The effects of government policy on organizational performance of provincial administration organization: mediating role of public entrepreneurship

Panitee Karnsomdee

doi:10.12688/f1000research.55080.1

Home Browse The effects of government policy on organizational performance of...

ALL Metrics

-

Views

-

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Research Article

The effects of government policy on organizational performance of provincial administration organization: mediating role of public entrepreneurship

[version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations, 2 not approved]

Panitee Karnsomdee

PUBLISHED 11 Aug 2021

Author details Author details

Faculty of Liberal Arts and Management Science, Kasetsart University, Mueang District, Sakon Nakhon Province, 47000, Thailand

Panitee Karnsomdee
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Background: The new paradigm of government management has stimulated public organizations to establish innovative and competitive management policies through public entrepreneurship in order to provide excellent public service and to enhance public organizational performance. This research study aims to investigate the effects of government policy on organizational performance through the mediating role of public entrepreneurship of provincial administration organization in the upper northeastern region 2 in Thailand.
Methods: This research employs a cross-sectional questionnaire study. Data were collected from 216 government officials through five-point Likert scale questionnaires with validity and reliability analyses. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics and inferential statistics toward path analysis.
Results: The research results reveal that government policy has a significant direct influence on organizational performance with a standardized coefficient of 0.655. Government policy has a significant indirect effect on organizational performance through the mediating role of public entrepreneurship with a standardized coefficient of 0.566. The total effects can be described with a standardized coefficient of 0.733 at a 0.05 significance level.
Conclusions: The government should establish innovative and competitive public policies to support a rapid change of entrepreneurial orientation, and transform policies into action. As public entrepreneurship has a significant mediating role in enhancing organizational performance, conventional public structures of performance management are being replaced by more innovative, adaptive, and competitive public entrepreneurship in order to get the desired and effective public outcomes for a provincial administration organization.

Keywords

government policy, public policy, organizational performance, public outcome, entrepreneurship, public entrepreneurship, mediating role, provincial administration

Corresponding author: Panitee Karnsomdee

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Copyright: © 2021 Karnsomdee P. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Karnsomdee P. The effects of government policy on organizational performance of provincial administration organization: mediating role of public entrepreneurship [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations, 2 not approved]. F1000Research 2021, 10:794 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.55080.1) First published: 11 Aug 2021, 10:794 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.55080.1) Latest published: 11 Aug 2021, 10:794 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.55080.1)

Introduction

The concept of public entrepreneurship has recently been established based on new public management, which focuses on developing competitiveness to drive innovative public work processes and provide excellent public service. Proactive and competitive government management policies on enhancing public entrepreneurship transformation have been determined as key success factors to support the achievement of organizational performance, especially for provincial administration organization as a local government agency in Thailand (Oyebanji & Olanrewaju, 2020). The decentralization of public power and budget to build public entrepreneurs is considered one of the major turning points of the bureaucratic system towards the Thailand 4.0 development model. Thailand 4.0 is a new economic agenda to boost economic development in Thailand based on creativity, innovation, digital technology, and high public service quality as well as to transform labor intensive industry into knowledge orientation towards value-based economy (Jones & Pimdee, 2017). Public entrepreneurship focuses on creating work innovation in order to improve public service quality and to meet public requirements with an appropriately flexible working system, achieving high performance, accepting specified risk, and finally resulting in the achievement of public goals. Many transformational projects have been launched to pivot government agencies toward public entrepreneurship such as establishing digital communities, supporting digital innovative start-up networks, and promoting digital parks for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) (Sangwanna & Pupat, 2014). Although the influence of government policy on organizational performance is well explored (Rodrigo et al., 2019; Kareem & Haseeni, 2015), the mediating role of public entrepreneurship in the context of provincial administration organization as local government agency in Thailand remains in question. Therefore, this research study aims to address this question and explore it in further detail. The objective of this research study is to investigate the effects of government policy on organizational performance through the mediating role of public entrepreneurship, in the context of provincial administration organization in the upper northeastern region 2 in Thailand. The results of this research study could be applied as strategic guidelines for local government organizations to enhance organizational performance. The paper begins with a review of the concepts and theories related to government policy, organizational performance, and public entrepreneurship in order to conceptualize the research conceptual framework and hypotheses development. The research methodology, data collection, analysis of data and the research results are later presented. Next, the proposed recommendation on public entrepreneurship transformation and public organizational performance enhancement as well as managerial implications and government suggestions are discussed. Finally, conclusion of the research findings and recommendations for future researches are documented.

Government policy

A policy can be defined as a plan of action established by an organization or a political party to determine the scope of operations; a policy is also a principle or set of plans used as a basis for making decisions (Akinyemi & Adejumo, 2018). Government policies include political activities, plans, and a scope of principles to be achieved by government and political actors in order to recognize public issues and make public decisions for the country’s development. Recently, government agencies are continuously implementing change through transforming public policies into actions and supporting the growth of innovation capacity in the government organization, as government policies have an influence on organizational performance (Ismanu & Kusmintarti, 2019; Karungani & Ochiri, 2017). As the challenges for public services become more complex, the concept of innovative and competitive management policies is being increasingly revisited and replaced by more adaptive and effective policies such as public entrepreneurship policies. It can be seen that an essential and appropriate government policy can enhance the concept of public entrepreneurship within an organization (Akinyemi & Adejumo, 2018; Obaji & Olugu, 2014). The role of government is perceived to be establishing innovative and proactive public policy to serve new public service demands and to motivate entrepreneurial orientation in various public organizations. Consequently, public entrepreneurship, as a government tool, seems to rapidly enhance public organizational performance and outcomes (Kareem & Haseeni, 2015; Sandfort, Selden, & Sowa, 2008). Therefore, this research study focuses on the entrepreneurship policies made by the government in order to build an innovative and effective public working system in the organization, and finally to increase organizational performance.

