Hypothesis Prove

5.4 Hypothesis Prove

A good place to start is the discussion of the hypotheses from one to four whether each of them are supported. In order to carry simple regression analysis out, SPSS 15.0 was applied in this section. What regression analysis mainly counted is the linear relation of variables, and the further predict of relationships between variables. Table 5-6 illustrating the relations among those variable of our hypothesis. Nearly all the hypotheses we draw up present a positive relationship in the research.

Next, we show the results of correlation analysis in the following Table 5-6.

Among those variables, whatever correlation coefficient the table shows is high, and the P-value is less than 0.05. That is, there are significant relationships between different pairs of variables. Therefore, the research will adopt simple analysis and go a step further to run multi-analysis to assure their relationships.

Table 5-6 Correlation matrix of variables

Organizational

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The Influence of Relationship Quality on Organizational Learning

This part mainly analyzes the relationship between relationship quality and organizational learning in order to examine if the outcome fits the hypothesis as follow:

H1: Relationship quality positively associates with organizational learning.

65   

After carrying out the simple regression model, the performance is presented in Table 5-7. The test of the statistic model is based on F-ratio and P-value in the ANOVA table. It can be found that F-ratio is 48.837 and P-value is 0.000 less than α=0.05; Thus, the significance of the regression gives a good reason of continuing to conduct research.

Table 5-7 Test of simple regression model

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 4002.980 1 4002.980 48.837 0.000

Residual 3852.408 47 81.966

Total 7855.388 48

Note: *p<0.1, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01

Subsequently, we examine the relationship between relationship quality and organizational learning. When concentrating on Table 5-8, it serves as evidence of a significant and positive relationship between relationship quality and organizational learning (β=0.714, t=6.988, P-value=0.00 <0.05). As for the explanatory capability, R square approaches to 51%. In addition, the adjusted explanatory capability (Adjusted R square) also attains to 49.9%. Once, a firm obtains business partners’ high trust, commitment, and satisfaction, no matter what kinds of cooperative relationships, they will have opportunities to access more manufacturing technology and new trends in market. It shows that the better relationship quality represents, the higher organizational learning appears.

Table 5-8 Result of examination influence of relationship quality to organizational learning

Model Unstandardized

66   

The Influence of Relationship Quality on Organizational Performance

This part is chiefly analyzing the relationship between relationship quality and organizational performance in order to check whether the outcome fits the second hypothesis as follow:

H2: Relationship quality positively relates to organizational performance..

After operating the simple regression model, the performance is presented in Table 5-9. The test of the statistic model is relied on F-ratio and P-value in the ANOVA table. It shown that F-ratio is 14.179 and P-value is 0.00 less than α=0.05;

Therefore, the significance of the regression gives a good reason of keeping conducting research.

Table 5-9 Test of simple regression model

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 170.410 1 170.410 14.179 0.000

Residual 564.855 47 12.018

Total 735.265 48

Note: *p<0.1, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01

Subsequently, we examine the relationship between relationship quality and organizational performance. When concentrating on Table 5-10, it serves as evidence of a significant and positive relationship between relationship quality and organizational performance (β=0.481, t=3.766, P-value=0.00<0.05). As for the explanatory capability, R square approaches to 23.2%. In addition, the adjusted explanatory capability (Adjusted R square) also attains to 21.5%. Many academics and practitioners regard relationship quality as a powerful influence on customer loyalty. There is no doubt that customer loyalty to have a powerful impact on company performance. Accordingly, there is fairly general agreement that the better relationship quality represents, the better organizational performance appears.

67   

Table 5-10 Result of examination influence of relationship quality to organizational performance Model Unstandardized

The Influence of Organizational Learning on Organizational Performance

This part is mainly analyzing the relationship between organizational learning and organizational performance in order to examine if the outcome fits the third hypothesis as follow:

H3: Organizational learning positively associates with organizational performance.

After carrying out the regression model, the performance is presented in Table 5-11. The test of the statistic model is relied on F-ratio and P-value in the ANOVA table. It can be found that F-ratio is 12.138 and P-value is 0.001 less than α=0.05;

Therefore, the significance of the regression gives a good reason of continuing to conduct research.

Table 5-11 Test of simple regression model

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 150.913 1 150.913 12.138 .001

Residual 584.353 47 12.433

Total 735.265 48

Note: *p<0.1, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01

Subsequently, we examine the relationship between organizational learning and organizational performance. When focusing on Table 5-12, it serves as evidence of a significant and positive relationship between organizational learning and

68   

organizational performance (β=0.453, t=3.484, P-value=0.001<0.05). In respect of the explanatory capability, R square approaches to 20.5%. In addition, the adjusted explanatory capability (Adjusted R square) also attains to 18.8%. The higher organizational learning represents, the better organizational performance appears.

Indeed, what has to be noticed is competitive firms usually possess several keys, whose items include consecutively learning new information about technology, markets, customers, and the business environment. In other words, organizations that aggressively learn have a greater capability which enables them to maintain competitive advantage and to better long-term performance.

