Thông tin tài liệu
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY NGO CHIN THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL CAPITAL, ENTREPRENEURSHIP, AND RESILIENCE CAPABILITY ON THE PERFORMANCE OF STATE-CAPITAL ENTERPRISES IN VIETNAM Major : Business Administration Code : 62 34 01 02 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHYLOSOPHY Ho Chi Minh City, 2020 i the dissertation was completed at: HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY Academic advisor : Assoc prof Nguyen Thuan, PhD Reviewer 1:………………………………… ……………………………… Reviewer 2:………………………………… ……………………………… This dissertation will be presented at the dissertation committee at Ho Chi Minh City Open University Ho Chi Minh City, …………………………… , 2020 This dissertation can be found at Ho Chi Minh City Open University library CHAPTER INTRODUCTION This chapter presents the following main contents in turn: (1) rationale of the study, (2) research objectives, (3) research subjects and scope, (4) research significance, and (5) the structure of the dissertation 1.1 Rationale of the study A State Capital Enterprise (SCE) is an enterprise in which the State does not hold the majority of charter capital or shares It is organized and operated in the form of a joint-stock company or a two-member limited liability company SCEs have been trending in Vietnam in recent years, in light of the mission of restructuring State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) Though most of the SOEs report pre-tax profits, these mainly originate from favorable treatment granted by the government A variety of studies on this topic have been conducted However, these researches have only focused on favorable tangible resources while ignoring intangible ones Social capital, an intangible resource, has received acceptance from the research community for its role in performance at all levels from micro, meso, and macro Social capital can increase tangible resources through support, coordination, share, and cooperation for mutual benefit (Helliwell & Putnam, 1995; Putnam, 1993); maintaining and promoting the sustainable operation of the corporation with the leverage of entrepreneurship (Covin & Slevin, 1991); its impact on the resilience capability to rationally respond, adjust, and allocate resources (Weick, Sutcliffe, & Obstfeld, 2008) Social capital has proven to be a special resource that can grow with time It was studied in Vietnam during the 2000s (Huynh, Nguyen, Nguyen, & Nguyen, 2018) These previous researches have shown the benefits of social capital to enterprises, in particular, promoting innovation (Jiménez-Jiménez, Martínez-Costa, & SanzValle, 2014; Landry, Amara, & Lamari, 2002), enhancing entrepreneurship, and raising the resilience capability (Aldrich & Meyer, 2015) It is useful for handling difficult situations; mitigating risks (Casey, 2002); and promoting entrepreneurship (Sambrook & Roberts, 2005) These factors have contributed to favorable operating results and competitive advantages for businesses Resilience capability also has had a positive relationship for performance periods of environmental turbulence The aggregate of these intangible resources, specifically social capital, entrepreneurship, and resilience capability are expected to have mutual influence and impact on the performance of SCEs in Vietnam This study will design a structural equation model to demonstrate (i) the impact of social capital, entrepreneurship, and resilience capability on SCEs performance and (ii) the mechanism through which social capital affects performance through entrepreneurship and the resilience capability Through a review of previous researches related to four concepts of social capital, entrepreneurship, resilience capability and performance, the writer found that there are many separate studies on each factor such as social capital, entrepreneurship or resilience capability has an impact on performance, however, no research has been found on the performance of SCEs in Vietnam improved due to the direct simultaneous impact of social capital, entrepreneurship, and resilience capability; as well as the indirect impact of social capital through entrepreneurship, resilience capability; and the indirect impact of entrepreneurship through resilience capability That is the reason that the writer chooses to the dissertation: “Impact of Social Capital, Entrepreneurship and Resilience capability on performance of State-capital Enterprises in Vietnam” 1.2 Research objectives - Study on simultaneous direct effects of social capital, entrepreneurship, resilience capability to the performance of SCEs in Vietnam; - Study the indirect effects of social capital through entrepreneurship and resilience capability to the performance of SCEs in Vietnam; - Study the indirect effects of entrepreneurship through resilience capability to the performance of SCEs