Public entrepreneurship

The concept of entrepreneurship in public organizations is highly incorporated into the mind-set of government officials (Kim, 2010; Kearney, Hisrich, & Roche, 2009) and can be used to change the orientation of public staff to be more innovative, creative, anticipatory, have higher risk acceptance, and be able to predict opportunities (Fahim, 2018; Banda & Kazonga, 2018). Public entrepreneurship can be defined as an activity that integrates or blends two different managerial roles: that of a public servant, and that of private entrepreneur (Syam, Lamangida, Madubun, Norwawati, & Akib, 2018). In emerging countries, and especially in Thailand, entrepreneurship development in the public sector seems to be of particular importance for driving the improvement of the economy. The government can implement various policies that change social and economic behaviors in order to influence the country’s growth and sustainability (Nikolov & Botseva, 2018; Wahyuni, 2004). It is thought that the recent government policy development on public entrepreneurship, consisting of building competitiveness, innovation, and digitalization, will bring the necessary change for the country (Svensson, 2019; Sarfat, 2012). Future government services will increasingly need to rethink and react like an entrepreneur, including innovative-orientation, risk acceptance, competitive service, and public digitalization (Kim, 2010; Zerbinati & Souitaris, 2005). The need for public entrepreneurship policies and programs has been recognized and programs have been established to promote entrepreneurial activities, stimulate innovative systematic thinking, and form collaborative relationships across government agencies, private sectors, and civil society in order to rapidly increase change and particularly to enhance public performance and outcomes (Rezaeikar & Azadehdel, 2015; Kim, 2010). Currently, the managerial and administrative organizational reforms of public organization toward public entrepreneurship have been established in the public sector with critical key functions to improve organizational performance (Fahim, 2018; Karinda et al., 2016). Therefore, this research study focuses on public entrepreneurship as having a mediating role in government policy and organizational performance in provincial administration organizations in Thailand.

Organizational performance

Organizational performance has become a significant indicator to measure ultimate outcomes compared to desired outcomes, especially in government organizations. Organizational performance has been defined as the process or action of performing a task towards the ultimate result of operations (Kearney, Hisrich, & Roche, 2008; Antoncic & Scarlat, 2005). It can be seen that public organizational performance seems to be directly influenced by government policy implementation (Akinyemi & Adejumo, 2018; Peters, 2015). Currently, a public entrepreneurship policy has been launched by the government to increase innovative and competitive public outcomes, and consequently enhance public organizational performance. Importantly, public organizations have established various modern performance determinant methods in order to measure outcome achievement. One of the various measurement instruments indicated a balanced scorecard, an organizational performance measurement system to reach the desired outcome, which provided a general outline for government organizations to achieve (Zastempowski, 2015; Greatbanks & Tapp, 2007). A balanced scorecard has gained widespread acceptance due to its use as a practical and a multi-dimensional performance measurement tool for public organizations. The performance management of a balanced scorecard applied in the public sector consists of four perspective dimensions: innovation and learning; efficiency of internal processes; public service quality; and effectiveness of goal achievement (Northcott & Taulapapa, 2012). The public performance will ultimately be driven by establishing the innovative and proactive government management policy and implementing public entrepreneurship in public organizations, in order to achieve desired organizational outcomes according to the rapid change of the external environment (Rodrigo et al., 2019). It can be seen that the concept of entrepreneurship within the public sector establishes a vital impact on public sector organizational performance including growth, development and productivity (Oyebanji & Olanrewaju, 2020; Kearney, Hisrich, & Roche, 2008). Therefore, this research study focuses on the effects of government policy on organizational performance in order to investigate the direct and indirect effects of such relationships.

To conclude, from the literature reviews of three variables of government policy, organizational performance, and public entrepreneurship, as discussed above, it can be seen that there are some relationships among the three specified variables to further explore and conceptualize in the model of this research study. The conceptual framework explaining such relationships was intensively investigated with hypotheses development.

Conceptual framework and hypotheses development

From the literature review, the conceptual framework of this research study was built and is presented in Figure 1. It describes the effects of government policy on organizational performance through the mediating role of public entrepreneurship in provincial administration organizations in the upper northeastern region 2 of Thailand. The conceptual framework has been developed for hypotheses testing based on the three bodies of knowledge (government policy, organizational performance, and public entrepreneurship) cited in the theoretical framework, as well as the researcher’s exploration about the relationship among the specified three variables.

Figure 1. Conceptual framework.

Based on the literature reviews of the constructs with the conceptualization of the relationships among the specified three variables, the hypotheses development proposed by the above conceptual framework can be described as follows:

H1. Government policy has a direct effect on organizational performance of the provincial administration organization in the upper northeastern region 2 of Thailand.

H2. Government policy has an indirect effect on organizational performance through the mediating role of public entrepreneurship in a provincial administration organization in the upper northeastern region 2 of Thailand.

In addition, the research hypotheses can be described in the forms of structural equations in order to explain the relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable, as well as to predict the dependent variable according to the causal model analysis. The symbols used to represent the specified three variables stated as follows:

GOVP = Government policy

PUBE = Public entrepreneurship

ORGP = Organizational performance

The structural equations can be described as follows:

(1)

ORGP = β_{1} GOVP

(2)

ORGP = β_{2} GOVP + β_{3} PUBE

The parameters of β₁, β₂, and β₃ in the equations refer to path coefficients, and they quantify the causal effects of the independent variable on the dependent variable (Pearl, 2010).

Methods

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was waived for this study as it is a survey research with no sensitive questions, as well as having no impact on respondents as the results are not specific. Additionally, the encode-recording of information ensures confidentiality as individual persons cannot be identified. The research had voluntary participation in the form of a consent statement in the questionnaire, with privacy and confidentiality protection. Finally, the data was collected through research assistants for education only and the research results do not identify the functional department of organizations, merely the organizations overall.

