Determinig the Effect of Organizational Culture on Small and Medium Enterprises Performance- A SEM Approach

The International Institute for Science, Technology and Education (IISTE). Science, Technology and Medicine Journals Call for Academic Manuscripts
of 10
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
  Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development ISSN 2222-17 ! aper# ISSN 2222-2$%% !&nline# 'ol.%( No.17( 21) 1 Determinig the Effect of Organizational Culture on Small and Medium Enterprises Performance: A SEM Approach *li+u ,utar Seu 1 ( /osli ,amood 2  1( .D !0andidate#( &tman eop *bdulla raduate Scool of 3usiness( 4niversit+ 4tara ,ala+sia 2( Scool of 3usiness ,anagement( 0ollege of 3usiness( 4niversit+ 4tara ,ala+sia 0orresponding *utor5 ali+umutarse  Abstract e ob8ective of tis stud+ is to investigate te relationsip of organi9ational culture on small and medium enterprise !S,E# performance( underpinned b+ contingenc+ teor+( and te structural e:uation modelling !SE,# for data anal+sis. eir relationsip receives a considerable scolarl+ attention in te literature( but few studies ave been conducted among Nigerian S,Es. S,Es are considered as important to te economic growt of  Nigeria and te+ served as te ma8or source of emplo+ment and significantl+ contribute to te te gross domestic  production. 3ased on te teoretical consideration( a model was proposed to e;amine tis relationsip. * :uantitative metod was used wit a total of <) :uestionnaires( self = administered to te owner>managers of S,Es in Nigeria. * total of %11 :uestions was dul+ completed and returned representing 7?.$@ response rate. e stud+ finding is in support of previous studies wo ave suggested te negative relationsip of organi9ational culture and firm performance in man+ organi9ations. e finding from tis stud+ will benefit S,E owner>managers( regulator+ agenc+ ie small and medium enterprise development agenc+ of Nigeria( it will also elp in polic+ formulation and will serve as a frame of future reference. 1.ntroduction Strategies are aimed at gaining a competitive advantage wic is discussed in te management literature. &ne of te most vital variables e;amined at a teoretical and practical dimension witin suc competitive strategies as  been te firm performance. Interactions of variations were anal+9ed in various discussions and studies concerning increase in performance( wic is discussed as an important conclusive variable in te literature. * common teor+ e;plaining performance is te /esource 3ased 'iew !/3'# wic concerned wit emplo+ing resources tat are uni:ue and diversel+ distributed wit a basic trust of using resources tat are valuable( rare( imitable and non = substitutable !3arne+( 1??1#( and contingenc+ teor+. 0ameron and Auinn !2<# saw &0 as a persistent set of values( beliefs( and assumptions tat described organi9ations and teir members( wile 0in-lo+ and ,u8taba !27#( and De long and Bae+ !2# viewed organi9ational culture as a pattern of norms( values( beliefs and attitude tat influences beaviour witin an organi9ation. &rgani9ational culture to  performance relationsip produced mi;ed finding5 e stud+ of 3erson( &reg and Dvir !2%#( Ceniuo and Simosi !2<#( Ngo and oi !2$#( Noar( oldstein and Scroeder !2$#( iu !2?#( E9irim( Nwibere and Emeceta !21# reported significant positive relationsip between organi9ational culture and performance( wereas( te stud+ of leanson etal( !2#( ee etal( !2<#( Navarro and ,o+a !27# establised a significant negative relationsip between te stud+ constructs. e conflicting finding on te &0 = performance relationsip suggest a furter e;amination of organi9ational culture to small and medium enterprises performance !S,E# witin te Nigerian conte;t. erefore( te paper is organi9ed as follows5 section two provides te review of related literature section tree is about te metod including sample and procedure( measurement( goodness of measure and model testing( te ne;t section discuses anal+sis and result( including +potesis testing section five lament on te implications for management section si; provides te limitations and direction for future studies. !. e#ie$ of %iterature 2.1 Organizational culture &rgani9ational culture !&0# as been defined b+ different scolars in different situations and conte;ts !Fale( 1??1#. *ccording to ata !1?$?# organi9ational culture is defined as te wa+ of life of a cluster of people. It is made up of nowledge( morals( belief( norms and values and an+ oter abilities gained b+ one as a fellow of a given societ+. In oter words( it is considered as te uni:ue wa+ of life of a group of people and teir compreensive wa+ of life. *ccording ai and ee !27# organi9ational culture is seen as a collective set of values tat encourages organi9ationGs values( opinion( preference and response. Hofstede !1??)# defined culture as te collective programming of te mind wic differentiates te members of one group from tat of anoter. 0ulture refers to sared traditions( values( and norms !Scein( 1??)#. 