The hotel industry is a critical component of the tourism sector, contributing significantly to the economic development of many countries, including Nigeria . In recent years, the Nigerian hotel industry has experienced rapid growth, driven by increasing demand for hospitality services . However, the industry faces intense competition, and hotels must deliver exceptional service to attract retain customers . In a service-driven sector, employees are the backbone of delivering exceptional customer experiences . In any organization employees are the real assets because the achievement or failure of any organization relies on its employee as well . Employee engagement and job satisfaction are essential factors that influence service delivery in the hotel industry . Job satisfaction is considered to be the most important element in the hotel industry . Service delivery has the potential of enhancing organization’s well-being and competitive performance which may further enhance service quality . Engaged and satisfied employees are more likely to provide excellent service, leading to increased customer satisfaction and loyalty . Despite global advancements in employee engagement and satisfaction practices, local hotels often struggle to address contextual challenges, including leadership inefficiencies, inadequate training, and limited employee recognition . The pressing issue centers on unresolved job satisfaction concerns that hamper employee performance in Oyo State’s hospitality industry. While existing research provides insights into engagement practices globally, the Nigerian context remains underexplored, particularly concerning factors limiting service delivery. This study seeks to bridge this gap by examining how employee engagement and job satisfaction affect service delivery, proposing a localized model for intervention and improvement. The findings of this research will provide evidence-based insights that can guide hotel managers in creating policies and strategies that enhance employee well-being and service performance, thereby boosting customer satisfaction and hotel success in Oyo State, Nigeria.

Oyo State was created in February 3, 1976 out of the old Western State, located in South West Nigeria, Oyo State covers 28,454 square kilometers. It is bounded in the south by Ogun State and in the north by Kwara State, in the west by the Republic of Benin while in the east it is bounded by Osun State. The study was carried out in Oyo state Nigeria. The study area lies between latitude 7°3’ and 9°12’ North of the equator and longitude 2°47’ east of the meridian, characterized by two climatic seasons. The state is made up of thirty- three (33) local government areas in four (4) agricultural zones (Ogbomosho zone, Ibadan/Ibarapa zone, Oyo zone and Oke-Ogun zone) and with three (3) senatorial districts (Oyo North, Oyo Central and Oyo South senatorial district) with a population of 7,010,864 people and fifth (5^th) largest listing of Nigeria’s 36 states ranked in order of their total population. The third most populous city in the country and formerly the second most populous city in Africa. Oyo state is bordered in the North by Kwara state, in the South by Ogun state, in the East by Kwara and Osun states and in the West by Republic of Benin. The favourable climate of the area encouraged about 70% of the inhabitants to engage in farming activities. The state has some tropical rain forest in the south around Ibadan, the state capital, but is covered mostly by a “derived” savanna that is largely the result of clearing and burning the former forest cover to provide land for cultivation.

This study adopts a survey research design. The research population used in the study are seven hundred and eighty-seven (787) employees of 38 registered hotels in the 10 LGAs in Oyo State Nigeria. The employees were selected based on their willingness to participate in the study. The sample size was determined using the Yamane (1967) formula of sample size determination for a known population.

where n = Sample size

N = Target population

e = Percentage of error 5% or 0.05 (95% Confidence Interval)

1= Constant value

Convenience sampling technique were adopted to administer the questionnaires in each of the 38 selected hotels until the sample size of 787 were met. The questionnaire used in this study has four sections; section 1 contains the respondent’s bio data such as age, marital status, gender, religion etc. Section 2 contains ten dimensions of employee engagement (i.e., motivation, involvement, leadership styles, employee-employer relationship and working conditions, career development, training and development, recognition and rewards, compensation and benefits and growth opportunities) and section 3 contains measures of job satisfaction (i.e., payment system, promotion, relationship, nature of work, recognition and appreciation, safety at the workplace, training and development, communication, job stress, supervisor support, supportive coworkers and work environment) and section 4 contains measures of service delivery (i.e., customer service standards, feedback and complaints, quality of product and services, customer expectation, customer loyalty, employee turnover, customer retention strategies, employee rewards and recognition), all structured on a five (5) point likert scale with weights assigned as follows: 5 -strongly agree, 4 - agree, 3 – neutral, 2- disagree, and 1 – strongly disagree. Partial Least Square Structural Equation Modelling were adopted for the analysis of data collected in this study. This was done with the aid of Smart PLS v3 Software.

