Content uploaded by Ana Čuić Tanković
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ana Čuić Tanković on Dec 06, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Ana Čuić Tanković
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ana Čuić Tanković on Jun 01, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rero20
Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rero20
Measuring the importance of communication skills
in tourism
Ana Cuic Tankovic, Jelena Kapeš & Dragan Benazić
To cite this article: Ana Cuic Tankovic, Jelena Kapeš & Dragan Benazić (2023) Measuring the
importance of communication skills in tourism, Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 36:1,
460-479, DOI: 10.1080/1331677X.2022.2077790
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2022.2077790
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa
UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.
Published online: 27 May 2022.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 4001
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Measuring the importance of communication skills
in tourism
Ana Cuic Tankovic
a
, Jelena Kape
s
a
and Dragan Benazi
c
b
a
Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management, University of Rijeka, Opatija, Croatia;
b
Faculty of
Economics and Tourism “Dr Mijo Mirkovic”, Juraj Dobrila University of Pula, Pula, Croatia
ABSTRACT
Tourism service providers need to have expressive communication
skills to be able to offer a better tourism product and create a
pleasant tourist experience. To better understand, conceptualize,
and achieve the multidimensional concept of communication
skills, this paper aims to investigate the literature and propose a
measurement scale adapted to the modern tourism workplace.
Results, based on a literature review and questionnaire survey,
show that five communication skill dimensions emerge: written,
oral, listening, digital, and non-verbal communication skills. The
paper’s theoretical contribution is the systematization of the lit-
erature and the conceptualization of communication skills up to
date, while its empirical contribution is based on the examination
of collected data related to the validated scale measurement. The
scale presented in this paper will assist future empirical research
on communication skills required in the field of tourism. The
paper will help generate novel research questions for identifying
and analyzing acquired communication skills.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 24 May 2021
Accepted 4 May 2022
KEYWORDS
communication skills;
tourism employees;
tourism workplace
JEL CODES
M31; J24; Z33
1. Introduction
Communication skills have been identified as one of the crucial factors of modern
businesses, and this has been confirmed by numerous studies conducted so far
(Goby, 2007; Halfhill & Nielsen, 2007; Lim et al., 2016; Plant & Slippers, 2015;
Robles, 2012; Shuayto, 2013; Wang et al., 2009; Zehrer & M€
ossenlechner, 2009).
Although professional knowledge is essential for work efficiency, research shows that
possessing only technical skills has become insufficient to meet the challenges of
today’s business environment (Robles, 2012). Namely, employers are no longer inter-
ested in individuals who possess only specific skills but lack other significant skills,
particularly soft skills (Binsaeed et al., 2016). According to Andrews and Higson
(2008), soft skills refer to interpersonal skills, dealing with people and attitudes, which
enhance business efficiency and interpersonal relations. While investigating the
CONTACT Ana Cuic Tankovic anact@fthm.hr
ß2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.
ECONOMIC RESEARCH-EKONOMSKA ISTRAŽIVANJA
2023, VOL. 36, NO. 1, 460–479
https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2022.2077790
managers’perspective, Robles (2012) distinguished the top ten soft skills necessary in
business, with communication skills ranked in second place, right after integrity.
Effective business communication is a prerequisite for the successful performance
of any company; however, its importance is particularly evident in the service indus-
try, where it is the essence of the service business. When it comes to tourism and
hospitality, the significance of communication is even greater because communication
in tourism goes far beyond conveying information and it has a much deeper mean-
ing, especially in the interaction between tourists and employees (Jameson, 2007;
Lolli, 2013a; Nikolich & Sparks, 1995). Moreover, according to Wesley et al. (2017),
the most important soft skill in tourism is communication. Research shows that hos-
pitality managers spend as much as 80% of their day interpersonally communicating
with others (Woods & King, 2010, as cited in Lolli, 2013b), and their communication
greatly affects employee job satisfaction (Paksoy et al., 2017). On the other hand, Go
et al. (1996) highlighted the employees in direct contact with guests as being the
most important ones, and proposed a new organizational structure model in the
shape of a reversed pyramid. Accordingly, all tourism employees have to be able to
maintain efficient communication with guests, colleagues and all other stakeholders at
all levels to maintain a positive business environment (Lolli, 2013a).
Numerous studies have discussed the importance of business communication;
however, previous research has mostly focused on the general aspects of interpersonal
communication rather than on specific types of communication skills. Hence, existing
studies mostly observe communication skills as a part of the soft skills set, measuring
them with a single item (Baird & Parayitam, 2019; Robles, 2012; Wesley et al., 2017),
while the ones examining specific communication skills are present in the consider-
ably smaller scope, particularly those concerning the tourism workplace. Furthermore,
it would appear that the literature that deals with communication skills has investi-
gated them based on their outcomes or business activities, neglecting the way the
message is conveyed. For instance, Conrad and Newberry (2012) investigated the
most important communication skills in business, based on desired communication
outcomes, by categorizing them into three main groups: (1) organizational, (2) leader-
ship and (3) interpersonal communication skills. Using a similar approach, Waldeck
et al. (2012) categorised communication skills into six main groups: (1) relationship
and interpersonal communication, (2) mediated communication, (3) intergroup com-
munication, (4) communication of enthusiasm, creativity, and entrepreneurial spirit,
(5) non-verbal communication, and (6) speaking and listening. However, thus far no
consensus has been reached in the literature concerning the operationalization of this
construct. Hence, further research with an emphasis on different forms of verbal and
non-verbal communication skills is needed (Chairat, 2016). However, these skills go
far beyond typically researched oral and written communication and should be
adapted to the needs of a modern workplace. Communication implies both what is
said and how it is said (Schroth, 2019), indicating, therefore, the need for including
non-verbal communication skills, which have often been overlooked by researchers.
Since tourism is a people-based industry, listening has been commonly emphasized as
a crucial skill needed in the tourism workplace (Lolli, 2013a; Zehrer &
M€
ossenlechner, 2009), although less often included in communication scales.
ECONOMIC RESEARCH-EKONOMSKA ISTRAŽIVANJA 461
Furthermore, it should be noted that required skills in tourism change over time
(Raybould & Wilkins, 2006). Due to the significant technological advancements, tour-
ism is nowadays inseparable from technology, requiring hence some new digital skills
from tourism employees. Although digital skills in tourism have already been
researched (Carlisle et al., 2021), they are observed from a general rather than a com-
munication perspective. No research to date has incorporated these groups of com-
munication skills based on the manner of message transmission, nor research them
in the tourism context. Hence, due to the limited coverage of skills, lack of tourism
focus, and constant changes in skills’requirements, the previously proposed scales
cannot fully represent the skills required in the modern tourism workplace. To fill
this gap, this research intends to determine the extensive set of communication skills
required for today’s work in tourism, based on the manner of message transmission.
The paper aims at identifying, testing, and incorporating into scale five aforemen-
tioned groups of communication skills derived from the literature. By integrating lis-
tening skills (Brownell, 2009; Lamb-White, 2008; Lolli, 2013a), non-verbal
communication skills (Knapp et al., 2014; Sundaram & Webster, 2000; Uzun, 2017),
and digital skills (Guffey & Loewy, 2016; Eshet-Alkalai, 2004; Van Laar et al., 2017)
to extensively used oral communication skills (Gray & Murray, 2011; Jackson, 2014;
MacDermott & Ortiz, 2017) and written communication skills (Jones, 2011; Kleckner
& Marshall, 2014; Morgan, 1997), this research will present an extended and compre-
hensive communication scale measuring the importance of communication skills for
future tourism employees. Since these skills will be even more important in the future
(Hsu, 2018), a comprehensive scale is needed to help future researchers, tourism
practitioners, and tourism educators to better understand, assess and develop specific
communication skills.
