List of Abbreviations
Chapter 6: Chapter 6: Findings on the Associations of Organisation Size and Employee Roles with the BSC
6.9 Hypothesis testing
170
- Employees working in strategic positions were likely to report higher levels of leadership involvement (β= 0.10 at ρ <0.01).
These results regarding BSC implementation and its associations with organisation size and strategic employees’ roles are further discussed in Chapter 9. Appendix 9 contains more information on the associations of BSC with organisation size and strategic employees’ roles.
171
(β= 0.89), strategy alignment and strategy as everyone’s everyday job (β= 0.86), strategy alignment and strategy as a continuous process (β= 0.68), strategy alignment and leadership involvement (β= 0.67), strategy as everyone’s everyday job and strategy as a continuous process (β= 0.82), strategy as everyone’s everyday job and leadership involvement (β= 0.76) and strategy as a continuous process and leadership involvement (β= 0.77), with all significant at ρ <0.01. Thus, Hypothesis H1 (SFO principles correlate positively with each other within the implementation of the BSC) is supported.
Hypothesis H2 estimated that a large organisation has more influence on the implementation of BSC than a small organisation. The results showed the large organisations to have a negative association with all five SFO principles. Thus, Hypothesis H2 is not supported. Hypothesis 3 predicted that employees with strategic roles would have a significant and positive relationship with BSC implementation as represented by SFO principles. The results showed employees with strategic roles to have a significant association with four of the five latent variables representing BSC implementation. Strategy as a continuous process was the only variable that did not show a significant association with employees holding strategic roles. Therefore, Hypothesis H3 is partly supported. Table 6.20 summarises the findings of this chapter regarding the hypotheses under consideration.
172 Table 6.20 Hypothesis testing results
Research questions Hypothesis Results
RQ1. How do SFO principles relate to each other within implementation of the BSC?
H1. SFO principles correlate positively with each other within the implementation of the BSC.
Supported. All latent variables showed significant relationships at ρ
<0.01 as follows:
- β= 0.80 for strategy translation and strategy alignment, - β= 0.87 for strategy translation and strategy as everyday job, - β= 0.84 for strategy translation and strategy as a continuous
process,
- β= 0.88 for strategy translation and leadership involvement, - β= 0.86 for strategy alignment and strategy as everyday job, - β= 0.68 for strategy alignment and strategy as a continuous
process,
- β= 0.67 for strategy alignment and leadership involvement, - β= 0.82 for strategy as everyday job and strategy as a continuous
process,
- β= 0.76 for strategy as everyday job and leadership involvement, and
- β= 0.77 strategy as a continuous process and leadership involvement.
RQ2. To what extent are organisational factors associated with the implementation of the BSC?
H2. The large organisation has more influence on the implementation of the BSC than the small organisation.
H2a.The level of BSC strategy translation is higher for employees working in large organisations than for employees working in small organisations;
H2b.The level of BSC strategy alignment is higher for employees working in large organisations than for employees working in small organisations;
H2c.The level of the strategy everyone’s everyday job through in large organisation is higher than that of small organisation;
- Not supported. Large organisation size has a significant and negative relationship with strategy translation (β= -0.25 at ρ
<0.01).
- Not supported. Large organisation size has a significant and negative relationship with the strategy alignment (β= -0.19 at ρ
<0.01).
173
H2d.The level of the strategy as a continuous process through BSC in large organisation is higher than that of small organisation;
H2e.The level of the leadership involvement through a BSC in the large organisation is higher than that of the small organisation..
- Not supported. Large organisation size has a significant and negative relationship with the strategy everyone’s everybody job (β= -0.21 at ρ <0.01).
- Not supported. Large organisation size has a significant and negative relationship with strategy as a continuous process (β= - 0.24 at ρ <0.01).
- Not supported. Large organisation size has a significant and negative relationship with leadership involvement (β= -0.16 at ρ
<0.01).