To determine the relationships between employee engagement and Job satisfaction on service delivery of hotels in Oyo State.

The Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) diagram visualizes the relationships among three key constructs (Figure 1). In Employee engagement (EPE), factors measured are: Motivation (EPE1), Involvement (EPE2), Leadership styles (EPE3), Employee-employer relationship (EPE4), Working environment (EPE5), Career development (EPE6), Training and development (EPE7), Recognition and rewards (EPE8), Compensation and benefits (EPE9), Growth opportunities (EPE10). The indicators (EPE1 to EPE10) have moderate-to-strong factor loadings (ranging from 0.35 to 0.54), indicating a good contribution to explaining Employee Engagement. Employee Engagement is positively linked to Service Delivery (SVD) with a path coefficient of 0.380. This indicates that higher Employee Engagement is associated with improved Service Delivery. In Job satisfaction (JBS), factors measured include: Compensation/Pay (JBS1), Promotion (JBS2), Relationship (JBS3), Nature of work (JBS4), Recognition and appreciation (JBS5), Safety at the workplace (JBS6), Training and development (JBS7), Communication (JBS8), Job stress (JBS9), Supervisor support (JBS10), Supportive Coworkers (JBS11), Work environment (JBS12). The indicators (JBS1 to JBS12) also show moderate-to-strong factor loadings (ranging from 0.26 to 0.58), indicating reliable contributions to explaining Job Satisfaction. Job Satisfaction is positively linked to both SVD with a path coefficient of 0.234, meaning higher Job Satisfaction contributes to better Service Delivery, and EPE with a small path coefficient of 0.036, indicating a minor but positive relationship. In Service Delivery (SVD), factors measured include: Customer service standards (SVD 1), Feedback and complaints (SVD 2), Quality of product and services (SVD 3), Customer expectation (SVD 4), Customer loyalty (SVD 5), Employee turnover (SVD 6), Customer retention strategies (SVD 7), Employee rewards and recognition (SVD 8). The indicators (SVD1 to SVD8) show strong factor loadings (ranging from 0.96 to 1.52), indicating that these elements are crucial for defining Service Delivery. SVD is positioned as the dependent variable, influenced by Employee Engagement and Job Satisfaction. Therefore, EPE has a stronger direct effect on Service Delivery (SVD) (0.380) compared to Job Satisfaction (JBS) (0.234). Job Satisfaction (JBS) contributes indirectly to Service Delivery through its small positive influence on Employee Engagement (0.036). For SVD, key contributors include employee rewards and recognition, customer loyalty, and retention strategies. For JBS, important factors include recognition, supportive coworkers, and training and development. For EPE, key drivers are career development, working environment, and compensation and benefits.

Table 1 presents the measurement model results for employee engagement, job satisfaction, and service delivery.