2. Theoretical background
2.1. Communication skills in tourism
Employees in tourism and hospitality should be carefully recruited and need to
receive continuous training, because their communication skills are an important
indicator in generating positive interaction with customers (Cuic Tankovic, 2020).
For tourism employees the ability to communicate properly is one of their most
important skills because it has become a vital part of the everyday operations of the
tourism business (Brownell, 2016; Lolli, 2013a).
While communication in tourism can be considered as being mostly external,
internal communication helps to reinforce employee satisfaction, which impacts guest
satisfaction (Ryan et al., 1996), by encompassing the exchange of ideas, thoughts, and
messages in order to issue information and instructions, persuade employees, coord-
inate activities, develop products and services, and evaluate and reward employees
(Guffey & Loewy, 2010). Combined with external and internal communication, inter-
personal communication in tourism is characterized by a high level of personal con-
nectivity (Zhu et al., 2006), where participants are linked individually and create
messages, taking into account the specific psychological characteristics of another per-
son (Burleson, 2010) and often including the feelings of individuals (Zhu et al., 2006).
462 A. CUIC TANKOVIC ET AL.
In this way, interpersonal communication occurring in the tourism process
engages the persons involved through voluntary and interdependent interactions of
meaningful verbal or nonverbal messages. This kind of communication is realized
through two-way communication channels and often through direct personal contact
and is considered significant by all parties.
The relevance of communication skills has been discussed in several tourism-
related studies, which highlight them as one of the most important skills for future
tourism employees (Wang et al., 2009; Zehrer & M€
ossenlechner, 2009). Conversely,
some other studies have shown that new tourism employees do not possess commu-
nication skills to a sufficient extent (Lolli, 2013b; Stevens, 2005; Paranto & Kelkar,
2000), indicating, therefore, the need for further research on this subject to enhance
its understanding. Notwithstanding the importance of communication skills for future
of encounters in tourism, some authors have documented considerable flaws in the
communication skills of tourism employees (Peterson, 1997; Bednar & Olney, 1987).
2.2. Written and oral communication skills
While there is a growing research on importance of communication skills from vari-
ous perspectives, the number of studies that examine communication skills with
regard to the way messages are conveyed is considerably smaller. Existing studies
mostly have focused on written communication skills (Jones, 2011; Kleckner &
Marshall, 2014; MacDermott & Ortiz, 2017; Morgan, 1997; Swenson, 1980; Waner,
1995) and oral communication skills (Dunbar et al., 2006; Gray & Murray, 2011;
Jackson, 2014; Kleckner & Marshall, 2014; Lolli, 2013a; MacDermott & Ortiz, 2017;
Morgan, 1997; Swenson, 1980; Ulinski & O’callaghan, 2002; Waner, 1995). These
skills undoubtedly are the foundation of literacy and a prerequisite of any business
communication, although Stevens (2005) stresses that oral communication skills are
lacking in young employees. Multiple scales for written and oral communication skills
were developed from the perspective of various professions and stakeholders. It
appears, however, that these skills are not sufficient to satisfy modern business needs,
thus requiring an expansion of the previously used communication skills set.
2.3. Listening communication skills
Besides writing and speaking, listening skills are considered as one of the most
important components of interpersonal communication (Bambacas & Patrickson,
2008; Brownell, 2009; Clokie & Fourie, 2016; Lamb-White, 2008; Lolli, 2013a; Maes
et al., 1997; Morgan, 1997; Ulinski & O’callaghan, 2002; Waner, 1995; Zehrer &
M€
ossenlechner, 2009). It is considered that a higher hierarchical level increases listen-
ing responsibility (Bisen & Priya, 2009). Namely, research shows that managers spend
more than 80% of their workday listening (Lamb-White, 2008, as cited in Lolli,
2013a). Listening communication skills imply the process of receiving, interpreting
and responding to the message received by the sender (Bisen & Priya, 2009) and is
considered the most important and most frequent communication activity in business
communication (Keyton et al., 2013). Listening skills remain neglected because the
ECONOMIC RESEARCH-EKONOMSKA ISTRAŽIVANJA 463
process of listening is a natural one: while hearing is a purely physical process, listen-
ing is a mental process that involves interpreting and understanding a message
(Krizan et al., 2008). It is considered that listening efficiency is between 25% and
50%, which means that 50% to 75% of the spoken information is ignored, forgotten
or misunderstood (Guffey & Loewy, 2016). A framework for listening skills was
developed by Brownell (1996), including six major components of the listening pro-
cess, which can be used as a suitable measurement tool for listening assessment.
2.4. Non-verbal communication skills
Communication styles and skills are composed of a variety of dimensions and attrib-
utes (Kang & Hyun, 2012; Norton, 1978) and include a multitude of nonverbal ele-
ments that complement or change the meaning of a verbal message. Although verbal
communication skills are the most common among researchers, Drucker (1989, as
cited in Ratcliffe, 2016) claims that the most important thing in communication is to
hear what is not being told, in other words, to observe one’s non-verbal communica-
tion. Namely, this form of communication is considered to account for almost 70%
of total communication (Barnum & Wolniansky, 1989, as cited in Sundaram &
Webster, 2000) and it is reflected through communication environment, physical
characteristics of communicator and body movements (Knapp et al., 2014). It is espe-
cially important in the service industry since the physical appearance of personnel
affects the perception of their courtesy and credibility (Sundaram & Webster, 2000).
Due to its complexity, the measurement of non-verbal communication represents a
challenge for researchers. Uzun (2017) has developed an extensive non-verbal com-
munication scale while Leigh and Summers (2002) and Limbu et al. (2016) have
focused on non-verbal cues of the salesperson. On the other hand, Lolli (2013a) has
narrowed the non-verbal skills to those important in the hospitality industry.
However, despite their indisputable importance, these skills remain understudied, and
no consensus regarding their operationalization has been reached.
2.5. Digital skills
The modern business environment, digitalization, and social media growth point to
the need for developing new communication skills that follow the technological
changes of contemporary business but go beyond technical and computer skills (Van
Laar et al., 2017). In this digital world, writing is more important than ever because
digital media require more written communication and employees’skills are always
exposed to the public due to the influence of the Internet (Guffey & Loewy, 2016).
Moore and Morton (2017) stressed the inability to adapt the message to a particular
situational context, where new employees lack adequate communication skills.
Digital literacy is necessary and means more than the ability to use software or
digital devices. It includes a range of complex cognitive, motor, social and emotional
skills that users need to function efficiently in a digital environment (Eshet-Alkalai,
2004). Due to the transparency that the Internet entails, the communication skills of
employees, are always exposed to the public, thus increasing their importance (Guffey
464 A. CUIC TANKOVIC ET AL.
& Loewy, 2016). Involving a range of complex cognitive, motor, social and emotional
skills that users need to function effectively in a digital environment (Eshet-Alkalai,
2004), digital communication skills also have to be applied in classical communication
tools, which are becoming interactive due to the transformation in adapting to con-
temporary media. Modern communication media allow two-way communication at
three levels: one to one, one to many, and many to many (Jenkins, 2010). The signifi-
cance of this area is deemed to grow considerably in the future, meaning that a
higher level of competency will be needed in this field and that the necessary skills
will also need to be precisely defined (Johanson et al., 2011; Carlisle et al., 2021;
Coffelt et al., 2019).
