员工满意度与顾客满意度间的关系 毕业论文外文翻译

毕业论文题目：员工满意度和顾客满意度关系研究
英文文献原文：
The relationship between employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction
Efforts to enhance customer satisfaction have been considered critical by many organizations, particularly those in the service sector (Schmit and Allscheid, 1995) and hence, have been researched by numerous studies. Despite vast research previously conducted on the relationship between the employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction, Schmit and Allscheid (1995) assert that further conceptual and empirical evidence is needed to reveal the relationship between employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction.
In previous research, employee satisfaction (hereafter ES) has been frequently measured by asking customers' perception of employee and customer satisfaction (hereafter CS) also has been measured by employees via survey. Though the use of indirect measures in assessing ES and CS is quite common, it still remains unclear whether this practice is appropriate. As an alternative attempt to measure customer and employee satisfaction more accurately, Schmit and Allscheid (1995) employed dyadic data from both the customer and employee surveys and simultaneously estimate both employee and customer model. They assumed employee job satisfaction was influenced by the work climate produced by the customers, linking employee model and customer model simultaneously. But each model was estimated based on different level of data: The employee model was based on the individual level, whereas customer model was based on data collected at the multiple offices of a service-oriented organization. As such, previous research which attempt to identify the ES-CS relationship had potential limits in gauging the focal constructs.
To show a comprehensive framework depicting the interplay of ES-CS, the present study tested the ES-CS relationship in the causal models which incorporates key constructs instead of just considering focal variables (i.e. ES and CS) (Brown and Lam's, 2008). In an attempt to uncover the link between ES and CS, this paper reviews information derived from relevant prior research and investigate whether the relationship between employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction is bilateral or unilateral. This study also examines the role of moderating variables which have incremental impacts on this link.
Hypothesis development on ES-CS relationship
The influence of ES on CS
The influence of employee satisfaction on customer satisfaction has received considerable attention in marketing literature and practice in recent years. It has been argued that behavior of satisfied employees plays an important role in shaping customers' perceptions of business interactions (Spiro and Weitz, 1990). This phenomenon may occur as satisfied employees are more apt to be friendly,
enthusiastic, attentive, and empathetic toward customers (Beatty et al., 1996; Rafaeli, 1993).
According to the concept of partner effects, a person is in some way, verbally or nonverbally, influenced by the characteristics and behaviors displayed by his or her counterpart (Dolen et al., 2002). Additionally, the contagion effect explains how satisfied employees influence others around them to feel good (Hatfield et al., 1993). As such, Schneider and Bowen (1985) said that employee job satisfaction is positively related to customers' perceptions of service. This notion suggests that employees who have higher levels of job satisfaction also believe they are able to deliver excellent service (Schlesinger and Zornitsky, 1991). It is also expected that happy or satisfied employees are more inclined to share these positive emotions with customers (Brief and Motowidlo, 1986). This was also consistent with Brown and Lam (2008) who provided the empirical evidences showing the robust relationship between employee job satisfaction and customer satisfaction. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed: H1-1. Employee satisfaction will positively influence customer satisfaction.
The influence of CS on ES
Compared to the influence of ES on CS, the impact in the opposite direction (from CS to ES) is supported by a few theories such as the social exchange theory (Konovsky and Pugh, 1994) and the psychological contract theory (Robinson and Morrison, 1995). Central to these conceptions is the norm of reciprocity (Netemeyer et al., 1997): Customers satisfied with their counterpart will engage in cooperative behavior as reciprocation for those who have benefited them (Bateman and Organ, 1983; Schnake, 1991). Beatty et al. (1996)and Gremler and Gwinner (2000) found that customers who developed a bond with the employees also were likely to care about employee wellbeing. If customers like the performance of the employee and express gratitude or satisfaction, in turn, it is also expected to lead to a higher level of employee satisfaction (Dolen et al., 2002). In other words, positive reinforcement from customers increases the satisfaction of sales employee (Beatty et al., 1996). In a similar vein, Bitner et al. (1990) posit that customers' inputs make important contributions to enhancement of service quality, leading to employee satisfaction. Goodwin and Gremler (1996) also argue that employees are concerned about customers' feelings and are pleased when customers display appreciation for quality service. Based on these notions, this study argues that customer satisfaction influences the job satisfaction of their counterpart. Therefore:
H1-2. Customer satisfaction will positively influence service providers' job satisfaction.
Sample and procedures