Table 5-12 Result of examination influence of organizational learning to organizational performance

Model Unstandardized

Organizational learning 0.139 0.453 3.484 .001 0.205 0.188 Note: *p<0.1, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01

Dependent Variable: Organizational performance

The Influence of Relationship Quality and Organizational Learning on Organizational Performance

Before going to the next point, the research would like to double check if H2 and H3 will be supported. It is for the reason that high correlations of the research results could lead to the phenomenon of collinearity among independent variables. Therefore, Multiple-regression is adapted to examine whether relationship quality and organizational learning have a significant effect on organizational performance.

After operating the Multiple-regression model, the performance is presented in Table 5-13. The test of the statistic model is relied on F-ratio and P-value in the ANOVA table. It can be discovered that F-ratio is 8.894 and P-value is 0.01 less than

69   

α=0.05; Therefore, the significance of the regression gives a good reason of continuing to conduct research.

Table 5-13 Test of multi-regression model

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 205.039 2 102.520 8.894 .001(a)

Residual 530.226 46 11.527

Total 735.265 48

Note: *p<0.1, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01

Afterward we examine the effect relationship quality and organizational learning on organizational performance. When focusing on Table 5-14, it serves as evidence of a significant and positive relationship between relationship quality and organizational learning on organizational performance (β of relationship quality and organizational learning are 0.292 and 0.286, respectively; t of relationship quality and organizational learning are 1.733 and 1.702, respectively; P-value of relationship quality and organizational learning are 0.09/0.096 <p=0.05, respectively). As for the explanatory capability, R square approaches to 27.9%. In addition, the adjusted explanatory capability (Adjusted R square) also attains to 24.8%. In addition, as we consider whether the multi-regression appears the phenomenon of the collinearity, we found that it seems to be not significant in the analysis (The first Eigen-value=2.982, the biggest Condition Index= 23.30 <30, the Tolerance=0.55<0.1). Therefore, both relationship quality and organizational learning separately possess partial explanation. In other words, H2 and H3 can be supported.

70   

Table 5-14 Result of multiple-regression analysis coefficient Model Unstandardized

The Influence of Network Position on Organizational Performance

This part mainly analyzes the relationship between network position and organizational performance in order to examine if the outcome fits the advance thought as follow:

H4: Network position positively relates to organizational performance.

Previously, Freeman (1979) made several key statements on centrality, including direct ties, betweenness, and closeness. In the following place, hypothesis 4 is tested by three aspects. First, after carrying out the regression model, the performance is presented in Table 5-15. The result indicates that direct ties among three types of networks do not have significantly positive effect on organizational performance.

Merely CCN’s direct ties have best explanation on organizational performance. In other words, the more direct ties a firm keeps, the more knowledge sharing and knowledge spillover the firm with their business partners obtain. However, due to the network characteristics of bicycle industry, the data that belongs to direct ties can’t positively relate to organizational performance. It seems unreasonable to suppose that one firm holds the more direct ties, it inevitably brings better organizational performance.

71   

Table 5-15 Regression analysis between direct ties and organizational performance

Organizational Performance

Note: A-TEAM communication network (TCN)

Overall collaborative communication network within the bicycle industry (CCNI) Complete communication network (CCN)

Second, the result (Table 5-16) indicates that all the betweenness centrality among three kinds of networks does not have significantly positive effect on organizational performance. Merely CCN’s betweenness centrality has best explanation on organizational performance. One explanation for betweenness centrality, as Nooy (2005) put it, is that the higher degree of betweenness centrality a firm controls, the chains of contacts will facilitate the spread of information in the network. However, due to the network characteristics of bicycle industry, the higher information flows are hold by most assemblers which possesses the capabilities of controlling information or banning the emergent amazement. Hence, the statement that betweenness centrality has a positive relationship with organizational performance can’t be widely accepted.

Table 5-16 Regression analysis between betweenness centrality and organizational performance

Organizational Performance

72   

Note: A-TEAM communication network (TCN)

Overall collaborative communication network within the bicycle industry (CCNI) Complete communication network (CCN)

Third, the result (Table 5-17) indicates that all the closeness centrality among three kinds of networks have significantly positive effect on organizational performance. TCN’s closeness centrality has better explanation on organizational performance. In other words, the closer one firm is to all other business partners, the easier information may be acquired in short time, the higher the closeness centrality one firm will be. Therefore, one can safely state that closeness centrality has a positive relationship with organizational performance.

Table 5-17 Regression analysis between closeness centrality and organizational performance

Organizational Performance

Note: A-TEAM communication network (TCN)

Overall collaborative communication network within the bicycle industry (CCNI) Complete communication network (CCN)

Summary

The primary aims of this chapter are to investigate relationship quality and organizational learning among bicycle and components firms from a social network theory perspective. The findings of this study were summarized in Table 5-18. Among these four hypotheses, three are fully supported (hypothesis 1, 2, and 3), one is partially supported (hypotheses 4).

73   

Table 5-18 Summaries of hypotheses

Hypotheses Results

H1: Relationship quality positively associates with organizational learning. Supported H2: Relationship quality positively relates to organizational performance. Supported

H3: Organizational learning positively associates with organizational performance. Supported

H4: Network position positively relates to organizational performance. Partially Supported

74