Table 4.16: Reliability of variable: Internal communication_TTN
Cronbach's Alpha
= | .846 | Corrected Item- Total Correlation | Cronbach's Alpha Item Deleted | if | |
TTN 1 | .617 | .877 | |||
TTN 2 | .760 | .743 | |||
TTN 3 | .772 | .728 | |||
Maybe you are interested!
-
Reliability Testing of Dependent Variable Scale -
Product Selling Price and Product Consumption Market -
Market / Product Pair Development Model -
Solution to expand product consumption market at Truong Hung Thinh General Trading Service Company Limited - 9 -
Impact of Financial Market Development on Enterprise Capital Structure by National Institutional Quality
Table 4.17: Reliability of variables: Product-market dynamics_NST
Cronbach's Alpha
= | .751 | Corrected Item- Total Correlation | Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted | |
Chromosome 1 | .640 | .735 | ||
Chromosome 2 | .674 | .717 | ||
Chromosome 3 | .685 | .714 | ||
Chromosome 4 | .462 | .821 | ||
Table 4.18: Variable reliability: Acceptance level BSC_MCN'
Cronbach's Alpha = .879
Corrected Item- Total Correlation | Cronbach's Alpha of Item Deleted | |
MCN' 1 | .757 | .837 |
MCN' 2 | .778 | .817 |
MCN' 3 | .763 | .831 |
In addition, the two factors ' centralization ' and ' influence of the financial department ' are measured by only two scales, which do not satisfy the conditions for reliability testing [4]. Therefore, these two scales are assumed to satisfy the reliability conditions for further testing.
4.5. Correlation coefficient test
The purpose of correlation coefficient testing is to examine the correlation between variables in the model, quantify the tightness of the linear relationship between two quantities in the model as well as detect unusual phenomena to serve the next steps.
Considering the correlation coefficient values in Tables 4.19 and 4.20, they are all in the range of 0 to 0.8. Therefore, the relationship between the variables is significant and mostly shows no signs of abnormality. Other statistics can be used to test this relationship. Specifically, the variables ' centralization ' and ' standardization' are inversely related to other variables. While the variables are positively related to each other.
Table 4.19: Correlation coefficient matrix (with dependent variable MCN)
MCN | QLC | TTH | QTC | SCH | TTN | NST | |
MCN | 1 | ||||||
QLC | .414 ** | 1 | |||||
TTH | -.381 ** | -.241 ** | 1 | ||||
QTC | -.522 ** | -.481 ** | .315 ** | 1 | |||
SCH | .401 ** | .216 ** | -.285 ** | -.278 ** | 1 | ||
TTN | .420 ** | .306 ** | -.217 ** | -.389 ** | .214 ** | 1 | |
NST | .296 ** | .276 ** | -.230 ** | -.244 ** | .204 ** | .165 * | 1 |
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 4.20: Correlation coefficient matrix (with dependent variable MCN')
QLC | TTH | SCH | QTC | TTN | NST | MCN' | |
QLC | 1 | ||||||
TTH | -.241 ** | 1 | |||||
SCH | -.481 ** | .315 ** | 1 | ||||
QTC | .216 ** | -.285 ** | -.278 ** | 1 | |||
TTN | .306 ** | -.217 ** | -.389 ** | .214 ** | 1 | ||
NST | .276 ** | -.230 ** | -.244 ** | .204 ** | .165 * | 1 | |
MCN' | .457 ** | -.443 ** | -.524 ** | .381 ** | .428 ** | .347 ** | 1 |
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
4.6. Hypothesis testing
This is the main step taken to test the hypotheses in the research model as well as to answer the research questions that have been raised. The method used is multivariate regression analysis with the support of SPSS16 software. Specifically, this part will be conducted in turn with two different independent variables: The level of acceptance of BSC_MCN is drawn from the theoretical overview and the variable The level of acceptance of BSC_MCN' is drawn from the reality of Vietnamese enterprises through the qualitative research part.
4.6.1. Model testing with dependent variable: Acceptance level BSC_MCN
The results are shown in Table 4.21. Specifically, the hypotheses H1, H2, H3, H4 and H5 are all accepted because the statistical significance value is less than 0.05 (respectively: 0.048; 0.011; 0.000; 0.001 and 0.002). However, the hypothesis H6 is not accepted because the statistical significance value is greater than 5% (respectively: 0.112). This means that the factors including: leadership participation, centralization, systematization, influence of the financial department and internal communication have an impact on the level of acceptance of the BSC model in strategic management at Vietnamese enterprises. On the contrary, the factor of product-market dynamism cannot be confirmed whether it has an impact on the level of acceptance of the BSC_MCN model or not. Regarding the signs and magnitudes of the Beta values for the variables, there are three variables that are directly proportional to the dependent variable MCN (QLC: 0.125; QTC: 0.199; TTN: 0.189), two variables that are inversely proportional (TTH: -0.149; SCH: -0.264) consistent with the research hypothesis (see table 4.21).
