perceived value has a direct and positive effect on satisfaction.

Hypotheses related to satisfaction. Loyalty only appears as the consequent variable of satisfaction, and its importance relies
on the fact that it provides information about the reputation of the institution, the act of recommendation among students,
and the re-entry of graduates into postgraduate programmes (Butt & Rehman, 2010; Hennig-Thurau, Langer, & Hansen,
2001). The following hypothesis is therefore put forward:

H12: Satisfaction with the HEI attended has a positive and direct effect on loyalty to the institution.

4. Study methods

4.1. Sampling and data

The population of the study was composed entirely of tourism and hospitality graduates already working in the tourism
industry in two specific, Portuguese tourism areas: West region and Leiria Fátima region. These regions are geographically
close, have similar tourism characteristics when it comes to visitors' supply and demand, and are relatively close to the
capital, Lisbon, in an emergent tourism area. Enterprises and organisations in both the official and the private tourism
sectors were initially contacted by phone in order to identify how many graduates were employed and to ensure
authorisation for the subsequent questionnaire. This procedure enabled the identification of a target population of 207
individuals. Then, using the Cochran formula (Cochran, 1963) and involving a margin of error of 3% and a confidence interval
of 95%, a completed sample of 174 cases was targeted. The questionnaire was sent by email or delivered personally, and data
were collected between January and June 2010.
To guarantee a representative sample of graduates working in the two regions, the cluster sampling method was applied,
which implied the previous extraction of a random sample of enterprises and organisations (public and private) where
graduates were working. All individuals within those entities with an HE degree in tourism or hospitality were invited to
take part in the study. With this procedure we obtained a sample of 166 completed questionnaires (about 80% of the study
population and 95% of the targeted sample). The main socio-demographic characteristics of the sample are in Table 2.
 S.T. Eurico et al. / Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42 35

Table 2
Socio-demographic profile of interviewees.

Sex Age Qualifications Programme Work situation Net household Is the actual job Is the actual job in the
attended in HE income (monthly) the first job? same area as the BSc?

Men: 23.49% 21–49 MSc Tourism-related Self-employed €451–€900: Yes: 29.5% Yes: 93.4%
Women: Mean: students: programmes: worker: 3.61% 66.67%
76.51% 29 13.25% 72.73%

PhD student: Hotel management: Salaried worker/ €901 to €1350: No: 70.5% No: 6.6%
1.81% 27.27% private sector: 29.01%
76.51%

Salaried worker/ More than €1350:

public sector: 19.88% 4.32%

4.2. Instruments

The final questionnaire instrument took into consideration the original ECSI questionnaire's structure (IPQ, 1999) and
was divided into two major parts. The first dealt with graduates' socio-demographic characteristics, education and training,
and work experience. The second part was divided into seven sections, each of which related to the constructs presented in
the research model. The six constructs that belong to the ECSI model (image, expectations, perceived quality, value,
satisfaction, and loyalty) were measured using the indicators previously validated by the other authors who used this model
in the education sector (Alves & Raposo, 2007b; Brown & Mazzarol, 2009; Chiandotto et al., 2007; Chitty & Soutar, 2004;
Martensen et al., 2000; Mason et al., 2009; Yorke, 2004). As for the employability construct, it was ascertained using the
nine items referred and justified in Section 2.2. All items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly
disagree or very low) to 5 (strongly agree or very high). A pilot study was conducted in 15 of the selected organisations to
improve the questionnaire. Constructs and indicators are in Table 3.

5. Results

In order to estimate and validate our model, partial least squares path modelling (PLS-PM) was applied. This method
allows the hypothesised linkages among the seven latent variables to be estimated, as well as the extent to which they are
adequately measured by the corresponding observed indicators to be assessed (Chin, 1998; Chin & Newsted, 1999). PLS-PM
does not demand a very high requirement for normal distribution of the source data and operates with a relatively small
sample size (Vinzi, Chin, Henseler, & Wang, 2010). In addition, PLS is used in national satisfaction indexes, and it is therefore
an appropriate choice for testing a research model such as the one presented here (IPQ, 1999). The software SmartPLS 2.0
M3 was used in this study to estimate and validate the model. The measurement model will be evaluated first, followed by
the structural model.