in Vietnam; - The implications for administrators to improving the performance of SCEs in Vietnam 1.3 Subjects of study and Research scope - Subjects of study: The dissertation will focus on research (1) the direct simultaneous impact of social capital, entrepreneurship and resilience capability on the performance of SCEs in Vietnam, (2) indirect impacts of social capital through entrepreneurship and resilience capability to the performance of SCEs in Vietnam, and (3) the indirect effect of entrepreneurship through resilience capability to the performance of SCEs in Vietnam - Research scope: SCEs operating in Vietnam as of August 2019 1.4 Significance of the study By a data set of 720 state-capital enterprises up to August 2019 in Vietnam, using both qualitative and quantitative methods, the dissertation has provided evidence of the impact of intangible resources including social capital, entrepreneurship, and resilience capability to the performance of SCEs in Vietnam is as follows, and that is also academic contributions of the dissertation: - The direct simultaneous impact of three intangible resources, including social capital, entrepreneurship, and resilience capability, on the performance of SCEs in Vietnam; a specific type of business is in the process of transformation, restructuring to complete - The indirect impact of social capital on the performance of SCEs in Vietnam through entrepreneurship and resilience capability - The indirect impact of entrepreneurship on the performance of SCEs in Vietnam through resilience capability 1.5 Dissertation structure To fulfill above mentioned research objectives, the study is structured as follows: Chapter 1: Introduction, Chapter 2: Literature review, Chapter 3: Research methodology, Chapter 4: Research results, Chapter 5: implications and limitations CHAPTER LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Corporate social capital Social capital is a concept that has been investigated in various fields such as economics, education, society, and psychology It is a multidimensional construct, which includes: (1) a system of networks, (2) human trust, and (3) interconnection between coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit (Helliwell & Putnam, 1995; Putnam, 1993; Quyen, Nguyen, & Huynh, 2017; Van Nguyen, Nguyen, Thuy, Nguyen, & Huynh, 2016) Social capital has been studied at individual, organizational and national level This study focuses on corporate social capital, which is defined as the aggregation of enterprise resources (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992), that exist in a quality relationship with a network structure comprised of a network of leaders (Tushman, 1997), an enterprise’s external network (Brashear Alejandro, Yang, & Boles, 2011), and its internal network (Brookes, Morton, Dainty, & Burns, 2006) The scale of corporate social capital includes both network quality and network structure, shown in the following table (adapted and developed from the original scale of Huynh Thanh Dien, 2012): Social capital of leaders (LD) Network structure and quality of closed networks (proximity) Network structure and quality of open network Internal Social capital (IN) Network structure and network quality among individuals who are members of the business Network structure and network quality among departments within the enterprise Network structure and network quality between individuals and corporate internal divisions External Social capital (EX) Network structure and horizontal network quality Network structure and vertical network quality 2.2 Entrepreneurship Entrepreneurship is a strategic demeanor, expressed in the initiative to seek opportunities under fierce competition based on innovation and a willingness to accept risks (Purwanti, Titin, Nguyen, Mayliza, & Mokodompit, 2020) The structure of entrepreneurship consists of three components: (1) proactive (AC), (2) innovation (IO), and (3) risk-taking (RI) Covin and Miles (1999) proposed four forms of entrepreneurship including sustained regeneration, organizational rejuvenation, strategic renewal, and domain redefinition The core elements of entrepreneurship are the ability to seize business opportunities and develop new venture startups, take risks, and be creative and innovative, and achieve sustainable results or rewards Entrepreneurship is measured in aspects: proactive, innovation, and risk-taking (Kraus, Niemand, Halberstadt, Shaw, & Syrjä, 2017); Details are in the following table (adapted and developed from the original scale of Bolton & Lane, 2012): Proactive (AC) Businesses always aim to achieve the best results Enterprises always take advantage of positive action first Enterprises always proactively see opportunities in difficulties Enterprises are always proactively formulating strategies and operational plans before all situations Innovation (IO) Enterprises are always innovating in all activities Enterprises are always investing in finding new ways to solve problems New ideas are encouraged in all business processes Enterprises are always innovating to best serve the business interests Risk taking (RI) Enterprises are not afraid of risks The business always takes strong action to achieve its goals in a situation involving a risk Enterprises choose to handle calmly to minimize risks Businesses take strong action by venturing into the unknown 2.3 Resilience capability Resilience capability has been defined as maintaining positive adjustments under challenging conditions (Weick et al., 2008) Resilience capability consists of four components: adaptability (AD), anticipatory (AT), agility (AG) and flexibility (FL) Researchers have proposed that businesses should build resilience capability by focusing on capacity and growth (sutcliffe & Vogus, 2003); exploitation and exploration (March, 1991); sustaining competitive advantage by managing performance and resilient systems (Robb, 2000) The core elements of resilience capability are the ability to react, respond, and adjust positively under uncertain and challenging conditions and environmental turbulences; and the agility, flexibility in allocating resources appropriately to ensure the sustainable operation of enterprises (Chu, 2015) Scale of resilience capability is as follow (inherited from the original scale of Chu, 2015) Adaptability (AD) Enterprises often apply new marketing techniques Enterprises regularly introduces new products and services Enterprises often improve products and services Enterprises often adopt new technologies and skills Anticipatory (AT) Enterprises regularly monitor changes in the market Enterprises regularly monitor the competitors' actions Enterprises regularly monitor the changing preferences of consumers Enterprises regularly monitor legal / regulatory changes Enterprises regularly monitor economic changes Enterprises regularly monitor technological progress changes Agility (AG) Enterprises quickly respond to changes in consumer demand in general Enterprises quickly react to the appearance of new products and services from competitors Enterprises quickly introduced new tariffs to respond to changes in prices of competitors Firms rapidly change (ie expand or reduce) the variety of products / services available for sale Businesses quickly switch suppliers to take advantage of lower costs, better quality or improved delivery times Enterprises quickly apply new technologies to produce better, faster and cheaper products and services Enterprises rapidly expanded into new regional and international markets Flexibility (FL) Enterprises are flexible in allocating marketing resources to the market with a diversified product line Enterprises are flexible in allocating production resources to produce a wide range of products Enterprises have flexibility in product design to support a wide range of potential products Enterprises have the ability to adjust their product strategy to match their products / services to the target market segment Enterprises have the ability to effectively rearrange organizational resources to support the company's intended strategies Enterprises have the ability to coordinate resources to develop, produce and distribute products intended to target markets 2.4 performance Performance is a measure of business operations to bring value to the external and internal shareholders of the organization (Antony & Bhattacharyya, 2010) or to create value for internal and outside stakeholders of the organization (Adams & Ctg, 2014) Performance can be measured in a variety of ways, including assessing business success and quantifying the results and effectiveness of the managing organization’s operations (Kennerley & Neely, 2003) Performance can also be measured through the application of objective and subjective indicators Chu (2015) use a typical scale to measure the performance of enterprises has three dimensions: (1) profit or profitability (PR), (2) customer satisfaction (SA) and (3) market efficiency (ME) Scale of performance is as follow: (inherited from the original scale of Chu, 2015) Satisfaction (SA) Enterprises have a high level of customer satisfaction Enterprises have a high level of value supply to customers Enterprises have a high level of response to customer needs Profitability (PR) Enterprises have a high return on investment (ROI) Enterprises have a high revenue on sales (ROS) Enterprises have the ability to achieve high financial targets Market efficiency (ME) Revenue growth rate Market expansion (finding new customers and markets) The level of old customer retention 2.5 Relevant background theories 2.5.1 Theory supports the relationship between social capital and performance * Social capital theory shows that social capital has the character of