Sampling and data collection

This research study aimed to investigate the effects of government policy on organizational performance through the mediating role of public entrepreneurship in provincial administration organizations in the upper northeastern region 2 of Thailand. This research study used a quantitative research method. A sample of 216 government officials of provincial administration organizations in the upper northeastern region 2 of Thailand was collected from the Office of the Permanent Secretary database as of June 2019; this number was determined using simple random sampling based on Taro Yamane’s formula (Yamane, 1973). Yamane explains a simplified formula to calculate the sample size from the population size with 95% confident level. Data were collected using five-point Likert scale questionnaire surveys. Printed questionnaires were created and distributed to the participants during the period of August–September 2019 via research assistants who are responsible for explaining the purpose of this research and the data usage, and gaining voluntary consent from participants. The respondents were asked to rate the questions using the five-point rating scale indications (5 = most agree, 1 = least agree). This research study was a cross-sectional construct as the data were collected at a single point in time from the specified key respondents with 100% response rate. For validity and reliability analysis, content validity was applied to ensure the accuracy of the research instrument. Content validation employs a primary role in assessing the degree to which the instrument measures the targeted constructed (Rusticus, 2014). Overall, the scale content validity index for the questionnaire was 1.00, demonstrating absolute agreement among content qualified experts. In addition, this research study employed the Cronbach’s alpha to test for reliability. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of all variables were calculated as follows: reliability values of government policy, organizational performance, and public entrepreneurship were at 0.904, 0.941, and 0.936, respectively, as shown in Table 1. The Cronbach’s alpha value for all variables is greater than 0.700, so it shows that the survey has very good reliability. The research results can be analyzed for significance with 95% confidence interval.

Table 1. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of variables.

Variables	Cronbach’s alpha
Government policy	0.904
Organizational performance	0.941
Public entrepreneurship	0.936

Data analysis

The research results were analyzed using SPSS version 26. Data were analyzed by using descriptive statistics. Frequency and percentage were used to describe the demographic information of respondents and mean and standard deviation were used for levels of respondents’ opinions on government policy, organizational performance, and public entrepreneurship. In addition, data were analyzed using inferential statistics stated as follows: Pearson’s product-moment correlation was applied to test the relationship among variables; path analysis was applied for hypotheses testing on direct and indirect effects of government policy on organizational performance through the mediating role of public entrepreneurship. Bias in research was considered and can be minimized through implementing a structured survey design and ensuring questions are well constucted, as this helps to ensure participants’ responses are more accurate and autonomous.

Results

The research findings from the respondents, hypotheses testing, discussion of results and implications for the study of the effects of government policy on organizational performance through the mediating role of public entrepreneurship on provincial administration organizations in the upper northeastern region 2 of Thailand are presented as follows.

Description of the respondents

216 questionnaire surveys were distributed to participants during the period of August-September, 2019. All were completed and correctly filled out, giving a 100% response rate. The research findings revealed that of 216 government officials from the upper northeastern region 2 in Thailand who took the surveys, 59.30% were female. The most common age group of government officials was that of 21-30 years, and this made up 36.10% of respondents. For the respondents’ education, most of the government officials had earned a Bachelor’s degree (77.80%). In addition, the most common position was that of government official (63.00%), with 6-10 years’ experience (33.30%). Most of the government officials worked for the Sakon Nakhon Provincial Administration Organization (43.10%). Lastly, the most common monthly income of the respondents was in between 10,001-20,000 Baht (52.30%), as shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of the respondents.

Characteristics	Percentage
Gender
Male	40.70
Female	59.30
Age (years)
21 – 30 years	36.10
31 – 40 years	33.30
More than 40 years	30.60
Educational background
Lower than Bachelor’s degree	11.60
Bachelor’s degree or equivalent	77.80
Higher than Bachelor’s degree	10.60
Position
Government official	63.00
Employee	13.90
Staff	22.20
Others	0.90
Work experience
Less than 6 years	19.90
6 – 10 years	33.30
11 – 15 years	28.70
More than 15 years	18.10
Organization
Sakon Nakhon Provincial Administration	43.10
Nakhon Panom Provincial Administration	32.40
Mukdahan Provincial Administration	24.50
Monthly income
Less than 10,001 Baht	4.20
10,001 – 20,000 Baht	52.30
20,001 – 30,000 Baht	29.20
More than 30,000 Baht	14.30

Hytotheses testing

For descriptive statistics, the collected data from five-point Likert scale questionnaire surveys specifying the rating scale indications (5 = most agree, 1 = least agree) were calculated as average scores and standard deviations. The mean scores of government officials’ opinion on government policy, public entrepreneurship, and organizational performance were high, with average scores on Likert scale of 3.65, 3.70, and 3.68, respectively. In addition, the standard deviations on Likert scales of these measures were 0.69, 0.74, and 0.70, respectively.

For inferential statistics, the analysis of the correlation coefficient among the two independent variables and the dependent variable was investigated. Pearson's product-moment correlation was used to determine the relationship of the independent variables. The objective of correlation analysis was to find the magnitude of correlation among the variables and to test for multi-collinearity. Correlation analysis between the independent variables of government policy and public entrepreneurship is shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Correlation analysis of the independent variables (GOVP, government policy; PUBE, public entrepreneurship; ORGP, organizational performance).

