The effects of managerial factors on performance of seafood exporters in ba ria – vung tau

The Effects of Managerial Factors on Performance
of Seafood Exporters in Ba Ria – Vung Tau
SUMMARY:
The study aims to measure impact of managerial factors on performance and
s of these elements. Survey of 141 seafood exporters in Ba Ria-Vung Tau shows
managerial factors (senior management commitments of production organization,
human resource training, and customer focus) and explains 66.88% of the variation
in enterprise performance. Research results also show that the senior managerial
commitment of performance has a positive impact as following: human resources
training (.311), consumer orientation (.214), the relationship in the enterprise (.183)
and committed the organization of production management of enterprise (.179).
Furthermore, the results show strong correlation of the managerial factors
Keywords: Enterprise performance, human resources, senior management,
production organization
1. Overview
Since the early 1990s, performance measurement has become an important
issue for scholars and practitioners. The literature has suggested that the managers
should design new performance measurement, including measuring financial and nonfinancial. Kaplan and Norton (1992, 1993, and 1996) advocated the design of the
Balanced Scorecard. Dixon et al. (1990) and Nanny et al. (1992) proposed the use of
integrated performance measurement system.
All these systems will be more emphasis on non-financial measures and will
allow the organization more valuable to customers and internal processes in the
operation of their measurement systems. Overall, this change will help businesses to
improve their performance substantially.
Performance measurement development history has extended and discussed
(Neely, 1999), Utter and Larker (2003) showed that performance measurement used to
allocate resources to support direct assessment and goal-oriented communication
strategies, and evaluate the effectiveness of management. Neely et al. (1994) suggested
that measurement activities help managers to identify good performance, to make
tradeoffs between profit and investment more clearly, to provide a means of

1


introducing individual strategic objectives long term, and to ensure for corporate
managers to know when to intervene if enterprise performance decreases.
In the current competitive environment, integration, and globalization of
economy, efficiency is crucial to the economic development of a country, an industry,
and business in each (Stench’s & Bruin, 2006).
Objectives of this study are to: 1) identify managerial factors affecting
enterprise performance and relationship of these factors, 2) identify the relationship
between strategic planning and implemental results actively done. To achieve the
above objectives, the author presents the theoretical background and research model,
with appropriate research methodology. A survey was sent to 170 businesses fisheries
production of Ba Ria - Vung Tau, randomly chosen to gather data on the performance
measurement system of them. There are 141-survey responses.
2. The research related to performance measurement
Research of performance measurement has experienced several stages during
the past 30 years. In the 1970s, researchers examined how organizations use
accounting management systems, especially the budget as a tool to measure
performance. The research scope of performance measurement began to expand into
the early 1990s.
Dixon et al. (1990) and Kaplan and Norton (1992, 1993, 1996) has developed a
new perspective and framework of organizational performance measurement system.
Nanny et al. (1992) suggested that the company should increase the level of competent
performance measurement. The level of competence depends on the match between
the design of performance measurement systems and corporate strategy.
Most published studies focus or structure of new measurements or additional
advice. Franco and Bourne (2003) explains that only recently the documentary
practitioners, scholars have tried to provide insights about "how to manage
organizations and measures how they get value from the data collected." The influence

of the structural characteristics and the nature of the industry in the organized
activities, have been addressed in the literature related to strategic planning
(Storehouse and Pemberton, 2002; Grant, 2003).
However, very few studies of the effects of performance measurement were
published (Hudson et al, 2001; Kimberley and Neely, 2003). Moreover, Langfield2


Smith (1997) suggests that there are few studies to examine the relationship between
strategy and management control systems had published. De Wale (2003) studied the
behavioral factors are important and complement the successful use of performance
measurement systems, and suggests that more researches are needed with "other
factors, such as environmental schools and organizations." Therefore, beside common
factors, this study includes strategic planning factor to find effects of experimental
performance measurement on it.
3. Theoretical background
3.1. The concept of performance
There are many different perspectives on performance. The concept of
performance has changed over time and expanded with the development of production
management. In broad term, concept of performance can change depending on the
scope of use (Tangent, 2005). Performance is also a theme that has been concerned by
technicians, sociologists, economists and most managers for many years.
In technical aspect, efficiency is the ratio between output and input. It measures
performance-using resources to produce the required output. However, this can lead to
focus on quantity but little attention to quality aspects.
Performance is also a social concept: "Performance is an attitude of mind. It is
an attitude of seeking continuous improvement of existing ones, with the belief that
people can work better today than yesterday and tomorrow better than today.
Moreover, it requires constant effort to adapt to the economic activity in the everchanging conditions, always apply the theory and methods. It is the strong belief in the
progress of humankind". (The European Productivity Agency's Conference Rome,
1958).

In economic aspect, the performance involves creating more value for
customers. For many companies, the economic purpose and basis for existence is to
create value. Performance growth is measured in terms of value (Tangney, 2005).
In managerial aspect, performance includes performance and efficiency of
performance. This means to ensure the products/ services are produced with lowest
and acceptable cost and can provide to customers on time competitive prices with the
quality that they desire (Khan, 2003).

3


According to the traditional definition, concept of efficiency is a very simple. It
is a relationship (ratio) between outputs and inputs, which is used to form the output.
Performance is measured by amount or volume of products created by a labor per unit
of time. Thus, performance is considered as the same meaning with working
efficiency.
Due to the rapidly changing of the economic environment, politics, society,
technology, especially the economic globalization trend, trade liberalization and the
fierce competition of quality, cost, product distribution, and delivery performance, etc.,
performance has a new approach. Following to the new approach, in addition to use
inputs in an optimal way, performance is expressed through quality and usefulness of
outputs. As performance orientates outputs, production must be considered in intimate
relationship between itself and needs and expectations of the market. Therefore,
performance and quality are not mutually exclusive but rather, performance - quality
associated with each other; support each other (Khan, 2003).
For a manufacturing business, in management aspect, performance is the
optimal use of resources to create products best meets the customer's requirements
(Bernolak, 1997, cited in Tangen, 2005). This definition mentions two important
features: first, performance closely relates to resources using (efficiency), and second,
the performance links closely with customer satisfaction (quality).

This view of performance is consistent with, the above view of Khan, which
both performance efficiency and effectiveness). Performance efficiency means doing
things right with correct methods while effectiveness mentions to doing right things at
the right time with good quality (Tangen, 2005).
This study applies new performance concept in enterprise managerial aspect,
which is improving the efficiency of resource use. This means to increase numbers and
quality of products and delivery to customers timely as required with lowest price.
In other words, performance is optimal use of resources to meet customers and
shareholders’ requirements, which are also profit maximizing through customer’s
highest satisfaction with the lowest prices can be (Phan Quoc Nghia, 2004). Therefore,
performance measurement must include both the effectiveness and efficiency, which is
to measure customer requirements of product quality, product price, delivery time, and
financial results of the business.
4


3.2. The concept of strategic planning
Strategic plan is a set of processes undertaken to develop a range of strategies
that can contribute to achieving organizational direction. A variety of definitions of
strategic planning has published. Grant (2003) exposed the comprehensive review of
the history of strategic planning from the "long term plan" concept to the current
debates between "management strategy" and "strategic thinking."
"Effort to strategic planning processes system allows an organization to achieve
its objectives and goals. There are five basic steps in the process of strategic planning:
objective/goal setting analyze the situation, consider alternative, implementation, and
evaluation "(Crittenden and Crittenden, 2000).
3.3. The relationship between these factors of management with enterprise
performance
There have been some studies on performance and the factors affecting it based
on different aspects and perspectives. Baines (1997), Park & Miller (1998), Hoffman

& Mehra (1999), Chapman & AlKha-wadeh (2002) and Khan (2003) show that the
commitment of senior management is a factor indispensable in programs to improve
enterprise performance.
They are ready to commit the necessary support in the training of human
resources, provide adequate resources to enable the organization achieve high
performance production. Some recent studies also show that the senior management
commitment on performance has a direct impact on the training of human resources
and the organization of production (POLITIS, 2005; Steenhuis & Bruijin, 2006).
The need to organize performance strategies according with the measurement
system is established in the literature (Dyson, 2000; McAdam and Bailie, 2002). That
is why a large number of frameworks are incorporated such as Balanced Scorecard
development, the performance prism, pyramid performance, the best method of
performance measurement and measurement methods Cambridge performance
(Hudson et al). Most published studies either focus on new measurements or structure
additional advices.
The researchers are interested in human resource elements also found a close
relationship between employees’ education and training and corporate performance
(Chapman & Al-Khawadeh, 2002; Chen, Liaw & Lee, 2003; Bhera, Narag & Singla,
5


2003; Appelbaum, 2005). Some experimental studies showed that group factors of
production: working conditions, equipment maintenance, manufacturing process
control is a significant contribution to enterprise performance (McKone, Schcroeder &
Cua, 2001; Sauian, 2002). Several theoretical and empirical studies agree that
customer orientation is a key element in business.
Study of Par & Miller (1998); Sauian (2002), Khan (2003) showed that
customer orientation has a positive impact on enterprise performance. In addition,
factors involved in s were also mentioned in several studies. Baines (1997), Savery
(1998); Schultz, Juran & Boudreau (1999) showed that trust relationship and

cooperation between management and labor have intimate relationships with
enterprise performance. Besides, internal corporate communication is also a factor
affecting enterprise performance (Baines, 1997; Chapman & AlKha-waldeh, 2002;
Appellbaum, 2005).
In summary, the results of previous studies show that there are five groups of
management factors affecting enterprise performance including commitment of senior
management performance, human resources training, production organization,
consumer orientation, and s. However, the group elements have been mainly
individually concerned in most studies; most previous studies focused research groups
from one to two factors.
3.4. Theoretical models and hypotheses
Based on the theories and results of concerned previous studies this paper
proposes a theoretical model with five groups of factors impacting on enterprise
performance, where the senior management commitment affects performance through
human resource training and production organization (Figure 1).
- Impact of senior management commitment on human resource training: managers’
concern, and support in human resources training, and recruitment to creating
favorable conditions for organization of production,
- Impact of commitment on production organization: managers’ concern and support
creating favorable conditions for the production organization,
- Human Resources Training: Staff knowledge and skills training supporting and
improving job performance,

6


- Customer Orientation: Understanding customer needs to satisfy the most
requirements with optimal products; improving products development by renewing
products meeting most changing requirements of our customers,
- Internal: reliable relationship, cooperation and information exchanging and sharing

of between departments and between employees and managers within enterprises,
- Production organization: Create advanced work environment, good equipments
maintenance effective control, and coordination of manufacturing processes.
In theory, there are six models to test the hypothesis that:
H1: There is a positive relationship between the commitment of senior management
and human resource training and enterprise performance.
H2: There is a positive relationship between the commitment of senior management
and organize production and enterprise performance.
H3: There is a positive relationship between production organization and enterprise
performance
H4: There is a positive relationship between human resources training and enterprise
performance
H5: There is a positive relationship between customer orientation and enterprise
performance
H6: There is a positive relationship between internal corporate relationships and
enterprise performance
.

7


Senior management commitment
on human resource training

Senior commitment on production
organization

Resources training

Enterprise

Performance

Customer orientation

Internal corporate relationships

Production organizations

Figure 1: Theoretical model
4. METHODOLOGY
Quantitative research methods areused in this study. Data collection is
conducted by direct interviews, e-mails and online surveys. Samples are chosen
following random method. Subjects answering questionnaires are managers’ fishery
exporters in BR-VT.
Scale concepts studied in theoretical models are multivariate scale. The
observed concepts are measured on a 5-point Likert scale (1: strongly disagree to 5:
strongly agree). The statements in each scale are references from previous studies
(Hoffman & Mehra, 1998, Chapman & Al-Khawadeh, 2002; POLITIS, 2005;
Steenhuis & Bruijn, 2006).
Scale concepts are adjusted to suit the conditions of the BR-VT seafood
exporters based on in-depth interviews of experts and business managers.
Theoretical models have six independent concept measured by 36 observed
concepts and one dependent concept measured by seven observed concept. Result
measurement model is applied for all scale concepts to access Cronbach alpha
coefficients

8


Scale of senior management commitment on human resources training (S1) is

measured by six observed concepts, whose content refers to how managers concern,
encourage their employees, create good work conditions, and recruit sufficient human
resource.
Scale of senior management commitment on production organization (S2) is
measured by six observed concepts, whose content refer to how managers concern,
support and create favorable conditions for production organization.
Scale of human resources training (S3) is measured by four concepts, whose
content focus on effective knowledge and skills training for employees.
Scale of customer orientation (S4) is measured by five concepts, whose content
refer to how companies understand customer requirements of product quality, and
design models changing by time and satisfy their requirements by product
improvements.
Scale of internal corporate relationships (S5) is measured by five observed
concepts, whose content refer to internal relationship within organization, information
exchanging and sharing between employees and managers
Scale of production organization (S6) consists of three components: physical
conditions (3 concepts), equipment maintenance (3 concepts), and production control
(4 concepts). Their content refers to conditions of temperature, ventilation, production
equipment maintenance, quality and production schedule control, and combination of
manufacturing processes.
Scale of Enterprise Performance (F) includes levels where companies meet
customer requirements of product quality measured by four observed concepts, whose
content mention to how companies provide customers with quality products satisfying
their requirements.
Products are ensured to meet product specification and quality standards
committed to customers. Product price is measured by 3 observed, whose content refer
to how companies set acceptable prices and competitive prices consistent with product
quality.
Scales are evaluated by preliminary analysis method to explore factors,
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), and Cronbach's coefficient alpha reliability for

9


each component using SPSS software. The scales are tested again for theoretical
models and hypotheses by EFA method, multivariate regression using SPSS software.

10


Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1
c2

.762

c3

.801

c4

.725

c5

.754

c6

.706

c7

.744

c11

.799

2

c15

.732

c16

.798

c17

.726

c18

.712

c19

.753

c20

.651

3

c8

.851

c9

.724

c21

.651

c22

.846

c23

.727

4

c24

.763

c26

.718

c27

.708

c28

.784

c29

.709

c30

.650

5

c31

.710

c32

.591

c33

.679

c34

.727

c35

.666

6

C36

.773

c12

.731

c13

.542

c14

.671

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
11


Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1
c2

.762

c3

.801

c4

.725

c5

.754

c6

.706

c7

.744

c11

.799

2

c15

.732

c16

.798

c17

.726

c18

.712

c19

.753

c20

.651

3

c8

.851

c9

.724

c21

.651

c22

.846

c23

.727

4

c24

.763

c26

.718

c27

.708

c28

.784

c29

.709

c30

.650

5

c31

.710

c32

.591

c33

.679

c34

.727

c35

.666

6

C36

.773

c12

.731

c13

.542

c14

.671

a. Rotation converged in 6 iterations.
12


5. RESULT
5.1. Describe the survey
The data collected from 141 seafood exporters in Ba Ria-Vung Tau with the
characteristics presented in Table 1.
Table 1: Characteristics of the sample seafood exporters in BR-VT

Ownership
Stock enterprises
Private enterprises
Foreign Investment enterprises
Size
Under 50
50 - 100
100- 300
Up 300
Total

Quantity
64
73
4

Quantity
22
59
50
10
141

Percentage
45.39
51.77
2.84
100.00
15.60
41.84
35.46
7.10
100.00

5.2. Preliminary evaluation scale with EFA
The concept scales of the study are preliminarily assessed and screened by EFA
method and Cronbach Alpha coefficients for each component. Selection criteria are
satisfied

when

concepts

have

correlation

coefficients

turn-total

(item-total

correlation)> .30, Cronbach alpha coefficients> .60; system load factor (factor
loading)> .40; total variance extracted for ≥ 50% (Hair & CTG, 1998).
Table 2. The table summarizes the results of scale
Cronbach’s
Variance
alpha
(%)

Model

Variables

Commitment of senior management
and human resource training (S1)

6

0.886

Commitment of senior management
and organize production ( S2)

6

0.862

Human resources training (S3)
Customer orientation ( S4)
Internal corporate relationships (S5)
Production organizations (S6)
Enterprise Performance (F)

4
5
5
7
7

0.805
0.846
0.942
0.879
0.821

Value

66.876

Satisfactory

62.100

13

Results exploring factor analysis (EFA) showed 36 variations
observed in 6 components of the enterprise performance scale and
retained 6 factors with 33 observed concepts. There are three items
of

excluded

observed

concepts:

production

organization

1,

production organization 4, and production organization 10.
After excluding the three concepts, the EFA results 6 factors of enterprise scale.
As KMO coefficient = 0.812, EFA matches the data and the statistical test Chi-quare
Bertlett 3.994E3 worth 0.000 significance level. Thus, the observed concepts are
correlated with each other considering the overall scope. The variance extracted by
66,876 shows that factors derived from 66.876% explained variance of the data,
eigenvalues in the system by 1171. Therefore, the scale draw is acceptable. The scales
have observed concepts excluded by of EFA, Cronbach Alpha coefficients were
recalculated, and the results achieved reliability requirements.
5.3. Analysis of the correlation matrix
The first step of conducting linear regression analysis is to consider the linear

correlation between all the concepts. That means to consider the overall relationship
between each independent variable with the dependent variable, and between the
independent concepts (Hoang Trong & Chu Nguyen Mong Ngoc, 2008).
Table.3. the correlation coefficient between the components

14


Correlations
S1
S1

Pearson Correlation

S2
1

Sig. (2-tailed)
N
S2

S3

S4

S5

S6

F

Pearson Correlation

S3
**

.395

S4

.427

**

S5
**

.519

S6

.606

**

F

.165

*

.486**

.000

.000

.000

.000

.050

.000

141

141

141

141

141

141

141

.395**

1

.449**

.412**

.422**

-.002

.511**

.000

.000

.000

.979

.000

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

N

141

141

141

141

141

141

141

.427**

.449**

1

.581**

.601**

.052

.653**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.000

.540

.000

N

141

141

141

141

141

141

141

.519**

.412**

.581**

1

.560**

.003

.607**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.000

.972

.000

N

141

141

141

141

141

141

141

.606**

.422**

.601**

.560**

1

.272**

.595**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.000

.001

.000

N

141

141

141

141

141

141

141

Pearson Correlation

.165*

-.002

.052

.003

.272**

1

.031

Sig. (2-tailed)

.050

.979

.540

.972

.001

N

141

141

141

141

141

141

141

.486**

.511**

.653**

.607**

.595**

.031

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.000

.000

.711

N

141

141

141

141

141

141

Pearson Correlation

Pearson Correlation

Pearson Correlation

Pearson Correlation

.711

141

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Table 3 shows that the dependent variable correlates have
quite strong linear correlation in the sense α> 0.05 with five
independent concepts S1, S2, S3, S4, and S5. Since all absolute
correlation coefficients between the concepts are in range of 0395 to
0653 satisfying -1≥ r ≥+1, all concepts satisfy the rule of multiple
linear regressions
This proves that the value achieved distinction in other words; the scales of this
study measured the different concept of studies. Correlation matrix also shows that
concepts of human resources training have the strongest impact on the dependent
variable of the enterprise performance. In contrast, variable commitment of human
15


resources management has least impact on the dependent concepts of the enterprise
performance.
Table 4: The parameters for each variable in the regression equation
COEFFICIENT (Coefficients)

Model

Factor

Unstandardized
Coefficients

B
1

Standardized
Coefficients

Std.
Error

(Constant)

.799

.354

S1

.067

.074

S2

.170

S3

t

Sig.

Beta

Collinearity
Statistics
Tolerance

VIF

2.255

.026

.068

.905

.367

.571

1.750

.063

.179

2.673

.008

.724

1.381

.281

.071

.311

3.967

.000

.526

1.900

S4

.189

.069

.214

2.749

.007

.536

1.867

S5

.139

.066

.183

2.110

.037

.429

2.328

S6

-.039

.052

-.046

-.760

.448

.877

1.140

a. Dependent Variable: F

From Table 4, shows that all four factors S2, S3, S4, and S5 scale factors
affecting enterprise performance, have a positive impact (positive beta) on enterprise
performance (HSDN) Sig = significance level 0000-0037 <0:05. The remaining two
factors S1 (Sig = .367), TCSX (Sig = .448) with Sig> 0:05 should not be statistically
significant. Therefore, the study concluded that the hypothesis S2, S3, S4, and S5 are
accepted. The regression equation for the standardized variable coefficient takes the
following form:
F = 0.068 S1 + 0.179S2 + 0.311S3 + 0.214S4 + 0.183S5 - 0.046S6 + εi (4.1)
Among them: F: Enterprise Performance (F)
S1: Commitment of senior management and human resource training (S1)
S2: Commitment of senior management and organize production (S2)
S3: Human Resource Training (S3)
S4: Customer orientation (S4)
S5: Internal corporate relationships (S5)
S6: Production organization (S6)

16


Residuals Statisticsa

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Std. Deviation

N

Predicted Value

2.6756

4.8984

4.1449

.47450

141

Std. Predicted Value

-3.097

1.588

.000

1.000

141

.041

.222

.089

.032

141

2.6391

4.8949

4.1445

.47329

141

-1.69757

1.18201

.00000

.41605

141

Std. Residual

-3.992

2.779

.000

.978

141

Stud. Residual

-4.091

2.844

.001

1.006

141

-1.78313

1.23754

.00040

.44063

141

-4.357

2.923

-.002

1.023

141

Mahal. Distance

.310

37.266

5.957

5.536

141

Cook's Distance

.000

.126

.009

.019

141

Centered Leverage Value

.002

.266

.043

.040

141

Standard Error of Predicted Value
Adjusted Predicted Value
Residual

Deleted Residual
Stud. Deleted Residual

a. Dependent Variable: F

17


18


6. CONCLUSION
6.1. Results and Discussion
In management aspect, with in-depth study of performance, this study proposed
and tested theoretical models of the relationship between management factors the
impact of these factors on enterprise Performance. This model includes the wide range
of management factors production businesses in Ba Ria - Vung Tau.
Enterprise performance is affected by many different factors such as capital,
technology, equipments, and management. This study shows that managerial factors
explain 66.88% of the variation of enterprise performance, which is a significant
percentage. Therefore, the enterprises should not only focus on investing in
equipments and innovating technology but also improving management to improve
performance.
The study results show strong relationship between managerial factors.
Therefore, when change occurs in any one factor, it has consequences for other factors
as well.
In this study, the concept of corporate performance is comprehensively
measured with the output consisting of four components: 1) senior management
commitment to the production organization, 2) consumer orientation, 3) human
resources training, 4) internal. The research results show that the four elements have
the strong correlation from .395 to .653, (Table 3), and standardized regression
coefficients of the 4 components with relatively high productivity .179 to .311(table 4).

Therefore, to achieve high Enterprise performance, the companies need to satisfy the
completely four components. Besides, the companies should specially focus on 2
components which gain high regression coefficient is human resources training (. 311)
and customer orientation (.214).
6.2. The solution
Based on the research results, each seafood exporters should improve
management factors to improve performance: 1) senior management commitment to
production organization, 2) customers orientation, 3) human resources training, 4)
internal,

19


- The senior management commitment to production organization: It is the use
of human resources in order to influence the processing of other input factors
(physical, financial, information,) into the real the goods and services in line with
business needs. In terms of management, production organization and management
plays important roles that decide the survival of advantaged production organization
and management can save time and materials and help companies to cut costs, which
are flexible to adapt to changes quickly and keep the production stable.
- Human Resources Training: Companies organize and develop special
knowledge and skills training courses suitable for employees of department. For food
manufacturing business, prior employees taking training courses should be those who
work for quality and hygiene management department. Training and developing
internal trainers, especially sale and seafood processing area create a strong training
system, which meet training requirements when necessary and helps new employees
understand specialty of the job that they work.
In addition, internal training educates employees about their role and enhances
their awareness of obligation and responsibility in organization.
- Customer orientation: A type of product or service cannot satisfy all

customers. Therefore, companies should understand the different needs of customers,
even in the same customer segment to study, design and create a good product
positioning for each customer segment. Success of this step strengthens other steps of
making optimal product lines, product pricing, communication, distribution, sales, and
after-sales.
- Internal: Companies build up organizational trust between staffs and company
by holding meeting, dialogues of company mission, vision, value, and benefits to
educate them about organizational culture and value, responsibility and benefits of
each employee in the organization. Manager build trust in employees by create work
environment of respect recognition with reliable regulations and policies so that they
keep loyal and work well.
6.3. Limitations and suggestions
Due to time and resource limitation, the sample size has not generalized to
fishery sector. Therefore, the author also expects to expand the scope of research to

20


assess the impact of other factors on Enterprise performance in Vietnam's fishery
sector in the next study.
1) Further study on various industry groups
2) Controlled concepts such as size, business ownership, and labor-intensive
level should be considered to find out difference (if any) of impact of management
factors on Enterprise performance.
REFERENCES
[1]. Baines, A. (1997), “Productivity improvement”, Work Study, 46 (2), 49-51
[2]. Bheda, R., Narag, A. S., & Singla, M. L. (2003), “Apparel manufacturing: a
strategy for productivity improvement”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management, 7 (1), 12-22
[3]. Chapman, R., & Al-Khawaldeh, K. (2002), “TQM and labour productivity in

Jordanian industrial companies”, The TQM Magazine, 14 (4), 248-262
[4]. Chen, L., Law, S., & Lee, T. (2003), “Using an HRM pattern approach to examine
the productivity of manufacturing firms – an empirical study”, International Journal
of Manpower, 24 (3), 299-318.
[5]. Hair, Jr. J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998),
“Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th ed”, Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.
[6]. Hoffman & Mehta (1999), “Operationally productivity improvement programs
through total quality management”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, 16 (1), 72-84
[7]. Khan, J, H. (2003), “Impact of Total Quality Management on Productivity”, The
TQM Magazine, 15 (6), 374-380.
[8]. McKone, K. E., Schroeder, R. G., & Cua, K. O. (2001). “The impact of total
productive maintenance practices on manufacturing performance”. Journal of Openrations Management, 19, 39-58.
[9]. Park, Y. H, & Miller, D. M. (1998), “Multi-factor analysis of firm-level
performance through feed-forward, feedback relationship”, Proceeding of the 1998
Winter Simulation Conference, D. J. Medeiros, E. F. Watson, J. S. Carson and M .S.
Minivan ends, pp.1519-1525.
[10 Phan Quoc Nghia (2004), “Measuring performance in measures of value added”.
Journal of Development Economics, No. 161, 11-14.
21