economic resources (Lin, 2002) According to this theory, each firm will invest in the relationship in order to generate benefits Resource-owned networks play an important role in creating benefits and performance Firstly, the relationship helps to access information In practice, businesses often face imperfect market conditions Therefore, access to information through social relationships is very necessary Second, individuals who are business leaders play an important role in decision-making can be influenced by social connections Some relationships may contain more valuable and powerful resources due to the strategic position of the leader in the network The network of relationships that forms social capital can circulate within the enterprise, reach out to interrelated businesses and even participate in the market, making it easy for businesses to achieve high performance * The theory of the strength of weak ties (Granovetter, 1973) deals with the role of the open network and the ability to exploit diverse and rich resources outside the internal network Weak ties are connections through bridges that are indirect outside relationships With this connection, the locality of the relationship are broken, increasing the relationship's extroversion This is also a factor that businesses need to pay attention to, invest in and exploit because it is the foundation for the strategic direction of business cooperation (Morgan, 2012) Indeed, compared to strong linkages and closed networks, weak ties and open networks not require much effort to invest and maintain * Structural gap theory: Burt R S (2009) has supplemented the weak ties strength theory by showing the role of the mediated network through structural gap theory Intermediary network is understood as the subject helps to connect businesses in two different network structures, creating the flow of resources in the network This theory contributes to explain the role of intermediaries (brokers) in the operation of the business * Institutional Theory: Institutional Theory states that when business leaders have promulgated strong decentralization (social capital of leaders); promulgating an active interpersonal and inter-departmental coordination mechanism (internal social capital) as well as promulgating a mechanism of cooperation, alliances and links with outside stakeholders (external social capital) will significantly improve the performance of the business because there is a clear mechanism of members, the parties participating in coordination will have the basis to perform the work effectively, without distraction, passively; There are mechanisms in place that will have a strict reward and penalty policy, thereby helping businesses quickly implement their decisions to bring the best results This theory contributes to the explanation of social capital that improves performance * Resource dependence theory: Resource dependence theory states that a business cannot operate alone but always has resource relationships with stakeholders and external organizations (external social capital); enterprises know how to exploit, utilize and have the support of external resources to help reduce the uncertainties of the business environment (Pfeffer, 1972) and help reduce transaction costs (Williamson, 1984) , thereby improving 20 CHAPTER RESEARCH RESULTS 4.1 Data analysis Characteristics of surveyed enterprises: Most types of enterprises are joint stock companies with agricultural capital accounting for 35.7%; The main field of activity is manufacturing, construction up to 49.6%; The number of major branches from to branches accounts for 30.6%; The structure of state capital is slow; Equitization area reached 100% in the sample; The equitization year focused heavily on the period 2018-2019 due to the time close to collecting information; Business results are mostly from normal to very good Characteristics of individuals surveyed: Male and female gender equivalent; Respondents aged 41-50 accounted for the majority of 34.7%; University education accounts for the majority of 49.9%; The leadership positions that answer most are deputy directors to general directors; The main task is senior manager reaching 25.2%; The common working time in enterprises in group to years is 26.4%; Working time in state-owned enterprises concentrated much about to 10 years, accounting for 36.1% 4.2 Research results 4.2.1 Testing scale The Cronbach’s Alpha reliability coefficient of the scale of concepts is presented in Table 4.1 as follows: Table 4.1: Cronbach’s alpha Scales Measurement items Cronbach’s alpha Leader social capital (LD) 05 0.839 Internal social capital (IN) 03 0.766 External social capital (EX) 07 0.874 Proactive (AC) 04 0.872 Innovation (IO) 04 0.829 Risk taking (RI) 04 0.863 Adaptability (AD) 04 0.877 Anticipatory (AT) 06 0.889 Agility (AG) 07 0.912 21 Flexibility (FL) 06 0.897 