The scientific literature indicates that possessing all the above-mentioned commu-
nication skills is highly important for success in today’s workplace; however, their
measurement represents a significant challenge for researchers and business professio-
nals alike. According to Spitzberg (2015), most of the debate regarding the criteria of
interpersonal communication skills focuses on a relatively small number of evaluative
dimensions, leaving the measurement of communication skills undefined. While mul-
tiple scales for the assessment of written and oral communication skills have been
developed, there is still insufficient understanding of the measurement of other com-
munication skills, which have also proved to be highly significant. A new comprehen-
sive measurement scale will help the understanding of the importance of
communication skills and their evaluation.
Although Forsyth et al. (1999) developed a model for assessing general communi-
cation and interaction skills (ACIS), the assessment of business communication, espe-
cially in tourism, requires a more specific approach. Some other researchers have
measured communication skills related to business performance (Clokie & Fourie,
2016; Coffelt et al., 2019; Schartel Dunn & Lane, 2019; Stevens, 2005; Ulinski &
O’callaghan, 2002) or specific areas of tourism and hospitality (Lolli, 2013b; Zehrer &
M€
ossenlechner, 2009) but since they mostly include only a few types of communica-
tion skills, there is still insufficient understanding of communication skills measure-
ment (Zerfass et al., 2017). Therefore, to fill this gap, this research brings together all
the most important categories of communication skills according to the review of sci-
entific literature, and seeks to integrate them into a unique measuring instrument.
3. Methodology
3.1. Scale development
To fully understand the communication skills needed for tourism employees, the
communication skills sets used previously need to be expanded by observing them
more broadly than focusing solely on the conventional written and oral communica-
tion skills. According to the literature review, five dimensions, comprising a total of
46 items, were identified. The five dimensions represent five core types of communi-
cation skills, while the items were generated to represent specific communication
skills sets required in the tourism workplace.
A questionnaire was designed based on an extensive review of the literature deal-
ing with the communication skills needed in today’s workplace. The first dimension
ECONOMIC RESEARCH-EKONOMSKA ISTRAŽIVANJA 465
refers to written communication skills and consists of nine items adapted from Jones
(2011) and Morgan (1997). The second dimension examines oral communication
skills, and includes 11 items compiled from several relevant studies (Jackson, 2014;
Morgan, 1997; Lolli, 2013a; Gray & Murray, 2011; Ulinski & O’callaghan, 2002). The
third dimension is based on Brownells HURIER model and explores listening skills
through six items. The fourth dimension refers to digital communication skills and
includes nine items adopted from Siddiq et al. (2016), Jones (2011), and Ferrari
Ferrari, Ferrari, (2014). The last, fifth dimension represents non-verbal communica-
tion skills and the eleven items used were adopted from several related studies
(Limbu et al., 2016; Leigh & Summers, 2002; Lolli, 2013a; Bambacas & Patrickson,
2008; Zehrer & M€
ossenlechner, 2009).
For all items, participants’opinions were rated using a 5-point Likert scale, indicating
their perceived importance of specific skills for working in tourism (1 –extremely unim-
portant, 5 –extremely important).
Since the paper aims to present a scale to measure the importance of communication
skills for future tourism employees, purposive sampling was chosen. Namely, the target
population of the study were tourism and hospitality students as future tourism employees.
The questionnaire was administered to all full-time students at the Faculty of
Tourism during their class periods. The research was conducted between the January
2019 and 2020, and both undergraduate and graduate students participated in the
survey. The chosen sample is considered adequate because students represent the
future employees in tourism and they are aware of the theoretical knowledge about
the importance of communication nowadays in tourism, acquired during the
Communication courses. Finally, a total of 468 valid questionnaires were obtained
and included in further analysis. The structure of respondents shows that 77% were
female and 23% male. The majority, 56% of respondents were 19 to 21 years old, fol-
lowed by those aged 22-25 (41%). Just 2% were aged 26–30 and 1% were 17 to
18 years old. Moreover, 81,42% of the respondents have working experience in the
tourism sector, for an average of 25,6 months in this field.
4. Data analysis
To test the communication skills scale, the collected data were analysed in three steps.
In the first step, univariate and multivariate outliers were evaluated, manifest varia-
bles were tested for univariate and multivariate normality of distribution, and the
presence of common method variance was assessed. Exploratory factor analysis was
performed in the second step to identify the initial dimensions of communication
skills. Lastly, confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to test the internal consist-
ency reliability, the convergent validity and the discriminant validity of the measure-
ment scales, and the final communication skills scale was designed.
4.1. Characteristics of collected data
All indicator variables were evaluated for univariate and multivariate outliers. The
conducted analysis of standardised values of the individual manifest variables showed
466 A. CUIC TANKOVIC ET AL.
there were no values significantly more than ±3 standard deviations away from the
mean. Furthermore, as no significant multivariate outliers were detected using the
Mahalanobis distance, the data for all 468 respondents were retained. Kurtosis and
Skewness values were calculated to assess the univariate normality of distribution of
indicator variables. Kurtosis values for most of the variables were greater than 3,
while Skewness values for all variables were negative, indicating that the data did not
have a univariate normal distribution. The Mardia-based Kappa, used to assess the
multivariate normal distribution of indicator variables, was 842.09 and statistically
significant (C.r. ¼169.55; p<0.05), meaning that the data did not have a multivariate
normal distribution. For these reasons, the Satorra and Bentler (1994) parameter cor-
rection was used in conducting confirmatory factor analysis.
4.2. Common method bias
The presence of common method variance, the systematic variance shared among the
analysed variables, was assessed, considering that the data for all variables were col-
lected from the same sources through a self-reported questionnaire (Jakobsen &
Jensen, 2015). Common method bias can distort the validity of research results with
regard to the relationship between latent variables, thus creating a systematic bias by
inflating or deflating correlations (Reio, 2010). Hence, to ensure valid research results,
it is recommended to test for common method bias using a variety of methods
(Podsakoff et al., 2003). In this study, procedural and statistical methods were applied
to reduce common method bias and its effect on the results of research. As the meas-
urement scale test sought to obtain judgements on communication competencies,
there was a possibility that some of the participants could try to provide socially
acceptable responses. Hence, during the survey, respondents were guaranteed full
anonymity and were told there are no right or wrong answers. Moreover, certain
dimensions of the communication skills scale were visually separated. The statistical
methods used to identify and control for common method bias were Harman’s
Single-Factor Test and the unmeasured latent factor. In Harman’s Single-Factor Test
all variables of the individual dimensions were included in factor analysis, and 6 fac-
tors were extracted using principal component analysis. The first factor explained
43.50% of variance of all variables. In other words, the conducted test indicated that
there was no single factor emerging from the study and that common method bias
was not a particularly serious issue in the proposed study. As Harman’s Single-Factor
test is considered an insensitive test (Podsakoff et al., 2003), the unmeasured latent
factor method was applied. This method allows all indicator variables to load on
related dimensions and on the latent unmeasured factor. The advantage of this
method is that the researcher does not need to include additional variables to the
study to measure common method bias. The method also models the effect of the
method factor on the measurement levels rather than on the latent construct they
represent (Podsakoff et al., 2003). To facilitate the identification of the final model,
all parameters of the unmeasured latent factor were constrained to be equal. The
results show the unmeasured latent factor parameter was 0.38 and common variance
among variables was 14.43. Based on these results it was concluded that common
ECONOMIC RESEARCH-EKONOMSKA ISTRAŽIVANJA 467
method bias did not have a significant effect on research results and was not an issue
in this study.