Variables	GOVP	PUBE	ORGP
MEAN	3.65	3.70	3.68
S.D.	0.69	0.74	0.70
GOVP	1
PUBE	0.756**	1
ORGP	0.655**	0.749**	1

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

Table 3 demonstrates that for the relationship between the independent variables, the correlation coefficients (r) do not exceed 0.800. As Hair et al. (2010) described, the relationship between the variables must be less than 0.800 otherwise it may cause multi-collinearity problems (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2010). As this research study found that the relationship between the independent variables with the highest coefficient value was 0.756, and so a multi-collinearity problem was not found in this relationship. Therefore, the research study can be tested for hypotheses by applying path analysis using a linear model structure, in order to investigate direct and indirect effects of government policy on organizational performance through the mediating role of public entrepreneurship at a 0.05 significance level.

The research results from hypotheses testing are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Research results from hypotheses testing (GOVP, government policy; PUBE, public entrepreneurship; ORGP, organizational performance).

Models	Cooefficients
	Unstandardized coefficients			Standardized coefficients		t	Sig.
	Beta	Std.Err.		Beta
			Direct effect	Indirect effect	Total effect
H₁: GOVP ➔ ORGP	0.661	0.052	0.655	-	0.655	12.687	0.000***
H₂: GOVP ➔ PUBE	0.810	0.048	0.756	-	0.756	16.879	0.000***
PUBE ➔ ORGP	0.706	0.043	0.749	-	0.749	16.550	0.000***
GOVP ➔ PUBE ➔ ORGP	0.209	0.068	0.207	0.566	0.773	3.059	0.003**
Adjusted R² = 57.60%				S.E.E = 0.455		F = 146.981

*** Predictor is significant at the 0.00 level (two-tailed).

** Predictor is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed).

Table 4 shows the results of hypotheses testing, which are that government policy and public entrepreneurship can causally predict in organizational performance of provincial administration organizations in the upper northeastern region 2 in Thailand up to 57.60% (adjusted R-Square 0.576) at a 0.05 significance level. In terms of the effects, government policy has a significant direct effect on organizational performance with a standardized coefficient of 0.655. The government policy has a significant direct effect on public entrepreneurship with a standardized coefficient of 0.756. Public entrepreneurship has a significant effect affected on organizational performance with a standardized coefficient of 0.749. In addition, government policy has a significant indirect effect on organizational performance through the mediating role of public entrepreneurship with a standardized coefficient of 0.566. The total effects can be described with a standardized coefficient of 0.773 at a 0.05 significance level. The research results have significant effects with 95% confidence intervals.

Discussion

According to the results of hypotheses testing by applying path analysis, government policy has a significant direct and indirect effect on organizational performance through the mediating role of public entrepreneurship in provincial administration organizations in the upper northeastern region 2 of Thailand. In general, the research results from this study are aligned with other previous literatures that investigated this topic in other organizations and in other countries (Oyebanji & Olanrewaju, 2020; Rodrigo et al., 2019; Akinyemi & Adejumo, 2018; Karinda et al., 2016; Kareem & Haseeni, 2015). Specifically, the research results recommend that modern government policies on driving public entrepreneurship are significant to organizational performance achievement in public sector. Despite the contributions this research study intensely provided, nominal limitations still need to be discussed. Firstly, the scope of data collection is only limited to the provincial administration organizations in the upper northeastern region 2 of Thailand. The limited sample coverage could impact the degree to which the research results can be generalized to the larger population. Secondly, the use of self-administered questionnaire surveys for data collection could lead to some subjective bias in the data. However, the proposed proactive policies for public entrepreneurship transformation and public performance enhancement of provincial administration organizations are discussed as follows.

Firstly, the government should establish innovative and competitive public policies to support the rapid change of entrepreneurial orientation for provincial administration organizations. As government policies on public entrepreneurship can encourage public organizations to take risks, and boost creativity, innovation, flexibility and adaptation as well as utilization of opportunities, the government should intensely consider these issues.

Secondly, government organizations should drive radical change to public entrepreneurship in order to efficiently manage public resources, innovatively provide excellent public services, strategically facilitate risk, continually sustain public interests, and effectively achieve organizational performance in the long run. The government should predominantly transform important policies into action.

Thirdly, government agencies should build public capacity as the role of public entrepreneurship will be critical in continuing to support the potential of government officials to deliver excellent public services and achieve better performance and outcomes. Conventional public structures of performance management are being replaced by more innovative, adaptive, and competitive public entrepreneurship strategies in order to get the desired and more effective public outcomes.

In conclusion, it can be seen that the essential proposed recommendations on public entrepreneurship transformation and public organizational performance enhancement as well as managerial implications and government suggestions are significant to all public organizations. The research results can be generalized to local government agencies to transform proactive government policies into actions, through establishing innovative strategy, implementing proactive working system, and incorporating digital technology for public service provision in order to enhance organizational performance.

Conclusion

The general inference drawn from this research study on the effects of government policy on organizational performance through the mediating role of public entrepreneurship in provincial administration organizations in the upper northeastern region 2 of Thailand concludes that government policies are important guidelines to implement entrepreneurial activities and to enhance government organizational performance, especially for some local government organizations that plan to transform themselves into public entrepreneurship. Public entrepreneurship is favourable in promoting innovation, increasing risk-taking orientation and boosting public organizational performance and outcomes for local government organizations in Thailand. However, this research study eagerly calls for more studies on other antecedent factors influencing public entrepreneurship in various levels of government organizations as future research.

Data availability

Underlying data

Figshare: Input-SaNooK_Scopus (English). https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.15050787.v1.

This research contains the following underlying data:

- Input-SaNooK_Scopus (English).sav (raw data sheet).

Figshare: Data Key for Questionnaire Responses. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.15098556.v1.

Extended data

Figshare: Questionnaires-Sanook-Scopus. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14993541.v1.

Figshare: Questionnaires-Sanook-Scopus (English) https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.15050643.v1.

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0).

