CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.5 Hypotheses Test
4.5.4 The Results of Moderating Effect Test
4.5.4.2 The Moderating Effect Test of Company Size on the Relationship
For the sake of better testing the influence of moderating variables and avoid the interference from other variables, this study used the hierarchical regression method for testing. The Model 1 in Table 4.31 used control variables (e.g. Position, Region, Age, Type, Action) to perform regression analysis on DT.
Having regression analysis of employee position, the dummy variable P_3 (=0.292, P<0.05) indicated that the impact of middle managers on the DT of enterprises was higher than that of general staffs; and the dummy variable P_4 (=0.381, P<0.01) indicated that the impact of senior managers on the DT of enterprises was higher than that of general staffs.
Having regression analysis of region which the enterprise belongs to, the dummy variable R_2 (=0.259, P<0.05) indicated that the eastern region had a higher impact on the DT of enterprise than the northeast region; The dummy variable R_4 (=- 0.489, P<0.001) indicated that the northeast region had a higher impact on the DT of enterprise than the western region.
Having regression analysis of age of the enterprise, the dummy variable A_4 (=0.628, P<0.001) indicated that the impact of the enterprise’s establishment period >10 years on the DT of enterprise was higher than that of the enterprise’s establishment period <3 years.
Having regression analysis of situation of the DT of enterprise, the dummy variable Action_2 (=-0.599, P<0.01), the dummy variable Action_3 (=- 0.566, P<0.01), and the dummy variable Action_4 (=-0.682, P<0.01) indicated that
“No, and there is no intention and plan for DT” had the greatest impact on the DT of enterprises.
Therefore, the employee position, the region of the enterprise, the age of the enterprise, and the situation of enterprises’ DT all had different degrees of impact on the DT of the enterprise.
It added the independent variable EE and the moderating variable Size in the Model 6 for regression. It added the multiplicative term of Zscore (Size) and Zscore (EE) in the Model 7 for regression. It added the variable DI in the Model 8 for regression. As shown in Table 4.31, the regression coefficient of the multiplicative term of Zscore (Size) and Zscore (EE) in the Model 7 was 0.152 (P<0.001), indicating that
the multiplicative term can significantly affect DT, and the R2 of the Model 6 was 0.352 and that of the Model 7 was 0.384, which was significantly improved, indicating that the model interpretation ability was enhanced. Therefore, it was proved that the moderating variable Size played a significant moderating role between the independent variable EE and the dependent variable DT, so the hypothesis H7 was valid. In addition, the regression coefficient of DI in the Model 8 was 0.305 (P < 0.001), and the effect was significant; R2 of the Model 7 was 0.384, and R2 of the Model 8 was 0.452, which was significantly improved, indicating that the model interpretation ability was enhanced. Therefore, it was proved that the moderating variable Size strengthened the impact of the independent variable EE on the dependent variable DT through the mediating variable DI, so the hypothesis H11 was valid.
Table 4.31 The Moderating Effect Test of Company Size on the Relationship between the External Environment and DT Independent VariablesDependent Variable: DT Model 1Model 2Model 3Model 4Model 5Model 6Model 7Model 8 PositionP_20.1120.0460.0560.0310.0620.010.0270.005 P_30.292*0.1210.279*0.1610.2190.1280.170.056 P_40.381**0.277**0.301**0.254*0.337**0.252*0.226*0.074 RegionR_20.259*0.1360.1630.1880.1770.110.1250.062 R_30.08-0.123-0.022-0.012-0.055-0.118-0.133-0.156 R_4-0.489***-0.294*-0.363**-0.245-0.303*-0.225-0.271*-0.234* AgeA_20.334*0.313*0.2370.150.1840.1560.1260.09 A_30.599***0.568***0.531**0.481**0.455**0.429**0.393**0.256 A_40.628***0.578***0.489**0.485**0.499**0.444**0.416**0.256 TypeT_2-0.083-0.054-0.0380.004-0.073-0.021-0.0050.042 ActionAction_2-0.599**-0.460*-0.534**-0.378*-0.511**-0.417*-0.406*-0.337* Action_3-0.566**-0.471*-0.511**-0.314-0.436*-0.361-0.349-0.234 Action_4-0.682**-0.525**-0.634**-0.404*-0.526**-0.442*-0.411*-0.21 Size- 0.151***0.118**0.146***0.130**0.118**0.148***0.103** CN- 0.359***- - - MC- - 0.339***- - -
Independent VariablesDependent Variable: DT Model 1Model 2Model 3Model 4Model 5Model 6Model 7Model 8 GP- - - 0.345***- - - - TT- - - - 0.318***- - - EE- - - 0.559***0.537***0.414*** Zscore (Size)*Zscore (EE)- - - 0.152***0.122*** DI- - - 0.305*** Constant3.667***1.980***2.193***1.829***2.176***1.331***1.303***0.778** F6.064***10.539***10.955***11.672***10.208***14.444***15.515***19.283*** R²0.1640.2840.2920.3050.2770.3520.3840.452 Adjusted R² 0.1370.2570.2650.2790.250.3280.3590.429 D-W0.30.5360.5570.5450.5160.6560.70.581 Maximum VIF6.2886.3476.36.456.3496.3756.3846.552 Note: ***P＜0.001，**P＜0.01，*P＜0.05
4.5.4.3 The Moderating Effect Test of Company Size on the Relationship between the External Environment and DI For the sake of better testing the influence of moderating variables and avoid interference from other variables, this study used the hierarchical regression method for testing. The Model 9 in Table 4.32 used control variables (e.g. Position, Region, Age, Type, Action) to perform regression analysis on DI.