4.3. Exploratory factor analysis
Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to better define the dimensions of the commu-
nication skills scale, that is, to purify the scale. Principal components analysis was used as
the factor extraction method, and factor rotation was carried out with the Varimax
method. Bartlett’s test of sphericity (10219.12; df ¼630, p<0.05) and the KMO measure
of sampling adequacy (KMO ¼0.96) indicated that the application of factor analysis to
the studied data set was possible and appropriate. The final factor analysis, presented in
Table 1,confirmedthepresenceoffivedimensionsofthecommunicationskillsscale.
Eliminated from the final factor analysis were variables whose factor loadings correlated
to multiple factors and variables with a very low factor loading (below 0.5).
Upon rotation, 60.69% of variance of all variables was explained, which is acceptable
given the exploratory character of the study. Based on exploratory factor analysis, 10 varia-
bles were eliminated, namely 2 variables in the dimension Written communication skills-
WCS (WCS8 and WCS9), 5 variables of Oral communication skills- OCS (OCS7, OCS8,
OCS9, OCS10 and OCS11) and 3 variables of Digital communication skills- DCS (DCS7,
DCS8, DCS9). To obtain the final model of the communication skills scale, confirmatory
factor analysis was performed after the exploratory analysis.
4.4. Confirmatory factor analysis
Confirmatory factor analysis is performed to confirm the internal consistency reliabil-
ity, the convergent validity and the discriminant validity of the measurement scale.
The initial model of confirmatory factor analysis with 36 items did not meet the con-
ditions for the convergent and discriminant validity or the internal consistency reli-
ability of the individual variables. To obtain a better fit of the model to the data,
certain variables were eliminated one by one. Upon each elimination, C.R. and AVE
values were re-estimated, together with item loadings, the discriminant validity criter-
ion and model quality indicators (CFI, TLI, RMSEA and SRMR). As stated earlier,
the Satorra and Bentler (1994) parameter correction procedure was used due to the
violation of assumptions of univariate and multivariate distribution normality.
Modification indexes were used in eliminating variables and those variables that had
a great improvement in the Chi Square indicator of model quality were removed.
Upon confirmatory analysis, an additional 16 variables were eliminated from the
final communication skills scale, namely 4 variables of the dimension "Written com-
munication skills", 3 variables of the dimension "Oral communication skills", 3 varia-
bles of the dimension "Listening communication skills" and 2 variables each from the
remaining two dimensions "Digital communication skills" and "Non-verbal communi-
cation skills". Although the final number of eliminated variables is significant, it is
acceptable given the exploratory character and features of this study. Furthermore,
subsequent content analysis established the presence of possible overlaps among items
of certain aspects of specific dimensions of communication skills. For example, in the
468 A. CUIC TANKOVIC ET AL.
Table 1. Exploratory factor analysis of communication skills scale.
Variable
XSD NVCS WCS LCS DCS OCS
Writing clearly and precisely. WCS1 4.27 0.038 0.105 0.686 0.116 0.253 0.040
Using an effective business vocabulary. WCS2 4.37 0.036 0.193 0.598 0.079 0.196 0.258
The use of correct spelling, grammar and
punctuation.
WCS3 4.53 0.035 0.222 0.644 0.063 0.148 0.237
Preparing documents that are concise,
accurate, and supportive of the
subject matter.
WCS4 4.47 0.033 0.134 0.613 0.203 0.240 0.177
Presentation of ideas and information in a
clear and logical sequence
WCS5 4.56 0.030 0.169 0.592 0.225 0.249 0.186
Ability to adjust writing styles for
different audiences.
WCS6 4.41 0.036 0.250 0.638 0.257 0.084 0.206
Ability to adjust writing styles for
different formats.
WCS7 4.41 0.034 0.247 0.668 0.261 0.116 0.177
Ability to develop information networks
both informal and formal.
OCS1 4.66 0.030 0.281 0.276 0.336 0.147 0.558
Ability to express complex ideas fluently
and coherently using
extensive vocabulary.
OCS2 4.51 0.033 0.204 0.305 0.046 0.277 0.668
Being articulate and using appropriate
tone of voice.
OCS3 4.66 0.029 0.350 0.171 0.251 0.147 0.661
Ability to produce a clear, systematically
developed presentation, on a broad
range of subjects.
OCS4 4.51 0.031 0.254 0.271 0.195 0.270 0.646
Speaking publicly and adjusting the style
according to the nature of
the audience.
OCS5 4.66 0.030 0.276 0.288 0.313 0.202 0.604
Holding audience’s attention/interest. OCS6 4.53 0.027 0.212 0.183 0.299 0.118 0.646
Hearing messages and concentrating on
the speaker.
LCS1 4.63 0.028 0.261 0.196 0.686 0.189 0.297
Understanding messages and
distinguishing main ideas.
LCS2 4.73 0.027 0.311 0.207 0.635 0.164 0.312
Remembering messages. LCS3 4.71 0.030 0.268 0.195 0.673 0.196 0.227
Interpreting messages accurately. LCS4 4.70 0.028 0.379 0.230 0.661 0.204 0.114
Evaluating messages and the speaker. LCS5 4.60 0.029 0.266 0.192 0.655 0.231 0.189
Responding to messages. LCS6 4.67 0.027 0.342 0.260 0.608 0.248 0.147
Displaying digital information for a given
audience and a specific purpose.
DCS1 4.53 0.029 0.239 0.172 0.228 0.669 0.114
Sharing digital information with others. DCS2 4.47 0.030 0.231 0.213 0.175 0.752 0.124
Providing digital feedback. DCS3 4.48 0.031 0.187 0.248 0.263 0.711 0.049
Using computer software to make digital
products (for presentations,
documents, pictures, and diagrams).
DCS4 4.51 0.033 0.246 0.133 0.243 0.634 0.217
Effective use of instant/text messaging. DCS6 4.44 0.035 0.161 0.204 0.105 0.606 0.216
Maintaining a professional presence on
social networks.
DCS7 4.52 0.033 0.217 0.210 0.039 0.616 0.206
Smiling while talking. NVCS1 4.73 0.026 0.652 0.198 0.174 0.128 0.067
Maintaining eye contact with
interlocutors.
NVCS2 4.77 0.023 0.717 0.125 0.278 0.218 0.059
Using appropriate gestures while talking. NVCS3 4.63 0.029 0.601 0.202 0.091 0.327 0.262
Using ppropriate formal posture. NVCS4 4.78 0.024 0.656 0.167 0.164 0.241 0.225
Using appropriate professional attire. NVCS5 4.71 0.026 0.595 0.137 0.186 0.240 0.296
Trust building and honesty. NVCS6 4.66 0.029 0.706 0.204 0.193 0.192 0.196
Being truthful and credible. NVCS7 4.72 0.027 0.665 0.142 0.259 0.165 0.207
Displaying self-confidence in
communication.