This study was administered with the cooperation of one of leading private education companies in Korea. This company has a business model of providing educational services through private tutors who visit the customers' homes on a regular basis. Private education services in Korea can be regarded as a commercial exchange
because customers pay for the education services received and private tutors are considered service employees to their customers (Williams and Anderson, 2005; Yi and Gong, 2008). Educational services seem to be good contexts for testing our research purpose as the customers could interact with employee on a regular basis and can observe the counterparts. To test these hypotheses, dyadic data incorporating both the customer and the corresponding employee were developed. This study recruited the customers and the corresponding private tutors to test the ES-CS link.
The surveys were administered as follows: First, 500 customer samples were randomly selected from about 50,000 customers nationwide. Questionnaires were sent to 372 customers who agreed to participate in the survey. After one month, 285 questionnaires were returned to us. It turns out that the sample represents the customer pool appropriately based on similarity of demographics between the final sample and the population. Second, the survey for employees was administered. Those who correspond to customers who respond to surveys were recruited for the purpose of probing the ES-CS relationship. Since there are no multiple customers from a single tutor, it could be said that customers are not nested within tutors. Finally, 227 samples (227 pair of customers and corresponding employees) were used in the final analysis after discarding the incomplete questionnaires.
Measures
This study used measures for key variables from existing studies and literature by slightly modifying them into the context of the current study (educational service). All constructs were assessed by multiple items using five-point scale ranging 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree. Figure 1 explains the simultaneous model considering both employee and customer perspectives.
Employee model
This study examined five constructs in the employee model. Each was role ambiguity, role conflict, job satisfaction, commitment, and intent to stay. Used were items developed by Ho et al.' (1997) to assess employee role ambiguity and role conflict. Also, this study measured employee job satisfaction with the items proposed by Netemeyer et al. (1997) and Hartline and Ferrell (1996). Commitment, the employee's identification with organization, was assessed with the items developed by Ganesan and Weitz (1996). Intent to stay was measured by items established by Good et al. (1996).
Customer model
In the customer model, five different constructs were considered: interaction quality, outcome quality, customer satisfaction, trust, and customer loyalty. Interaction quality and outcome quality were measured by applying an adapted version of Brady and Cronin's (2001)model tailored for the context of educational service. Customer satisfaction was assessed by adapting the items of Mano and Oliver (1993) and Bettencourt (1997). These items were used to measure customer's responses to service experience with the employee. Customer trust was measured by the four items
proposed by Ramsey and Sohi (1997). This study also defined customer loyalty as the customer having intention to do the business with the organization in the future and engaged in positive word-of-mouth communication about it. Customer loyalty was assessed by modifying items developed by Zeithaml et al. (1996).
Analysis
Structural equation methodology was applied to test the hypothesized model. In order to specify the model, each of the constructs was represented by multiple measures. The first step in the model testing was to conduct a multiple items' reliability and validity check by applying confirmatory factor analysis to confirm if the multiple items sufficiently measure the proposed constructs. Next, the hypothesized model was assessed by estimating the standardized path coefficients for each proposed relationship.
Reliability and validity checks
The first step of the reliability and validity check was to confirm the overall goodness-of-fit indices of the measurement model. In Table I, this study presents the results for both the customer model and the employee model. Since the GFI and AGFI may contain inconsistencies due to sampling characteristics (Hoyle and Panter, 1995), this study substituted two fit indices with TLI and CFI. χ 2 and RMSEA are also included as fit indices since it is generally recommended to incorporate at least 4 indices to confirm general fitness (Kline, 1998).
In conducting confirmatory factor analysis, added were related variables such as customer satisfaction in the employee model and employee satisfaction in the customer model. The indices of employee model include the following results: the chi-squire statistic was 367.5 with 194 degree of freedom, comparative fit index (CFI) was 0.989, TLI was 0.986, and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.063. The fit ness of customer model was χ 2 (155)=247.3, CFI=0.995, TLI=0.993, RMSEA=0.051. According to the outcomes, the model fitness was adequate for both models because the values of CFI and TLI in the 0.90 range have been known as the adequate fit for these indices and RMSEA is lower than the criteria proposed by Browne and Cudeck (1992).