5.1. Measurement model

Reliability was initially assessed for each item, and the obtained loadings were mainly above 0.7, indicating good item
reliability (Table 4). Guidelines suggest that the standardised loading for each item should be higher than 0.7 (Hair and
Sarstedt, 2011). However, an item reliability of 0.5 is still acceptable (Chin, 1998). Regarding composite reliability, which
measures the extent to which a latent variable is adequately represented by its indicators, all values exceeded the
recommended 0.7 threshold (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
The measurement model was further evaluated regarding convergent validity and discriminant validity. In this respect,
Gefen and Straub (2005) claim that convergent validity is demonstrated if the indicators present a t-value (bootstrap) that is
significant for the corresponding latent variable; in other words, it must be higher than 1.96 (considering a 95% confidence
interval). In our study, this result is verified for all items (Table 4). The average variance extracted (AVE) was also used to
access convergent validity; according to Dillon and Goldstein (1984), it should exceed 0.5. Table 4 indicates that the AVE
values range from 0.47 to 0.8. Only one construct – employability – did not exceed the 0.5 threshold value. However, all its
loadings exceeded the level and are statistically significant, and so it was considered to have sufficient convergent validity.
To assess discriminant validity, the average variance extracted for each construct must be higher than the squared
correlations between the construct and all the other constructs in the model (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). This analysis
indicates adequate discriminant validity, apart from three situations regarding employability. Nevertheless, the analysis of
the cross-loadings, which are another measure of discriminant validity, shows that all items' loadings are higher than all of
their cross-loadings, dissipating any uncertainty as far as employability is concerned.
36 S.T. Eurico et al. / Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42

Table 3
Latent variables and corresponding indicators.

Latent variables Indicators

Employability Globally, the HEI attended allows finding a first job within six months after graduation (Emp1)
Globally, the HEI attended is valued by employers (Emp2)
Globally, the HEI attended interacts with the tourism industry sector (Emp3)
Globally, the HEI attended prepares students for the transition to the job market (Emp4)
Globally, the degree programme is directly linked and relevant to successful performance of professional duties (Emp5)
Globally, having a bachelor's degree raises the expectation of professional enhancement (Emp6)
Globally, the HEI attended enhances the adequacy of the studies with respect to the employment requisites (Emp7)
Globally, the HEI attended allows and enhances lifelong learning (Emp7)
Globally, the HEI attended matches the tourism industry sector demands (Emp8)

Image Generally, this is a good HEI to study at (Im1)

The HEI attended shows and encourages innovation (Im2)
The HEI attended has a trustworthy academic status (Im3)
The HEI attended offers its students educational achievement (Im4)
The HEI attended supports its graduates (Im5)
The HEI attended contributes dynamically to the society's development (Im6)

Expectations Teachers' pedagogical methods (Exp1)

Teachers' scientific knowledge (Exp2)
HEI facilities (Exp3)
HEI support functions (Exp4)
Overall quality of services in general (Exp5)
Preparation for coming job and career (Exp6)
The services received considering your initial expectations (Exp7)

Quality Overall quality of the service provided (Q1)

Programme's curricula (Q2)
Teachers' pedagogical methods (Q3)
Teachers' scientific knowledge (Q4)
The organisation and functioning of the HEI (Q5)
HEI facilities (library, computing, services, tutorials) (Q6)
Non-teaching staff and services (Q7)
HEI building (Q8)

Value The value paid for this programme at this HEI is rewarded by the way employers face and look for its graduates (V1)
The value of the education received is rewarded by the ease in finding a first job (V2)
The value paid for this programme is rewarded by the overall provided service (V3)

Satisfaction Globally, I am satisfied with the services provided by the HEI attended (S1)
My expectations regarding overall experience received were totally satisfied (S2)
As an employer fully integrated in the labour market, the HEI attended satisfies my need for advanced studies (S3)
The HEI attended can be considered as ideal HEI (S4)
The services offered and acquired skills reward having chosen this HEI (S5)

Loyalty If I had to choose an HEI to graduate from again, I'd choose the same (L1)
If I had to choose a programme again, I'd choose the same (L2)
I intend to recommend the HEI attended (L3)
I intend to recommend the programme I've attended (L4)
If I choose to continue studying, I'll do it at the HEI attended (L5)

5.2. Structural model

In Fig. 2, we provide the estimated path coefficients and corresponding p-values for the structural model. This provides
evidence that employability is a key antecedent of image and that image is the most important antecedent of satisfaction. As
can be observed, nine of the twelve path coefficients are statistically significant at a 95% confidence level. Within each
ellipse, the R2 values are presented. The latent variable satisfaction reports the greatest R2 (0.754). Loyalty also reports an R2
value superior to 0.67, indicating the adequacy of the model and data for the issue under study. Note also the high R2 (0.525)
associated with the latent variable image. The dashed grey lines represent the hypotheses involving direct effects that are
rejected.

5.3. Testing the research hypotheses

The results shown in Fig. 2 allow the testing of the hypotheses that involve direct relationships between latent variables.
All tests were conducted to a 95% confidence level. Some hypotheses were rejected: H1 (p 40.05), H3 (p 40.10), and H7
(p40.10). To test H10, the indicators relating to non-human elements were dropped, and the model was re-estimated
considering only the indicators related to human elements. This procedure produced a significant path diagram estimate of
0.2281 (p o0.01), which validated H10.
 S.T. Eurico et al. / Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42 37

Table 4
Measurement model results.