NVCS8 4.72 0.026 0.703 0.124 0.254 0.174 0.238
Showing an honest understanding for
other people.
NVCS9 4.68 0.029 0.709 0.290 0.195 0.145 0.044
Showing empathy in communication. NVCS10 4.65 0.030 0.690 0.112 0.134 0.090 0.231
Demonstrating appropriate cultural
communication skills.
NVCS11 4.76 0.023 0.617 0.176 0.213 0.163 0.225
% explained variance after rotation 17.84 11.32 10.79 10.76 9.98
Factor extraction method: Principal components analysis, Varimax rotation, n ¼468.
Source: The authors.
ECONOMIC RESEARCH-EKONOMSKA ISTRAŽIVANJA 469
dimension "Written communication skills", overlapping is likely between WCS1 –
"Writing clearly and precisely" and WCS5 - "Providing information and ideas in a
clear, ordered and effective pattern". Similar overlapping can also be found in the
other dimensions but are not mentioned here due to limited space. Table 2 presents
the final results of confirmatory factor analysis.
The Goodness of Fit indexes of the final model, taking into account the Satorra
and Bentler (1994) correction, indicate a satisfactory fit to empirical data, consist-
ent with the recommendations of Hu and Bentler (1999). The Chi Square/df indi-
cator is 1.12, that is, below 3.5. The values of CFI and TLI are both 0.99, higher
than the cut-off value of 0.95. The values of RMSEA and SRMR are 0.016 and
0.03, respectively, and are below the critical values of 0.06 for RMSEA and 0.08
for SRMR.
Most of the item standardized loadings were either higher than or very close to
the recommended value of 0.7 and their elimination would not have made any sig-
nificant contribution to improving convergent validity. The size of the established
item loadings suggests that the remaining items of the communication skills scale
show a satisfactory level of internal consistency reliability. The CR values of the ana-
lysed measurement scale ranged from 0.78 to 0.89, and the AVE values of all scale
dimensions were above 0.5, and ranged from 0.55 to 0.68. Hence, it can be concluded
that the measurement scale shows a satisfactory level of convergent validity. Upon
testing for convergent validity, the measurement scale was tested for discriminant
Table 2. Confirmatory factor analysis.
Dimension/item Standardized loadingsZ-value CR AVE
Written communication skills 0.78 0.55
WCS5 0.683 15.07
WCS6 0.760 18.40
WCS7 0.775 28.83
Oral communication skills 0.82 0.60
OCS2 0.717 18.18
OCS4 0.809 28.26
OCS5 0.795 22.42
Listening communicaiton skills 0.86 0.68
LCS1 0.832 26.42
LCS2 0.829 28.07
LCS3 0.804 25.00
Digital communication skills 0.85 0.58
DCS1 0.759 21.57
DCS2 0.821 34.58
DCS3 0.769 22.67
DCS4 0.701 18.11
Non-verbal communication skills 0.89 0.55
NVCS2 0.768 17.65
NVCS3 0.720 19.40
NVCS5 0.698 12.60
NVCS6 0.785 27.94
NVCS7 0.752 18.21
NVCS9 0.750 19.28
NVCS11 0.698 12.38
Satorra-Bentler Correction.
p<0.05.
CR ¼composite reliability; Ave ¼Average variance extracted.
Source: The authors.
470 A. CUIC TANKOVIC ET AL.
validity using the Fornell-Larcker criterion (1981) and the Heterotrait-monotrait
(HTMT) ratio of the correlation (Henseler et al., 2015). Table 3 presents the results
of discriminant validity analysis of the communication skills scale.
The square roots of AVE of the dimensions of the communication skills scale are
larger than the correlation coefficients of each individual dimension with all other
dimensions of the communication skills scale, with the exception of the dimensions
"Written communication skills" and "Oral communication skills"; thus, the Fornell-
Larcker criterion can be considered only partially fulfilled. Because the criterion gives
weaker results in detecting discriminant validity when item loadings range from 0.6
to 0.8 (Voorhees et al., 2016) as is the case in this study, the HTMT ratio was calcu-
lated. This indicator represents the average of the heterotrait-heteromethod correla-
tions (the correlations of indicators across constructs measuring different
phenomena) relative to the average of the monotrait-heteromethod correlations (cor-
relations of indicators within the same constructs) (Henseler et al., 2015). All HTMT
indicators are below 0.9, indicating that the analysed communication skills scale has a
satisfactory level of discriminant validity.
5. Conclusion and discussion
This research was conducted in response to recent calls for more research regarding a
comprehensive scale of communication skills to facilitate future tourism employees’
entering the workplace. Up to date, studies have focused on the communication skills
set, emphasizing the importance of communication as a part of soft skills (Wesley
et al., 2017; MacDermott & Ortiz, 2017). Unlike previous research, which focuses on
the desired outcome or business activities resulting from communication skills
(Conrad & Newberry, 2012; Waldeck et al., 2012), this study highlights the import-
ance of how the message is conveyed in the modern workplace and divides commu-
nications into five types of proficiency.
The evidence from this paper suggests that communication skills are multidimen-
sional, with the proposed scale for communication skills proving the existence of five
dimensions, namely Written communication skills (factor 1), Oral communication
skills (factor 2), Listening communication skills (factor 3), Digital communication
skills (factor 4), and Non-verbal communication skills (factor 5).
Table 3. Discriminant validity.
Written
communication
skills
Oral
communication
skills
Listening
communication
skills
Digital
communication
skills
Non-verbal
communication
skills
Written
communication skills
0.741
Oral communication skills 0.757 (0.766) 0.775
Listening
communication skills
0.687 (0.693) 0.732 (0.726) 0.824
Digital
communication skills
0.645 (0.665) 0.683 (0.695) 0.628 (0.640) 0.762
Non-verbal
communication skills
0.684 (0.691) 0.732 (0.737) 0.739 (0.742) 0.683 (0.694) 0.741
(HTMT ratio).
Source: The authors.
ECONOMIC RESEARCH-EKONOMSKA ISTRAŽIVANJA 471
Regarding Written communication skills (factor 1) and Oral communication skills
(factor 2), this study confirms that these skills are the prerequisite of business communi-
cation, a finding consistent with previous studies (MacDermott & Ortiz, 2017;Kleckner
& Marshall, 2014;Jackson,2014). As expected, Listening communication skills (factor 3)
have emerged as an essential component of interpersonal communication, linked to the
most common activity in business communication (Keyton et al., 2013), and increased
hierarchical responsibilities (Bisen & Priya, 2009) connected to absorbing information
through listening. The fourth factor, i.e., Digital communication skills, refers to contem-
porary challenges beyond technical and computer skills, involving processed digital infor-
mation used and shared with others, as previously proven by Moore and Morton (2017).