The measurement model results for Employee Engagement (EPE), Job Satisfaction (JBS), and Service Delivery (SVD) are presented in Table 1. These constructs were assessed based on item loadings, Cronbach’s Alpha, Composite Reliability (CR), and Average Variance Extracted (AVE), which are essential for validating the internal consistency and convergent validity of the constructs. The Employee Engagement (EPE) construct consists of 10 items (EPE1 to EPE10) that assess various aspects of employee engagement. The item loadings range from 0.732 to 0.856, all exceeding the commonly recommended threshold of 0.7 for adequate item reliability. This indicates that each item contributes significantly to the measurement of the latent construct, suggesting good internal consistency and convergent validity for the EPE scale. The Cronbach’s Alpha (0.849) value is well above the acceptable threshold of 0.7, indicating high internal consistency among the items in the EPE construct. Likewise, the Composite Reliability (0.883) value is also well above the recommended threshold of 0.7, further supporting the reliability of the EPE construct. With an AVE (0.712) value greater than the threshold of 0.5, the construct demonstrates good convergent validity, implying that the items explain a substantial portion of the variance in the latent construct. Overall, the Employee Engagement construct is reliable, with strong item loadings and excellent internal consistency and convergent validity. The Job Satisfaction (JBS) construct is measured by 12 items (JBS1 to JBS12). The item loadings range from 0.721 to 0.822, with most items exceeding the recommended threshold of 0.7. This indicates that the items effectively measure the latent construct of job satisfaction. The Cronbach’s Alpha (0.879) for the JBS construct also exhibits excellent internal consistency, as it is well above the acceptable threshold of 0.7. The Composite Reliability (0.913) value further supports the reliability of the JBS scale, indicating that the items are consistently measuring the construct. The AVE (0.649) value exceeds the threshold of 0.5, demonstrating adequate convergent validity and suggesting that the items are capturing the intended dimensions of job satisfaction. The Job Satisfaction construct is highly reliable and valid, with strong item loadings and excellent internal consistency and convergent validity. The Service Delivery (SVD) construct consists of 8 items (SVD1 to SVD8), with item loadings ranging from 0.780 to 0.891. All loadings exceed the threshold of 0.7, indicating that the items are appropriate and contribute effectively to the measurement of service delivery. The Cronbach’s Alpha (0.875) for the SVD construct shows high internal consistency, as it is well above 0.7. The Composite Reliability (0.901) value is higher than the threshold of 0.7, further confirming the reliability of the construct. The AVE (0.657) AVE value exceeds the threshold of 0.5, indicating that the construct demonstrates good convergent validity. The Service Delivery construct is reliable and valid, with high internal consistency and good convergent validity. The results of the measurement model indicate that the constructs of Employee Engagement (EPE), Job Satisfaction (JBS), and Service Delivery (SVD) are all reliable and valid measures in this study. All items in each construct have acceptable loadings, demonstrating that the items adequately represent the latent variables. Additionally, all the Cronbach’s Alpha, Composite Reliability (CR), and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values confirm the internal consistency and convergent validity of each construct, making them suitable for further analysis in the structural model. Further, the Employee Engagement (EPE) demonstrates a high degree of internal consistency and convergent validity, indicating that the items effectively capture the various aspects of employee engagement in the organization. The relatively high loadings across all items suggest that the construct is robust and well-defined. While the Job Satisfaction (JBS) also shows strong internal consistency and convergent validity, with items reflecting key aspects of job satisfaction, such as compensation, promotion opportunities, and work relationships. The high reliability values suggest that this construct is well-defined and can be reliably used to assess job satisfaction in the context of this study. The Service Delivery (SVD), as expected, also shows good reliability and validity, with items that assess various aspects of service quality, customer feedback, and loyalty. The construct's ability to capture the broad scope of service delivery makes it a comprehensive measure for evaluating service outcomes. The high values for Cronbach’s Alpha and Composite Reliability (CR) indicate that the measurement model is internally consistent, while the AVE values suggest that the constructs are well-defined and represent the intended underlying dimensions. This model is therefore well-suited for subsequent structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the hypothesized relationships between employee engagement, job satisfaction, and service delivery.

Table 2 presents the discriminant validity of the variables.

Table 2 presents the results of the discriminant validity assessment for the constructs of Service Delivery (SVD), Employee Engagement (EPE), and Job Satisfaction (JBS). Discriminant validity tests the extent to which each construct is distinct and not highly correlated with other constructs in the model. This ensures that each construct measures a unique aspect of the research and is not redundant with others. In this case, discriminant validity is assessed by evaluating the correlation coefficients between the constructs. To determine good discriminant validity, the correlation values should be relatively low to moderate. Typically, a correlation value above 0.85 may suggest that the constructs are not sufficiently distinct and may indicate a lack of discriminant validity.