0ameron and Auinn !2<# saw &0 as a  persistent set of values( beliefs( and assumptions tat described organi9ations and teir members( wile 0in-lo+ and ,u8taba !27#( and De long and Bae+ !2# viewed organi9ational culture as a pattern of norms( values(  beliefs and attitude tat influences beaviour witin an organi9ation.  Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development ISSN 2222-17 ! aper# ISSN 2222-2$%% !&nline# 'ol.%( No.17( 21) 2 In addition( according to *8mal and Fosinen !2$# organi9ational culture represents te basic( taen for granted assumptions and deep patterns of meaning sared b+ organi9ational participation and e;pressions of tese assumptions. Despande( Jarle+ and Kebster !1??L# opined tat &0 guide te perception and beaviour of its members. Studies ave proven tat &0 serves as a source of sustainable competitive advantage !*lavi et al.,  2< Ceniuo M Simosi( 2<#. &rgani9ational culture is important for influencing te people and organi9ational tining( beaviour( state of mind( norms and values !Sa( I:bal( Sabir M *sif 211#. Scien !1??)# provided te basic levels of culture as basic assumptions( values and artifacts respectivel+. e assumptions are te e;planator+ scemes tat people use in identif+ing situations and maing sense of on-going events( activities and uman relationsip wic will form te basis of collective action. ese assumptions ave fasioned over time as members of a group develop plans to manage te problem and passing along te strategies to new peers. *t te ne;t level( values are representations of a more visible appearance of culture tat sows acceptance as well as identif+ing wat is significant to a particular group. Kile( te last level of culture is establised troug artifacts tat are visible. ese artifacts ma+ include tings lie art( tecnolog+( language ceremon+ and man+ more. 2.2 Organizational culture and Firm performance Several studies ave been conducted in relation to organi9ational culture and performance and some of te findings reported significant relationsip between te two constructs( oters negative wile tere are also reported mi;ed findings. 3erson( &reg and Dvir !2%# investigated cief e;ecutive officers values and organi9ational performance of twent+ si; companies. e finding indicated tat organi9ational culture is a good mediator on te relationsip between 0E& values and organi9ational performance. Ceniuo and Simosi !2<# e;amined transformational leadersip( culture and business performance( using a sample of tree undred emplo+ees of large financial companies in reece. e finding of te stud+ sows tat cultural orientation ad a direct effect on te overall business performance. However( Ngo and oi !2$# reported a significant relationsip between adaptabilit+ culture and uman resource and mareting culture related performance of multinational firm operating in Hong Fong. Naor( oldsttein and Scroeder !2$# inspected one undred and ninet+ eigt manufacturing enterprises using a regression metod and mail surve+s. e result indicated a positive relationsip between culture( infrastructure and performance. Similarl+( te stud+ of iu !2?# assessed te relationsip between organi9ational culture and new service deliver+ performance( using a face = to = face interview wit one undred and ninet+ two business managers. 0orrelation was used for data anal+sis( te finding reported tat tere are strong complementar+ relationsips among innovative culture( supportive culture( maret orientated culture( learning culture( customer communication wit new service deliver+ performance. e stud+ of Eer and Eer !2?# investigated te relationsip between organi9ational culture and  performance of te uris manufacturing sector. * Sample of one undred and twent+ two manufacturers of te top five undred firms was used( wit logistic regression for data anal+sis. e finding sows tat firms wit fle;ible culture tend to be non = financial performance( wile firm to control tend to use performance measurement s+stem for monitoring. uc9a( ,oan and Hill !21# e;amined national culture( maret orientation and networ-derived benefits for service S,Es. e findings of teir stud+ indicated culture affects  business owners maret orientations. Sa et al.,  !211# e;amined te influential role of culture on leadersip effectiveness and organi9ational performance in aistan. eir findings indicated a significant and positive relation between culture and performance. Similarl+( Slater( &lson and Binnengan !211# in teir stud+ of  business strateg+( culture( and performance used a sample of senior mareting managers wit five undred and above emplo+ee wit te use of te :uestionnaire as a researc instrument. e+ found tat cultural orientation  pla+ a role in creating superior performance( evidencing significant and positive relationsip between culture and  performance. a9ici !211# surve+ed pro8ect manager engineers and e;ecutive from sevent+ si; 4S firms. e finding indicated tat a clan or group culture facilitate a coesive( ig performing team wor environment( wic result in improved pro8ect and business performance. ,u8eeb and *mad !211# empiricall+ tested te relationsip between component of organi9ational culture and performance management practices( and reported significant and positive relationsip between elements of organi9ational culture and performance management  practices. Similarl+( 0ow !212# e;amined te role of organi9ational culture in te uman resource to  performance lin( used a sample of two undred and fort+ tree Hong Fong and aiwanese firm operating in uangdong( 0ina. e finding indicated tat organi9ational culture mediated te relationsip between uman resources and performance relationsip. is finding is similar to Due and Edet !212# wic surve+ed ninet+ nine non = governmental organi9ational out of one undred and tirt+ two operating in Nigeria. e results of ordinar+ least s:uares !