Non-verbal communication skills (factor 5) have the highest composite reliability, and
just one eliminated variable. This framework has included items referring to the comple-
ment of a verbal message, like Smiling while talking, Using appropriate gestures while
talking, Using appropriate formal posture, Using appropriate professional attire, and
Maintaining eye contact with interlocutors. Besides these supportive elements, this
dimension involves other critical elements of the perception of communication, such as
Displaying self-confidence in communication, Showing an honest understanding for
other people, Showing empathy in communication, and Demonstrating appropriate cul-
tural communication skills, which strongly contribute to the overall importance of com-
munication skills.
To summarise, this study empirically investigates the importance of communica-
tion skills for future tourism employees, proposing an integrated scale consisting of
five dimensions. This research responds to the nowadays need of the market because
up-to-date communication skills have yet to be clearly defined. Therefore, this
research aims to analyze specific factors about existing skills, not yet thoroughly
researched and implemented in a comprehensive scale. This research gathers new
information and provides a better understanding of the communication skills scale,
according to the five constructs proposed. In that way, this study will help provide a
foundation for future research on communication by identifying new factors of the
communication skills set and updating previous theories.
The strength of this work lies in the vast multidimensional scale, which expands
the previous measurements with variables of listening skills, non-verbal communica-
tion skills, and digital skills. This study investigates communication skills using a
broad range of attributes instead of measuring them with a limited set or specific set
of items, as is the case in other similar studies. This finding adds to a growing body
of literature on communication skills, integrated in the soft skills required for future
tourism professionals to enter the world of work. Hence, this paper’s conclusions and
proposals are of great relevance for tourism managers, helping them get a more com-
plete picture of candidates. Universities can significantly benefit from this study and
adapt the proposed curricula to better prepare students for the work market.
Despite attempts to impartially analyze the selected literature on communication
skills and apply the selected methodology, this study has some limitations, which sug-
gest directions for future research. First, the sample used in the study included only
students of Faculties of Economics and Tourism. To be able to generalise results and
to re-test the full scale with its original 46 items and the expanded scale resulting
472 A. CUIC TANKOVIC ET AL.
from exploratory factor analysis, future studies could include other potential respond-
ents such as secondary school students and tourism workers. Also, measuring the
importance of communication skills of a tourism worker from the tourists point of
view would benefit the analysis of the influence of communication skills on the per-
ceived service. Further research should be conducted with tourism employers, but
also with tourists, to understand how important these dimensions of communication
are. Since this study was conducted on a sample of university students, the results of
future studies should be compared with other audiences for whom communication
skills are critical to employment and career development. Furthermore, research could
be extended to cover other cultural settings to see whether differences exist in the
perception of competencies. On the other side, the present study did not consider the
aspect of management that also has a role in the communication skills assessment of
employees. The ability of respondents to answer independently depending on their
understanding of the meaning of all the proposed items also needs further investiga-
tion. Therefore, researchers should adopt a mixed methods approach where respond-
ents should demonstrate and express their actual communication skills. Such
qualitative data can be analysed by a communication expert. Also, the predictive abil-
ity of the scale was not tested relative to certain important dependent variables.
Namely, communication skills should have an impact on improving personal and
business relationships, motivating employees, building one’s own image and the
image of the service organization, enhancing job satisfaction, enhancing the satisfac-
tion of service users, etc. Hence, it would be interesting to test the scale in different
situations and settings to examine, for example, whether different degrees of commu-
nications skills can affect loyalty or help to win back unsatisfied service users, or how
communication skills could enhance the functional and emotional components of ser-
vice value, thus helping to maintain relationships with users. In addition, future
research could focus on examining the effect of perceived communication skills on
employability, entrepreneurial intention, or career development.
Funding
This paper was funded under the project line ZIP UNIRI of the University of Rijeka, for the
project ZIP-UNIRI-116-4-19.
ORCID
Ana Cuic Tankovic http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4383-684X
Jelena Kape
shttp://orcid.org/0000-0003-0563-219X
Dragan Benazi
chttp://orcid.org/0000-0001-5396-3706
References
Andrews, J., & Higson, H. (2008). Graduate employability, ‘soft skills’versus ‘hard’business
knowledge: A European study. Higher Education in Europe,33(4), 411–422. https://doi.org/
10.1080/03797720802522627
ECONOMIC RESEARCH-EKONOMSKA ISTRAŽIVANJA 473
Baird, A. M., & Parayitam, S. (2019). Employers’ratings of importance of skills and competen-
cies college graduates need to get hired: Evidence from the New England region of USA.
Education þTraining,61(5), 622–634. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-12-2018-0250
Bambacas, M., & Patrickson, M. (2008). Interpersonal communication skills that enhance
organisational commitment. Journal of Communication Management,12(1), 51–72. https://
doi.org/10.1108/13632540810854235
Barnum, C., & Wolniansky, N. (1989). Taking cues from body language. Management Review,
78(6), 59–60.
Bednar, A. S., & Olney, R. J. (1987). Communication needs of recent graduates. The Bulletin of
the Association for Business Communication,50(4), 22–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/
108056998705000408
Binsaeed, R. H., Unnisa, S. T., & Rizvi, L. J. (2016). The big impact of soft skills in today’s
workplace. Review of Public Administration and Management,400(4289), 1–6.
Bisen, V. & Priya. (2009). Business communication. New Age International.
Brownell, J. (2009). Fostering service excellence through listening: What hospitality managers
need to know. Cornell Hospitality Report,9(6), 6–18.
Brownell, J. (2010). The skills of listening-centered communication. In: Wolvin, A. D. (Ed.).
Listening and human communication in the 21st century. (pp. 141–157). Blackwell
Publishing Ltd.
Brownell, J. (2016). Listening: Attitudes, principles and skills. (5th ed.). Routlegde.
Burleson, B. R. (2010). The nature of interpersonal communication: A message-centered
approach. In: Berger, C. R., Roloff, M. E., & Roskos-Edwoldsen (Eds.). The handbook of
communication science. (pp. 145–163). Sage.
Carlisle, S., Ivanov, S., & Dijkmans, C. (2021). The digital skills divide: Evidence from the
European tourism industry. Journal of Tourism Futures.https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-07-
2020-0114
Chairat, P. (2016). Communication skills used by english major graduates in the workplace: A
case study. International Journal of Languages, Literature and Linguistics,2(1), 38–43.
https://doi.org/10.18178/IJLLL.2016.2.1.64
Clokie, T. L., & Fourie, E. (2016). Graduate employability and communication competence:
Are undergraduates taught relevant skills? Business and Professional Communication
Quarterly,79(4), 442–463. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490616657635
Coffelt, T. A., Grauman, D., & Smith, F. L. (2019). Employers’perspectives on workplace com-
munication skills: The meaning of communication skills. Business and Professional
Communication Quarterly,82(4), 418–439. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490619851119
Conrad, D., & Newberry, R. (2012). Identification and instruction of important business com-
munication skills for graduate business education. Journal of Education for Business,87(2),
112–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2011.576280
Cuic Tankovic, A. (2020). Importance of communication skills for tourism students.
Proceedings of the International Conference on Global Economy in Business, Management,
Social Science and Humanity Perspective (GEMSH-20), IIRST Explore. 52–56.
Dunbar, N. E., Brooks, C. F., & Kubicka-Miller, T. (2006). Oral communication skills in higher
education: Using a performance-based evaluation rubric to assess communication skills.
Innovative Higher Education,31(2), 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-006-9012-x
Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the
digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia,13(1), 93–160.