The reliability and inter-correlations of the constructs are reported in Tables I-III. Given that this study consisted of dyadic data, this process conducted within each domain. In Table I, the evidence of internal consistency is provided by the composite reliability. It is regarded as a less constraining index for measuring internal consistency compared to Cronbach's alpha (Homburg and Giering, 2001). All values are higher than the criteria proposed by Venkatraman (1990), as Table I shows, the composite reliability ranged from 0.627 to 0.883.
Also, the correlations (Φ estimates) among the latent variables are included in Tables II and III. Table II contains the outcomes of the employee model and Table III presents the results of customer model. This study performed test of discriminant validity among the factors based on Φ estimates. Table II showed that there are no correlation estimates which comprise 1 in confidence intervals (Φ±2SE)at the
employee model. Also, the A VE values were greater than the squared Φ coefficients (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). Thus, it could be said that all measurements achieved criterion for discriminant validity (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). The values of correlation esti mates ranged from −0.483 to 0.844. In the customer model, the confidence intervals of all Φ values (Φ±2SE) were also under 1 and the square roots of A VE values were greater than the Φ coefficients. These outcomes also explained that all estimates achieved the criterion for discriminant validity in the customer model. Table III shows that the values of correlation estimates ranged from 0.419 to 0.850 in the customer model.
Results
According to the model fitness analysis, our hypotheses linking the employ model with the customer model fit well (χ 2 (584)=939.4, CFI=0.987, TLI=0.985, RMSEA=0.052). The overall fit of the structural model was adequate, and the standardized path estimates indicate significant relationships among the constructs. In Table IV, this study present the results of the structural equation model depicted in Figure 1. All paths were statistically significant with the only exception occurring in the path from customer satisfaction to job satisfaction. Since the unilateral model can be nested in the bilateral model, the improvement in fit is assessed by comparing the chi square difference between the bilateral model and each unilateral model.
The model testing is conducted by comparing the baseline model (i.e. bilateral model) with the test model (i.e. unilateral model) in which imposes a relationship of zero on the path from ES to CS or on the path from CS to ES at the bilateral model. The results of these comparisons, reported in Table V, indicate that failure of the path from ES to CS causes it to fit the data significantly worse than the baseline model, supporting H1-1. On the other hand, the chi square difference between the unilateral model assuming a path from ES to CS and the baseline model indicates that adding a path from CS to ES does not improve its fit. Therefore, H1-2 was not supported. Discussion
H1 provided partial support for our conceptions derived from the previous studies related with the ES-CS relationship. The influence of employee satisfaction on customer satisfaction was found to be significant, supporting H1-1, but the path from customer satisfaction to employee satisfaction (H1-2) was not significant. This partial support indicates that the relationship between employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction is unilateral rather than mutual. Given no significance of customer satisfaction on employee satisfaction, employee satisfaction seems to be affected less by customer satisfaction, possibly more by other factors (e.g. pay, co-workers, and supervisor). Simply stated, the results show that employees' job satisfaction leads to an increase in customer satisfaction, however, not vice versa.
Brown and Lam (2008) found variables such as service characteristics, research contexts, and study methods moderated the relationship between ES and CS, but employee's disposition and work climate factors which were proven to be critical variables in the domain of employee satisfaction research were not included. Hence,
we investigate how dispositional variables moderate the relationship between ES and CS.
Hypothesis development on moderating effect
Dispositional variables
Personality factors have been known to account for the differences in job attitudes (Staw and Ross, 1985). Among various dispositional variables, this study posits that self efficacy acts as a moderating variable. Self efficacy is a core concept in social cognition theory (Yi and Gong, 2008) and refers to individuals' judgments that they have capabilities to perform their job or fulfill duty appropriately. Self efficacy also pertains to judgments about what one is capable of doing a task with whatever skills one possesses (Bandura, 1986).McKee et al. (2006) said that individuals who have more confidence in their abilities tend to exert more effort to perform particular behaviors, persist longer in order to overcome obstacles and set more challenging goals than those who have less confidence in their abilities. It is also expected that people with high self efficacy generally set a higher level of outcome expectations and are more likely to achieve their desired outcomes (Pereay et al., 2004). As such, employees with higher self efficacy are expected to show more confidence in their abilities and are more likely to provide quality service to the customers. This, in turn, is expected to lead to a higher level of customer satisfaction. Therefore:
H2-1. Employee self efficacy moderates the ES-CS relationship: For employees who score high on self efficacy, employee satisfaction will be more positively related to customer's satisfaction.
文献翻译（4000字以上）：
员工满意度与顾客满意度间的关系
以服务行业为代表的很多企业开展了许多调查研究,从而批判地考虑了提升顾客满意度的措施。