&S# reveal a positive association between organi9ational culture and organi9ational  performance. Some studies( owever( reported a negative relationsip between organi9ational culture and firm  performance. leason( et al.,  !2# reported a significant negative relationsip between culture( capital and  Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development ISSN 2222-17 ! aper# ISSN 2222-2$%% !&nline# 'ol.%( No.17( 21) L  performance( wen te+ conducted a stud+ on te relationsip between culture and performance. e data were generated from fourteen European countries using retailers( grouped into four different clusters troug secondar+ data. ee( oon( Fim and Fang !2<# investigated te effects of maret-oriented culture and mareting strateg+ on firm performance wit one undred and twent+ samples of businesses using te surve+ as an instrument. e data were collected using bot :ualitative and :uantitative approaces. /egression and structural e:uation model were used for data anal+sis. e result found tat ,& culture does not affect firm  performance. Navarro and ,o+a !27# investigated learning culture using surve+ :uestionnaire and structural e:uation modeling. e sample collected made up of two undred and si;t+ nine S,Es in two sectors tat is te Spanis optometr+ sector and te Spanis telecommunications sector respectivel+. e+ reported a negative association between te culture of tese two sectors and maret orientation to performance. *dditionall+( Oainol !21# e;amined cultural bacground and firm performance of Indigenous ,ala+ famil+ business using samples of S,Es from Fuala umpur and Selangor were used( wit surve+ :uestionnaire and a multiple linear regression for data anal+sis. e finding of te stud+ reported tat E& is not a mediator of te relationsip between cultural  bacground and firm performance. Far+ei8a !212# assessed te impact of culture on performance appraisal reforms in *frica. Data was generated from one undred and fort+ seven :uestionnaires and twent+ seven interviews from 4gandas 0ivil Service. e finding sows a negative association between culture and performance. Similarl+( o !212# assessed te managerial capabilities( organi9ational culture and organi9ational performance( using resource  based view as teoretical underpinning. e sample frame consists of four undred and eleven otels in 0ina( structural e:uation modeling was used for data anal+sis and te stud+ emplo+ed a surve+ :uestionnaire. e result of te stud+ sows a negative linage between bot managerial capabilities and organi9ational culture on financial performance. e findings above are in agreement wit eac oter( tat organi9ational culture does not ave an+ significant relationsip wit organi9ational performance. E9irim( Nwibere and Emeceta !21# e;amined te effect of organi9ational culture on organi9ational performance wit regression metod for data anal+sis. &rgani9ational culture to performance relationsip was found to be significant. 0ompetitive( entrepreneurial and consensual organi9ational culture was found to be significantl+ positive to profitabilit+( sales volume and maret sare. 3ureaucratic organi9ational culture was negativel+ related to organi9ational  performance. 3ased on tese argument( we proposed5  H1: Organizational culture has a Positive relationship with firm performance &. Method 3.1 ample and Procedure *ccording to Small and ,edium Enterprises Development *genc+ of Nigeria !S,ED*N( 212#( tere were 1$2? S,Es in Fano wic constituted te population of te stud+. e sample si9e was drawn from Frie8cie and ,organ !1?7# table for sample si9e determination( based on its L2 S,Es were selected. In order to tae care of none response rate and minimi9e error in sampling as suggested b+ Hair( Kolfinbarger and &rtinal !2$#( te sample si9e was double( ence( a total of <) :uestionnaires was distributed to te owner>managers of small and medium enterprises in Fano( te nort- western part of Nigeria. e respondents were selected on te basis of s+stematic probabilit+( random sample tecni:ue. * total of 1$2? constituted te population( <) represent te sample. Hence( based on s+stematic procedure te sample interval is piced b+ dividing te population wit te sample si9e as !population>sample#. 3ased on tis( an interval of nt wic represents L was cosen. erefore( te selection process was tat at starting point a value between 1and L was piced( ten subse:uentl+( <( ? 