Ferrari, A. (2014). DIGCOMP: A framework for developing and unrerstanding digital compe-
tence in Europe. eLearning Papers,38(1), 7–24.
Fisher, E. (2011). What practitioners consider to be the skills and behaviours of an effective
people project manager. International Journal of Project Management,29(8), 994–1002.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.09.002
Forsyth, K., Lai, J. S., & Kielhofner, G. (1999). The assessment of communication and inter-
action skills (ACIS): Measurement properties. British Journal of Occupational Therapy,
62(2), 69–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/030802269906200208
474 A. CUIC TANKOVIC ET AL.
Go, F. M., Monachello, M. L., & Baum, T. (1996). Human resource management in the hospi-
tality industry. John Wiley & Sons.
Goby, V. P. (2007). Business communication needs: A multicultural perspective. Journal of
Business and Technical Communication,21(4), 425–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1050651907304029
Gray, E. F., & Murray, N. (2011). A distinguishing factor: Oral communication skills in new
accountancy graduates. Accounting Education. An International Journal,20(3), 275–294.
Guffey, M. E., & Loewy, D. (2010). Business communication proces & product. (7th ed.).
Cengage Learning.
Guffey, M., & Loewy, D. (2016). Essentials of business communication. (10th ed.). Cengage
Learning.
Halfhill, T. R., & Nielsen, T. M. (2007). Quantifying the “softer side”of management educa-
tion: An example using teamwork competencies. Journal of Management Education,31(1),
64–80.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant
validity in variance based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science,43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Hsu, C. H. C. (2018). Tourism education on and beyond the horizon. Tourism Management
Perspectives,25, 181–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2017.11.022
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure ana-
lysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal,6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Jackson, D. (2014). Business graduate performance in oral communication skills and strategies
for improvement. The International Journal of Management Education,12(1), 22–34. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2013.08.001
Jakobsen, M., & Jensen, R. (2015). Common method bias in public management studies.
International Public Management Journal,18(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.
2014.997906
Jameson, D. A. (2007). Embedding written and oral communication within the hospitality cur-
riculum. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education,19(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10963758.2007.10696881
Jenkins, K. B. (2010). Media convergence: The three degrees of network. Mass and interper-
sonal communication. Routledge.
Johanson, M., Ghiselli, R., Shea, L. J., & Roberts, C. (2011). Changing competencies of hospi-
tality leaders: A 25-year review. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education,23(3), 43–47.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2011.10697012
Jones, C. G. (2011). Written and computer-mediated accounting commnunication skills: An
employer perspective. Business Communication Quarterly,74(3), 247–271. https://doi.org/10.
1177/1080569911413808
Kang, J., & Hyun, S. S. (2012). Effective communication styles for the customer-oriented ser-
vice employee: Inducing dedicational behaviors in luxury restaurant patrons. International
Journal of Hospitality Management,31(3), 772–785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.09.
014
Keyton, J., Caputo, J. M., Ford, E. A., Fu, R., Leibowitz, S. A., & Liu, T. (2013). Investigating
verbal workplace communication bevaiors. Journal of Business Communication,50(2),
152–169.
Kleckner, M. J., & Marshall, C. R. (2014). Critical communication skills: Developing course
competencies to meet workforce needs. The Journal of Research in Business Education,
56(2), 59–81.
Knapp, M. L., Hall, J. A., & Horgan, T. G. (2014). Nonverbal communication in human inter-
action. (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Krizan, A. C., Merrier, P., Logan, J., & Williams, K. (2008). Business communication. (7th ed.).
Thomson.
ECONOMIC RESEARCH-EKONOMSKA ISTRAŽIVANJA 475
Lamb-White, J. (2008). Communication skills for business: Three components for successful
oral communication. Suite 101. Retrieved from For Business. http://soft-skills-development.
suite101.com/article.cfm/communicationskills
Leigh, T. W., & Summers, J. O. (2002). An initial evaluation of industrial buyers’impressions
of salespersons’nonverbal cues. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management,22(1),
41–53.
Lim, Y. M., Lee, T. H., Yap, C. S., & Ling, C. C. (2016). Employability skills, personal qualities,
and early employment problems of entry-level auditors: Perspectives from employers, lec-
turers, auditors, and students. Journal of Education for Business,91(4), 185–192. https://doi.
org/10.1080/08832323.2016.1153998
Limbu, Y. B., Jayachandran, C., Babin, B. J., & Peterson, R. T. (2016). Empathy, nonverbal
immediacy, and salesperson performance: The mediating role of adaptive selling behavior.
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,31(5), 654–667. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-03-
2015-0048
Lolli, J. (2013a). Perceptions of the importance and preparedness of interpersonal communica-
tion skills of the entry-level hospitality leader: Implications for hospitality educators. Journal
of Teaching in Travel & Tourism,13(4), 354–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313220.2013.
839302
Lolli, J. C. (2013b). Interpersonal communication skills and the young hospitality leader: Are
they prepared? International Journal of Hospitality Management,32, 295–298. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.02.010
MacDermott, C., & Ortiz, L. (2017). Beyond the business communication course: A historical
perspective of the where, why, and how of soft skills development and job readiness for
business graduates. IUP Journal of Soft Skills,11(2), 7–24.
Maes, J. D., Weldy, T. G., & Icenogle, M. L. (1997). Amanagerial perspective: Oral communi-
cation competency is most important for business students in the workplace. Journal of
Business Communication,34,67–80.
Moore, T., & Morton, J. (2017). The myth of job readiness? Written communication, employ-
ability and the “skills gap”in higher education. Studies in Higher Education,42(3), 591–609.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1067602
Morgan, G. J. (1997). Communication skills required by accounting graduates: Practitioner
and academic perceptions. Accounting Education,6(2), 93–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/
096392897331514
Nikolich, M. A., & Sparks, B. A. (1995). The hospitality service encounter: The role of commu-
nication. Hospitality Research Journal,19(2), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/
109634809501900205
Norton, R. (1978). Foundation of a communicator style construct. Human Communication
Research,4(2), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1978.tb00600.x
Paksoy, M., Soyer, F., & C¸alık, F. (2017). The impact of managerial communication skills on
the levels of job satisfaction and job commitment. Journal of Human Sciences,14(1),
642–652. https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v14i1.4259
Paranto, S. R., & Kelkar, M. (2000). Employer satisfaction with job skills of business college
graduates and its impact on hiring behavior. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education,
9(3), 73–89. https://doi.org/10.1300/J050v09n03_06
Peterson, M. (1997). Personnel interviewers’perceptions of theimportance and adequacy of
applicants’communication skills. Communication Education,46(4), 287–291. https://doi.org/
10.1080/03634529709379102
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method
biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.
The Journal of Applied Psychology,88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.
879
Plant, K., & Slippers, J. (2015). Improving the business communication skills of postgraduate
internal audit students: A South African teaching innovation. Innovations in Education and
Teaching International,52(3), 310–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.852480
476 A. CUIC TANKOVIC ET AL.
Raybould, M., & Wilkins, H. (2006). Generic skills for hospitality management: A comparative
study of management expectations and student perceptions. Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism Management,13(2), 177–188. https://doi.org/10.1375/jhtm.13.2.177
Reio, T. G. Jr, (2010). The threat of common method variance bias to theory building. Human
Resource Development Review,9(4), 405–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484310380331
Ryan, A. M., Schmit, M. J., & Johnson, R. (1996). Attitudes and effectivness: Examining rela-
tions at an organizational level. Personnel Psychology,4, 853–882.