According to the Table, the correlation between Service Delivery (SVD) and Employee Engagement (EPE) is 0.721. This suggests a moderately strong positive relationship between these two constructs. This value is not overly high (i.e., not above 0.85), so it indicates that while SVD and EPE are related, they are not so highly correlated that they are measuring the same concept. The relationship between employee engagement and service delivery is likely meaningful but distinct. Also, the correlation between Service Delivery (SVD) and Job Satisfaction (JBS) is 0.638. This represents a moderate positive correlation between job satisfaction and service delivery. It indicates that organizations with higher levels of job satisfaction may also experience better service delivery outcomes. However, this is not a perfect correlation, suggesting that each construct still captures different aspects of the work environment and organizational performance.

The correlation between Employee Engagement (EPE) and Job Satisfaction (JBS) is 0.385. This is a relatively low correlation, indicating that while these two constructs are related, they are measuring different dimensions. Employee engagement may reflect an emotional and cognitive commitment to the organization, while job satisfaction might be more about an employee's contentment with specific aspects of their job, such as compensation or work relationships. The low to moderate correlation suggests that these two constructs are distinct, confirming that EPE and JBS do not overlap excessively in terms of their conceptualization. The results of the correlation matrix indicate that the constructs SVD, EPE, and JBS have adequate discriminant validity. Specifically, the correlation values between constructs are below 0.85, which suggests that each construct is measuring a unique aspect of organizational dynamics. The correlations between EPE and SVD (0.721) and SVD and JBS (0.638) are moderate, implying that while these constructs are related, they are not overly similar. Also, the lower correlation between EPE and JBS (0.385) further supports the idea that Employee Engagement and Job Satisfaction are distinct, capturing different facets of the employee experience. Thus, the constructs in the model can be considered sufficiently distinct, and the findings support their discriminant validity. This is a critical finding, as it indicates that the constructs are unique and that the measurements used in the model accurately reflecting different dimensions of the work environment, employee attitudes, and organizational outcomes. This is important because it provides confidence that each construct is independently contributing to the understanding of organizational behaviour and outcomes.

Table 3 presents the summary of direct hypothesis testing.

Table 3 presents the results of the structural model testing the relationships between Employee Engagement (EPE), Job Satisfaction (JBS), and Service Delivery (SVD). The path coefficients (β), standard errors, and p-values are provided for each hypothesized relationship in the model. These results help assess the strength, direction, and significance of the relationships between the constructs. The p-values indicate the statistical significance of each path, and the coefficients (β) represent the strength and direction of these relationships. In general, a p-value below 0.05 indicates that the path is statistically significant, while the path coefficient β reflects the magnitude and direction of the effect (positive or negative). A positive β suggests a positive relationship, while a negative β would suggest an inverse relationship. The path coefficient from Employee Engagement (EPE) to Service Delivery (SVD) is 0.380, which indicates a moderate positive relationship between employee engagement and service delivery. This suggests that higher employee engagement is associated with better service delivery outcomes. The p-value of less than 0.001 indicates that this relationship is highly significant, supporting the hypothesis that EPE positively influences SVD. This finding aligns with the theory that engaged employees are more likely to provide high-quality service, possibly due to their emotional commitment and motivation to contribute to the organization. The path coefficient from Job Satisfaction (JBS) to Service Delivery (SVD) is 0.234, indicating a moderate positive relationship. This means that higher job satisfaction is also linked to better service delivery outcomes, though the effect is smaller compared to the relationship between EPE and SVD. The p-value of < 0.05 confirms that this relationship is statistically significant, supporting the hypothesis that JBS influences SVD. This finding suggests that satisfied employees are more likely to deliver better customer service, likely due to their positive attitudes and contentment with their work environment. The path coefficient from Job Satisfaction (JBS) to Employee Engagement (EPE) is 0.036, indicating a very small positive relationship between these two constructs. Despite the small magnitude of the coefficient, the p-value of < 0.05 suggests that this relationship is statistically significant, supporting the hypothesis that JBS has a small but positive effect on EPE. This suggests that employees who are satisfied with their job may also feel more engaged with their work, although the strength of this relationship is weaker compared to the others in the model. Therefore, the results in Table 3 offer important insights into the relationships between Employee Engagement (EPE), Job Satisfaction (JBS), and Service Delivery (SVD). All three hypothesized relationships were supported, but the strength of the relationships varied across the paths. The implication is that Employee Engagement should be a priority for organizations seeking to improve Service Delivery. Strategies that enhance engagement, such as recognition, career development opportunities, and fostering a positive work environment, may lead to better customer service and organizational performance. Job Satisfaction also plays a role in improving Service Delivery, though the effect is weaker than engagement. Organizations should focus on ensuring that employees are satisfied with critical aspects of their job, such as compensation, work-life balance, and organizational culture, to indirectly enhance service quality. While Job Satisfaction has a small positive effect on Employee Engagement, organizations should consider other factors that more directly influence engagement. These might include leadership styles, opportunities for skill development, and work autonomy.

