• Tiada Hasil Ditemukan

Universlti Utara Malaysia

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Share "Universlti Utara Malaysia "

Copied!
60
0
0

Tekspenuh

(1)

The copyright © of this thesis belongs to its rightful author and/or other copyright owner. Copies can be accessed and downloaded for non-commercial or learning purposes without any charge and permission. The thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted as a whole without the permission from its rightful owner. No alteration or changes in format is allowed without permission from its rightful owner.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(2)

THE STUDY ON ENTREPRENEURIAL ORIENTATION, MARKET ORIENTATION AND SUSTAINABLE

PERFORMANCE AMONG CONTRACTORS

SID ALI CHAHI (822114)

Master of Science (Management) UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA

April 2019

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(3)

TITLE PAGE

The study on Entrepreneurial Orientation, Market Orientation and Sustainable Performance among Contractors

By

SID ALI CHAHI

Thesis Submitted to

Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business, Universiti Utara Malaysia,

in Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Master of science (management)

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(4)

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(5)

PERMISSION TO USE

In presenting this thesis in fulfilment of the requirements for a postgraduate degree from Universiti Utara Malaysia, I agree that the Universiti Library may make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for the copying of this thesis in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purpose may be granted by my supervisor(s) or, in their absence, by the Dean of Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business. It is understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis or parts thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to Universiti Utara Malaysia for any scholarly use which may be made of any material from my thesis.

Requests for permission to copy or to make other use of materials in this thesis, in whole or in part, should be addressed to:

Dean of Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business Universiti Utara Malaysia

06010 UUM Sintok

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(6)

ABSTRACT

Sustainable performance has recorded few from prior studies. Market-oriented companies can integrate sustainability activities into their business strategies and perform, and it is also the case for Entrepreneurially oriented companies. Since construction companies have often been charged for the environmental liabilities of their activities, there has been urgency for integration of environmental initiatives, not only within the walls of the company, but across the entire strategy and organisational behaviour in order to ensure the company’s sustainable performance.

This study is aimed the association between Entrepreneurial Orientation, Market Orientation and Sustainable Performance among construction firms. To test the hypotheses, this study was used a quantitative research. The data was collected from a survey of 117 construction firms. A Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) 25.0 was used to analyse a data and multiple regression analyses were performed to test the hypotheses of the study.

The research findings were significant except the impact of innovativeness on sustainability performance. This study contributed to theoretical knowledge, and the results would also be valuable in providing new insights to management.

.

Keywords: Construction firms, entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation, sustainable performance.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(7)

ABSTRAK

Prestasi mapan telah direkodkan amat sedikit dalam kajian yan lepas. Syarikat berorientasi pasaran boleh mengintegrasikan aktiviti kemapanan ke dalam strategi perniagaan mereka, untuk berjaya dan seperti juga kes terhadap orientasi

keusahawanan. Oleh kerana syarikat-syarikat pembinaan sering

dipertanggungjawabkan dengan tanggungjawab alam sekitar untuk aktiviti mereka, terdapat keperluan yang mendesak untuk mengintegrasikan inisiatif alam sekitar, bukan sahaja di dalam syarikat tetapi juga strategi dan tingkah laku organisasi secara menyeluruh untuk memastikan prestasi syarikat yang lestari. Untuk menguji

hipotesis, kajian ini digunakan secara kuantitatif dan data dikumpulkan dari kaji selidik 117 syarikat. Pakej Statistik untuk Sains Sosial (SPSS) 25.0 telah digunakan untuk menganalisis data dan analisis regresi dilakukan untuk menguji hipotesis kajian. Keputusan kajian adalah signifikan kecuali kesan inovasi terhadap prestasi yang berterusan. Oleh itu, kajian ini menyumbang kepada teori pengurusan dan hasilnya juga berguna dalam memberikan pandangan baru terhadap pengurusan.

Kata kunci: Firma pembinaan, orientasi keusahawanan, orientasi pasaran, prestasi mapan.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(8)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

In the Name of Allah, the Most Forgiving, Most Merciful

All praise and gratitude be given to Allah, Lord of the Lords, for giving me such a great strength, patience, courage, and ability to complete this study. The completion of this study would not have been possible without the contribution of a number of people that help and guide me to complete this research. To begin with, my highest appreciation goes to Assoc Prof. Dr. Darwina bt Hj. Ahmad Arshad, my amazing supervisor who has provided unlimited amount of encouragement and professional support. Thank you Dr. Darwina, for your time, opinion, constructive suggestion, a superb positive attitude, outlook and approachable. Without your support, this research would not have been come in to reality. Secondly, an honest gratitude and special thanks for my family (father, mother, brother and my two sisters) that always give a support and motivation to finish this study. Moreover, I want to express a sincere appreciation to Sir. Mustapha Saadoune who represent for me a symbol of leadership, and to friends and other lecturer in Universiti Utara Malaysia who always gave a great support during this research. Last but not lease, I hope this research will be of assistance of someone in the future despite this is the fundamental tool necessary for academic work. May Allah blessing be upon the readers for this research.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(9)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1 Background of Study ... 1

1.2 Problem statement ... 3

1.3 Research Questions ... 5

1.4 Research Objectives ... 6

1.5 Significance of the Study ... 6

1.6 Scope of the Study ... 7

1.7 Definition of the Key Terms ... 7

1.8 Organisation of the Thesis ... 8

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW ... 10

2.1 Introduction ... 10

2.2 Sustainable Performance ... 10

2.3 Entrepreneurial Orientation ... 17

2.3.1 Relationship between Autonomy and Sustainable Performance ... 21

2.3.2 Relationship between Competitive Aggressiveness and Sustainable Performance ... 23

2.3.3 Relationship between Proactiveness and Sustainable Performance ... 24

2.3.4 Relationship between Innovativeness and Sustainable Performance ... 25

2.3.5 Relationship between Risk Taking and Sustainable Performance ... 28

2.4 Market Orientation ... 29

2.4.1 Relationship between Market Orientation and Sustainable Performance .. 32

2.5 Literature Gap ... 33

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(10)