Construct Item Loading t-Value Construct reliability AVE

n
Employability Emp1 0.600 7.729 0.887 0.470
Emp2 0.601 7.637n
Emp3 0.700 11.44n
Emp4 0.808 23.20n
Emp5 0.747 13.61n
Emp6 0.620 7.976n
Emp7 0.705 12.84n
Emp8 0.588 7.073n
Emp9 0.761 15.12n

Image Im1 0.804 20.72n 0.871 0.533

Im2 0.794 17.12n
Im3 0.675 8.838n
Im4 0.800 21.77n
Im5 0.623 8.197n
Im6 0.663 9.021n

Expectations Exp1 0.699 10.27n 0.889 0.537

Exp2 0.651 7.883n
Exp3 0.738 7.364n
Exp4 0.769 8.394n
Exp5 0.797 13.60n
Exp6 0.696 8.116n
Exp7 0.766 10.39n

Quality Q1 0.775 18.61n 0.890 0.505

Q2 0.637 10.12n
Q3 0.728 11.96n
Q4 0.672 8.885n
Q5 0.776 15.38n
Q6 0.709 8.908n
Q7 0.737 11.92n
Q8 0.635 7.168n

Value V1 0.894 33.57n 0.9268 0.809

V2 0.915 42.47n
V3 0.889 34.99n

n
p o 0.001.

To test H8 and H9, we first multiplied the corresponding direct effects to obtain an estimate for the indirect effect. Then,
the percentile bootstrap was determined and used to define a 95% confidence interval, based on which the null hypothesis
that the corresponding parameter is zero was tested. For H8, this procedure yields an indirect estimate of expectations on
satisfaction, through quality, that equals 0.115 (i.e. 0.489  0.235). In turn, through the percentile bootstrap, the confidence
interval of 0.029–0.229 was determined. Therefore, the corresponding null hypothesis must be rejected at a 95% confidence
level, meaning that this indirect effect is significant; in other words, H8 is not rejected. To test H9, we first eliminated the
indicators related to human elements, and the model was re-estimated considering only non-human indicators. In this case,
the estimated indirect effect equals 0.068 (0.386  0.175), and the bootstrap confidence interval ranges from  0.004 to
0.157, showing that the corresponding null hypothesis should not be rejected at a 95% confidence level. Consequently, the
indirect effect is not significant, and H9 is rejected.

6. Discussion

In particular, the results show that eight of the twelve hypotheses were supported. H1 predicted the existence of a direct
effect of employability on satisfaction, but it was rejected. In fact, even though the estimated path coefficient is positive, as
expected, it is not statistically significant (p 40.05). So, this result is somewhat contradictory to previous studies about the
relationship between employability perceptions and graduates' satisfaction (Mason et al., 2003; Mason et al., 2009; Yorke,
2004). Nonetheless, this effect happens through image, which proved to be, among all the variables, the one with the
highest explanatory power of satisfaction. This result indicates that the level of satisfaction with the attended HEI is not
directly associated with its capacity to ensure its students a proper integration into the labour market. The current position,
which is still a very recent development, is that HEIs in Portugal have begun to consider the concept of employability; this
seems to be reflected in the respondents' attitudes, as they continue to see in a university degree the passport to successfully
obtaining a job. Moreover, in the process of choosing an HEI, the graduates seem to have neglected aspects related to
training for employability and its role in the curriculum, the attention and investment that institutions give to it, the actual
needs of the tourism industry, and the HEIs' responses to these aspects. The issue of employability has only recently
38 S.T. Eurico et al. / Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42

Employability
R²=0.000
H1 Loyalty
H2 0.164 H6 R²=0.668
0.725** 0.204*

- 3
H Image
0.094 R²=0.525
H12
0.642**
H5
H4
0.441 **
0.428**

Value
Expectations R²=0.239 Satisfaction
R²=0.133 R²=0.754
H7 H11
0.003 0.170*

-
H8
0.490**
H9
0.489**
H12
Quality 0.235**
R²=0.24

Fig. 2. Structural model results. nnp o 0.01; np o 0.05. H8 and H9 involve indirect effects. The values 0.490 and 0.489 in the diagram are the estimated direct
path coeficients, respectively.