References

Akinyemi FO, Adejumo OO: Government policies and entreprenuership phases in emerging economies: Nigeria and South Africa. J Entrepr Res. 2018: 1–18. Publisher Full Text
Antoncic B, Scarlat C: Corporate entrepreneurship and organizational performance: A comparison between Slovenia and Romania. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference of the faculty of management Koper Congress Centre Bernardin. Slovenia; November 2005. 71–89.
Banda P, Kazonga E: The effect of public sector corporate entrepreneurship on organizational performance in the health sector: A case of selected public hospitals in Lusaka, Zambia. IOSR J Business Management (IOSR-JBM). 2018; 20(4): 8–18.
Fahim MA: The impact of entrepreneurship on performance in public sector organizations with application to the Egyptian electricity holding company. Arab J Admin. 2018; 38(2): 227–256. Publisher Full Text
Greatbanks R, Tapp D: The impact of balanced scorecard in a public sector environment: Empirical evidence. Int J Operations Production Management. 2007; 27(8): 846–873. Publisher Full Text
Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, et al.: Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs; 2010.
Ismanu S, Kusmintarti A: Government policies and firm size as a moderating effect of innovation on business performance. Adv Economics, Business Management Res. 2019; 136: 123–128. Publisher Full Text
Jones C, Pimdee P: Innovative ideas: Thailand 4.0 and the fourth industrial revolution. Asian Int J Soc Sci. 2017; 17(1): 4–32. Publisher Full Text
Kareem MA, Haseeni ZJ: E-Government and its impact on organizational performance. Int J Management Commerce Innovations. 2015; 3(1): 664–672.
Karinda JM, Noermijati, Armanu, et al.: The effect of organizational culture, and entrepreneurship characteristics of knowledge management on company performance (Study on contruction services company first small qualification Papua in Jayapura). South East Asia J Contemporary Business, Economics Law. 2016; 11 (2), 80–86.
Karnsomdee P: Input-SaNooK_Scopus (English). figshare. Dataset. 2021. Publisher Full Text
Karnsomdee P: Questionnaires-Sanook-Scopus. figshare. Dataset. 2021. Publisher Full Text
Karnsomdee P: Questionnaires-Sanook-Scopus (English). figshare. Dataset. 2021. Publisher Full Text
Karnsomdee P: Data Key for Questionnaire Responses. figshare. Dataset. 2021. Publisher Full Text
Karungani WP, Ochiri G: Effect of policy and regulatory framework on organizational performance: A case of Nairobi country, Kenya. Int J Economics, Commerce Management. 2017; 5(6): 565–573.
Kearney C, Hisrich R, Roche F: A conceptual model of public sector corporate entrepreneurship. Int Entrep Manag J. 2008; 4: 295–313. Publisher Full Text
Kearney C, Hisrich R, Roche F: Public and private sector entrepreneurship: similarities, differences or a combination? J Small Business Enterprise Devel. 2009; 16(1): 26–46. Publisher Full Text
Kim Y: Stimulating entrepreneurial practices in the public Sector: The roles of organizational characteristics. Admin Society. 2010; 42(7): 780–814. Publisher Full Text
Nikolov GB, Botseva D: Role and importance of government policies and strategies for long-term economic development. Synthesis of Science and Society in Solving Global Problems Conference, Shioda GmbH, Steyr, Austria. 2018; 2018: 34–38.
Northcott D, Taulapapa TM: Using the balanced scorecard to manage performance in public sector organization: Issues and challenges. Int J Public Sector Management. 2012; 25(3): 166–191. Publisher Full Text
Obaji NO, Olugu MU: The role of government policy in entrepreneurship development. Sci J Business Management. 2014; 2(4): 109–115. Publisher Full Text
Oyebanji AS, Olanrewaju FK: Fostering corporate entrepreneurial culture through performance appraisal in organizations. IOSR J Business Management (IOSR-JBM). 2020; 22(7): 43–48. Publisher Full Text
Pearl J: An introduction to causal inference. Int J Biostat. 2010; 6(2). PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Peters BG: Policy capacity in public administration. Policy Society. 2015; 34: 219–228. Publisher Full Text
Rezaeikar EM, Azadehdel MR: Relationship between entrepreneurship and organizational performance in executive organization in Guilan. Science J (CSJ). 2015; 36(3): 3425–3431. Publisher Full Text
Rodrigo MR, Victor J, M G, et al.: Technological antecedents of entrepreneurship and its consequences for organizational performance. Technological Forecasting Social Change. 2019; 147: 22–35. Publisher Full Text
Rusticus S: Content validity. In: Michalos AC (eds) Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2014. Publisher Full Text
Sandfort J, Selden SC, Sowa JE: Do government tools influence organizational performance? Examining their implementation in early childhood education. Am Rev Public Admin. 2008; 38(4): 412–438. Publisher Full Text
Sangwanna S, Pupat P: Thai industrial cluster promotion model development for Region 8: Rajamangala University of Technology and Suvarnabhumi Airport. Asian Int J Soc Sci. 2014; 14(2): 84–103. Publisher Full Text
Sarfat G: Do public policies for entrepreneurship make a difference? Prospective scenarios for Canada, Ireland, and Italy. Future Studies Res J. 2012; 4(1): 114–139. Publisher Full Text
Svensson P: Formalized policy entreprenuership as a governance tool for policy integration. Int J Public Admin. 2019; 42(14): 1212–1221. Publisher Full Text
Syam H, Lamangida T, Madubun J: Public entreprenuership perspective in management of the Limboto Lake in Gorontalo Regency, Indonesia. Acad Entreprenuership J. 2018; 24(4): 1528–2686.
Wahyuni H: The role of government in economic growth: Evidence from Asia and Pacific countries. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis Indonesia. 2004; 19(1): 71–81. Publisher Full Text
Yamane T: Statistics an Introduction Analysis. 2nd ed New York: Harper and Row; 1973.
Zastempowski M: The balanced scorecard in the public sector organization. Managing Public Organizations in Theory and Practice. 2015: 53–64.
Zerbinati S, Souitaris V: Entrepreneurship in the public sector: a framework of analysis in European local governments. Entrepreneurship Regional Devel. 2005; 17: 43–64. Publisher Full Text