Satisfaction (SA) 03 0.852 Proficiency (PR) 03 0.868 Market efficiency (ME) 03 0.846 The results show that all scales meet the requirements of Cronbach's Alpha reliability coefficient: the highest is the AG scale with α = 0.912 (agility scale) and the lowest is the IN scale with α = 0.766 (the scale of internal social capital) Therefore, the scales continue to be evaluated by the EFA exploratory factor analysis method The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) result showed a value of 0.5 ≤ KMO = 0.903 ≤ 1; total variance extracted = 61.266% > 50% at eigenvalue = 1.235> 1; the maximum load factor of each observed variable was ≥ 0.5 This shows that the exploratory factor analysis was consistent with the survey data Fifty-nine items with 13 latent variables were used in the model Table 4.2 EFA results Factors (latent variables) Leader SC Inter nal SC Exter nal SC Proa ctive inno vati on Rist takin g 10 11 12 13 Agilit y Flex ibilit y Sati sfac tion Profit ability Market Efficiency Items LD1 578 LD2 744 LD3 739 LD4 712 LD5 730 Adapt Antic abilit ipato y ry IN1 787 IN2 686 IN3 659 EX1 691 EX2 812 EX3 655 EX4 765 EX5 683 EX6 620 22 EX7 644 AC1 709 AC2 846 AC3 888 AC4 732 IO1 685 IO2 715 IO3 756 IO4 806 RI1 867 RI2 710 RI3 701 RI4 827 AD1 801 AD2 804 AD3 800 AD4 810 AT1 686 AT2 527 AT3 815 AT4 805 AT5 737 AT6 810 AG1 883 AG2 790 AG3 849 AG4 679 AG5 738 AG6 790 AG7 670 FL1 808 FL2 537 FL3 783 FL4 835 FL5 803 FL6 800 SA1 857 SA2 872 SA3 694 PR1 798 23 PR2 862 PR3 833 ME1 807 ME2 780 ME3 839 Tests KMO value Sig value (Bartlett's Test of Sphericity) Cumulative variance Eigenvalues value 0.903 0.000 61.266 1.235 The data satisfaction for exploratory factor analysis was tested using Kaiser-MeyerOlkin (KMO) The value of 0.903 confirmed the adequacy of the sample size Another measure to examine the correlation of the measured items is Barlett’s test of sphericity It provides the statistical test for the presence of correlation among the measured items (Hair, Sarstedt, Ringle, & Mena, 2012) The cumulative variance (%) in this research was 61.266%, meaning that over 61% of the amount of its variance was explained by the factor Factor loading was another parameter used to ensure the practical significance of the EFA analysis The results with factor loading ranging from 0.527 to 0.862 indicated the data appropriateness for the next analysis step Thus, the EFA results showed that the exploratory factor analysis is consistent with the survey data The scales are standard for performing CFA analysis 4.2.2 CFA Analysis and SEM test The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results of the social capital, entrepreneurship, resilience capability and performance matched the data in terms of Chi-squared / df, GFI, TLI, CFI, and RMSEA index in the Figure 4.1 The average variance extracted (AVE) values were in the range of 0.506 to 0.691, ensuring the convergent characteristics of the data as in Table 4.3 24 Table 4.3: Confirmatory factor analysis results Scales EX LD IN AC RI IO AG FL AT Items EX1 EX2 EX3 EX4 EX5 EX6 EX7 LD1 LD2 LD3 LD4 LD5 IN1 IN2 IN3 AC1 AC2 AC3 AC4 RI1 RI2 RI3 RI4 IO1 IO2 IO3 IO4 AG1 AG2 AG3 AG4 AG5 AG6 AG7 FL1 FL2 FL3 FL4 FL5 FL6 AT1 AT2 Weight 0.771 0.789 0.631 0.850 0.576 0.581 0.732 0.658 0.722 0.724 0.728 0.742 0.762 0.708 0.699 0.810 0.828 0.808 0.743 0.870 0.624 0.760 0.879 0.722 0.694 0.714 0.836 0.855 0.786 0.804 0.784 0.798 0.807 0.579 0.771 0.798 0.730 0.799 0.797 0.749 0.743 0.795 CR AVE 0.875 0.506 0.840 0.512 0.767 0.524 0.875 0.637 0.867 0.624 0.831 0.553 0.914 0.605 0.900 0.600 0.890 0.574 25 AD PR SA ME AT3 AT4 AT5 AT6 AD1 AD2 AD3 AD4 PR1 PR2 PR3 SA1 SA2 SA3 ME1 ME2 ME3 0.777 0.765 0.733 0.730 0.829 0.742 0.805 0.827 0.816 0.856 0.821 0.870 0.821 0.742 0.781 0.808 0.825 0.878 0.642 0.870 0.691 0.691 0.652 0.847 0.648 Several tests were conducted to evaluate the model fitness The SEM result of the standardized structure model showed that the theoretical model was suitable for survey data (Chisquared / df = 1,831 ≤ 3; 0.8 ≤ GFI = 0.848 ≤ 1; 0.9 ≤ TLI = 0.923 ≤ 1; 0.9 ≤ CFI = 0.927 ≤ 1; RMSEA index = 0.038 Entrepreneurship 0.591 0.034 12.06 0.000 Entrepreneurship > Resilience capability 0.055 0.042 22.52 0.000 Social capital > Resilience capability 0.214 0.041 19.14 0.000 Entrepreneurship > performance 0.298 0.040 17.50 0.000 Social capital > performance 0.127 0.042 20.94 0.000 Resilience capability > performance 0.329 0.040 16.90 0.000 26 Figure 4.1 SEM analysis model 27 4.3 Discussion - Regarding impact of social capital on performance of SCEs in Vietnam Social capital has a direct impact on performance with the coefficient of: 0.127, and has an indirect impact on performance through entrepreneurship with the coefficient of: 0.176> 0.127, has an indirect impact on performance through resilience capability with coefficient of: 0.018
Ngày đăng: 18/09/2020, 06:26
Xem thêm:
