the relationship among entrepreneur, participatory … · · 2011-09-07supply chain management in...
TRANSCRIPT
65
The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development27-29 January 2011
Abstract The purposes of this study were to review the
level of Entrepreneur, Participatory Stakeholders and Marketing
Capability toward the Supply Chain Management in Mediating
the Sustainable Competitive Advantage and to analyze those
affected factors toward the sustainable competitive advantage of
SMEs enterprise at Northern Region of Thailand. The research
tool was questionnaire survey with descriptive statistical technique
of average mean, standard deviation and inferential statistics of
Structural Equation Model. The population was the 759 SMEs
entrepreneurs at Northern Region with similar gender proportion
of male and female, the majority was age group between 41-50
years old, married, undergraduate, single proprietor and limited
partnership. There business experience of 4-6 years and 7-10
years and less than 10 employees, personal investment and
financial institution investment and entrepreneur valued the
entrepreneurship, participatory stakeholders, marketing capability
in applying strategic supply chain management in mediating the
sustainable competitive advantage a high level.
The key success factors in business operation were the
participation from senior management at all level and the adoption
of strategic supply chain management. The main logic was due
to the cooperation of both internal and external stakeholders at
SMEs business level to achieve the joint benefits and business
alliance. The alliance could be in form of jointly forecasting the
demand of product, raw materials and passing the sales data
among the members within the supply chain and the adopting
of marketing capability to support business operation in order
to mediating the sustainable competitive advantage.
Keywords: Entrepreneur, Marketing capability, Supply Chain
Management
The Relationship Among Entrepreneur, Participatory Stakeholders and Marketing Capability toward the
Supply Chain Management in Mediating the Sustainable Competitive Advantage at Northern Region,
THAILAND
Boonthawan Wingwon1 Pattarika Maneepun2
M.B.A. Program, Faculty of Management Science, Lampang Rajabhat University,
119 Lampang Matha Rd. Muang District Lampang Province, 52100, Tel: 08-1882-3465,
E-mail: [email protected]
Faculty of Business Administration, Lampang Inter-tech College,
173 Prahonyothin Rd. Muang District, Lampang Province, 52100, Tel: 08-1784-0580,
E-mail: [email protected]
1. Introduction Currently, the SMEs business in Thailand had gained
popularity due to the affect of the economic crisis forcing business
enterprises to cut back their employment which led individual to
lost job and force one to generate new business or profession
in order to strengthen one financial security. [1]. It could be
stated that SMEs business was the economic power of grass
root with the key role in new business era. [2] They created new
innovative products for both domestic and international markets,
including the initiation the economic growth of various business
fronts. Hence, the entrepreneur was valued resource over
the innovation, the capital or other factors. [3] The successful
entrepreneur would improve one’s knowledge base by integration
among those existing experiences partners and sharing new
learning experiences from the domestic business alliance and
the affected external environment, [4] the geographic conditions
and important community activities. [5]
Entrepreneur was the opportunist in freely searching for
wealth and individual reward by applying passion, determination
and personal capability in preparation one self to face the forth coming
risks and uncertainty in generating growth to owned business.
[6] In the past years, numerous new entrepreneurs had set up
owned businesses to generate the economic development and to
strengthen the competitive capability of the country. [2]. Actually,
the entrepreneurship theories could be affectively applied to real
environment. However, the current business world was more
fluctuated and highly venerable than in the past, in particular
with the external environment of economic condition which was
highly sensitive, e.g. the strengthen of Baht currency against
the exporting business. [7] It included the evolving of social
conditions, the local political unrest, global warming, the severe
competition and various new innovations. [8] Therefore, the
available options for the new business proprietors were increasingly
numerous to entertain the desire of relevant business parties.
66
The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development27-29 January 2011
With the current fluctuated economic condition, together
with the limited business experiences and knowledge of entrepreneurs
were less competitive competency to successfully operate new
business. Nowadays, business required new product launch to
the market and delivered to the customer in short time frame.
The product life cycle on the other hands were getting shorter and
shorter and customers were continuing to raise their expectation.
In order to be able to compete with competitive competency,
majority entrepreneurs were valued the importance of strategic
supply chain management as they all viewed in the similar
direction that it could introduce cost reduction and increase the
business competency in the form of improvement in innovation,
communication technology and logistics, e.g. wireless internet and
the immediate delivery. All these evolvements of supply chains
resulted in the reduction of private investment of the country in
year 2009 to level 2.0 causing the crisis in property sector and
both domestic and international finance sectors, decreasing in
export sector and the slowdown of service sector. [9]
The above mentioned issues had long term outcome
on the closing down of numerous businesses and also discovered
the additional issue of obstacle withdrawal among entrepreneurs
instead of attempting to solve and cure those facing issues. For
the interview with random entrepreneurs at 5 Northern Region
provinces, it revealed that the main issues were the limited
business administration system, the effectiveness in business
finance, limited trustworthy, lack of business competency, short
of leadership and vision, lack of supply chain management and
short of coordination among internal and external stakeholders.
Hence, SMEs entrepreneurs needed to adjust strategies
to achieve business sustainability. Furthermore, the business
owners needed to analyze their business performance, to
generate new thinking and new innovative ideas from identified
opportunities in order to cope with the changing environment
and generate higher business competency and build the long
term competitive advantage.
2. Research Objectives 1. To study the level of importance of entrepreneur,
the participatory stakeholders, marketing capability toward the
supply chain management in mediating the sustainable competitive
advantage of SMEs business at Northern Region,
2. To study the affect factors toward the mediating
the sustainable competitive advantage of SMEs business at
Northern Region.
The research was carried out in survey format with 4
research scopes, i.e. (1) Subject Matters: To focus the study
on the strategic supply chain management and the mediating
competitive advantage (2) Duration: To carry out the study from
October 2010 till January 2011 for 4 months (3) Population:
To study among SMEs entrepreneurs and (4) Coverage Area:
To carry out at Lampang, Lamphun, Chiangmai, Chiangrai and
Prayao (Northern Region). The anticipated outcome from the
study were (1) To realize the level of importance of entrepreneur,
the participatory stakeholders, marketing capability toward the
supply chain management in mediating the competitive advantage
(2) To realize the affect factors toward the entrepreneur, the
participatory stakeholders, marketing capability toward the supply
chain management in mediating the sustainable competitive
advantage.
3. Literature Review The literature for this research review was based on
the concept and theory of entrepreneurship with the character
of risk taker, arbitrageur, innovator, manager and capitalist. The
first 3 characters were critical to business success while the
remaining 2 characters were with less importance. [10], However,
the business environment and the stakeholders of both internal
and external were also critical to the business [11] as variable
factors described below:
1. Entrepreneurship
Entrepreneur played the key role in supporting the
economic system. Any person paid no attention toward any
related entrepreneur activities, e.g. determination, vision,
innovator, drive, aspiration and risk management, the chance of
business success would not be materialized (Wickham, 2006,
p.9). [12] Therefore, there would not be entrepreneur if without the
person with these characters. Since the key role of entrepreneur
were the driver of the organization and direction under the
economic system.
Longenecker, Moore, Petty and Palich [13] specified
that entrepreneur was the person with the role in discovering
the market demands and initiated the business start up to meet
those demands in various dimensions and were recognized by the
society by having the risk management based on the innovation
change and economic development which was supported by the
Meyer’s concept. [14] which mentioned that the entrepreneur was
the person who integrated all forces to construct the economic
growth by developing new knowledge base as the combination
of own capability and past experience, including the learning
from local alliance in achieving business success.
67
The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development27-29 January 2011
Furthermore, Zimmerer and Scarborough [15] also agreed
that entrepreneur was the person with the key role in managing
risks in private business system and was the person to locate profit
opportunity under the business risks including the recognition
from the society and relevant stakeholders for talent, determination,
creative thinking to achieve business challenge with the objective
for business growth. [16] specified that entrepreneur was
person with vision and aspiration to achieve variable objective
targets within owned heart and under influence of participatory
stakeholder. [17]
2. Stakeholder Participatory
Stakeholder participatory was the general operation of
an organization by classifying the duty of each function, division
and unit as per assigned responsibility or organization chart of
each business unit [8] of which each function or division required
to communicate and participate in activity by mean of operation
instruction and coordination either from top down, bottom up
or from same level. The working behavior with stakeholder
participatory was importance as it was the affective way of
working by pooling resources from both internal and external of
the organization with based on the business principles, failure
development or business success of such organization which could
be measurable as per key performance indicators. Any form of
success from the idea proposal, joint planning and joint operation
for the organization development required the stakeholder
participatory process. [17]
On the production process, the relevant parties consisted
of raw materials suppliers, organization or business and
customers while the stakeholder participatory consisted of the
raw materials suppliers, organization or business, customers,
staff or employees and business owner. The relevant parties of
the organization were not only those above specified, but also
included those who had direct contact with the organization either
internal or not. In addition, it also included those who had no
direct contact with the organization but had the affect toward the
organization at variable level [18] and participatory stakeholder
had affected to supply chain management strategy. [19]
3. Supply Chain Management Strategy
The current supply chain management participatory
was extended to include the cooperation at industry level and
supply chain level in order to generate benefits and business alliance
by means of demand forecast of products and raw materials
and the pass on of sales data among members of supply chain
[19] including the flow of activities which could be assessed, be
improved, be redesigned for improvement be compiled with speed
and accuracy. [20] The supply chain management linked vision,
mission, strategies, and performance evaluation for sustainable
business at current and in the future. Hsiao and Melody [21]
revealed that the organization with the supply chain management
had the production cycle and the inventory level lower than their
competitor by 50%. [22]
Nevertheless, the consideration should be applied to
the organization capability, personnel capability, capital structure,
financial capability, security, production time table and the
information capability by mean of jointly administration with focus
on the profit, benefits and joint investment in physical resource,
human resource and the introduction of IT as the operation tool
[23] to build the competitive advantage [24] which consisted of
both economic expansion and economic shrinkage. The logistics
operation was the mean to measure the fast delivery, the order
taking and the immediate response, the flexibility to reliable meet
the delivery of customer / trading partner once delay (Green,
Whitten and Inman, 2008), [25] the quality of process, the lower
of delivery cost, the appropriate inventory level, lower manpower
cost and lower the administrative cost over the product sales
[26]and supply chain management strategy had affected to
competitive advantage. [27]
4. Marketing Ability
Marketing ability was the main function of business
with the responsibility in distribution products and services to
customers, starting from the study, analysis of demand and
generating demand in future. [28] including the sale promotion
for the products to reach customers. The marketing decision
involved marketing strategy with 4 P’s, i.e. Product, Price, Place
and Promotion. Marketer must analyze the customer demand,
plan, investigate and control to ensure that the marketing plan
was in line with customer demand as per the following steps.
[29] (1) The operation was the data exhibited the sales volume
and marketing performance (2) Marketing research was the
analysis of marketing data of consumer toward the business
products and services. [27] The marketing research assisted the
management in planning and decision in marketing, competitor
analysis and strategy as the business operation tool. [30] and
as the base in developing marketing strategy by relied on the
external information, e.g. the economic change, politic, social
and technology. The marketing performance could be measured
by the sales volume, market share, [25] customer satisfaction,
customer royalty, corporate trustworthiness, the increase in new
customer and the increase in market share [26] and marketing
ability had affected to competitive advantage. [31]
68
The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development27-29 January 2011
5. Sustainable Competitive Advantage
The increase of competitive advantage consisted of (1)
low production unit cost (2) product or service differentiation over
competitor and (3) speed of response time. [31] The business
would achieve success relied on the organization structure and
competition of such business [31] with key factors as (1) Threat
from the new competitors in the industry (2) Threat from the
replaceable products or services (3) Power of negotiation with
raw material suppliers (4) Power of negotiation with customers
and (5) Competition condition within the industry. These 5 factors
were the industry elements for developing strategy for business
success in the long term. The competitive advantage needed
to have product differentiation over competitors and with higher
perceived value among customers, i.e. worth money, with benefit
and with high sentimental value that other product brand or
service providers could not achieved. Therefore, on top of the
product / service value, it must also different from competitors
or difficult to imitate and furthermore, the product / service must
not be able to be replaced. [32] which meant that customer must
faced switching cost, i.e. if customer wanted to move from existing
product to new competitive product, custom must face the
emotion upset toward the financial risk or the social recognition
risk. Hence, the literature review on intangible variables related
to (1) entrepreneur (2) participatory stakeholders (3) marketing
capability (4) supply chain management and (5) sustainable
competitive advantage.
Figure 1 Research Conceptual Framework
3
had direct contact with the organization either internal or not. In addition, it also included those who had no direct contact with the organization but had the affect toward the organization at variable level [18] and participatory stakeholder had affected to supply chain management strategy. [19]
3. Supply Chain Management StrategyThe current supply chain management
participatory was extended to include the cooperation at industry level and supply chain level in order to generate benefits and business alliance by means of demand forecast of products and raw materials and the pass on of sales data among members of supply chain [19] including the flow of activities which could be assessed, be improved, be redesigned for improvement be compiled with speed and accuracy. [20] The supply chain management linked vision, mission, strategies, and performance evaluation for sustainable business at current and in the future. Hsiao and Melody [21] revealed that the organization with the supply chain management had the production cycle and the inventory level lower than their competitor by 50%. [22]
Nevertheless, the consideration should be applied to the organization capability, personnel capability, capital structure, financial capability, security, production time table and the information capability by mean of jointly administration with focus on the profit, benefits and joint investment in physical resource, human resource and the introduction of IT as the operation tool [23] to build the competitive advantage [24] which consisted of both economic expansion and economic shrinkage. The logistics operation was the mean to measure the fast delivery, the order taking and the immediate response, the flexibility to reliable meet the delivery of customer / trading partner once delay (Green, Whitten and Inman, 2008), [25] the quality of process, the lower of delivery cost, the appropriate inventory level, lower manpower cost and lower the administrative cost over the product sales [26]and supply chain management strategy had affected to competitive advantage. [27]
4. Marketing Ability Marketing ability was the main function of
business with the responsibility in distribution products and services to customers, starting from the study, analysis of demand and generating demand in future. [28] including the sale promotion for the products to reach customers. The marketing decision involved marketing strategy with 4 P’s, i.e. Product, Price, Place and Promotion. Marketer must analyze the customer demand, plan, investigate and control to ensure that the marketing plan was in line with customer demand as per the following steps. [29] (1) The operation was the data exhibited the sales volume and marketing performance (2) Marketing research was the analysis of marketing data of consumer toward the business products and services. [27] The marketing research assisted the management in planning and decision in marketing, competitor analysis and strategy as the business operation tool. [30] and as the base in developing marketing strategy by relied on the external information, e.g. the economic change, politic,
social and technology. The marketing performance could be measured by the sales volume, market share, [25] customer satisfaction, customer royalty, corporate trustworthiness, the increase in new customer and the increase in market share [26] and marketing ability had affected to competitive advantage. [31]
5. Sustainable Competitive Advantage The increase of competitive advantage consisted
of (1) low production unit cost (2) product or service differentiation over competitor and (3) speed of response time. [31] The business would achieve success relied on the organization structure and competition of such business [31] with key factors as (1) Threat from the new competitors in the industry (2) Threat from the replaceable products or services (3) Power of negotiation with raw material suppliers (4) Power of negotiation with customers and (5) Competition condition within the industry. These 5 factors were the industry elements for developing strategy for business success in the long term. The competitive advantage needed to have product differentiation over competitors and with higher perceived value among customers, i.e. worth money, with benefit and with high sentimental value that other product brand or service providers could not achieved. Therefore, on top of the product / service value, it must also different from competitors or difficult to imitate and furthermore, the product / service must not be able to be replaced. [32] which meant that customer must faced switching cost, i.e. if customer wanted to move from existing product to new competitive product, custom must face the emotion upset toward the financial risk or the social recognition risk. Hence, the literature review on intangible variables related to (1) entrepreneur (2) participatory stakeholders (3) marketing capability (4) supply chain management and (5) sustainable competitive advantage.
Figure 1 Research Conceptual Framework
Hypo thesis Assumption H: 1 Entrepreneur affected toward Participatory
Stakeholder H: 2 Entrepreneur affected toward Supply Chain
Management
H:7
H:5
H:6
H:8
H:4
H:3
H:1
H:2
Marketing Ability
Supply chain Management Entrepreneur Sustainable
Competitive Advantage
Participatory Stakeholder
Hypo thesis Assumption
H: 1 Entrepreneur affected toward Participatory
Stakeholder
H: 2 Entrepreneur affected toward Supply Chain
Management
H: 3 Entrepreneur affected toward Marketing Ability
H: 4 Participatory Stakeholder affected toward Supply
Chain Management
H: 5 Marketing Ability affected toward Supply Chain
Management
H: 6 Participatory Stakeholder affected toward Sustainable
Competitive Advantage
H: 7 Supply Chain Management affected toward
Sustainable Competitive Advantage
H: 8 Marketing Ability affected toward Sustainable
Competitive Advantage
4. Research Methodology The research was carried out in questionnaire survey
format with 5 measurable factors were developed from the literature
review with Cronbach’s Alpha .899. The questionnaires were
distributed via postal service among 200 SMEs entrepreneurs per
each province as names registered and listed at Provincial Trade
Office. The total 1,000 questionnaires were disseminated to 5
different provinces of the Northern Region and with responded
back of 759 within one month time frame representing 75.90%.
Data was checked and replaced in case of loss with Adjacent
Mean and be proceeded to data compilation and analysis by
conceptual structure equation model by PLS-Graph 3.0
program. [33]
5. Research Outcome The majority of entrepreneurs were similar in gender
proportion of male and female representing 49.30% and 50.70%,
with the majority were in age group between 41-50 years old,
with married marital status, with business established in Lampang
Lamphun provinces and followed by Chiangrai, Chiangmai
and Prayao provinces at similar proportion. The majority had
undergraduate educational level, with single proprietor and limited
partnership, with service business and followed by commercial
business, with business experience of 4-6 years and 7-10 years
and with less than 10 employees, with personal investment and
financial institution investment.
69
The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development27-29 January 2011
6. Research Summary and Conclusion
From Figure 2, it revealed that the factor toward the
entrepreneur’s most business success was the supply chain
management representing 43.00% and had direct affect toward
the coefficient path equal to 0.412 with R2 value of 0.371, the
sustainable competitive advantage representing 37.00% and had
4
H:3 Entrepreneur affected toward Marketing Ability
H: 4 Participatory Stakeholder affected toward Supply Chain Management
H: 5 Marketing Ability affected toward Supply Chain Management
H: 6 Participatory Stakeholder affected toward Sustainable Competitive Advantage
H: 7 Supply Chain Management affected toward Sustainable Competitive Advantage
H: 8 Marketing Ability affected toward Sustainable Competitive Advantage
4. Research Methodology The research was carried out in questionnaire
survey format with 5 measurable factors were developed from the literature review with Cronbach’s Alpha .899. The questionnaires were distributed via postal service among 200 SMEs entrepreneurs per each province as names registered and listed at Provincial Trade Office. The total 1,000 questionnaires were disseminated to 5 different provinces of the Northern Region and with
responded back of 759 within one month time frame representing 75.90%. Data was checked and replaced in case of loss with Adjacent Mean and be proceeded to data compilation and analysis by conceptual structure equation model by PLS-Graph 3.0 program. [33]
5. Research Outcome The majority of entrepreneurs were similar in
gender proportion of male and female representing 49.30% and 50.70%, with the majority were in age group between 41-50 years old, with married marital status, with business established in Lampang Lamphun provinces and followed by Chiangrai, Chiangmai and Prayao provinces at similar proportion. The majority had undergraduate educational level, with single proprietor and limited partnership, with service business and followed by commercial business, with business experience of 4-6 years and 7-10 years and with less than 10 employees, with personal investment and financial institution investment.
6. Research Summary and Conclusion
Figure 2 Analysis Outcome of Conceptual Structure Framework From Figure 2, it revealed that the factor toward
the entrepreneur’s most business success was the supply chain management representing 43.00% and had direct affect toward the coefficient path equal to 0.412 with R2
Figure 2 Analysis Outcome of Conceptual Structure Framework
Table 1 Testing Result of Hypothesis Assumption
direct affect toward the marketing ability representing 31.00%
and with the coefficient path equal to 0.309 and with R2 value
of 0.312 and also had direct affect toward participatory
stakeholders with the coefficient path equal to 0.515 and with
R2 value of 0.265 subsequently.
5
value of 0.371, the sustainable competitive advantage representing 37.00% and had direct affect toward the marketing ability representing 31.00% and with the
coefficient path equal to 0.309 and with R2 value of 0.312 and also had direct affect toward participatory stakeholders with the coefficient path equal to 0.515 and with R2 value of 0.265 subsequently.
Table 1 Testing Result of Hypothesis Assumption Research
HypothesisCoefficient path t-stat p-value Conclusion
Entrep →Particip 0.515 14.752 0.000 Support Entrep →Stratscm rcProd&ServQlty 0.277 7.2344 0.000 Support Entrep →Mar 0.309 8.5035 0.000 Support Particip→ Stratscm 0.471 14.2102 0.000 Support Mar → Stratscm 0.332 9.6182 0.000 Support Particip→ Compet 0.200 3.8122 0.000 Support Stratscm → Compet 0.412 7.1909 0.000 Support Mar→ Compet 0.095 2.7123 0.009 Reject
Remark: Entrep = Entrepreneur / Particip = Participatory Stakeholders / Stratscm = Supply Chain Management / Mar = Marketing Ability / Compet = Sustainable Competitive Advantage Remark: Accepted at p-value ≤ 0.10
From Table2, the analysis of affect variables with relationship revealed that
Entrepreneur had direct affect toward the participatory stakeholders with the coefficient path value of 0.515 which was acceptable with the p-value = 0.000
Entrepreneur had direct affect toward the supply chain management with the coefficient path value of 0.277 which was acceptable with the p-value = 0.000 Entrepreneur had direct affect toward the marketing ability with the coefficient path value of 0.309 which was acceptable with the p-value = 0.000 and Participatory stakeholders had direct affect toward supply chain management with the coefficient path value of 0.471 which was acceptable with the p-value = 0.000
Marketing ability had direct affect toward the supply chain management with the coefficient path value of 0.200 which was acceptable with the p-value = 0.000 and Participatory stakeholders had direct affect toward sustainable competitive advantage with the coefficient path value of 0.370 which was acceptable with p-value = 0.000
Supply chain management had direct affect toward sustainable competitive advantage with the coefficient path value of 0.412 which was acceptable with p-value = 0.000 with the exception of Marketing ability had no affect toward the sustainable competitive advantage which was not in line with the hypothesis assumption.
Table 2 Affections of Antecedent Variables of Entrepreneur, Participatory Stakeholders, Marketing Ability toward Supply Chain Management in Mediating the Sustainable Competitive Advantage
Antecedent Dependent variable R2 Affect
Particip Entrep Stratscm Mar Compet Particip 0.266 DE N/A N/A 0.471 N/A 0.200 IE N/A N/A 0.000 N/A 0.000 TE N/A N/A 0.471 N/A 0.200 Stratscm 0.434 DE 0.471 N/A N/A 0.332 0.412 IE 0.000 N/A N/A 0.000 0.000 TE 0.471 N/A N/A 0.332 0.412 Mar 0.312 DE N/A N/A 0.332 N/A 0.095 IE N/A N/A 0.000 N/A 0.000 TE N/A N/A 0.332 N/A 0.095 Compet 0.371 DE 0.200 0.000 0.412 0.095 0.370 IE 0.000 0.114 0.000 0.000 0.000 TE 0.200 0.114 0.412 0.095 0.370
Remark: TE = total affect, DE = direct affect, IE = indirect affect.
The analysis outcome of conceptual structure framework revealed that the factor toward the
Remark: Entrep = Entrepreneus / Particip = Participatory Stakeholedrs / Stratscm = Supply Chain Management / Mar = Marketing
Ability / Compet =Sustainable Competitive Advantage
Remark: Accepted at p-value < 0.10
70
The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development27-29 January 2011
From Table2, the analysis of affect variables with
relationship revealed that
Entrepreneur had direct affect toward the participatory
stakeholders with the coefficient path value of 0.515 which was
acceptable with the p-value = 0.000
Entrepreneur had direct affect toward the supply chain
management with the coefficient path value of 0.277 which was
acceptable with the p-value = 0.000
Entrepreneur had direct affect toward the marketing
ability with the coefficient path value of 0.309 which was acceptable
with the p-value = 0.000 and Participatory stakeholders had direct
affect toward supply chain management with the coefficient path
value of 0.471 which was acceptable with the p-value = 0.000
5
value of 0.371, the sustainable competitive advantage representing 37.00% and had direct affect toward the marketing ability representing 31.00% and with the
coefficient path equal to 0.309 and with R2 value of 0.312 and also had direct affect toward participatory stakeholders with the coefficient path equal to 0.515 and with R2 value of 0.265 subsequently.
Table 1 Testing Result of Hypothesis Assumption Research
HypothesisCoefficient path t-stat p-value Conclusion
Entrep →Particip 0.515 14.752 0.000 Support Entrep →Stratscm rcProd&ServQlty 0.277 7.2344 0.000 Support Entrep →Mar 0.309 8.5035 0.000 Support Particip→ Stratscm 0.471 14.2102 0.000 Support Mar → Stratscm 0.332 9.6182 0.000 Support Particip→ Compet 0.200 3.8122 0.000 Support Stratscm → Compet 0.412 7.1909 0.000 Support Mar→ Compet 0.095 2.7123 0.009 Reject
Remark: Entrep = Entrepreneur / Particip = Participatory Stakeholders / Stratscm = Supply Chain Management / Mar = Marketing Ability / Compet = Sustainable Competitive Advantage Remark: Accepted at p-value ≤ 0.10
From Table2, the analysis of affect variables with relationship revealed that
Entrepreneur had direct affect toward the participatory stakeholders with the coefficient path value of 0.515 which was acceptable with the p-value = 0.000
Entrepreneur had direct affect toward the supply chain management with the coefficient path value of 0.277 which was acceptable with the p-value = 0.000 Entrepreneur had direct affect toward the marketing ability with the coefficient path value of 0.309 which was acceptable with the p-value = 0.000 and Participatory stakeholders had direct affect toward supply chain management with the coefficient path value of 0.471 which was acceptable with the p-value = 0.000
Marketing ability had direct affect toward the supply chain management with the coefficient path value of 0.200 which was acceptable with the p-value = 0.000 and Participatory stakeholders had direct affect toward sustainable competitive advantage with the coefficient path value of 0.370 which was acceptable with p-value = 0.000
Supply chain management had direct affect toward sustainable competitive advantage with the coefficient path value of 0.412 which was acceptable with p-value = 0.000 with the exception of Marketing ability had no affect toward the sustainable competitive advantage which was not in line with the hypothesis assumption.
Table 2 Affections of Antecedent Variables of Entrepreneur, Participatory Stakeholders, Marketing Ability toward Supply Chain Management in Mediating the Sustainable Competitive Advantage
Antecedent Dependent variable R2 Affect
Particip Entrep Stratscm Mar Compet Particip 0.266 DE N/A N/A 0.471 N/A 0.200 IE N/A N/A 0.000 N/A 0.000 TE N/A N/A 0.471 N/A 0.200 Stratscm 0.434 DE 0.471 N/A N/A 0.332 0.412 IE 0.000 N/A N/A 0.000 0.000 TE 0.471 N/A N/A 0.332 0.412 Mar 0.312 DE N/A N/A 0.332 N/A 0.095 IE N/A N/A 0.000 N/A 0.000 TE N/A N/A 0.332 N/A 0.095 Compet 0.371 DE 0.200 0.000 0.412 0.095 0.370 IE 0.000 0.114 0.000 0.000 0.000 TE 0.200 0.114 0.412 0.095 0.370
Remark: TE = total affect, DE = direct affect, IE = indirect affect.
The analysis outcome of conceptual structure framework revealed that the factor toward the
Table 2 Affections of Antecedent Variables of Entrepreneur, Participatory Stakeholders, Marketing Ability toward Supply Chain
Management in Mediating the Sustainable Competitive Advantage
Marketing ability had direct affect toward the supply chain
management with the coefficient path value of 0.200 which was
acceptable with the p-value = 0.000 and Participatory stakeholders
had direct affect toward sustainable competitive advantage with
the coefficient path value of 0.370 which was acceptable with
p-value = 0.000
TSupply chain management had direct affect toward
sustainable competitive advantage with the coefficient path value
of 0.412 which was acceptable with p-value = 0.000 with the
exception of Marketing ability had no affect toward the sustainable
competitive advantage which was not in line with the hypothesis
assumption.
The analysis outcome of conceptual structure framework
revealed that the factor toward the entrepreneur’s most business
success was supply chain management representing 43.00%
which had direct affect and coefficient path value equal to 0.412
and with R2 value of 0.371. The marketing capability and the
Table 3 Analysis of Discriminant Validity
participatory stakeholders had direct affect toward the sustainable
competitive advantage with coefficient path value equal to 0.095
and 0.200 with R2 value of 0.371 by having the supply chain
management as the mediator to the success.
6
entrepreneur’s most business success was supply chain management representing 43.00% which had direct affect and coefficient path value equal to 0.412 and with R2
value of 0.371. The marketing capability and the participatory stakeholders had direct affect toward the
sustainable competitive advantage with coefficient path value equal to 0.095 and 0.200 with R2 value of 0.371 by having the supply chain management as the mediator to the success.
Table 3 Analysis of Discriminant Validity Construct Construct CR R2 AVE
Entrep Particip Mar Strat-scm Compet Entrep 0.758 - 0.348 1.000 Particip 0.768 0.266 0.361 0.515 1.000
Mar 0.82 0.312 0.450 0.481 0.341 1.000 Strat-scm 0.801 0.434 0.335 0.520 0.614 0.492 1.000 Compet 0.836 0.371 0.423 0.474 0.485 0.366 0.581 1.000
Remark: Figure value in main diagonal was AVE meant the indicator for Discriminate Validity measurement of construct Table 3 revealed the composite reliability (CR) with value higher than 0.50 indicated that all questions in measureable indicators were reliable with validity and correlation value of each indicator within the same variables had higher value than the correlation value of each indicator with different variables indicated the high discriminant validity.
7. Research Outcome DiscussionThe majority of entrepreneurs was similar in
gender proportion of male and female, and age group between 41-50 years old of the most, married, business established in Lampang and Lamphun provinces and followed by Chiengrai, Chiengmai and Prayao provinces at similar proportion. The majority had undergraduate educational level, with single proprietor and limited partnership as per the study of Hatten which concluded that entrepreneurs must be the leader of changes and would bring the progress to the society by utilizing own capability, of family members and of networks to build entrepreneur society which in turn would managed business growth together with the understand of adapted methodology from own experience and strategy as entrepreneurs. [34] Baum and Locke, [35] Beaver and Jennings, [36] The majority of businesses were in service sector which was the business that not required large capital investment with business experience of 4-6 years and 7-10 years and with less than 10 employees and with personal investment and financial institution investment. The most affect factor toward the entrepreneur business success was the supply chain management. The corporation was to generate benefits and business alliance by jointly forecast the demand of products, raw materials and the passing of data among members in the supply chain. [19] in order to build the sustainable competitive advantage.
In addition, the supply chain management had direct affect toward the marketing ability representing 31.00%. This direct affect was in line with the study of Zeng, Xie and Tam, [29] which described that the business operation was the information indicated the sales volume, the marketing performance and the marketing research.
It was the marketing data of consumers toward the business products and services. [27] The most effective factor toward the entrepreneurs’ success in business was the supply chain management. These reasons were both internal and external stakeholders corporate in industrial level and supply chain management level.
Anyway, the supply chain management had direct affect toward the participatory stakeholders of both internal and external as per the study of Renn and Schweitzer [37] which indicated that the working behavior with stakeholder participatory was importance as it was the affective way of working by pooling resources from both internal and external of the organization with based on the business principles, failure development or business success of such organization which could be measurable as per key performance indicators. Any form of success from the idea proposal, joint planning and joint operation for the organization development required the stakeholder participatory process.
8. Research Recommendation The supporting units of SMEs business should
have advisory platform or meeting conference to exchange opinions among entrepreneurs to aware of the competition impact and should have informative data on economic status, economic trend and current competition environment to support entrepreneur for proactive marketing planning.
For the extension of this research, the researcher should have mechanism in supporting entrepreneur in specific business that concise, practical and tangible for actual operation or the sample of success from the research outcome.
9. Acknowledgements Researchers would like to express appreciation
to the management of Rajabhat Lampang University and Intertech College Lampang for value the importance and grant financial supports for this survey research and would like to also recognize every peer reviews in providing
Remark: TE = total affect, DE = direct affect, IE = indirect affect.
Remark: Figure value in main diagomal was AVE meant the indicotor for Discriminate Validity measurement of construct
71
The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development27-29 January 2011
Table 3 revealed the composite reliability (CR) with
value higher than 0.50 indicated that all questions in measureable
indicators were reliable with validity and correlation value of
each indicator within the same variables had higher value than
the correlation value of each indicator with different variables
indicated the high discriminant validity.
7. Research Outcome Discussion The majority of entrepreneurs was similar in gender
proportion of male and female, and age group between 41-50
years old of the most, married, business established in Lampang
and Lamphun provinces and followed by Chiengrai, Chiengmai
and Prayao provinces at similar proportion. The majority had
undergraduate educational level, with single proprietor and
limited partnership as per the study of Hatten which concluded
that entrepreneurs must be the leader of changes and would
bring the progress to the society by utilizing own capability, of
family members and of networks to build entrepreneur society
which in turn would managed business growth together with the
understand of adapted methodology from own experience and
strategy as entrepreneurs. [34] Baum and Locke, [35] Beaver
and Jennings, [36] The majority of businesses were in service
sector which was the business that not required large capital
investment with business experience of 4-6 years and 7-10 years
and with less than 10 employees and with personal investment
and financial institution investment.
The most affect factor toward the entrepreneur business
success was the supply chain management. The corporation
was to generate benefits and business alliance by jointly forecast
the demand of products, raw materials and the passing of data
among members in the supply chain. [19] in order to build the
sustainable competitive advantage.
In addition, the supply chain management had direct
affect toward the marketing ability representing 31.00%. This
direct affect was in line with the study of Zeng, Xie and Tam, [29]
which described that the business operation was the information
indicated the sales volume, the marketing performance and the
marketing research.
It was the marketing data of consumers toward the
business products and services. [27] The most effective factor
toward the entrepreneurs’ success in business was the supply
chain management. These reasons were both internal and
external stakeholders corporate in industrial level and supply
chain management level.
Anyway, the supply chain management had direct
affect toward the participatory stakeholders of both internal and
external as per the study of Renn and Schweitzer [37] which
indicated that the working behavior with stakeholder participatory
was importance as it was the affective way of working by pooling
resources from both internal and external of the organization with
based on the business principles, failure development or business
success of such organization which could be measurable as per
key performance indicators. Any form of success from the idea
proposal, joint planning and joint operation for the organization
development required the stakeholder participatory process.
8. Research Recommendation The supporting units of SMEs business should have
advisory platform or meeting conference to exchange opinions
among entrepreneurs to aware of the competition impact and
should have informative data on economic status, economic trend
and current competition environment to support entrepreneur for
proactive marketing planning.
For the extension of this research, the researcher
should have mechanism in supporting entrepreneur in specific
business that concise, practical and tangible for actual operation
or the sample of success from the research outcome.
9. Acknowledgements Researchers would like to express appreciation to
the management of Rajabhat Lampang University and Intertech
College Lampang for value the importance and grant financial
supports for this survey research and would like to also recognize
every peer reviews in providing comments and recommendations
for the completeness of this research study.
10. Reference[1] Ahuja, G, & Lampert, C. M. (2001). Entrepreneurship in the
large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established
firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management
Journal, 22, 521-543.
[2] Hisrich, R. D. , Peters, M. P. , & Shepherd, D. A. (2005).
Entrepreneurship. (6 th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
[3] Brown, J. S. , & Duguid, P. (1991) “Organizational Learning
and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of
Working, Learning, and Innovation,” Organization Science,
2(1): 40-57.
[4] Boyd, C.E. (1990). Water quality in ponds for aquaculture.
Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University,
Auburn, Alabama.
[5] Minnitti, K. , & Bygrave. M. (1999). Venture creation and
the enterprising individual: A review and synthesis.
Journal of Management. 27(7): 23-25.
72
The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development27-29 January 2011
[6] Boyd, D.P. , & Gumpert, D.E. (1983). Coping with
entrepreneurial stress. Harvard Business Review, 61(2),
44-64.
[7] Than Sestakit. (2010). Study Summary SMEs in Thailand:
Economic, Social and Culture Roles. (Online) Available
http://www.sme.go.th /Documents/2553/mp/ wh itepaper-
2552/Chapter7.pdf, Retrieved [October 10, 2010]
[8] Wingwon, B., (2007). Small Business Management,
Lampang, Faculty of Management Sciences, Rajabhat
Lampang University.
[9] Kasikorn Thai Research Center. (2008). Loans for Small
and Medium Enterprises (SMEs): Business Opportunity
of Commercial Bank. (Online) Available, http://research.
kasik ornresearch.com. Retrieved [October 10, 2010]
[10] Bosma, M., Praag M.V., & Wit. ( 2000). Determinants
of successful Entrepreneurship. (online) Available :
www.ondememerschap.nl/pdf-ez/H200002.pdf. Retrieved
from [2010, March 15].
[11] Stoner, J.F., Freeman, R.E. & Gilbert, D.R. (2003). Modern
Management (6th ed.). New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India.
[12] Wickham, P. A. (2006). Strategic Entrepreneurship.
(4thed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
[13] Longenecker, J. G. , Moore, C. , Petty, J. W. , & Palich, L. E.
(2006). Small Business Management: An Entrepreneurial
Emphasis. International Edition Thomson South-Western.
[14] Meyer, J. A. (2002). Knowledge and use of innovation
methods in young SME’s. International Journal of
Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 2(3):
246-267.
[15] Zimmerer, T. W. , & Scarborough, N. M. (2002). Essentials
of entrepreneurship and small business management.
(4thed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
[16] Moorman, J. W. , & Halloran. J. W. (2006). Successful
business planning for entrepreneurs. (1st ed.) Ohio:
Thomson/South-Western.
[17] Renn, Ortwin. , & Pia-Johanna Schweitzer. (2009). Inclusive
risk governance: Concepts and application to .environmental
policy making. Environmental Policy and Governance.
19:174–185.
[18] Dietz, Thomas. , & Paul, C. S. (2008). Public Participation
in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making.
Washington D.C.: The National Academies Press.
[19] Tracey, M. (1998). The importance of logistics efficiency to
customer service and firm performance. The International
Journal of Logistic Management. 9(2): 65-81.
[20] Kim, S. W. (2006). Affects of supply chain management practices,
integration and competition capability on performance.
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal.
11(3): 241-248.
[21] Hsiao, Ju-Miao Melody. (2007). The Impact of Retailer-Supplier
Cooperation and Decision-Making Uncertainty on Supply Chain
Performance, University of Sydney. Faculty of Economics
and Business.
[22] Joseph W.K. Chan, (2005). Competitive strategies and
manufacturing logistics: An empirical study of Hong Kong
manufacturers. International Journal of Physical Distribution
&Logistics Management, 35(1): 20-24.
[23] Bowersox, D. J. , & Daugherty, P. J. (1995). Logistics
paradigms: The impact of information technology, Journal of
Business Logistics, 42(2): 56-64.
[24] Li, S. , Ragu-Nathan, B. , Ragu-Nathan, T.S. , & Rao,
S. S. (2006). The impact of supply chain management
practices on competitive advantage and organizational
performance, Computer Information Systems Department,
Bryant University, 34(2): 107-124.
[25] Green, K. W. , Whitten, D. W. , & Inman, R. A. (2008) “The
impact of logistics performance on organizational performance
in a supply chain context” Supply Chain Management: An
International Journal, 13(4): 317-327.
[26] Wallenburg, C.M. , & Weber, J. (2005). Structural equation
modeling as a basis for theory development within logistics
and supply chain management research, Retrieved Jan
25,2010, from http://www.springerlink.com.
[27] Ambler, T., Styles, C., & Xiucun, W. (1999). The affect of
channel relationships and guanxi on the performance of
inter-province export ventures in the People’s Republic of
China, International Journal of Research in Marketing,
16(1): 75-87.
[28] Knight, G. (2000). Entrepreneurship and marketing strategy:
The SMEs under globalization, Journal of International
Marketing, 8(2): 12-32.
[29] Zeng, X. , Xie, X. M. , & Tam, C. M. (2010). Relationship
between cooperation networks and innovation performance
of SMEs, Journal of Technovation, 30(3):181-194.
[30] Wingwon, B. and Piriyakul, M., (2010), PLS Multi-Group
Path Model for Determinants of Competitive Advantage
for SMEs, Lampang, Faculty of Management Sciences.
Rajabhat Lampang University.
[31] Porter, M. E. (1980). “The five competitive forces that shape
strategy”. Harvard Business Review, January20: 45-48.
73
The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development27-29 January 2011
[32] Barney, J. (1991). “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive
Advantage”, Journal of Management, 17(1): 99-120.
[33] Chin, W. W. (2001).PLS-Graph Users Guide 3.0 C.T.Bauer
College of Business, University of Houston, Houston,Texas.
[34] Chandler, G.N., & Jansen, E. (1992). The founder’s self-
assessed competence and venture performance. Journal
of business Venturing, 7(3): 223-237.
[35] Baum, J.R.& Locke, E.A (2004). The relationship of
entrepreneurial traits, skill, and motivation to new venture
growth. Journal of applied Psychology, 89(4):587-598.
[36] Beaver, G., & Jennings, P. (2005). “competitive advantage
and entrepreneurial power. The dark side of entrepreneur-
ship.” Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Devel-
opment, 12: 1, 923.
[37] Renn, & Schweitzer, (2009). Inclusive risk governance:
Concepts and application to environmental policy
making. Environmental Policy and Governance 19:174–185.