尽管大量调查仓促地论证了员工满意度与顾客满意度之间的关系，但Schmit and Allscheid 断言道：今后仍然需要概念性和经验主义的证据去检验员工满意度和顾客满意度之间的关系。

在过去的研究中，以询问顾客的感觉的方式来频繁地测量员工满意度，以调查员工的方式来测量顾客满意度。

尽管这种间接评估员工满意度与顾客满意度的方式非常普遍，但这种方式是否恰当仍然值得商榷。

为了让可供选择的测量顾客满意度与员工满意度的方式更加精确，Schmit and Allscheid 使用了顾客满意度与员工满意度的对称数据，并且同时评估了员工和顾客的模型。

他们假设员工的工作满意度是被那些由顾客产生的工作趋势所影响的，从而将员工模型与顾客模型联系了起来。

但是每一个模型都是建立在不同层次的数据之上的，例如：员工模型是建立在同一层面上的，然而，顾客满意度是建立在不同服务标准的企业提供的服务的基础上的。

例如，过去那些尝试区分顾客满意度和员工满意度的研究在
测量标准方面有着潜在的限制。

Brown and Lam's显示了一个描绘员工满意度与顾客满意度相互作用的综合框架，本研究测试的员工满意度与顾客满意度关系的因果模型相结合的关键结构而不是只考虑局部变量（即员工满意度与顾客满意度）在试图揭示员工满意度与顾客满意度之间的联系，本文回顾了相关的信息和来自以前的研究探讨员工满意度与顾客满意度之间的关系是双侧或单侧。

本研究还考察了在这一环节的调节变量增量的影响作用。

在员工满意度与顾客满意度关系假说的发展
员工满意度对顾客满意度的影响
Spiro and Weitz在 1990研究得近年来员工满意度对顾客满意度的影响在营销文献和实践中获得相当大的关注。

它已被认为是满意的员工行为在塑造客户的业务交互感知中起着重要的作用。

这种现象可能是满意的员工更容易对客户发生友好，热情，周到，善解人意。

Dolen等人在2002研究得根据合作伙伴的影响的概念，一个人在某种程度上，口头或非语言的，受他或她对手特性和行为表示的影响。

Hatfield等人在1993研究得此外，传染效应解释了如何影响员工周围的，使他们感觉良好，得到满足。

Schneider 和 Bowen 在1985研究得员工工作满意度本身与客户感知的服务成正相关关系。

Schlesinger 和 Zornitsky在1991年研究得到一个见解，拥有更高水平工作满意度的员工，相信他们有能力提供优质的服务。

Brief 和Motowidlo在1986认为员工更倾向于与客户一起分享快乐或满意的情感。

这也符合布朗和林（2008）提供的经验证据显示了员工的工作满意度和客户满意度间强大的关系。

因此，提出以下假设：H1-1. 员工的满意度会正向影响顾客满意度。

顾客满意度对员工满意度的影响
相比于员工满意度对顾客满意度的影响，在相反方向的影响（从顾客满意度对员工满意度）有几个支持理论，如社会交换理论支持（konovsky和普，1994）和心理契约理论（鲁滨孙和墨里森，1995）。