Table 4.21: Factors affecting the level of acceptance of BSC_MCN
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | Collinearity Statistics | |||
B | Std. Error | Beta | Tolerance | VIF | |||
(Constant) | 1,726 | .636 | 2,713 | .007 | |||
QLC | .148 | .075 | .125 | 1,987 | .048 | .723 | 1,383 |
TTH | -.154 | .060 | -.149 | -2.556 | .011 | .834 | 1,199 |
SCH | -.279 | .069 | -.264 | -4.025 | .000 | .662 | 1,511 |
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | Collinearity Statistics | |||
B | Std. Error | Beta | Tolerance | VIF | |||
QTC TTN NST | .244 .257 .136 | .071 .080 .085 | .199 .189 .091 | 3,446 3.201 1,597 | .001 .002 .112 | .859 .815 .877 | 1,165 1,226 1,140 |
R Square: | 51.2% | ||||||
Durbin-Watson | 1,568 | ||||||
Dependent Variable: MCN (BSC Acceptance) | |||||||
The explanatory power of the research model is 51.2% (R Square = 0.512), which means that the independent variables explain 51.2% of the variation in the dependent variable (BSC_MCN acceptance level).
4.6.2. Model testing with dependent variable: Acceptance level BSC_MCN'
This section tests the impact of factors on the BSC_MCN' acceptance level variable developed from the reality of Vietnamese enterprises through the qualitative research step. The results in Table 4.22 imply that: hypotheses H1, H2, H3, H4, H5 and H6 are all accepted because the statistical significance value is less than 0.05 (respectively: 0.006; 0.000; 0.000; 0.006; 0.001 and 0.015). This means that factors including: leadership participation, centralization, systematization, influence of the financial department, internal communication and product-market dynamism have an impact on the BSC acceptance level in strategic management in Vietnamese enterprises. Regarding the signs and magnitudes of the beta values for the variables, there are four variables that are directly proportional to the dependent variable MCN' (QLC: 0.168; QTC: 0.153; TTN: 0.187 and NST: 0.134), two important variables are
inversely proportional relationship (TTH: -0.216; SCH: -0.228), consistent with the research hypothesis (see table 4.22).
Table 4.22: Factors affecting the level of acceptance of BSC_MCN'
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | T | Sig. | Collinearity Statistics | |||
B | Std. Error | Beta | Tolerance | VIF | |||
(Constant) QLC TTH SCH QTC TTN NST | 1,830 .185 -.205 -.222 .173 .234 .184 | .564 .066 .053 .061 .063 .071 .075 | .168 -.216 -.228 .153 .187 .134 | 3,247 2,793 -3.839 -3.608 2,757 3,284 2,443 | .001 .006 .000 .000 .006 .001 .015 | .723 .834 .662 .859 .815 .877 | 1,383 1,199 1,511 1,165 1,226 1,140 |
R Square: | 0.549 | ||||||
Durbin-Watson | 1,589 | ||||||
Dependent Variable: MCN' (BSC Adoption Level) | |||||||
The explanatory power of the research model is 54.9% (R Square = 0.549), which means that the independent variables explain 54.9% of the variation in the dependent variable (BSC_MCN' acceptance level).
4.6.3. Choosing a research model
The results of the explanatory power (R-Square) of the two models show that the second model explains better than the first model with the corresponding explanatory power of R 2 = 54.9% and 51.2%. That is, the independent variables in the first model explain 51.2% of the variation in the dependent variable. While the independent variables in the second model explain 54.9% of the variation in the dependent variable. This shows that
The second model is more suitable for the actual situation of Vietnamese enterprises. In other words, the variable: the level of acceptance of BSC in strategic management at Vietnamese enterprises (MCN) built from theory should be replaced by the variable: the level of acceptance of BSC in strategic management at Vietnamese enterprises (MCN ' ) developed from the reality of Vietnamese enterprises.
Through qualitative research methods will be suitable for the reality of strategic management in Vietnamese enterprises today.
4.7. ANOVA test
The purpose of this step is to test whether or not there is a difference in the level of impact of independent variables on dependent variables between different research groups. The method used is ANOVA (Analysis Of Variance). This process is also carried out in two steps: (1) Levene test for homogeneity of variance and (2) ANOVA test for variance of mean values between groups.