Robles, M. M. (2012). Executive perceptions of the top 10 soft skills needed in today’s work-
place. Business Communication Quarterly,75(4), 453–465. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1080569912460400
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covari-
ance structure analysis. In: A. Von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis:
Applications for developmental research. (pp. 399–419). Sage.
Schartel Dunn, S. G., & Lane, P. L. (2019). Do interns know what they think they know?
Assessing business communication skills in interns and recent graduates. Business and
Professional Communication Quarterly,82(2), 202–213. https://doi.org/10.1177/
2329490619826258
Schroth, H. (2019). Are you ready for Gen Z in the workplace? California Management
Review,61(3), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125619841006
Shuayto, N. (2013). Management skills desired by business school deans and employers: An
empirical investigation. Business Education & Accreditation,5(2), 93–105.
Siddiq, F., Scherer, R., & Tondeur, J. (2016). Teachers’emphasis on developing students’
digital information and communication skills (TEDDICS): A new construct in 21st century
education. Computers & Education,92–93,1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.
006
Spitzberg, B. H. (2015). Interpersonal communication competence and social skills. In: E.
Donsbach (Ed.) The international encyclopedia of communication. (pp. 2486–2492) Blackwell
Publishing Ltd.
Stevens, B. (2005). What communication skills do employers want? Silicon Valley recruiters
respond. Journal of Employment Counseling,42(1), 2–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1920.
2005.tb00893.x
Sundaram, D. S., & Webster, C. (2000). The role of nonverbal communication in service
encounters. Journal of Services Marketing,14(5), 378–391. https://doi.org/10.1108/
08876040010341008
Swenson, D. H. (1980). Relative importance of business communication skills for the next ten
years. Journal of Business Communication,17(2), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/
002194368001700205
Ulinski, M., & O’callaghan, S. (2002). A comparison of MBA students’and employers’percep-
tions of the value of oral communication skills for employment. Journal of Education for
Business,77(4), 193–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832320209599070
Uzun, T. (2017). Development of the nonverbal communication skills of school administrators
scale (NCSSAS): Validity, reliability and implementation study. Educational Research and
Reviews,12(7), 442–455.
Van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J., Van Dijk, J. A., & De Haan, J. (2017). The relation between
21st-century skills and digital skills: A systematic literature review. Computers in Human
Behavior,72, 577–588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.010
Voorhees, C. M., Brady, M. K., Calantone, R., & Ramirez, E. (2016). Discriminant validity test-
ing in marketing: An analysis, causes for concern, and proposed remedies. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science,44(1), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0455-4
Waldeck, J., Durante, C., Helmuth, B., & Marcia, B. (2012). Communication in a changing
world: Contemporary perspectives on business communication competence. Journal of
Education for Business,87(4), 230–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2011.608388
ECONOMIC RESEARCH-EKONOMSKA ISTRAŽIVANJA 477
Waner, K. K. (1995). Business communication competencies needed by employees as perceived
by business faculty and business professionals. Business Communication Quarterly,58(4),
51–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/108056999505800410
Wang, J., Ayres, H., & Huyton, J. (2009). Job ready graduates: A tourism industry perspective.
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management,16(1), 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1375/jhtm.
16.1.62
Wesley, S. C., Jackson, V. P., & Lee, M. (2017). The perceived importance of core soft skills
between retailing and tourism management students, faculty and businesses. Employee
Relations,39(1), 79–99. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-03-2016-0051
Zehrer, A., & M€
ossenlechner, C. (2009). Key competencies of tourism graduates: The employ-
ers’point of view. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism,9(3-4), 266–287. https://doi.org/
10.1080/15313220903445215
Zerfass, A., Ver
ci
c, D., & Volk, S. C. (2017). Communication evaluation and measurement:
Skills, practices and utilization in European organizations. Corporate Communications: An
International Journal,22(1), 2–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-08-2016-0056
Zhu, Y., Nel, P., & Bhat, R. (2006). A cross cultural study of communication strategies for
building business relationship. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management,6(3),
319–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470595806070638
Appendix
Table A1. Constructs of the communication scale.
Constructs Items Source
Written
communication skills
Writing clearly and precisely. Jones, 2011
Using an effective business vocabulary.
The use of correct spelling, grammar and
punctuation.
Morgan, 1997
Preparing documents that are concise, accurate,
and supportive of the subject matter.
Jones, 2011
Providing information and ideas in a clear,
ordered and effective pattern.
Morgan, 1997
Ability to adjust writing styles for
different audiences.
Ability to adjust writing styles for
different formats.
Including well-designed illustrations, graphs, and
tables where appropriate.
Jones, 2011
Writing internal informal messages. Morgan, 1997
Oral
communication skills
Ability to develop information networks both
informal and formal.
Ability to express complex ideas fluently and
coherently using extensive vocabulary.
Jackson, 2014
Being articulate and using appropriate tone
of voice.
Lolli, 2013a
Ability to produce a clear, systematically
developed presentation, on a broad range
of subjects.
Jackson, 2014
Speaking publicly and adjusting the style
according to the nature of the audience.
Holding audience’s attention/interest. Gray & Murray, 2011
Giving feedback appropriately and constructively Jackson, 2014
Receiving feedback appropriately and
constructively
Ability to modify presentation in response to
feedback from listeners.
Morgan, 1997
Possession of negotiation skills. Ulinski &
O’callaghan, 2002
(continued)
478 A. CUIC TANKOVIC ET AL.
Table A1. Continued.
Constructs Items Source
Constructive participation in meetings by
contributing ideas and suggestions.
Jackson, 2014
Listening
communication skills
Hearing messages and concentrating on
the speaker.
Brownell, 2010
Understanding messages and distinguishing
main ideas.
Remembering messages.
Interpreting messages accurately.
Evaluating messages and the speaker.
Responding to messages.
Digital
communication skills
Displaying digital information for a given
audience and a specific purpose.
Siddiq et al., 2016
Sharing digital information with others.
Providing digital feedback.
Using computer software to make digital
products (for presentations, documents,
pictures, and diagrams).
Effective use of email for external and internal
correspondence.
Jones, 2011
Effective use of instant/text messaging.
Maintaining a professional presence on
social networks.
Knowledge of netiquette. Ferrari, 2014
Understanding the consequences of making
digital information available for everyone on
the Internet.
Siddiq et al., 2016
Non-verbal
communication skills
Smiling while talking. Limbu et al., 2016
Maintaining eye contact with interlocutors.
Using appropriate gestures while talking.
Using appropriate formal posture. Leigh & Summers, 2002
Using appropriate professional attire.
Trust building and honesty. Bambacas &
Patrickson, 2008
Being truthful and credible. Lolli, 2013a
Displaying self-confidence in communication. Fisher, Fisher, Fisher, 2011
Showing an honest understanding for
other people.
Showing empathy in communication. Zehrer &
M€
ossenlechner, 2009
Demonstrating appropriate cultural
communication skills.
Lolli, 2013a
Source: The authors.
ECONOMIC RESEARCH-EKONOMSKA ISTRAŽIVANJA 479