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1

VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 11 Aug 2021

Author details Author details

Faculty of Liberal Arts and Management Science, Kasetsart University, Mueang District, Sakon Nakhon Province, 47000, Thailand

Panitee Karnsomdee
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Article Versions (1)

version 1

Published: 11 Aug 2021, 10:794

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.55080.1

Copyright

© 2021 Karnsomdee P. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

0

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Karnsomdee P. The effects of government policy on organizational performance of provincial administration organization: mediating role of public entrepreneurship [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations, 2 not approved]. F1000Research 2021, 10:794 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.55080.1)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?

Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE

ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 11 Aug 2021

Views

0

Reviewer Report 05 Mar 2025

Illugi Torfason Hjaltalin, Reykjavik University, Reykjavik, Iceland

Not Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.58621.r364393

It is an interesting study and seems quite relevant as it links policy with outcomes (performance). Based on my knowledge, the survey questionnaire and the approach examines constructs composed of items or factors. However, they lack specificity. As another reviewer ... Continue reading

It is an interesting study and seems quite relevant as it links policy with outcomes (performance). Based on my knowledge, the survey questionnaire and the approach examines constructs composed of items or factors. However, they lack specificity. As another reviewer has noted: "what factors are involved?" seems to be the big issue here.

When examining the questionnaire it is difficult to see whether it has been built for this purpose (correlation analysis). From the looks of it this survey appears to be a combination of descriptive and factor analysis. The potential of the study, as it is written, to offer explanations about causal relationships remains questionable. On the other hand, it might be applicable to either a descriptive analysis or exploratory factor analysis.

I suggest the researchers considers complementing their quantiative data with qualitative interviews, such as mixed methods (quan-qual), adopting a longitudinal multi-case study. This might lead to the generation of explanatory evidence concerning (generative) causation in relation to effects of government intervention over time. There is also a research need to provide explanations concerning the effects of particular antecedents of public sector innovation, including the aspects highlighted in the paper, such as entrepreneurial orientation in public sector contexts (or leadership quality more generally), on the outcomes of public innovation initiatives considering contextual variations in such effects (cf. De Vries et al., 2016 [Ref-1]).

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

No
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required.
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

No

References

1. DE VRIES H, BEKKERS V, TUMMERS L: INNOVATION IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND FUTURE RESEARCH AGENDA. Public Administration. 2016; 94 (1): 146-166 Publisher Full Text

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Public sector innovation and e-government

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Views

8

Reviewer Report 12 Feb 2025

Dawit Udessa Gede, Bule Hora University, Bule Hora, Oromia, Ethiopia

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.58621.r364390

The author needs to update the citations to include sources from at least 2024. Currently, the most recent materials referenced in this article date back to 2020, which is considered outdated. Incorporating more recent research and publications will not only ... Continue reading

The author needs to update the citations to include sources from at least 2024. Currently, the most recent materials referenced in this article date back to 2020, which is considered outdated. Incorporating more recent research and publications will not only enhance the credibility of the article but also ensure that it reflects the latest developments and discussions in the field. Keeping citations current is essential for maintaining relevance and providing readers with the most accurate information.

The research must utilize a design that is robust and appropriate for examining mediating roles. Traditional descriptive methods and basic inferential analyses are insufficient for a thorough investigation of mediation effects. To effectively explore the complexities of mediating relationships, it is essential to employ more sophisticated statistical techniques, such as structural equation modeling or regression analysis that accounts for mediators. These approaches provide a deeper understanding of how and why certain variables influence one another, thereby yielding more reliable and meaningful results. Adopting a sound research design will enhance the validity of the findings and contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the underlying processes at play.

The descriptive section of the study is somewhat effective; however, it lacks sufficient support from the evidence presented in the accompanying table. The researcher has placed undue emphasis on demographic data, providing a table of evidence and interpretations that do not align with the main focus of the study. Furthermore, the results of the path analysis are unclear because the appropriate methods were not employed, and crucial evidence to substantiate the findings was not provided. To improve the study, it is important to ensure that the analysis directly addresses the primary research questions and focuses on relevant variables.
Additionally, utilizing suitable statistical techniques for path analysis will enhance clarity and provide a more accurate representation of the relationships among variables. Including comprehensive evidence to support the results will strengthen the overall validity of the research and ensure that the findings contribute meaningfully to the field.

The use of descriptive statistics in the study is commendable; however, the application of inferential statistics is inadequate due to the inappropriate use of relevant statistical tools. When dealing with mediating variables, the analysis cannot be adequately addressed through simple linear regression techniques. Instead, it requires more advanced statistical methods that can account for the complexities of mediation. To achieve this, the study should utilize robust statistical software such as AMOS or Stata SEM Builder, which are specifically designed for structural equation modeling (SEM) and can effectively analyze relationships between multiple variables, including mediators. These tools allow for a more nuanced understanding of how variables interact and influence one another, ultimately leading to more reliable and interpretable results

The researcher has only provided demographic data in the table, which is not relevant to the core focus of the study. Additionally, there are no graphs illustrating the measurement model or path diagram, despite the researcher claiming to have employed path analysis. This lack of visual representation makes it difficult to assess the relationships and interactions between the variables. Furthermore, the study does not present any results regarding the validity and reliability of the instruments used. Establishing the credibility of the measurement tools is essential for ensuring the accuracy of the findings. To substantiate the results, it is crucial to include a path model diagram, which visually represents the hypothesized relationships among the variables. I strongly recommend that the researcher incorporate all relevant figures, tables, and graphs into the study. These visual aids will enhance clarity, facilitate understanding, and provide a more comprehensive overview of the research findings, ultimately strengthening the overall quality and rigor of the study.