2.6 Summary ... 34

CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 35

3.1 Introduction ... 35

3.2 Theoretical framework ... 36

3.3 Research Hypotheses ... 36

3.4 Operational Definition ... 37

3.5 Research Design ... 40

3.6 Research Sample and Population ... 42

3.6.1 Population ... 42

3.6.2 Sample and Unit of Study ... 43

3.7 Sampling Design ... 43

3.8 Unit of Analysis ... 45

3.9 The Sampling Method ... 45

3.10 Reliability and Validity ... 48

3.10.1 Reliability ... 49

3.10.2 Validity ... 49

3.11 Data Collection Method ... 50

3.11.1 Questionnaire Design ... 50

3.11.2 Rating Scales for the Response ... 51

3.11.3 Data Collection Procedures ... 52

3.12 Technique of Data Analysis ... 52

3.13 Chapter Summary ... 53

CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS ... 54

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(11)

4.1 Introduction ... 54

4.2 Data Screening ... 54

4.2.1 Missing Data ... 54

4.2.2 Response Rate ... 54

4.2.3 Outlier Detection ... 56

4.2.4 Normality Test ... 57

4.3 Factor Analysis ... 58

4.3.1 Factor Analysis for Sustainable Performance ... 58

4.3.2 Factor Analysis for Entrepreneurial Orientation ... 59

4.3.3 Factor Analysis for Market Orientation ... 61

4.4 Reliability Analysis ... 63

4.5 Respondents’ Profile ... 63

4.6 Correlation... 65

4.7 Regression ... 66

4.8 Hypotheses Testing ... 67

4.9 Summary ... 68

CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ... 69

5.1 Introduction ... 69

5.2 Recapitulation of the Study ... 69

5.3 Discussion ... 70

5.3.1 Autonomy towards Sustainable Performance ... 71

5.3.2 Competitive Aggressiveness towards Sustainable Performance ... 71

5.3.3 Proactiveness towards Sustainable Performance ... 72

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(12)

5.3.4 Innovativeness towards Sustainable Performance ... 73

5.3.5 Risk Taking towards Sustainable Performance ... 73

5.3.6 Market Orientation towards Sustainable Performance ... 74

5.4 Theoretical Contribution of the Study ... 75

5.5 Practical Contribution of the Study ... 76

5.6 Limitation of the Study ... 77

5.7 Conclusion ... 78

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(13)

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3-1 Operational Definition... 37

Table 3-2 Summary of the Questionnaire ... 47

Table 4-1 Response Rate of The Survey ... 55

Table 4-2 nonresponse bias of the survey ... 55

Table 4-3 Summary of Skewness and Kurtosis Value of the Variables... 57

Table 4-4 Component Matrix of Sustainable Performance ... 59

Table 4-5 Component Matrix of EO... 60

Table 4-6 Component Matrix of MO ... 62

Table 4-7 Summary of the Reliability Results of the Study Variables ... 63

Table 4-8 Correlation Among Variables Constructs ... 65

Table 4-9 Regression Analysis ... 67

Table 4-10 Summary Hypotheses Results ... 67

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(14)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3.1 ... 36 Figure 4.1 ... 96

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(15)

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Research Questionnaire ... 87 Appendix B DATA ANALYSIS ... 93

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(16)

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

EO = Entrepreneurial Orientation MO = Market Orientation

SP = Sustainable Performance

CIDB = Construction Industry Development Board CREAM = Construction Research Institute of Malaysia IMP = Industrial Malaysia Plan

CIMP = Construction Industry Malaysian Plan CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility

SME = Small and Medium Enterprises

OECD = Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development WCED = World Commission on Environment and Development FP = Firm Performance

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(17)

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of Study

Sustainability in construction become a composite agenda which, have a specific aims to achieve it in practice (Bamgbade et al., 2019). In a current business scenario, the construction firms have revolved a great significant challenge due to rapid development and execution of new products and services (Azman, Hon, Skitmore, Lee, & Xia, 2019; Gann & Salter, 2000). A moderate growth at 7.4% in 2016 have been recorded from construction sector in Malaysia which attracted and opened the door for many firms for entry and compete in construction sector. The number of contractors increase by 5.8% and the personnel worker rise by 7.1%. at that effect, the productivity of the whole sector marked at 12.4% (CIDB, 2017).

In Malaysia, the major activities that contribute to the development of the economy growth are came from the residential, industrial, commercial and services sectors.

Essentially, according to Jatarona, Md Yusof, Ismail, and Saar (2016), the Malaysian government is the major client for the construction industry in Malaysia. The projects mostly concentrate on the development of the basic infrastructure likes roads, dams, irrigation works, schools, houses, and other physical foundations. These projects are very useful to boost and sustain the standard of living of the nation.

Thus, firms operating in the construction industry can grab the opportunity to contribute the strategic plan for the nation.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(18)

REFERENCES

Abdulrazak, S. R., & Ahmad, F. S. (2014). Sustainable Development: A Malaysian Perspective. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 164(August), 237–241.

Angelidou, M., Psaltoglou, A., Komninos, N., Kakderi, C., Tsarchopoulos, P., &

Panori, A. (2018). Enhancing sustainable urban development through smart city applications. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 9(2), 146–169.

Azman, M. A., Hon, C. K. H., Skitmore, M., Lee, B. L., & Xia, B. (2019). A Meta- frontier method of decomposing long-term construction productivity components and technological gaps at the firm level: evidence from Malaysia.

Construction Management and Economics, 0(0), 1–17.

Bamgbade, J. A., Kamaruddeen, A. M., Nawi, M. N. M., Adeleke, A. Q., Salimon, M. G., & Ajibike, W. A. (2019). Analysis of some factors driving ecological sustainability in construction firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 208, 1537–

1545.

Bhupendra, K. V., & Sangle, S. (2016). Strategy to derive benefits of radical cleaner production, products and technologies: A study of Indian firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 126, 236–247.

Birkeland, J. lynn. (2014). Positive development and assessment. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 3(1), 4–22.

Brundtland, G. H. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: our common future Oslo. oslo.

Chan, C. M. L., Teoh, S. Y., Yeow, A., & Pan, G. (2018). Agility in responding to disruptive digital innovation: Case study of an SME. Information Systems Journal, 20(1), 436–455.

Chang, A. Y., & Cheng, Y. T. (2019). Analysis model of the sustainability development of manufacturing small and medium- sized enterprises in Taiwan.

Journal of Cleaner Production, 207, 458–473.

Chen, Y., Tang, G., Jin, J., Li, J., & Paillé, P. (2014). Linking Market Orientation and Environmental Performance: The Influence of Environmental Strategy, Employee’s Environmental Involvement, and Environmental Product Quality.

Journal of Business Ethics, 127(2), 479–500.

Ciasullo, M. V., & Troisi, O. (2013). Sustainable value creation in SMEs: a case

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(19)

study. The TQM Journal, 25(1), 44–61.

https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2015-0216 CIDB, C. I. D. B. M. (2017). Malaysia Country Report.

CIDB, C. I. D. B. M. (2019). CIDB conference. Retrieved March 5, 2019, from http://www.cidb.gov.my

Conway, E. (2014). Assessing sustainability support to Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs). International Journal of Performability Engineering, 10(4), 377–386.

Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic Management of Small Firms in Hostile and Benign Environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75–

87.

Covin, J. G., & Wales, W. J. (2012). the measurement of entrepreneurial orientation.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(4), 677–702.

CREAM, C. R. I. of M. (2019). event. Retrieved March 5, 2019, from http://www.cream.my/main/

De Clercq, D., Dimov, D., & Thongpapanl, N. (Tek). (2010). The moderating impact of internal social exchange processes on the entrepreneurial orientation- performance relationship. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(1), 87–103.

de Oliveira Claro, P. B., Claro, D. P., & Amâncio, R. (2008). Entendendo o conceito de sustentabilidade nas organizações. Rausp Management Journal, 43(4), 289–

300.

Dubois, cathy L. ., & Dubois, david A. (2012). Strategic hrm as social design for environmental sustainability in organization. Human Resource Management, 51(6), 799–826.

Dunphy, D. (2011). Conceptualizing Sustainability: The Business Opportunity. In Business and sustainability: Concepts, strategies and changes (pp. 3–24).

Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Elkington, J. (2001). The chrysalis economy: How citizen CEOs and corporations can fuse values and value creation. (Capstone, Ed.). UK: Oxford.

ENR, E. N. R. (2013). ENR Top Lists. Retrieved March 3, 2019, from

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(20)

https://www.enr.com/toplists/2013-Top-250-International-Contractors1

Fellnhofer, K. (2019). Entrepreneurially oriented employees and firm performance:

mediating effects. Management Research Review, 42(1), 25–48.

Filser, M., & Eggers, F. (2014). Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: A comparative study of Austria, Liechtenstein and Switzerland. South African Journal of Business Management, 45(1), 55–65.

Gann, D. M., & Salter, A. J. (2000). Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms: the construction of complex products and systems. Research Policy, 29(7–8), 955–972.

George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0 update (10a ed.). (Pearson, Ed.) (10a ed). Boston: Pearson.

Green, K. W., Toms, L. C., & Clark, J. (2015). Impact of market orientation on environmental sustainability strategy. Management Research Review, 38(2), 217–238.

Gunarathne, U., & Jayawardhana, D. N. . (2015). Entrepreneurial orientation and organizational performance ( With Special Reference to SMEs in Sri Lanka ).

Entrepreneurial Orientation and Organizational Performance, (SEPTEMBER), 0–8.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th Ed.). (I. Prentice Hall, Ed.) (7th Ed). New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Hart, S. L., & Milstein, M. B. (2003). Creating sustainable value. Academy of Management Perspectives, 17(2), 56–67.

Hughes, M., & Morgan, R. E. (2007). Deconstructing the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance at the embryonic stage of firm growth. Industrial Marketing Management, 36(5), 651–661.

Hult, G. T. M. (2011). Market-focused sustainability : market orientation plus ! Journal of Academic Marketing Science, 39, 1–6.

Hult, G. T. M., & Ketchen, D. J. (2001). Does market orientation matter?: a test of the relationship between positional advantage and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 22(9), 899–906.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(21)

Iqbal, Q. and Hassan, S. H. (2018). Green management matters: green human resource management as blue ocean strategy. Firms’ Strategic Decisions:

Theoretical and Empirical Findings, 3, 214–236.

Jatarona, N. A., Md Yusof, A., Ismail, S., & Saar, C. C. (2016). Public construction projects performance in Malaysia. Journal of Southeast Asian Research, 2016, 1–7.

Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1990). The Market orientation. Journal of Marketing, 54(2), 1–18.

Kohtamäki, M., Heimonen, J., & Parida, V. (2019). The nonlinear relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and sales growth: The moderating effects of slack resources and absorptive capacity. Journal of Business Research, 100(September 2018), 100–110.

Kucukvar, M., & Tatari, O. (2013). Towards a triple bottom-line sustainability assessment of the U.S. construction industry. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 18(5), 958–972.

Kuhl, M. R., Da Cunha, J. C., Maçaneiro, M. B., & Cunha, S. K. (2016).

Relationship Between Innovation and Sustainable Performance. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20(06), 1650047.

Langerak, F. (2003). An Appraisal of Research on the Predictive Power of Market Orientation. European Management Journal Vol., 21(4), 3–5.

Lawrence, S. R. R., Collins, E., Pavlovich, K., & Arunachalam, M. (2006).

Sustainability Practices of SMEs : Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(4), 242–257.

Lee, K. H., & Saen, R. F. (2012). Measuring corporate sustainability management: A data envelopment analysis approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 219–226.

Lee, W. L., Chong, A. L., & Ramayah, T. (2018). The effects of entrepreneurial orientation on the performance of the Malaysian manufacturing sector. Asia- Pacific Journal of Business Administration.

Liu, W. H., Lin, K. L., Jhan, H. T., Lin, T. L., Ding, D. L., & Ho, C. H. (2011).

Application of a sustainable fisheries development indicator system (sfdis) for better management outcomes in taiwan offshore and coastal fishery. Coastal Management, 39(5), 515–535.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(22)

Liu, Z., Li, J., Zhu, H., Cai, Z., & Wang, L. (2014). Chinese firms’ sustainable development-The role of future orientation, environmental commitment, and employee training. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 31(1), 195–213.

Loong Lee, W., Chong, A. L., & Ramayah, T. (2019). The effects of entrepreneurial orientation on the performance of the Malaysian manufacturing sector. Asia- Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 11(1), 30–45.

Luken, R. A., Van Berkel, R., Leuenberger, H., & Schwager, P. (2016). A 20-year retrospective of the National Cleaner Production Centres programme. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 1165–1174.

Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct and Linking It to Performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172.

Marrewijk, M. van. (2003). Concepts and Definations of Csr and Corporate Sustainability Between Agency and Communion. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 95–105.

Meyers, lawrence s., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A. . (2016). Applied multivariate research: Design and interpretation. Sage publications.

Morgan, R. E., & Strong, C. A. (1998). Market orientation and dimensions of strategic orientation. European Journal of Marketing, 32(11/12), 1051–1073.

Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS survival manual. (M.-H. Education, Ed.). United Kingdom:

McGraw-Hill Education.

Pantouvakis, A., Vlachos, I., & Zervopoulos, P. D. (2017). Market orientation for sustainable performance and the inverted-U moderation of firm size: Evidence from the Greek shipping industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 165, 705–

720.

Pratono, A. H., Darmasetiawan, N. K., Yudiarso, A., & Jeong, B. G. (2019).

Achieving sustainable competitive advantage through green entrepreneurial orientation and market orientation: The role of inter-organizational learning.

Bottom Line.

Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial Orientation and Business Performance: an assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 761–

787.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(23)

Revell, A., & Blackburn, R. (2007). The Business Case for Sustainability ? in the UK ’ s Construction and Restaurant Sectors. Business Strategy and the Environment, 16(October 2005), 404–420.

Salimon, M. G., Bamgbade, J. A., Nathaniel, A. O., & Adekunle, T. A. (2017).

Integrating technology acceptance model and organizational innovativeness in the adoption of mobile commerce. Management Science Letters, 7, 497–512.

Sciascia, S., D’Oria, L., Bruni, M., & Larrañeta, B. (2014). Entrepreneurial Orientation in low- and medium-tech industries: The need for Absorptive Capacity to increase performance. European Management Journal, 32(5), 761–

769.

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill building approach. Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research (Seventh ed). United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Severo, E. A., Guimarães, J. C. F. de, & Dorion, E. C. H. (2017). Cleaner production and environmental management as sustainable product innovation antecedents:

A survey in Brazilian industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 87–97.

Shee, H., Miah, S. J., Fairfield, L., & Pujawan, N. (2018). The impact of cloud- enabled process integration on supply chain performance and firm sustainability: the moderating role of top management. Supply Chain Management, 23(6), 500–517.

Shen, L. Y., Li Hao, J., Tam, V. W. Y., & Yao, H. (2007). A checklist for assessing sustainability performance of construction projects. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 13(4), 273–281.

Sher, A., Mazhar, S., Zulfiqar, F., Wang, D., & Li, X. (2019). Green entrepreneurial farming: A dream or reality? Journal of Cleaner Production, 220, 1131–1142.

Shi, Q., Yan, Y., Zuo, J., & Yu, T. (2016). Objective conflicts in green buildings projects: A critical analysis. Building and Environment, 96, 107–117.

Shields, J., & Shelleman, J. M. (2015). Integrating sustainability into SME strategy.

Journal of Small Business Strategy, 25(2).

Shu, C., De Clercq, D., Zhou, Y., & Liu, C. (2019). Government institutional support, entrepreneurial orientation, strategic renewal, and firm performance in transitional China. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(24)

Sittimalakorn, W., & Hart, S. (2004). Market orientation versus quality orientation : sources of superior business performance Market orientation versus quality orientation : sources of superior business performance. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 12, 243–253.

Stubbs, W., & Chris, C. (2008). Conceptualizing a “Sustainability Business Model.”

Organization & Environment, 22(2), 103–127.

Wales, W., Gupta, V. K., Marino, L., & Shirokova, G. (2019). Entrepreneurial orientation: International, global and cross-cultural research. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, 37(2), 95–104.

Wales, W., Monsen, E., & Mckelvie, A. (2011). The organizational pervasiveness of entrepreneurial orientation. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 35(5), 895–

923.

WCED, W. C. on E. and D. (1987). "Special working session”, Our Common Future, WCED, PA. (Vol. 17).

Wiengarten, F., & Longoni, A. (2015). A nuanced view on supply chain integration:

A coordinative and collaborative approach to operational and sustainability performance improvement. Supply Chain Management, 20(2), 139–150.

Yong, Y. C., & Mustaffa, N. E. (2012). Analysis of factors critical to construction project success in Malaysia. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 19(5), 543–556.

Yusof, N., Awang, H., & Iranmanesh, M. (2017). Determinants and outcomes of environmental practices in Malaysian construction projects. Journal of Cleaner Production, 156, 345–354.

Zhang, M., Lettice, F., Chan, H. K., & Nguyen, H. T. (2018). Supplier integration and firm performance: the moderating effects of internal integration and trust.

Production Planning and Control, 29(10), 802–813.

Zhou, K. Z., Li, J. J., Zhou, N., & Su, C. (2008). Market orientation, job satisfaction, product quality, and firm performance: evidence from China. Strategic Management Journal, 29(August), 985–1000.

Zou, X., & Moon, S. (2014). Hierarchical evaluation of on-site environmental performance to enhance a green construction operation. Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, 31(1), 5–23.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(25)

Appendix A

Research Questionnaire

.

Dear Sir/Madam,

This study seeks to identify the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation and sustainable performance among contractors in north of Malaysia. The information obtained from this survey is very important for the researcher in fulfilling the requirement for Master of science Management in Universiti Utara Malaysia.

Kindly answer all questions. This questionnaire might take about 10 minutes to complete.

All information will be treated in strict confidence and your responses will only be analyzed in aggregate forms. Your kind participation in this study is highly valued and appreciated.

Should you have any enquiries regarding this study, please do not hesitate to contact me at chahi.sidali@hotmail.com or 0108758893.

Yours sincerely,

CHAHI Sid Ali Darwina Hj. Ahmad Arshad, Assoc. Prof. Dr.

Postgraduate Student Senior lecturer

School of Business Management School of Business Management Universiti Utara Malaysia Universiti Utara Malaysia Sintok, Kedah darwina@uum.edu.my

UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(26)

Part A

Sila jawab soalan berikut dengan menandakan (X) dalam kotak yang disediakan secan tepat

Please answer the following questions by ticking (X) in the appropriate box accurately

1 Apakah kedudukan semasa anda dalam

perniagaan? What is your current position in the company?

Ketua pegawai eksekutif / Chief executive officer

Ketua pegawai operasi / Chief operation officer

Pengarah urusan / Managing directors Pengurus besar / General manager Pengurus / Manager

Pengurus projek / Project manager Lain-lain (sila nyatakan)

Others (please specify) 2 Berapa lama anda berada dalam kedudukan

semasa ? How long have you been in the current position?

Kurang dan setahun / Less than 1 years 1-3 tahun / years

3-5 tahun / years 5-10 tahun / years

Lebih 10 tahun / 10 years and above 3 Berapa lama anda berkhidmat dengan syarikat itu

? How long have you been with the company?

Kurang dan setahun / Less than 1 years 1-3 tahun / years

3-5 tahun / years 5-10 tahun / years

Lebih 10 tahun / 10 years and above 4 Berapa lama penpengalama anda dalam industri

ini ?

How long have you been experienced in this industry?

Kurang dan setahun / Less than 1 years 1-3 tahun / years

3-5 tahun / years 5-10 tahun / years

Lebih 10 tahun / 10 years and above

5 Jantina anda :

Your gender : Male (lelaki )

Female (perempuan) 6 Umur anda :

Your age : Kurang dan 21 tahun / Less than 21

years

21-25 tahun /years 26-30 tahun / years

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(27)

31-40 tahun / years 41-50 tahun / years

Lebih 50 tahun / 50 years and above 7 Pendidikan tertinggi anda:

Your highest level of education : ijazah sarjana atau lebih / Master or higher

ijazah Sarjana Muda / Degree Diploma /Diploma

SPM/STPM 8 Berapa banyak pekerja sepenuh masa pada

masa sekarang yang bekerja dalam perniagaan anda ?

How many full time employees presently work in your business?

Kurang dan 25 pekerja / Less than 25 employees

25-50 pekerja / employees 50-100 pekerja / employees 100-250 pekerja / employees 250-500 pekerja / employees Lebih 500 pekerja / More than 500 employees

9 Berapa tahun perniagaan anda telah beroperasi ?

How many years has your business been operating?

Kurang dan setahun / Less than 1 years

1-3 tahun / years 3-5 tahun / years 5-10 tahun / years

Lebih 10 tahun / 10 years and above

10 Jenis gred kontraktor anda ?

What type of your contractor’s grade? G1 G4 G2 G5 G3 G6 G7 11 Jenis kategori kontraktor anda ?

What type of your contractor’s category? B CE ME

12 Siapakah pelanggan anda?

Who is your customers? agensi kerajaan / Government

agencies

institusi swasta / Private institutions kedua-duanya Both

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(28)

PART: B

Berdasarkan kepada skala yang disediakan, sila kenalpasti tahapbersetuju / tidak bersetuju anda pada pernyataan berikut dengan menanda (X).

Based on the scale given, please indicate your degree of strength agreement/disagreement on the following statement by ticking (X).

Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4 5

Strongly agree amat tidak bersetuju amat bersetuju

EO 1 2 3 4 5

1 Istilah "penanggung risiko" dianggap sebagai sifat positif dalam perniagaan kami. / The term “risk taker” is considered a positive attribute in our business.

2 Dalam perniagaan, kami digalakkan mengambil risiko yang dikira dengan idea-idea baru./ In our business we are encouraged to take calculated risks with new ideas.

3 Perniagaan kami menekankan eksplorasi dan eksperimen iuntuk peluang./ Our business emphasizes both exploration and experimentation for opportunities.

4 Kami secara aktif memperkenalkan penambahbaikan dan inovasi dalam perniagaan kami. / We actively introduce improvements and innovations in our business.

5 Perniagaan kami adalah kreatif dalam kaedah

pengendaliannya. /Our business is creative in its methods of operation.

6 Perniagaan kami mencari jalan baru untuk melakukan sesuatu. /Our business seeks out new ways to do things.

7 Kami sentiasa cuba mengambil inisiatif dalam setiap keadaan (contohnya: menghadapi pesaing, dalam projek ketika bekerja dengan orang lain). /We always try to take the initiative in every situation (e.g., against competitors, in projects when working with others).

8 Kami cemerlang dalam mengenal pasti peluang. /We excel at identifying opportunities.

9 Kami memulakan tindakan yang mana organisasi lain bertindak balas. /We initiate actions to which other organizations respond.

10 Perniagaan kami berdaya saing. /Our business is intensely competitive..

11 Secara umum, perniagaan kami mengambil pendekatan yang berani atau agresif apabila bersaing. / In general, our business takes a bold or aggressive approach when competing.

12 Kami cuba untuk membatalkan dan menggerakkan persaingan sebaik mungkin. / We try to undo and out-manoeuvre the

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(29)

competition as best as we can.

13 Pekerja dibenarkan untuk bertindak dan berfikir tanpa campur tangan.Employees are permitted to act and think without interference.

14 Pekerja melakukan pekerjaan yang membolehkan mereka membuat dan memeriksa/menyiasat perubahan dalam cara mereka melakukan tugas kerja mereka. /Employees perform jobs that allow them to make and instigate changes in the way they perform their work tasks.

15 Pekerja diberi kebebasan dan kemerdekaan untuk

menentukan sendiri cara kerja mereka. /Employees are given freedom and independence to decide on their own how to go about doing their work.

16 Pekerja diberi kebebasan untuk berkomunikasi tanpa campur tangan. / Employees are given freedom to communicate without interference.

17 Pekerja diberi kuasa dan tanggungjawab untuk bertindak sendiri jika mereka menganggap ia sebagai yang terbaik untuk perniagaan.

Employees are given authority and responsibility to act alone if they think it to be in the best interests of the business.

18 Pekerja mempunyai akses kepada semua maklumat penting.

Employees have access to all vital information.

MO 1 2 3 4 5

19 Objektif perniagaan kami didorong terutamanya oleh kepuasan pelanggan. / Our business objectives are driven primarily by customer satisfaction.

20 Strategi kami didorong oleh kepercayaan tentang bagaimana kami boleh mewujudkan nilai yang lebih besar untuk

pelanggan. /Our strategies are driven by beliefs about how we can create greater value for customers.

21 Kami menekankan komitmen berterusan untuk memenuhi keperluan pelanggan. /We emphasize constant commitment to serving customer needs.

22 Kami kerap berkongsi maklumat mengenai strategi pesaing.

/We regularly share information concerning competitors’

strategies.

23 Kami menekankan tindak balas yang segera terhadap

tindakan pesaing yang mengancam kami. / We emphasize the fast response to competitive actions that threaten us.

24 Kami kerap menyampaikan maklumat mengenai keperluan pelanggan di semua fungsi perniagaan. We regularly communicate information on customer needs across all business functions.

25 Kami sering membincangkan trend pasaran di semua fungsi perniagaan. / We frequently discuss market trends across all business functions.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(30)

SP 1 2 3 4 5 27 Pada masa ini syarikat kami mengurangkan tahap

pengeluaran pencemaran dan penghasilan sisa. / Currently our company is reducing pollution emission and waste production levels

28 Pada masa ini Syarikat kami mengurangkan pelepasan karbon (contoh : pengangkutan). / Currently our company is reducing carbon emission (eg transportation).

29 Pada masa ini syarikat kami mengambil berat tentang kerugian minimum terhadap persekitaran. / Currently our company is caring about minimum loss to environment.

30 Perubahan telah berlaku untuk mencapai motivasi dan kepuasan pekerja. / Changes have been occurred to achieve workers’ motivation and satisfaction.

31 Perubahan telah berlaku untuk memperbaiki keadaan kesihatan dan keselamatan Pekerjaan. / Changes have been occurred to improve occupational health and safety conditions.

32 Perubahan telah berlaku untuk meningkatkan kesejahteraan social. Changes have been occurred to increase social well- being.

33 Syarikat kami telah menunjukkan pertumbuhan Jualan dalam tempoh tiga tahun yang lalu. /Our company has registered sales growth in the past three years.

34 Syarikat kami sentiasa mencari aliran pendapatan baru (contoh. Produk baru, pasaran baru). / Our company keeps finding new revenue streams (e.g. new products, new markets).

35 Produk kami mencapai pasaran yang lebih luas. /Our

product reached a wider market.

26 Semua fungsi perniagaan kami disepadukan dalam memenuhi keperluan pasaran sasaran kami. / All of our business functions are integrated in serving the needs of our target markets.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(31)

Appendix B

DATA ANALYSIS

1. Outliers

Case Processing Summary

Cases

Valid Missing Total

N Percent N Percent N Percent

Mahalanobis Distance 117 100,0% 0 0,0% 117 100,0%

Descriptives

Statistic Std. Error

Mahalanobis Distance Mean 5,9487179 ,45508429

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Lower Bound 5,0473662 Upper Bound 6,8500697

5% Trimmed Mean 5,5080227

Median 5,2541402

Variance 24,231

Std. Deviation 4,92248928

Minimum ,54023

Maximum 27,53778

Range 26,99755

Interquartile Range 5,34947

Skewness 1,802 ,224

Kurtosis 4,787 ,444

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(32)

Extreme Values

Case Number Value

Mahalanobis Distance Highest 1 36 27,53778

2 81 27,53778

3 39 15,09712

4 84 15,09712

5 31 14,38181a

Lowest 1 92 ,54023

2 46 ,64137

3 1 ,64137

4 85 ,75289

5 40 ,75289

a. Only a partial list of cases with the value 14,38181 are shown in the table of upper extremes.

Table 4.2

Results of outlier detection

case ID MAH probability outlier case ID MAH probability outlier

1 0,64137 0,9957 0 41 5,46012 0,4863 0

2 4,51788 0,607 0 42 4,12493 0,6598 0

3 2,51043 0,8673 0 43 5,49365 0,4822 0

4 14,22399 0,0272 0 44 7,04642 0,3166 0

5 12,75843 0,047 0 45 5,49365 0,4822 0

6 8,94177 0,1769 0 46 0,64137 0,9957 0

7 5,59765 0,4697 0 47 4,51788 0,607 0

8 1,40285 0,9657 0 48 2,51043 0,8673 0

9 13,46885 0,0362 0 49 14,22399 0,0272 0

10 7,05297 0,316 0 50 12,75843 0,047 0

11 2,93847 0,8165 0 51 8,94177 0,1769 0

12 1,40285 0,9657 0 52 5,59765 0,4697 0

13 2,3968 0,8798 0 53 1,40285 0,9657 0

14 12,34329 0,0547 0 54 13,46885 0,0362 0

15 5,227 0,515 0 55 7,05297 0,316 0

16 10,53984 0,1037 0 56 2,93847 0,8165 0

17 1,38977 0,9665 0 57 1,40285 0,9657 0

18 3,36284 0,7621 0 58 2,3968 0,8798 0

19 7,73478 0,2582 0 59 12,34329 0,0547 0

20 2,37381 0,8823 0 60 5,227 0,515 0

21 2,65101 0,8512 0 61 10,53984 0,1037 0

22 5,39724 0,494 0 62 1,38977 0,9665 0

23 9,42945 0,1508 0 63 3,36284 0,7621 0

24 0,94153 0,9877 0 64 7,73478 0,2582 0

25 1,28434 0,9725 0 65 2,37381 0,8823 0

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(33)

26 1,77912 0,9389 0 66 2,65101 0,8512 0

27 2,5884 0,8584 0 67 5,39724 0,494 0

28 1,83263 0,9344 0 68 9,42945 0,1508 0

29 3,75525 0,7098 0 69 2,69589 0,8459 0

30 5,58634 0,4711 0 70 1,28434 0,9725 0

31 14,38181 0,0257 0 71 1,77912 0,9389 0

32 6,50257 0,3693 0 72 2,5884 0,8584 0

33 2,21492 0,8989 0 73 1,83263 0,9344 0

34 5,85554 0,4396 0 74 3,75525 0,7098 0

35 7,31198 0,293 0 75 5,58634 0,4711 0

36 27,53778 0,0001 1 76 14,38181 0,0257 0

37 5,25414 0,5117 0 77 6,50257 0,3693 0

38 6,68538 0,3509 0 78 2,21492 0,8989 0

39 15,09712 0,0195 0 79 5,85554 0,4396 0

40 0,75289 0,9933 0 80 7,31198 0,293 0

case ID MAH probability outlier 81 27,53778 0,0001 1

82 5,25414 0,5117 0

83 6,68538 0,3509 0

84 15,09712 0,0195 0

85 0,75289 0,9933 0

86 5,46012 0,4863 0

87 4,12493 0,6598 0

88 5,49365 0,4822 0

89 7,04642 0,3166 0

90 5,49365 0,4822 0

91 1,83263 0,9344 0

92 0,54023 0,9973 0

93 4,51788 0,607 0

94 2,51043 0,8673 0

95 14,22399 0,0272 0

96 10,55359 0,1032 0

97 8,94177 0,1769 0

98 5,59765 0,4697 0

99 1,40285 0,9657 0

100 13,46885 0,0362 0

101 7,05297 0,316 0

102 2,93847 0,8165 0

103 1,40285 0,9657 0

104 2,3968 0,8798 0

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(34)

105 12,34329 0,0547 0

106 5,227 0,515 0

107 10,53984 0,1037 0

108 1,38977 0,9665 0

109 3,45146 0,7504 0

110 7,73478 0,2582 0

111 2,37381 0,8823 0

112 2,65101 0,8512 0

113 5,39724 0,494 0

114 9,42945 0,1508 0

115 2,69589 0,8459 0

116 1,28434 0,9725 0

117 1,77912 0,9389 0

Figure 5.1

Mahalanobis Distance

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(35)

2. Normality test

Case Processing Summary

Cases

Valid Missing Total

N Percent N Percent N Percent

ER 115 100,0% 0 0,0% 115 100,0%

EI 115 100,0% 0 0,0% 115 100,0%

EP 115 100,0% 0 0,0% 115 100,0%

EC 115 100,0% 0 0,0% 115 100,0%

EA 115 100,0% 0 0,0% 115 100,0%

MO 115 100,0% 0 0,0% 115 100,0%

SP 115 100,0% 0 0,0% 115 100,0%

Descriptives

Statistic Std. Error

ER Mean 3,8464 ,07684

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Lower Bound 3,6942 Upper Bound 3,9986

5% Trimmed Mean 3,9106

Median 4,0000

Variance ,679

Std. Deviation ,82397

Minimum 1,00

Maximum 5,00

Range 4,00

Interquartile Range ,67

Skewness -1,140 ,226

Kurtosis 2,115 ,447

EI Mean 3,7652 ,08636

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Lower Bound 3,5941 Upper Bound 3,9363

5% Trimmed Mean 3,8333

Median 4,0000

Variance ,858

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(36)

Std. Deviation ,92609

Minimum 1,00

Maximum 5,00

Range 4,00

Interquartile Range 1,33

Skewness -,921 ,226

Kurtosis 1,079 ,447

EP Mean 3,3855 ,07520

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Lower Bound 3,2365 Upper Bound 3,5345

5% Trimmed Mean 3,4018

Median 3,3333

Variance ,650

Std. Deviation ,80640

Minimum 1,00

Maximum 5,00

Range 4,00

Interquartile Range 1,00

Skewness -,466 ,226

Kurtosis ,918 ,447

EC Mean 3,4696 ,08192

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Lower Bound 3,3073 Upper Bound 3,6318

5% Trimmed Mean 3,4984

Median 3,6667

Variance ,772

Std. Deviation ,87848

Minimum 1,00

Maximum 5,00

Range 4,00

Interquartile Range 1,00

Skewness -,425 ,226

Kurtosis ,452 ,447

EA Mean 3,2478 ,07412

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Lower Bound 3,1010 Upper Bound 3,3947

5% Trimmed Mean 3,2778

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(37)

Median 3,3333

Variance ,632

Std. Deviation ,79483

Minimum 1,00

Maximum 5,00

Range 4,00

Interquartile Range ,67

Skewness -,650 ,226

Kurtosis 1,327 ,447

MO Mean 3,8587 ,07822

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Lower Bound 3,7038 Upper Bound 4,0136

5% Trimmed Mean 3,9408

Median 4,0000

Variance ,704

Std. Deviation ,83877

Minimum 1,00

Maximum 5,00

Range 4,00

Interquartile Range ,88

Skewness -1,407 ,226

Kurtosis 3,022 ,447

SP Mean 3,8309 ,07593

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Lower Bound 3,6805 Upper Bound 3,9813

5% Trimmed Mean 3,8849

Median 4,0000

Variance ,663

Std. Deviation ,81428

Minimum 1,00

Maximum 5,00

Range 4,00

Interquartile Range 1,00

Skewness -1,099 ,226

Kurtosis 2,143 ,447

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(38)

Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

ER ,188 115 ,000 ,893 115 ,000

EI ,217 115 ,000 ,901 115 ,000

EP ,160 115 ,000 ,934 115 ,000

EC ,149 115 ,000 ,946 115 ,000

EA ,178 115 ,000 ,932 115 ,000

MO ,126 115 ,000 ,878 115 ,000

SP ,124 115 ,000 ,922 115 ,000

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(39)

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(40)

Percentiles

Percentiles

5 10 25 50 75 90 95

Weighte d Average (Definiti on 1)

ER 2,0000 2,8667 3,6667 4,0000 4,3333 5,0000 5,0000

EI 2,0000 2,6667 3,0000 4,0000 4,3333 5,0000 5,0000

EP 2,0000 2,3333 3,0000 3,3333 4,0000 4,0000 5,0000

EC 2,0000 2,2000 3,0000 3,6667 4,0000 4,6667 5,0000

EA 1,3000 2,3333 3,0000 3,3333 3,6667 4,1667 4,3333

MO 1,5000 3,0000 3,5000 4,0000 4,3750 4,8750 5,0000

SP 2,4444 2,8222 3,3333 4,0000 4,3333 4,8889 5,0000

Tukey's Hinges

ER 3,6667 4,0000 4,3333

EI 3,0000 4,0000 4,3333

EP 3,0000 3,3333 4,0000

EC 3,0000 3,6667 4,0000

EA 3,0000 3,3333 3,6667

MO 3,5000 4,0000 4,3750

SP 3,3889 4,0000 4,3333

3. Factor analysis

3.1 sustainable performance

Table 4.4: KMO an Bartlett’s Test Sustainable Performance

Communalities

Initial Extraction

SP1 1,000 ,733

SP2 1,000 ,681

SP3 1,000 ,799

SP4 1,000 ,828

SP5 1,000 ,728

SP6 1,000 ,743

SP7 1,000 ,532

SP8 1,000 ,491

SP9 1,000 ,636

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. ,871 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 1031,652

df 36

Sig. ,000

Component Matrixa

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(41)

Total Variance Explained

Component

Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %

1 6,170 68,558 68,558 6,170 68,558 68,558

2 ,905 10,057 78,615

3 ,694 7,715 86,330

4 ,421 4,677 91,007

5 ,317 3,527 94,534

6 ,206 2,289 96,822

7 ,121 1,340 98,162

8 ,096 1,068 99,230

9 ,069 ,770 100,000

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Component 1

SP4 ,910

SP3 ,894

SP6 ,862

SP1 ,856

SP5 ,853

SP2 ,825

SP9 ,797

SP7 ,729

SP8 ,701

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

a. 1 components extracted.

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(42)

3.2 Entrepreneurial Orientation KMO and Bartlett's

Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.

,854

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity

Approx.

Chi-Square 190 0,80 4

df 153

Sig. ,000

Total Variance Explained

Componen t

Initial Eigenvalues Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings

Total

% of Variance

Cumulative

% Total

% of Variance

Cumulative

%

1 8,945 49,695 49,695 3,489 19,385 19,385

2 2,061 11,449 61,144 2,934 16,302 35,687

3 1,326 7,367 68,511 2,852 15,844 51,531

4 1,220 6,780 75,290 2,806 15,589 67,120

5 1,071 5,949 81,239 2,541 14,119 81,239

6 ,666 3,699 84,938

7 ,524 2,911 87,849

8 ,444 2,467 90,316

9 ,375 2,083 92,399

10 ,289 1,605 94,004

11 ,238 1,323 95,327

12 ,217 1,204 96,531

13 ,162 ,898 97,429

14 ,151 ,842 98,270

15 ,118 ,655 98,926

16 ,083 ,460 99,386

17 ,063 ,350 99,736

18 ,048 ,264 100,000

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(43)

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

• Autonomy

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. ,804 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 412,966

df 15

Sig. ,000

Rotated Component Matrixa

Component

1 2 3 4 5

EC1 ,882

EC2 ,876

EC3 ,761 ,419

EA5 ,574 ,408

EA3 ,907

EA1 ,784

EA4 ,630

EA2 ,528 ,557

EA6 ,408 ,421

EI2 ,852

EI1 ,836

EI3 ,829

EP3 ,867

EP1 ,866

EP2 ,846

ER2 ,834

ER1 ,827

ER3 ,720

Universlti Utara Malaysia

(44)

Component Matrixa

Component 1

EA1 ,887

EA4 ,849

EA2 ,827

EA3 ,805

EA5 ,780

EA6 ,689

Extraction Method:

Principal Component Analysis.

a. 1 components extracted.

Total Variance Explained

Component

Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %

1 3,921 65,353

Rujukan

DOKUMEN BERKAITAN

The present study aimed to compare the impact of two types of pragmatic teaching methods, YouTube Interventional Teaching Method (YITM) and Conventional Teaching Method

Berdasarkan dalil berikut, jelas menunjukkan bahawa cara berwudhu' yang sempurna adalah dengan membasuh kaki sehingga kedua buku lali atau mata kaki. Demikianlah

The Impact of External Factors On Bank Fraud Prevention And The Role Of Capability Element As Moderator In Saudi Arabia Banking Sector Asian Academic Research Journal of

accruals quality for firm i in year t and calculated as standard deviation of residuals, FSIZE: firm size and measured as natural logarithm of total assets, FDEBT: financial debt

Since macroeconomic and financial factors play a key role in the development of any financial market, this study investigates the macroeconomic and financial determinants

Moreover, based on the theory of distributive leadership, social interaction and social cognitive, this study examined the relationships between teacher leadership

The study also examined the moderating effect of audit committee interaction, senior management support, and information technology usage on the relationship between internal

• The study intends to investigate competencies required from graduates who hold a bachelor degree in Hospitality Management from any Higher Education Institutions (HEis)