attracted the attention of HEIs and students. Therefore, it is not surprising that satisfaction was much greater with other
elements that were not taken for granted.
According to this explanation, the rejection of H3 becomes quite clear. Much like the results obtained by Gedye et al.
(2004), the respondents in our study did not attribute a significant relevance to the issue of employability in relation to their
expectations of HE. The fact that they were graduates who, as seen from their socio-economic profile, had integrated into
the labour market with relative ease may have resulted in employability as a factor being side-lined compared to other
factors such as the programme's curriculum, the teaching of scientific knowledge, and general services provided by the HEI.
Nevertheless, the fact remains that the socio-economic reality of students in the early years of their studies is clearly distinct
from that of this sample of students who have already graduated. As unemployment is becoming a major problem, even for
graduates, the increasing relevance of employability within the HEIs may lead to different results in the near future,
compared to the results obtained for H1 and H3 in this study.
H2 conveys that employability has a direct effect on HEIs' image and this hypothesis is not rejected. In this sense, it
corroborates the few studies that approached the relationship between these two constructs (Cetin, 2010; Duarte et al.,
2010; Landrum et al., 2010; Soutar & Turner, 2002). Moreover, it represents the strongest relationship in the model,
surpassing that of satisfaction and loyalty. Thus, the direct influence of employability on image has acquired empirical
support, indicating that HEIs must incorporate employability into their educational practice and promotional strategy. Their
image can be crucial when trying to attract new students and for reinforcing the loyalty of the alumni. Therefore,
information relating to employability and successful results achieved in this area will, if well-promoted, contribute to the
improvement of the HEI's institutional image.
The results did not lead to the rejection of H4, H5, and H6. Respectively, this suggests that there is a direct and positive
effect of image on expectations, satisfaction, and loyalty. Hence, the image of a particular HEI will help shape students'
expectations of it, as previously suggested by Kurtz et al. (1997) and tested by Cassel and Eklof (2001). The results of this
study also show that image is, of all satisfaction antecedents, the one with the greatest explanatory power, as had already
been observed in the studies of Brown and Mazzarol (2009), Kristensen, Kanji, and Dahlgaard (1992) and Kristensen,
Martensen, and Gronholdt (2000). A direct and positive effect of image on loyalty, foreseen by H6, was not rejected, in
accordance with previous studies (Alves & Raposo, 2007a; Kristensen et al., 1992, 2000).
As far as H7 is concerned, the results reject the existence of a direct effect of expectations on satisfaction. This result
confirms those of previous studies. For example, Kristensen et al. (1999) concluded that these results could be positive,
negative, or simply inexistent. There is also little consensus on the nature of the influence of expectations on satisfaction in
 S.T. Eurico et al. / Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42 39

the HE framework, and the results presented by Eskildsen et al. (2000), Martensen et al. (2000), and Ostergaard and
Kristensen (2005) are also unclear. The rejection of H7 may simply result from the fact that respondents value other
dimensions more highly than this one for the formation of their satisfaction in this area. Image, quality, and value are
possibly the most visible and concrete elements that students prioritise in the formation of their sense of satisfaction about
their academic experience and the attended HEI, placing expectations at a secondary level. Nevertheless, expectations have
been shown to display an indirect effect on satisfaction through perceived quality, as confirmed by the empirical study of
Anderson and Sullivan (1993) and Kristensen et al. (1999), supporting H8 and giving this construct some importance in the
formation of satisfaction.
On the subject of perceived quality, a literature review shows that perceived quality can influence customer satisfaction.
Furthermore, the distinction between the human and the non-human elements is supported by empirical studies that prove
different effects, depending on whether they consider one or the other of these in the formation of satisfaction (Chitty &
Soutar, 2004; Kristensen et al., 1999; Zeithaml, 1987; ). The results obtained are different from those defended by Zeithaml
(1987), which conceive of a relationship between the perceived qualities of the non-human elements with satisfaction,
mediated by perceived value. In fact, the results rejected H9, which envisaged this indirect effect. The non-human elements
cover aspects related to the organisation and functioning of the HEI, including academic services, facilities, and educational
resources (Kristensen et al., 1999); according to the obtained data, they are not significant when mediated through
perceived value in the process of satisfaction formation. This analysis allows us to conclude that, for the respondents, the
influence of perceived quality on satisfaction is not so much related to the technical quality of the education service but to
the quality associated with the human element, as suggested by the results for H10. The human component of perceived
quality refers to the educational services provided, the overall quality of teaching, the curricula, and the teachers' scientific
knowledge. The non-rejection of H10 reflects the importance of these elements to the respondents, thus expressing the
importance of the experiences they had with teachers and other non-academic staff. The influence of perceived quality on
satisfaction, particularly the human component of it, reinforces the empirical results achieved in earlier studies (González,
Comesaña & Brea, 2007; Hennig-Thurau et al., 2001; Parasuraman, Berry, & Zeithaml, 1988).
H11 stated that perceived value has a direct impact on satisfaction, and the results provide evidence that allow this to not
be rejected. These results confirm those of other authors (McDougall & Levesque, 2000; Oliver, 1997), stressing the
increasing importance of the concept of perceived value and its significance in considering repeated purchase. In the context
of HE, this relationship demonstrates that there is a direct link between perceived value and the value of the teaching–
learning process, bearing in mind the efforts made by students and in view of their future employment, as argued by
Ostergaard and Kristensen (2005). The fact that all respondents are already working in the tourism industry has probably
influenced these results, confirming the relevance of this relationship.
The graduates' satisfaction has been shown to have a significant and direct influence on loyalty (H12). This result is
consistent with those found in other studies (Butt & Rehman, 2010; Hennig-Thurau et al., 2001). They are also consistent
with the ECSI model in which loyalty, resulting from the consumer's satisfaction and contributing to profit growth, is seen as
essential for companies as it will encourage repeat purchase behaviour. In the tourism field of HE, it may be concluded that
satisfaction has a positive impact on loyalty, and that graduates' intentions to recommend the HEI they attended helps to
attract new students. It also keeps the possibility open that graduates will choose the same HEI for continuing their studies;
this, ultimately, results in the growth of the HEI's academic reputation.