Given that the results of the analysis are not robust, it raises significant concerns about the validity of the conclusions drawn from the study. If the foundation of the analysis lacks rigor or is based on flawed methodologies, it is unlikely that the conclusions can be considered reliable or credible.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

No
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

No

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Management and organizational performance

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Views

41

Reviewer Report 28 Jun 2022

Kittisak Jermsittiparsert, Faculty of Education, University of City Island, Famagusta, Cyprus; Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Muhammadiyah Sinjai, Sulawesi Selatan, Indonesia; Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar, Sulawesi Selatan, Indonesia; Publication Research Institute and Community Service, Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidenreng Rappang, South Sulawesi, Indonesia

Not Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.58621.r142113

In fact, the issues the author set out to study are important and interesting. However, it has so many flaws that it is unsuitable for indexing in this format.

Start from the title of the article. It ... Continue reading

In fact, the issues the author set out to study are important and interesting. However, it has so many flaws that it is unsuitable for indexing in this format.

Start from the title of the article. It has a few interesting points. The first question is what does the term "government policy" mean here? What is the direction of that policy? However, when looking at the attached questionnaire, the author call it the external factors. And almost all the questions try to repeatedly ask whether various government policies contribute to promoting entrepreneurship of government agencies or not. And how is it possible that by summing and averaging the opinions of these respondents, it will lead to a link to the results that the author tries to say that these "government policies" are what caused them? However, it must be considered in terms of logic, rationality, not just the results of numerical analysis.

In terms of improvements, the author should change the term "provincial administrative organization" to "local government" to make this research clearer, more international, and better linked to other research and the bigger picture. The picture that will emerge from such revisions is that federal policies, which should have a clearer and more rational direction such as decentralization and budgets to local governments, will lead to better performance of local governments.
However, if the author still wishes to clearly specify that it is a PAO (provincial administration organization), it can be done by stating in the research method that the local government organizations in this research are PAOs in the upper northeastern region of Thailand.

The Introduction is very short, it still needs to be expanded accordingly. The author needs to have a clearer direction in highlighting the importance of the subject to be studied. The author may make it clear that government organizations here refer to local government organizations. With this clarity, the author will be able to begin clearly that local governments are critical in providing public services to the people. The most basic explanation is that it is the agency closest to the people. Therefore, its performance means something that will benefit the people. Subsequently, the author should point out that the performance of local government organizations differs from country to country. Anyway, what factors are involved? These issues should be cited by a number of research papers to give a brief overview without going into details but to show that they are of great academic importance and have been studied extensively. In this Introduction, the author may also mention the situation in Thailand. There are related reports suggesting that the performance of local governments in the country is still poor. There are many reasons for this. The question of this research is, what factors will improve the performance of these local government organizations?

Literature reviews need to be updated to a higher standard than they are. A synthesis of really relevant research needs to be produced in order to develop hypotheses and form a research conceptual framework accordingly. The big problem with this research paper is citations. The sources the author refer to are not mentioned, as the author tries to say they do. It becomes a problem that, in fact, what the author is trying to bring up, to convince readers, is information that does not exist. For example, it is said that Oyebanji & Olanrewaju (2020) is referring to local government organizations in Thailand, but it is actually a general organization and is conducted in Nigeria. Or saying that government policy affects organizational performance is based on two studies that looked at the underlying variables: technology and e-government, not government policy.

In the Research methods, the author did not mention the population size. Indeed, the biggest problem and at the heart of the matter that render the results of this article's analysis useless is the questionnaire. It is clear that the author did not actually design the questionnaire for research on this issue, but on another issue. Attempting to convert an issue from the original questionnaire to a new issue that the content of the questionnaire could not reflect, would cause problems that could not be resolved.

As for the results of the research, the author must be aware that the demographic data of the samples are not the results of the research. Because it is not an answer to a research question, and no one cares about what gender or monthly income the respondents are in the sample.

The conclusions and discussions were not very good. Author need to point out the findings of the research, what it means, and discuss other research, especially overseas, which is the big picture. However, since the questions in this questionnaire are problematic from the beginning. When examined in detail to describe the results of statistical analysis and their origins, there are large gaps or discrepancies in the matter.

The number of references used is relatively small. And as I said, they were incorrectly referenced.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

No
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

No
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

No
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

No

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Political Science, Public & Private Management, International Political Economy, Social Research

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1

VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 11 Aug 2021

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2	3
Version 1 11 Aug 21	read	read	read

Kittisak Jermsittiparsert, University of City Island, Famagusta, Cyprus; Universitas Muhammadiyah Sinjai, Sulawesi Selatan, Indonesia; Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar, Sulawesi Selatan, Indonesia; Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidenreng Rappang, South Sulawesi, Indonesia
Dawit Udessa Gede, Bule Hora University, Bule Hora, Ethiopia
Illugi Torfason Hjaltalin, Reykjavik University, Reykjavik, Iceland

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Sign up for content alerts

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

0 Views

05 Mar 2025 | for Version 1

Illugi Torfason Hjaltalin, Reykjavik University, Reykjavik, Iceland

0 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Not Approved

It is an interesting study and seems quite relevant as it links policy with outcomes (performance). Based on my knowledge, the survey questionnaire and the approach examines constructs composed of items or factors. However, they lack specificity. As another reviewer has noted: "what factors are involved?" seems to be the big issue here.

