List of Abbreviations
Chapter 7: Chapter 7: Findings on the Association of BSC with Organisational Commitment and Public Service Motivation
7.6 Data analysis preparation
7.7.3 SEM analysis .1 Tested model
7.7.3.2 SEM results
The SEM process resulted in fit indices as follows: the RMSEA was 0.053, repesenting a good fit (Steiger 2007; Hair et al. 2010, p. 667). The CFI value was 0.909 and the TLI value was 0.896; these are acceptable. According to Hair et al.
(2010, p. 669) a cut-off criterion of ≥ 0.90 for CFI and TLI indicates goodness of fit.
Meanwhile, the SRMR result was 0.053, which indicates a good fit as it is under the maximum level (0.08) suggested by Hu and Bentler (1999), Hooper et al. (2008) and Iacobucci (2010). Hence, based on the fit index results, the model of the associations between BSC implementation and OC and PSM can be considered to be a good fit.
The complete results of the examination of BSC implementation and its association with OC and PSM are as described in Table 7.18.
Strategy translation
Strategy alignment
Strategy as everyday job
Strategy as continuous process
Leadership involvement
PSM OC
Education Age Gender Tenure
BSC implementation
195
Table 7.18 Measurement model estimates and structural model of BSC, OC and PSM
Measurement model estimates
Strategy translation -> st1 0.77(0.12) ‡
Strategy translation -> st2 0.68(0.02) ‡
Strategy translation -> st3 0.70(0.02) ‡
Strategy translation -> st4 0.62(0.02) ‡
Strategy alignment -> sa1 0.79(0.01) ‡
Strategy alignment -> sa2 0.86(0.01) ‡
Strategy alignment -> sa3 0.69(0.01) ‡
Strategy as job -> sj1 0.67(0.01) ‡
Strategy as job -> sj2 0.73(0.01) ‡
Strategy as job -> sj3 0.65(0.02) ‡
Strategy as job -> sj4 0.67(0.02) ‡
Strategy as job -> sj5 0.64(0.02) ‡
Strategy as job -> sj6 0.62(0.02) ‡
Strategy as job -> sj7 0.58(0.02) ‡
Strategy process -> sp1 0.74(0.01) ‡
Strategy process -> sp2 0.78(0.01) ‡
Strategy process -> sp3 0.78(0.01) ‡
Strategy process -> sp4 0.68(0.01) ‡
Leadership involvement -> li1 0.76(0.01) ‡
Leadership involvement -> li2 0.79(0.01) ‡
Leadership involvement -> li3 0.77(0.12) ‡
Leadership involvement -> li4 0.81(0.01) ‡
Leadership involvement -> li5 0.59(0.02) ‡
Leadership involvement -> li6 0.59(0.02) ‡
OC -> oc1 0.40(0.02) ‡
OC -> oc2 0.48(0.02) ‡
OC -> oc3 0.54(0.02) ‡
OC -> oc4 0.46(0.02) ‡
OC -> oc5 0.55(0.02) ‡
OC -> oc6 0.61(0.02) ‡
OC -> oc7 0.84(0.01) ‡
OC -> oc8 0.85(0.01) ‡
OC -> oc9 0.86(0.01) ‡
PSM -> psm2 0.67(0.02) ‡
PSM -> sj3 0.47(0.02) ‡
PSM -> sj4 0.69(0.02) ‡
PSM -> sj5 0.49(0.02) ‡
Structural model
PSM -> OC 0.13(0.03) ‡
Educational level -> OC -0.00(0.01)
Age -> OC -0.07(0.02) ‡
Gender -> OC -0.05(0.02) ‡
Organisation tenure -> OC -0.00(0.02)
Strategy translation -> OC -0.36(0.14) †
Strategy alignment -> OC 0.09(0.06)
Strategy as job -> OC 0.08(0.09)
Strategy process -> OC 0.33(0.06) ‡
Leadership involvement -> OC 0.63(0.08) ‡
Educational level -> PSM -0.18(0.03)
Age -> PSM 0.12(0.03) ‡
Gender -> PSM 0.05(0.03) *
Organisation tenure -> PSM -0.08(0.03) ‡
Strategy translation -> PSM 0.49(0.19) †
Strategy alignment -> PSM -0.04(0.09)
Strategy as job -> PSM 0.35(0.13) ‡
Strategy process -> PSM -0.26(0.08) ‡
Leadership involvement -> PSM -0.01(0.11)
Note: Reported are standardised coefficients (standard errors). Sig.: *: 10% or less; †: 5% or less;
‡: 1% or less.
196 7.8 Hypothesis testing
This section discusses the associations between the findings and the hypotheses proposed. Before presenting the findings with regard to the hypotheses, we provide the findings as related to the control variables. Educational level was found to have an insignificant relationship with both OC and PSM. This finding thus contrasts with those of previous studies (Motaz 1986; Perry 1997; Camilleri and Heijden 2007). Concerning age, the results were mixed; older age showed a negative relationship with OC (β=- 0.07 at ρ <0.01) and a positive relationship with PSM (β= 0.12 at ρ <0.01). Therefore, as regards the connection of age with OC, the findings supported the previous study by Camilleri and Heijden (2007).