这些概念的核心是互惠规范（Netemeyer 等人。

，1997）：客户满意他们的对手将是那些得益于他们互换合作行为（Bateman 和Qrgan，1983；施纳克，1991）。

Beatty 等人（1996）和Gremler和Gwinner （2000）发现，开发顾客很可能是员工得到福利的关键。

如果客户喜欢的员工的表现和表达感激和满足，反过来，这也将导致更高水平的员工满意度（dolen等人，2002）。

换句话说，从客户的积极的强化增加销售员工满意度（比蒂等人，1996）。

与此类似，比特纳等人（1990）提出，客户输入到服务质量提高的重要贡献，导致员工满意度。

古德温和Gremler（1996）也认为，员工关注顾客的感受与高兴的是当客户显示赞赏的优质服务。

基于这些概念，本研究认为，顾客满意与工作满意度的影响。

因此：H1-2. 顾客满意度会正向影响服务人员工作满意度。

样本和流程
在韩国本研究与一个领先的私人教育公司合作。

本公司已通过私人导师谁访问客户的家庭定期提供教育服务的一种商业模式。

在韩国的私立教育服务可以被视为一个商业交易因为客户支付教育服务接收和私人家教服务员工顾客（威廉姆斯和安德森，2005；一和宫，2008）。

教育服务似乎是测试我们的研究目的为客户良好的环境能定期与员工的互动，可以观察同行。

为了检验这些假设，二进数据将客户和相应的员工开发。

本研究招募了客户和相应的私人测试员工满意度和顾客满意度的链接。

调查问卷如下：第一，从全国50000位客户中随机抽取500位客户样品。

问卷被送到了372个同意参加调查的顾客手中。

一个月后，285份问卷返回给我们。

事实证明，适当的样本代表根据最后的样本和人口的人口统计数据之间的相似性客户池。

第二，对员工的调查。

那些应对客户调查被招募的目的员工和顾客满意度关系探析。

由于从导师那得到一个单一的不多的客户，可以说，客户不嵌套在导师。

最后，丢弃的不完整的问卷后得到227个样本（227对客户和相应的员工）用于最后的分析。

措施
本研究采用关键变量的措施，从现有的研究成果和稍加改成目前研究的语境下的文学（教育服务）。

所有的结构都采用五点量表为1 =强烈反对5 =非常同意多个项目评估。

图1说明了同时考虑员工和顾客的观点。

员工模型
本研究审查员工模型构建中的五。

每个角色冲突，角色模糊，工作满意度，承诺和留职意愿。

使用项目通过Ho等人开发的（1997）来评估员工的角色模糊、角色冲突。

同时，本研究测量员工的工作满意度与Netemeyer等人提出的项目（1997）和哈特兰和费雷尔（1996）承诺，组织员工的认同，是由Ganesan和Weitz开发项目评估（1996）。

由好等人建立项目测定留职意愿（1996）。

顾客模型
在客户模型，五种不同的结构被认为是：互动质量，结果质量，客户满意度，信任，顾客忠诚。

使用改编版的布雷迪和克罗宁测量了互动质量和结果质量（2001）模型为教育服务的上下文。

客户满意是由适应马诺和奥利弗评估项目（1993）与贝当古（1997）。

这些物品被用来衡量客户的反应，与员工服务经验。

由四项建议由拉姆齐和sohi测定顾客信任（1997）。

这项研究还定义了顾客忠诚有意向在未来的组织做生意的客户和从事正面口碑传播呢。

顾客忠诚是通过修改项目以Zeithaml等人开发的评估（1996）。

分析
结构方程方法进行测试的假设模型。

以指定的模型，每一个的结构是由多个措施表示。

在模型试验的第一步是进行多项目的信度和效度进行验证性因素分析确定多个项目充分测量提出了构建检查。

其次，假设模型的每个提出关系规范化路径
系数的估计进行评估。

可靠性和有效性检查
第一步的可靠性和有效性检查是确定的测量模型拟合指数整体。

在目录上，本研究提出了两个客户模型和员工的模型结果。

自从GFI和AGFI以来可能包含由于采样特性的不一致（霍伊尔和豹，1995）取代的TLI和CFI两个拟合指数的研究。

χ 2和RMSEA也包括作为拟合指数是因为它通常建议将至少4个指标的确定一般合理性（克莱恩，1998）。

在进行验证性因素分析，增加了相关的变量，如在客户模型在员工与员工满意度客户满意度模型。

员工模型指标包括以下结果：卡方统计的367.5与194个自由度，比较拟合指数（CFI）为0.989，TLI为0.986，和近似误差均方根（RMSEA）为0.063。

客户模型的健身χ 2 (155)=247.3,，CFI = 0.995，TLI = 0.993，RMSEA = 0.051。

根据结果，该模型能足够两个模型由于在0.90范围内CFI和TLI值被称为这些指标与RMSEA足够的配合是低于布朗和cudeck提出的标准（1992）。

可靠性和间的结构相关性报告表I-III。

鉴于这项研究包括二进数据，这个过程在每个域中进行的。

在目录上，内部一致性的证据是由复合材料可靠性提供了。

它作为一种制约更少的指数为衡量内部一致性相比，Cronbach的阿尔法（洪堡和捷林，2001）。

所有值均高于由Venkatraman提出的标准（1990），如表我表明，复合材料的可靠性为0.627～0.883。

同时，相关性（Φ估计）潜变量之间的包括在表II和III。

表II包含员工模型和表III结果提出客户模型的结果。

本研究进行测试的区分效度的基础上Φ估计的因素。

表二显示没有相关估计包括1的置信区间（Φ±2Se）在员工模型。

同时，平均值均大于平方Φ系数（巴戈齐和一，1988）。

因此，可以说，所有的测量实现标准区分效度（安德森和Gerbing，1988）。

相关的估计值的范围从？0.483到0.844。

在客户的模型，所有Φ值的置信区间（Φ±2Se）也在1和平均值的平方根大于Φ系数。

这些结果也说明，所有的估计达到标准判别的有效性在客户模型。

表三显示相关的估计值的范围从0.419到0.850在客户模型。

结果
根据模型的拟合度分析，我们假设的连接采用模型与用户模型很好的拟合 (χ 2 (584)=939.4, CFI=0.987, TLI=0.985, RMSEA=0.052)。

结构模型的总体拟合是足够的，和标准化路径的估计表明，重大结构之间的关系。

在目录IV，本文图1所示的结构方程模型的结果。

所有的路径有统计学显着发生在路径从顾客满意度对工作满意度的唯一的例外。

由于单边模式可以嵌套在双边模式，提高适应是通过比较两国模型和各个单向模型之间的卡方差异评估。

测试该模型是通过比较基线模型上进行的（即双边模式）与测试模型（即单边模式）在施加一个关系零ES到 CS的路径或路径从CS到ES在双边模式。

这些比
较的结果，在表V报道，表明ES CS的路径故障使其适合的数据比基线模型显著下降，支持h1-1。

另一方面，单方面的模型假设一个路径从ES CS和基线模型之间的卡方差异表明，添加一条从CS到 ES不提高其适合。

因此，h1-2不被支持。

讨论
H1为我们提供的概念来自与es到cs关系有关的以前的研究部分支持。

员工满意度对顾客满意度的影响是显著的，支持h1-1，但是从客户满意度，员工的满意度（h1-2）是不重要的。

这部分的支持表明，员工满意度与顾客满意度之间的关系是片面而不是相互。

没有意义的客户满意度，员工满意度，员工满意度是影响顾客满意度低，可能更多的其他因素（如支付，同事，和上司的）。

简单地说，结果表明，员工的工作满意度，使顾客满意，不过增加，反之亦然。

布朗和林（2008）发现变量如服务的特点，研究内容，研究方法调节员工满意度和顾客满意度之间的关系，但员工的性格和工作环境因素被证明在员工满意度的研究领域是至关重要的变量不包括。

因此，我们研究的特质变量中度员工满意度和顾客满意度之间的关系。

调节效应假设的发展
处理变量
人格因素已考虑到在工作态度上的差异（秸秆和罗斯，1985）。

各种性格的变量中，本研究认为，自我效能感作为调节变量。

自我效能感是在社会认知理论的核心概念（一和宫，2008），是指个人的判断，他们有能力完成自己的工作或履行义务地。

自我效能感是判断什么人能够做什么的一个技巧，任务具有（班杜拉，1986）。

麦基等人（2006）表示，他们对自己的能力更有信心的个体倾向于施加更大的努力来执行特定的行为，持续时间较长，为了克服障碍，建立更具挑战性的目标比那些在自己的能力缺乏信心。

它还预计，高自我效能感一般都设定了一个较高水平的结果预期的人，更容易达到他们期望的结果（pereay等人。

，2004）。

因此，具有较高的自我效能感的员工都将显示在他们的能力更有信心和更容易为客户提供优质的服务。

这，反过来，预计将导致更高水平的客户满意度。

因此：H2-1员工自我效能温和派的员工满意度和顾客满意度关系：员工谁得分高的自我效能感，员工的满意度会对顾客满意度的正相关。