7. Conclusions

The contribution of this study is to present a model, encompassing the employability construct, for the analysis of the
process of the formation of satisfaction and loyalty among tourism graduates. The introduction of this concept has been
proved to be conceptually and empirically relevant. This is mostly due to the effect that it has been shown to have on the
image of HEIs, which was the construct with the greatest impact on the formation of satisfaction. Thus, it becomes clear that
HEIs should invest their efforts primarily into two dimensions, image and employability, to obtain the satisfaction and loyalty
of their immediate users, that is, graduates and students. Quoting Harvey (2010: 7), “a degree may once have been a
passport into graduate employment: it was indicative of a level of knowledge and intellectual ability. However, as a result of
organisational changes and the expansion in the numbers of graduates, this is no longer the case.” Therefore, in light of
these results, HEIs with tourism programmes should commit to ensuring that their human resources are qualified in
accordance with the actual needs of the tourism industry, taking into account the views of all the involved partners. This
study presents a model that allows that to be done by evaluating graduates' satisfaction with the HEI attended. This study
can also simultaneously help HEIs consider educational strategies that enhance students' employability and facilitate
successful integration into the labour market after graduation. For instance, that may be accomplished by offering graduates
a wide choice of postgraduate programmes that reinforce and update their skills in topics (such as accommodation,
recreation, etc.) directly related to the different hospitality and tourism services provided to tourists.
Some implications for management can now be suggested. In fact, employability was revealed to be a dimension that
influences the image that graduates form about HEIs, which has an impact on their intention to return to continue their
studies and on their recommendations to potential candidates. Consequently, it is important that HEIs use innovation,
reflection, and foresight to develop their educational practice for the preparation of employable individuals. Also important
is communicating this effectively to the outside world, mostly through the Internet, which is seen as a privileged mean of
40 S.T. Eurico et al. / Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42

obtaining information by students (Pampaloni, 2010). Another effective way of promoting HEIs is to promote seminars,
conferences, events, and related experiences, as well as holding open days and guided tours of the campuses of the
institutions. These methods enable students to “identify or experience characteristics specific to each school” (Pampaloni,
2010: 41). Caring for the whole visual aspect of an institution's site is also a crucial strategy, ensuring that it is attractive and
modern (Vrontis, Thrassou, &, Melanthiou, 2007).
The knowledge of the labour market has allowed these students to evaluate their experience in HE in a broad and
reflective manner. It is current feedback that reports on the dynamism and constant metamorphosis of the markets. It can
and should be used by HEIs to adjust their practices to the realities that their students will face. If HEIs' communication and
marketing strategies follow up on these results, they may influence the decisions of potential students on which institution
to attend. They will also, most likely, succeed in attaining the loyalty of former students who find themselves pressured by a
constant need to update their knowledge and continue the journey of lifelong learning (Hemsley-Brown, 2012). Finally, we
can only conclude that the obtained results indicate the need for a dynamic and continuous adjustment between the HEIs,
which prepare future professionals for the tourism sector, and the tourism industry itself. The sustainable development of
tourism depends largely on the skills of its human resources, especially in a sector characterised by the intangibility of the
services offered which, in turn, is mainly dependent on its professionals (Dhiman, 2012; Ladkin, 2011).
This study is not without limitations. Firstly, new indicators should perhaps be considered for measuring employability,
in order to improve its convergent validity. Due to this, the conclusions based on this construct should be treated with
caution. This is a possible line of future research that will both ensure the transversal nature of the model and improve its
validity. The second limitation of this study is that the respondents are those who are already integrated into the tourism
labour market, which means that graduates who are either unemployed or working in a different sector than tourism are
not taken into account. A replication of this study with alternative indicators and adjusted to the professional status of these
individuals would assist the optimisation of strategies within HEIs. Thirdly, it is also a possibility that the differences
between the socio-economic reality of students currently attending the early years of their programmes and the graduates
that constituted our sample may determine distinctive results for the effect of employability on satisfaction. Indeed, the
difficulties inherent in the economic situation that embraces Europe, and the rising unemployment rate among graduates,
may influence students and increase their attention to the employability issue, as well as the preparation they receive in
HEIs to enhance their prospects as employable individuals. Moreover, future research should seek to analyse a wider sample,
namely one that considers a national dimension of the Higher Education system regarding Tourism programs. One other
interesting suggestion for future researchers would be to replicate the study in other countries with different stages of
Tourism development and with a distinct socio-economic scenario. It would be interesting to consider new areas and new
functions associated with different features, as well as new organisational forms of the tourism industry in these areas and
their impact on the perception of employability. It would then be possible to analyse how those results might differ from the
ones we have obtained.