Table 4 presents the predictive relevance of the model.

SSO: Sum of Squares of Observed values

Q²: Predictive Relevance

This study used the blindfolding procedure to test the predictive relevance of the model. Predictive relevance (Q²) is used to assess the parameter estimates, and how values are built around the model including, explanations of the quality of the model. The rule of thumb for determining the predictive relevance of the endogenous variables is that the structural models with Q² greater than zero are considered to have predictive relevance. As it applied to this study, the results were retrieved from the blindfolding output of PLS through the variable score out of which cross-validated redundancy was extracted as shown in Table 4. The Q² value for SVD is 0.626, meaning the model explains approximately 62.6% of the variance in this construct, indicating moderate predictive relevance. Thus, the results for SVD indicate that the model demonstrates adequate predictive relevance for explaining variation in Service Delivery. It is an indication that the relationships between the constructs in the model are predictive of the outcomes related to service delivery.

Concerning the association between employee engagement and service delivery of hotel industry in Oyo State, the study found a highly significant relationship. This result is in line with the findings of who reported that employee engagement had a significant influence on individual performance. The result of the study also agrees with the findings of who found that employee engagement had a significant effect on service quality. Also, the outcome of the study conforms to the findings of who reported that employee engagement had a significant relationship on organizational productivity within the hospitality sector. Regarding the connection between job satisfaction and service delivery of hotel industry in Oyo State, the study establishes a significant relationship. This result is in line with the findings of who reported that satisfied employees have high or improved morale which can bring about amazing improvement in quality-of-service delivery and hence productivity. The result of their study shows a significant relationship. Furthermore, relating the relationship between job satisfaction and employee engagement of hotel industry in Oyo State, the study found a significant relationship. This result is in line with the findings of who shows a significant relationship between job satisfaction, job performance and employee engagement.

One of the conclusions that could be drawn from this study is that there is a positive and significant relationship between employee engagement and service delivery of hotel industry in Oyo State. The managerial implication of this is that hotel managers and policymakers in Oyo State, highlighting the need to invest in employee engagement initiatives to enhance service delivery and competitiveness in the industry. This underscores the critical role that engaged employees play in enhancing customer satisfaction and overall service performance. Consequently, hotel management should prioritize strategies that foster employee engagement to sustain and improve service excellence, thereby strengthening their competitive advantage in the hospitality sector. In addition, the study also concludes that there is a positive and significant relationship between job satisfaction and service delivery of hotel industry in Oyo State. The managerial implication of this is creating a work environment that promotes employee satisfaction as a key driver of improved service delivery of hotel industry in Oyo State. Finally, it is concluded from the study that there is a positive and significant relationship between job satisfaction and employee engagement of hotel industry in Oyo State. This finding highlights the critical role job satisfaction plays in fostering higher levels of employee engagement. To achieve optimal performance and service delivery, hotel management should prioritize initiatives that enhance job satisfaction, as engaged employees are more likely to contribute to the organization’s success and customer satisfaction.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.