The classification of research groups for inclusion in the ANOVA test is based on previous studies and the author's qualitative research process. Specifically, it includes: (1) business size based on the research of Kenvin Hendricks, Larry Menor and Christine Wiedman (2004) [49], (2) ownership form and (3) business type based on the author's qualitative research.
Similarly, this part will be conducted in turn with two different independent variables: BSC_MCN acceptance level drawn from the theoretical overview; and variable : BSC_MCN acceptance level drawn from the reality of Vietnamese enterprises through the qualitative research part.
4.7.1. ANOVA test with dependent variable: Acceptance level of BSC_MCN
Table 4.23 shows that the homoscedasticity condition is satisfied ( p =
0.436 >0.05), meaning there is no difference in variance between groups.
Table 4.23: Levene test for homoscedasticity
F
df1 | df2 | Sig. | |
1.901 | 35 | 170 | .436 |
a. Design: Intercept + Scale + Business type + Ownership form + Scale * Business type + Scale * Ownership form + Business type * Ownership form + Scale * Business type * Ownership form
Next, the results in Table 4.24 show that all p values are greater than 0.05, so there is no difference in the mean values between the groups. In other words, there is no difference in the level of impact of the independent variables on the dependent variable.
(MCN) among study groups by firm size, business type, and ownership form.
Table 4.24: ANOVA test of average variance between groups
Source
Type III Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
Corrected Model | 51,809 a | 35 | 1,480 | .918 | .605 |
Intercept | 1438.322 | 1 | 1438.322 | 891,767 | .000 |
Scale | 3,449 | 2 | 1,724 | 1,069 | .346 |
Business type | 5.159 | 2 | 2,580 | 1,599 | .205 |
Form of ownership | 3.142 | 3 | 1,047 | .649 | .584 |
Size * Business type | 2,746 | 4 | .686 | .426 | .790 |
Size * Ownership form | 4,457 | 6 | .743 | .461 | .837 |
Business type * Ownership form | 6,720 | 6 | 1,120 | .694 | .654 |
Size * Business type * Ownership form | 22,277 | 12 | 1,856 | 1.151 | .323 |
Error | 274,191 | 170 | 1,613 | ||
Total | 2180,000 | 206 | |||
Corrected Total | 326,000 | 205 |
a. R Squared = .159 (Adjusted R Squared = -.014)
4.7.2. ANOVA test with dependent variable: Acceptance level BSC_MCN'
Similarly, Table 4.25 shows that the homogeneity of variance condition is satisfied (p=.478), meaning that there is also no difference in variance between groups.
Table 4.25: Levene test for homoscedasticity
F
df1 | df2 | Sig. | |
1,657 | 35 | 170 | .478 |
a. Design: Intercept + Size + Business Type + Ownership + Size * Business Type
+ Scale * Form of ownership + Type of business * Form of ownership + Scale * Type of business * Form of ownership
In addition, the results in Table 4.26 imply that all p-values are greater than 0.05, so there is no difference in the mean values between the groups. In other words, there is no difference in the impact level of the Independent variables on the dependent variable.
belonging (MCN') among research groups by firm size, business type and ownership form.
Table 4.26: ANOVA test of average variance between groups
Source
Type III Sum of Squares | Df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
Corrected Model | 39,561 a | 35 | 1,130 | .809 | .766 |
Intercept | 1520.061 | 1 | 1520.061 | 1.088E3 | .000 |
Scale | .152 | 2 | .076 | .054 | .947 |
Business type | .330 | 2 | .165 | .118 | .889 |
Form of ownership | 7,480 | 3 | 2,493 | 1,785 | .152 |
Size * Business type | 3,741 | 4 | .935 | .670 | .614 |
Size * Ownership form | 6,546 | 6 | 1,091 | .781 | .586 |
Business type * Ownership form | 6,571 | 6 | 1,095 | .784 | .583 |
Size * Business type * Ownership form | 8,611 | 12 | .718 | .514 | .904 |
Error | 237,425 | 170 | 1,397 | ||
Total | 2236.444 | 206 | |||
Corrected Total | 276,986 | 205 |
a. R Squared = .143 (Adjusted R Squared =- .034)
Thus, with the ANOVA test results as above, it can be affirmed that the impact level of the independent variables: leadership participation, centralization, systematization, influence of the financial department, internal communication, product - market dynamism on the dependent variable of the level of BSC acceptance in strategic management at Vietnamese enterprises has no difference between the research groups in terms of scale, business type and ownership form of Vietnamese enterprises.
4.8. Hypothesis testing results
Based on the above analysis results (Table 4.27), it can be seen that the beta coefficients are all statistically significant. This means that the variables: senior management involvement, financial department power, internal communication and product and market dynamism have a positive impact and the variables centralization, system