Having regression analysis of employee position, the dummy variable P_3 (=0.467, P<0.01) indicated that the impact of middle managers on the DI of enterprises was higher than that of general staffs; and the dummy variable P_4 (=0.618, P<0.01) indicated that the impact of senior managers on the DI of enterprises was higher than that of general staffs.
Having regression analysis of region which the enterprise belongs to, the dummy variable R_2 (=0.311, P<0.01) indicated that the eastern region had a higher impact on the DI of enterprise than the northeast region; The dummy variable R_4 (=- 0.306, P<0.05) indicated that the northeast region had a higher impact on the DI of enterprise than the western region.
Having regression analysis of age of the enterprise, the dummy variable A_4 (=0.684, P<0.001) indicated that the impact of the enterprise’s establishment period >10 years on the DI of enterprise was higher than that of the enterprise’s establishment period <3 years.
Having regression analysis of situation of the DT of enterprise, the dummy variable Action_3 (=-0.544, P<0.05), and the dummy variable Action_4 (=- 0.866, P<0.001) indicated that “No, and there is no intention and plan for DT” had the greatest impact on the DI of enterprises.
Therefore, the employee position, the region of the enterprise, the age of the enterprise, and the situation of enterprises’ DT all had different degrees of impact on the DI of the enterprise.
It added the independent variable EE and the moderating variable Size in the Model 14 for regression. It added the multiplicative term of Zscore (Size) and Zscore (EE) in the Model 15 for regression. As shown in Table 4.32, the regression coefficient of the multiplicative term of Zscore (Size) and Zscore (EE) in the Model 15 was 0.097 (P < 0.01), indicating that the multiplicative term can significantly affect DI, and the R2 of the Model 14 was 0.297 and that of the Model 15 was 0.309, which was significantly improved, indicating that the model interpretation ability was enhanced.
Therefore, it was proved that the moderating variable Size played a significant moderating role between the independent variable EE and the dependent variable DI, so the hypothesis H8 was valid.
Table 4.32 The Moderating Effect Test of Company Size on the Relationship between the External Environment and DI Independent VariablesDependent Variable: DI Model 9Model 10Model 11Model 12Model 13Model 14Model 15 PositionP_20.1400.0860.1010.0690.1080.0630.074 P_30.467**0.329*0.461**0.355*0.425**0.347*0.373** P_40.618***0.530***0.557***0.506***0.582***0.516***0.500*** RegionR_20.311**0.2100.244*0.250*0.259*0.1990.209 R_30.241*0.0710.1630.1580.1460.0860.077 R_4-0.306*-0.136-0.200-0.088-0.166-0.093-0.123 AgeA_20.2750.2550.2040.1130.1760.1380.119 A_30.592**0.571***0.555**0.494**0.513**0.472**0.448** A_40.684***0.641***0.586***0.559**0.600***0.544**0.526** TypeT_2-0.215-0.190-0.181-0.139-0.205-0.166-0.156 ActionAction_2-0.380-0.260-0.323-0.184-0.311-0.234-0.228 Action_3-0.544*-0.463*-0.500*-0.324-0.456*-0.385-0.378 Action_4-0.866***-0.733***-0.823***-0.622**-0.757***-0.679**-0.659** Size- 0.149**0.129**0.144**0.139**0.126**0.145** CN- 0.291***- - - MC- - 0.230***- - - -
Independent VariablesDependent Variable: DI Model 9Model 10Model 11Model 12Model 13Model 14Model 15 GP- - - 0.298***- - - TT- - - - 0.198***- - EE- - - 0.418***0.404*** Zscore(Size)*Zscore(EE) - - - 0.097** Constant3.603***2.148***2.452***1.958***2.495***1.739***1.721*** F7.119***9.817***9.131***10.959***8.564***11.221***11.125*** R²0.1880.2700.2560.2920.2440.2970.309 Adjusted R² 0.1610.2420.2280.2650.2150.2700.281 D-W0.5780.7240.6760.7200.6260.7130.763 Maximum VIF6.2886.3476.3006.4506.3496.3756.384 Note: ***P＜0.001，**P＜0.01，*P＜0.05
4.5.4.4 The Moderating Effect Test of Company Size on the