Meanwhile, regarding the connection between age and PSM, the findings supported Perry (1997). With respect to gender, maleness had a negative association with OC (β=- 0.05 at ρ <0.01), supporting Perry’s (1997) results.
However, maleness showed a positive association with PSM (β= 0.05 at ρ <0.1), confirming Vandenabeele’s (2011) work. In terms of organisation tenure, only the relationship with PSM was significant (β=- 0.08 at ρ <0.05); no significant relationship with OC was shown. This result thus supports Balfour and Wechsler’s (1996) conclusion that organisation tenure has an insignificant relationship with OC.
Turning to the main variables, three main hypotheses were to be tested in this part of the research: the association of BSC implementation with OC, the association of BSC implementation with PSM, and the relationship of OC with PSM in organisations implementing BSC. The following is an explanation of the hypothesis testing based on the findings from the SEM process. Firstly, with regard to OC, we found that of the five latent variables of BSC implementation, three had a significant effect. These were strategy translation, strategy as a continuous process and leadership involvement. The relationship between BSC implementation and OC can be summarised thus:
197
- Strategy translation has a negative and significant relationship with OC (β=- 0.36 at ρ <0.05);
- Strategy as a continuous process has a positive and significant relationship with OC (β= 0.33 at ρ <0.01);
- Leadership involvement has a positive and significant relationship with OC (β=
0.63 at ρ <0.01).
Secondly, in a similar vein, not all variables of BSC implementation showed a statistically significant relationship with PSM. The three latent variables found to have a significant association with PSM were strategy translation, strategy as everyone’s everyday job, and strategy as a continuous process. Meanwhile, the other two variables, strategy alignment and leadership involvement, were not found to be significantly associated with PSM. The significant associations can be summarised thus:
- Strategy translation has a positive and significant relationship with PSM (β= 0.49 at ρ <0.05);
- Strategy as everyone’s everyday job has a positive and significant relationship with PSM (β= 0.35 at ρ <0.01);
- Strategy as a continuous process has a negative and significant relationship with PSM (β= -0.26 at ρ <0.01).
Thirdly, regarding the association between OC and PSM, we found PSM to have a positive correlation with OC (β= 0.13 at ρ <0.01). Table 7.19 summarises the findings in correlation with the hypotheses.
198 Table 7.19 Hypothesis testing results
Research question
Hypothesis Results
RQ3. Do the SFO principles within the
implementation of the BSC framework have a relationship with
organisational commitment?
H4. The SFO principles within the implementation of the BSC are positively associated with organisational commitment.
H4a. The better the strategy translation through BSC implementation, the more employees’ organisational commitment will increase;
H4b. The better the strategy alignment through BSC implementation, the more employees’ organisational commitment will increase;
H4c. The better the realisation of strategy as everyone’s everyday job through BSC implementation, the more employees’
organisational commitment will increase;
H4d. The better the realisation of strategy as a continuous process through BSC implementation, the more employees’
organisational commitment will increase;
H4e. The better the leadership involvement through BSC implementation, the more employees’ organisational commitment will increase.
Not supported. Strategy translation has a negative and significant relationship with OC (β=- 0.36 at ρ <0.05);
Not significant. Strategy alignment has a positive and insignificant relationship with OC (β= 0.09 at ρ >0.1);
Not significant. Strategy as everyone’s everyday job has positive and insignificant relationship with OC (β= 0.08 at ρ >0.1);
Supported. Strategy as a continuous process has a positive and significant relationship with OC (β= 0.33 at ρ <0.01);
Supported. Leadership involvement has a positive and significant relationship with OC (β= 0.63 at ρ <0.01).
RQ4. Do the SFO principles within the implementation of BSC have a relationship with public service
motivation?
H5. The SFO principles within the implementation of the BSC are positively associated with public service motivation.
H5a. The better the strategy translation through BSC implementation, the more employees’ public service motivation will increase;
H5b. The better the strategy alignment through BSC implementation, the more employees’ public service motivation will increase;
H5c. The better the realisation of strategy as everyone’s everyday job through BSC implementation, the more employees’
public service motivation will increase;
H5d. The better the realisation of strategy as a continuous process through BSC implementation, the more employees’
public service motivation will increase;
Supported. Strategy translation has a positive and significant relationship with PSM (β= 0.49 at ρ <0.05);
Not significant. Strategy alignment has a negative and insignificant relationship with PSM (β= -0.04 at ρ >0.1);
Supported. Strategy as everyone’s everyday job has a positive and significant relationship with PSM (β= 0.35 at ρ <0.01);
Supported. Strategy as a continuous process has a negative and significant
199
H5e. The better the leadership involvement through BSC implementation, the more employees’ public service motivation will increase.
relationship with PSM (β= -0.26 at ρ <0.01);
Not significant. Leadership involvement has a negative and insignificant relationship with PSM (β= -0.01 at ρ >0.01).
RQ5. How does OC relate to PSM within an organisation implementing the BSC?
H6. Public service motivation is positively associated with organizational commitment within organisations that apply the BSC as their performance management systems.
Supported. OC is positively associated with PSM within organisations applying the BSC (β= 0.13 at ρ <0.01).