H3. Employees holding strategic roles have more influence on BSC implementation than other employees.
H3a. The level of strategy translation through BSC of employees holding strategic roles is higher than the rest of employees;
H3b. The level of strategy alignment through BSC of employees holding strategic roles is higher than the rest of employees;
H3c. The level of the strategy everyone’s everyday job through BSC of employees holding strategic roles is higher than the rest of employees;
H3d. The level of the strategy as a continuous process through BSC of employees holding strategic roles is higher than the rest of employees;
H3e. The level of the leadership involvement through a BSC of employees holding strategic roles is higher than the rest of employees.
- Supported. Strategy translation has a positive and significant relationship with strategic employees’ roles (β= 0.19 at ρ <0.01).
- Supported. Strategy alignment has a negative and significant relationship with strategic employees’ roles (β= 0.10 at ρ <0.01).
- Not supported. Strategy as everyone’s everyday job is not significantly different among employees in strategic positions than among other employees (β= 0.11 at ρ >1).
- Supported. Strategy as a continuous process has a significant and negative relationship with strategic employees’ roles (β= 0.02 at ρ
<0.01).
- Supported. Leadership involvement has a significant and negative relationship with strategic employees’ roles (β= 0.10 at ρ <0.01).
174 6.10 Chapter summary
This chapter has provided the empirical evidence of this study of the associations of organisation size and strategic employee roles with the BSC model. Before proceeding to data analysis, the data underwent a screening process including:
sample adequacy analysis, missing data and treatment analysis, analysis of outliers, and testing for the normality of data distribution. Prior to CFA, the validity of the measurement model was tested for reliability and construct validity. The reliability test was conducted using Cronbach’s alpha; the coefficient range from 0.81 to 0.86 indicated that the model was reliable for reliability and internal consistency (Netemeyer et al. 2003). Following Hair and colleagues’ (2010) construct validity classification, this research applied convergent, discriminant and nomological validity testing. All three tests showed evidence of validity convergence, discriminant validity and nomological validity for the BSC CFA model, indicating the construct validity of the model.
The first goal of this study was to examine how SFO principles relate to each other within implementation of the BSC. In this examination, CFA using STATA statistics package version 14 was adopted. The second goal was to investigate BSC implementation’s association with organisation size, and the third goal was to capture any difference in BSC implementation between employees with strategic roles and other employees. To reach the second and third goals, SEM was applied using maximum likelihood, as suggested by Iacobucci (2010). The total number of respondents processed in the analysis stage was 1,604, with 69 respondents missing and excluded from the calculation. During the analysis process, the fit index properties of the CFA results did not reach the minimum thresholds as suggested by Hu and Bentler (1999), Hooper et al. (2008) and Iacobucci (2010).
After re-running the CFA model conducting error term correlations (see Hooper et al. 2008), the fit indices were improved. The RMSEA of 0.069 would be considered by Hooper et al. (2010) to be the maximum score indicating a good model fit (Steiger 2007). In terms of SRMR, the result of 0.055 was under the maximum
175
point (0.06) suggested by Hu and Bentler (1999), Hooper et al. (2008) and Iacobucci (2010). The CFI value index was 0.930 and the TLI value was 0.915.
Hooper et al. (2008) initially advanced a cutoff criterion of ≥ 0.90 for CFI and TLI;
however, recent studies have shown that a value greater than 0.90 for CFI and TLI is needed in order to ensure that mis-specified models are not accepted (Hu and Bentler 1999). Thus, according to the fit index results, the modified model appears to be good fit. Table 6.18 provides information on the modified model fit indices, showing the modified model to be an improved fit. Unlike the CFA results, the SEM results examining the effects of organisational size and employee roles indicated that the model was poor, with fit indices above the standard maximum. However, it is worth noting that organisation size showed a negative and significant relationship with the BSC, while strategic roles showed a positive relationship with BSC implementation in four of the five SFO principles. The next chapter discusses the findings as summarised in Table 6.20.
176