References

Airey, D. (1997). Attitudes to careers in tourism: An Anglo Greek comparison. Tourism Management, 18(3), 149–158.
Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2007a). Conceptual model of student satisfaction in higher education. Total Quality Management, 18(5), 571–588.
Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2007b). Student satisfaction index in Portuguese public higher education. The Service Industries Journal, 27(6), 795–808.
Anctil, Eric., (2008). Selling Higher Education: marketing and advertising america's Colleges and Universities: ASHE Higher Education Report, Vol. 34
(no. 2). Las Vegas: ASHE Higher Education Report Series.
Anderson, E., & Sullivan, V. (1993). The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms. Marketing Science, 12, 125–143.
Ayikoru, M., Tribe, J., & Airey, D. (2009). Reading tourism education: Neoliberalism unveiled (2009). Annals of Tourism Research, 36(2), 191–221.
Ayres, H. (2006). Education and opportunity as influences on career development: findings from a preliminary study in Eastern Australian tourism.. Journal
of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 5(1), 16–28.
Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Axelsen, M. (2009). Trends in tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(1), 149–152.
Barron, P. (2007). Hospitality and tourism students' part-time employment: patterns, benefits and recognition. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and
Tourism Education, 6(2), 40–54.
Baum, T. (2007). Human resources in tourism: Still waiting for change. Tourism Management, 28(6), 1383–1399.
Belanger, C., Mount, J., & Wilson, M. (2010). Institutional image and retention. Tertiary Education and Management, 8(3), 217–230.
Biscomb, K., Wiscombe, C., & Judith, M. (2012). Get out to work!: An evaluation of an employability project. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism
Education, 11(1), 1–4.
Brown, R., & Mazzarol, T. (2009). The importance of institutional image to student satisfaction and loyalty within Higher Education. Higher Education, 58,
81–95.
Busby, G. (2003). Rethinking of education and training for tourism. Tourism Management, 24 p, 495–498.
Butt, B., & Rehman, K. (2010). A study examining the students satisfaction in Higher Education. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 5446–5450.
Campostrini, S., & Gerzeli, S. (2007). Informative sources for the evaluation of the university education effectiveness in Italy. In L. Fabbris (Ed.), Effectiveness
of university education in Italy. Employability, competences, human capital (pp. 2–9). Padua: Physica-Verlag.
Cassel, C., & Eklof, J. A. (2001). Modelling customer satisfaction and loyalty on aggregate levels: Experience from the ECSI pilot study. Total Quality
Management, 12(7&8), 834–841.
Catramby, T. C., & Costa, S. R. (2004). Qualificação profissional em turismo como fator de competitividade do setor. Caderno Virtual de Turismo, 4(3), 26–34.
Charles, K. R. (1997). Tourism education and training in the caribbean: preparing for the 21st century. Progress in tourism and hospitality research, 3,
189–197.
Chiandotto, B., Bini, M., & Bertaccini, B. (2007). Quality assessment of the university educational process: An application of the ECSI model. In L. Fabbris.
(Ed.), Effectiveness of university education in Italy. Employability, competences, human capital (pp. 43–54). Padua: Physica-Verlag.
Chin, W., & Newsted, P. (1999). Structural equation modeling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. In R. Hoyle (Ed.), Statistical strategies
for small sample research (pp. 307–342). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
 S.T. Eurico et al. / Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42 41