12 until te last sample piced wic was te number <) respondent. *fter respondents identification troug teir lists( a total of <) :uestionnaires was personall+ administered wit te elp of si; researc assistants. Some of te respondents answer te :uestionnaire instantl+( oters after some few wees( wile some too some monts before teir responses retrieved. !a le 1. #uestionnaire $istri ution and %etention Item Bre:uenc+ ercentage @ Distributed Auestionnaires <) 1 /eturned Auestionnaires %11 7?.$ /e8ected Auestionnaires <L ?.$ /etained Auestionnaires ))$ 7 * total of ))$ respondents constituted te sample for tis researc wic sows a good response rate of 7  percent tat covers te entire S,E owner>managers in Fano( Nigeria. is rate is considered sufficient based on Searans !2L# argument tat a L percent response rate is suitable for te surve+. Similarl+( te current response rate is regarded ade:uate going wit te suggestion tat a sample si9e sould be between % and 1 times te number of stud+ variable for regression t+pe of anal+sis to be carried !Hair et al., 21 allant( 21#.  Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development ISSN 2222-17 ! aper# ISSN 2222-2$%% !&nline# 'ol.%( No.17( 21) ) iven te number of stud+ variable < a sample of < is considered ade:uate for data anal+sis. Hence( )$$ usable responses of 7 percent satisfied te re:uired sample si9e re:uired for data anal+sis. 3.2 &easurement e measurements of te stud+ were from different sources. * measurement adopted from Suli+anto and /aab !212# was used to measure firm performance wit reliabilit+ values of .$2$ and si; items. &rgani9ational culture measurement was adopted from *l = Swidi and ,amood !212# wit a reliabilit+ value of .$%< and eigteen items. e firm performance and organi9ational culture scales were measured as uni = dimensional respectivel+. *ll variables were measured in tis stud+ using te %- point scale( ranging from 1 !strongl+ disagree# to % !strongl+ agree# based on te previous wors of Oang and Bang !2#( *min and Fan !2?#( and *l = Sardia and *mad !21)# Seu !21)#( Seu and ,amood !21)a#( Seu and ,amood !21)b#. 3.3 'oodness of &easures In tis stud+ te construct reliabilit+ is assessed b+ computing te composite reliabilit+ !0/# for eac construct after emplo+ing te ma;imum lieliood estimation. Bornell and arer !1?$1# criteria was used taen in te computation of 0/ inde; alongside wit te reliabilit+ calculation as illustrated in able 1. 0onse:uentl+( te average variance e;tracted !*'E# were assessed for eac construct !*nderson( 1?$2 3ago99i M +nn( 1?$2 Bornell M arcer( 1?$1 Hair( *nderson( atam M 3lac( 1??$#. *'E was used to measure convergent validit+ !Bornell M arcer( 1?$1 Hair et al.( 1??$# suggested convergent measures sould contain less tan %  percent error variances meaning tat *'E sould be .% or above. Hair et al.( !1??$ 21# cutoff value of .7 and .% for 0/ and *'E respectivel+ was emplo+ed. e 0/ value ranges from .$77 to .$$?( and te factor loadings were between .%2) to .?12 !p P .%#( and te *'E ranged from .%2L to .<7? wic as met te minimum tresold set !Bornell M arcer( 1?$1 Hair et al.( 1??$#. e *verage variance e;tracted was used in tis stud+ in order to assess te convergent validit+ as recommended b+ Hair et al.( !21#. e test sow ow te indicators of te construct converged and sare te same variance. In a nutsell( te indicators are e;pected to converged and sare a ig proportion of variance on a common point( te latent constructs. able 1. 'alidit+ and /eliabilit+ 'ariable Indicators oading *'E 0omposite /eliabilit+ &rgani9ational culture &0% &0< &07 &0$ &01< &017 &01$ .<2 .<%< .%%$ .<%2 .$11 .$7) .?12 .%) .$$? Birm performance E/1 E/2 E/% E/< .$1< .?%) .%2) .%71 .<17 .$77 e stud+ also assesses te discriminant validit+. Discriminant validit+ as te name implies( is basicall+ concerned wit te degree to wic a given construct is different from oter construct !Hair etal.( 21#. 0onse:uentl+( ig level of discriminant validit+ sows tat te latent construct is uni:ue and captures some  penomena as against oters. &ne of te wa+s of computing discriminant validit+ is to compare te s:uare root of a given construct wit te wole correlation of tat construct( and *'E is e;pected to be greater tan te construct correlation !Bornel M acer( 1?$1#. able 2 below indicated tat all te s:uare root of *'E ranging  between .7L) to .7$% were greater tan te value of te construct in te correlation matri;. Hence( tis indicated tat all constructs sare more variance wit teir items tan wit oter constructs( ence supporting discriminant validit+. !a le 2. $iscriminant (alidit)  B &0 Birm performance '.(&) &rgani9ational culture .2% '.(*+ *.+ &odel !esting e model fit was assessed using a series of indices recommended b+ Hair etal.( !21#( 3rian !2<#( = te DE*2 !3ollen( 1?$?#( 0omparitive fit !0BI# ! 3entler(1??#( good-of-fit inde; !BI#( ucer-ewis !I#( and te root mean s:uare error of appro;imation !/,SE*# indices. * fit to te data was acieved for te BI Q .$7 as indicated in table L.
Similar documents
View more...
Related Search
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!