Chin, W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research
(pp. 295–336). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Chitty, B. & Soutar, G. (2004). Is the European Customer Satisfaction Index Model Applicable to Tertiary Education? ANZMAC 2004 Conference Wellington
(pp. 1–7). Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy.
Choy, D. J. (1995). The quality of tourism employment. Tourism Management, 16(2), 129–137.
Cochran, W. (1963). Sampling techniques2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Cuffy, V., Tribe, J., & Airey, D. (2012). Lifelong learning for tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(3), 1402–1424.
De Vos, A., De Hauw, S., & Van der Heijden, B. (2011). Competency development and career success: The mediating role of employability. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 79, 438–447.
Dhiman, M. C. (2012). Employers' perceptions about tourism management employability skills. Anatolia – International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality
Research, 23(3), 359–372.
Dillon, W., & Goldstein, M. (1984). Multivariate analysis. Methods and applications. New York: Wiley.
Duarte, P., Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2010). Understanding university image: A structural equation model approach. International Review on Public and
Nonprofit Marketing, 7, 21–36.
ECSI Technical Committee (1998). European customer satisfaction index. Foundation and Structure for Harmonized National Pilot Projects. European
Comission (DGIII, Industry) and European Organization for Quality (EOQ).
Engberg, M.E (2007). Educating the workforce for the 21st century: a cross-disciplinary analysis of the impact of the undergraduate experience on students'
development of a pluralistic orientation. Research in Higher Education, 3(48), 283–317.
Eskildsen, J., Martensen, A., Gronholdt, L., & Kristensen, K. (2000). Benchmarking student satisfaction in higher education based on the ECSI methodology.
sinergie raporti di ricerca, 9, 385–402.
Eurico, S., Oliveira, F., Gonçalves, S., & Pais, S. (2012). Issues on Tourism and Marine Resources’ employability: A challenge for Higher Education? European
Journal of Tourism. Hospitality and Recreation, 3(1), 95–113.
Fabra, M., & Camisón, C. (2009). Direct and indirect effects of education on job satisfaction: A structural equation model for the Spanish case. Economics of
Education Review, 28, 600–610.
Fidgeon, P. (2010). Tourism education and curriculum design: A time for consolidation and review?. Tourism Management, 31, 699–723.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing
Research, 18(3), 328–388.
Gedye, S., Fender, E., & Chalkley, B. (2004). Students' undergraduate expectations and post-graduation experiences of the value of a degree. Journal of
Geography in Higher Education, 28(3), 381–396.
Gefen, D., & Straub, D. (2005). A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-graph: Tutorial and annotated example. Communications of the Association for
Information Systems, 16(25), 91–109.
González, M., Comesaña, L., & Brea, J. (2007). Assessing tourist behavioral intentions through perceived service quality and customer satisfaction. Journal of
Business Research, 60, 153–160.
Hair, J., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal or Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–151.
Hartman, D., & Schmidt, S. (1995). Understanding student/alumni satisfaction from a consumer's perspective. Research in Higher Education, 36(2),
197–217.
Harvey, L. (2001). Defining and measuring employability. Quality in Higher Education, 7(2), 97–109.
Harvey, L. (2010). New realities: The relationship between higher education and employment. Tertiary Education and Management, 6(1), 3–17.
Harvey, L., Locke, W., & Morey, A. (2002). Enhancing employability, recognizing diversity. Making links between higher education and the world of work.
Manchester: CSU: Universities of UK.
HEFCE. (2002). Performance Indicators in Higher Education from Higher Education Funding Council for England: 〈http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Learning/PerfInd/〉
Accessed 12.05.09.
Hemsley-Brown, J. (2012). ‘The best education in the world’: Reality, repetition or cliché? International students' reasons for choosing an English University.
Studies in Higher Education, 37(8), 1005–1022.
Hennig-Thurau, T., Langer, M., & Hansen, U. (2001). Modeling and managing student loyalty: An approach based on relationship quality. Journal of Service
Research, 4, 331–344.
Hillage, J., & Pollard, E. (1998). Employability: Developing a framework for policy analysis. EfEE Research Briefing, 85, 85.
Hjalager, A.-M. (2003). Global tourism careers? opportunities and dilemmas facing higher education in tourism. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and
Tourism Education, 2(2), 26–38.
Huang, R. (2013). International experience and graduate employability: Perceptions of Chinese international students in the UK. Journal of Hospitality,
Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 13, 87–96.
IPQ (1999). ECSI – Portugal, from European Customer Satisfaction Index 〈http://www.ipq.pt/ecsi/index.html〉 Accessed 29.05.07.
Johnson, M., Gustafsson, A., Andreassen, T. W., Lervik, L., & Cha, J. (2001). The evolution and future of national customer satisfaction index models. Journal of
Economic Psychology, 22, 217–245.
Kivinen, O., & Nurmi, J. (2007). Job requirements and competences: do qualifications matter? In U. Techler (Ed.), Careers of university graduates (pp. 131–
142). Kassel: Springer.
Knight, P., & Yorke, M. (2003). Employability and good learning in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(1), 3–16.
Kohler, J. (2004). The bologna process and employability: The impact of employability on curricular development. A key objective of academic studies and
for academic institutions. Conference Bled/Slovenia (p. 1–21). Bled/Slovenia: s.e.
Kristensen, K., Kanji, G., & Dahlgaard, J. (1992). On measurement of customer satisfaction. Total Quality Management, 3(2), 123–128.
Kristensen, K., Martensen, A., & Gronholdt, L. (2000). Customer satisfaction measurement at post Denmark: Results of application of the european customer
satisfaction index methodology. Total Quality Management, 11(7), 1007–1015.
Kristensen, K., Martensen, A., & Gronholdt, L. (1999). Measuring the impact of buying behaviour on customer satisfaction. Total Quality Management
10(4/5), 602–614.
Kurtz, D., Clow, K., Ozment, J., & Ong, B. (1997). The antecedents of consumer expectations of services: An empirical study across four industries. The Journal
of Services Marketing, 11(4), 230–248.
Ladkin, A. (2011). Exploring tourism labor. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(3), 1135–1155.
Landrum, R., Turrisi, R., & Harless, C. (2010). University image: The benefits of assessment and modeling. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 9(1),
53–68.
Lee-Ross, D., & Pryce, J. (2010). Human resources and tourism. skills, culture and industry. UK. Channel View Publications, 2010.
Li, W. (2011). An empirical study on tourism enterprises' satisfaction with university graduates – From the perspective of employable skills. In: International
conference on Applied Social Science (ICASS 2011), vol. V (pp. 449–453). People's Republic of China: Changsha.
Lockwood, A., & Medlik, S. (2001). Tourism and hospitality in the 21st century. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
Lopez-Bonilla, J., & Lopez-Bonilla, L. (2012). Holistic competence approach in tourism higher education: An exploratory study in Spain. Current Issues in
Tourism, 1, 1–15.
Martensen, A., Grønholdt, L., Eskildsen, J., & Kristensen, K. (2000). Measuring student oriented quality in higher education: Application of the ECSI
methodology. Sinergie Rapporti di Ricerca, 9, 371–383.
Mason, G., Williams, G., & Cranmer, S. (2009). Employability skills initiatives in higher education: What effects do they have on graduate labour market
outcomes?. Education Economics, 17(1), 1–30.
42 S.T. Eurico et al. / Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 16 (2015) 30–42

Mason, G., Williams, G., Cranmer, S., & Guile, D. (2003). How much does higher education enhance the employability of graduates? (Report to HEFCE) from:
HEFCE: 〈http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/RDreports/2003/rd13_03/〉 Accessed 12.05.09.
Mayaka, M., & King, B. (2002). A quality assessment of education and for Kenya’s tour-operating sector. Current Issues in Tourism, 5(2), 112–133.
McDougall, G., & Levesque, T. (2000). Customer satisfaction with services: Putting perceived value into the equation. The Journal of Services Marketing, 14(5),
392–410.
OECD. (1993). From Higher Education to Employment: Synthesis Report. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2006). Jobs strategy: Lessons from a decade’s esperience. Paris: OECD.
Oliver, R. (1997). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. NY: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
Ostergaard, D. & Kristensen, K. (2005). Drivers of student satisfaction and loyalty at different levels of Higher Education (HE) – Cross-institutional results
based on the ECSI methodology. From: 〈http://www.google.pt/search?hl=pt-PT&q=drivers þof þstudent þ satisfaction þ and þloyalty þat þdifferentþ
levels&meta=〉 Accessed 10.01.09.
Pampaloni, A. (2010). The influence of organizational image on college selection: What students seek in institutions of Higher Education. Journal of
Marketing for Higher Education, 20(1), 19–48.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L., & Zeithaml, V. (1988). SERVQUAL: Multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing,
64(1), 12–40.
Rothwell, A., Jewell, S., & Hardie, M. (2009). Self-perceived employability: Investigating the responses of post-graduate students. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 75, 152–161.
Schomburg, H., & Teichler, U. (2006). Higher education and graduate employment in Europe. The Netherlands: Springer.
Smith, K., Clegg, S., Lawrence, E., & Todd, M. (2007). The challenges of reflection: Students learning from work placements. Innovations in Education and
Teaching International, 44(2), 131–141.
Soutar, G., & Turner, J. (2002). Students' preferences for university: A conjoint analysis. The International Journal of Educational Management, 16(1), 40–45.
Tribe, J. (2003). Editorial: the future of higher education in hospitality, leisure, sport and tourism. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education,
2(1), 1–4.
Vinzi, V., Chin, W., Henseler, J., & Wang, H. (2010). Handbook of partial least squares. Concepts, methods and applications. Heidelberg: Springer.
Vrontis, D., Thrassou, A., & Melanthiou, Y. (2007). A contemporary higher education student-choice model for developed countries. Journal of Business
Research, 60, 979–989.
Webb, D., & Jagun, A. (1997). Customer care, customer satisfaction, value, loyalty and complaining behavior: validation in a UK university setting. Journal of
Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 10, 139–151.
Yorke, M. (2004). Employability in the undergraduate curriculum: some student perspectives. European Journal of Education, 39(4), 109–427.
Zeithaml, V. (1987). Defining and relating price, perceived quality and perceived value (Report no. 87-101). Cambridge: Marketing Science Institute.