When examining the questionnaire it is difficult to see whether it has been built for this purpose (correlation analysis). From the looks of it this survey appears to be a combination of descriptive and factor analysis. The potential of the study, as it is written, to offer explanations about causal relationships remains questionable. On the other hand, it might be applicable to either a descriptive analysis or exploratory factor analysis.

I suggest the researchers considers complementing their quantiative data with qualitative interviews, such as mixed methods (quan-qual), adopting a longitudinal multi-case study. This might lead to the generation of explanatory evidence concerning (generative) causation in relation to effects of government intervention over time. There is also a research need to provide explanations concerning the effects of particular antecedents of public sector innovation, including the aspects highlighted in the paper, such as entrepreneurial orientation in public sector contexts (or leadership quality more generally), on the outcomes of public innovation initiatives considering contextual variations in such effects (cf. De Vries et al., 2016 [Ref-1]).

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

No
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required.
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

No

References

1. DE VRIES H, BEKKERS V, TUMMERS L: INNOVATION IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND FUTURE RESEARCH AGENDA. Public Administration. 2016; 94 (1): 146-166 Publisher Full Text

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Public sector innovation and e-government

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

8 Views

12 Feb 2025 | for Version 1

Dawit Udessa Gede, Bule Hora University, Bule Hora, Oromia, Ethiopia

8 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved With Reservations

The author needs to update the citations to include sources from at least 2024. Currently, the most recent materials referenced in this article date back to 2020, which is considered outdated. Incorporating more recent research and publications will not only enhance the credibility of the article but also ensure that it reflects the latest developments and discussions in the field. Keeping citations current is essential for maintaining relevance and providing readers with the most accurate information.

The research must utilize a design that is robust and appropriate for examining mediating roles. Traditional descriptive methods and basic inferential analyses are insufficient for a thorough investigation of mediation effects. To effectively explore the complexities of mediating relationships, it is essential to employ more sophisticated statistical techniques, such as structural equation modeling or regression analysis that accounts for mediators. These approaches provide a deeper understanding of how and why certain variables influence one another, thereby yielding more reliable and meaningful results. Adopting a sound research design will enhance the validity of the findings and contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the underlying processes at play.

The descriptive section of the study is somewhat effective; however, it lacks sufficient support from the evidence presented in the accompanying table. The researcher has placed undue emphasis on demographic data, providing a table of evidence and interpretations that do not align with the main focus of the study. Furthermore, the results of the path analysis are unclear because the appropriate methods were not employed, and crucial evidence to substantiate the findings was not provided. To improve the study, it is important to ensure that the analysis directly addresses the primary research questions and focuses on relevant variables.
Additionally, utilizing suitable statistical techniques for path analysis will enhance clarity and provide a more accurate representation of the relationships among variables. Including comprehensive evidence to support the results will strengthen the overall validity of the research and ensure that the findings contribute meaningfully to the field.

The use of descriptive statistics in the study is commendable; however, the application of inferential statistics is inadequate due to the inappropriate use of relevant statistical tools. When dealing with mediating variables, the analysis cannot be adequately addressed through simple linear regression techniques. Instead, it requires more advanced statistical methods that can account for the complexities of mediation. To achieve this, the study should utilize robust statistical software such as AMOS or Stata SEM Builder, which are specifically designed for structural equation modeling (SEM) and can effectively analyze relationships between multiple variables, including mediators. These tools allow for a more nuanced understanding of how variables interact and influence one another, ultimately leading to more reliable and interpretable results

The researcher has only provided demographic data in the table, which is not relevant to the core focus of the study. Additionally, there are no graphs illustrating the measurement model or path diagram, despite the researcher claiming to have employed path analysis. This lack of visual representation makes it difficult to assess the relationships and interactions between the variables. Furthermore, the study does not present any results regarding the validity and reliability of the instruments used. Establishing the credibility of the measurement tools is essential for ensuring the accuracy of the findings. To substantiate the results, it is crucial to include a path model diagram, which visually represents the hypothesized relationships among the variables. I strongly recommend that the researcher incorporate all relevant figures, tables, and graphs into the study. These visual aids will enhance clarity, facilitate understanding, and provide a more comprehensive overview of the research findings, ultimately strengthening the overall quality and rigor of the study.

Given that the results of the analysis are not robust, it raises significant concerns about the validity of the conclusions drawn from the study. If the foundation of the analysis lacks rigor or is based on flawed methodologies, it is unlikely that the conclusions can be considered reliable or credible.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

No
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

No

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Management and organizational performance

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

41 Views

28 Jun 2022 | for Version 1

Kittisak Jermsittiparsert, Faculty of Education, University of City Island, Famagusta, Cyprus; Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Muhammadiyah Sinjai, Sulawesi Selatan, Indonesia; Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar, Sulawesi Selatan, Indonesia; Publication Research Institute and Community Service, Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidenreng Rappang, South Sulawesi, Indonesia

41 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Not Approved

In fact, the issues the author set out to study are important and interesting. However, it has so many flaws that it is unsuitable for indexing in this format.

Start from the title of the article. It has a few interesting points. The first question is what does the term "government policy" mean here? What is the direction of that policy? However, when looking at the attached questionnaire, the author call it the external factors. And almost all the questions try to repeatedly ask whether various government policies contribute to promoting entrepreneurship of government agencies or not. And how is it possible that by summing and averaging the opinions of these respondents, it will lead to a link to the results that the author tries to say that these "government policies" are what caused them? However, it must be considered in terms of logic, rationality, not just the results of numerical analysis.

In terms of improvements, the author should change the term "provincial administrative organization" to "local government" to make this research clearer, more international, and better linked to other research and the bigger picture. The picture that will emerge from such revisions is that federal policies, which should have a clearer and more rational direction such as decentralization and budgets to local governments, will lead to better performance of local governments.
However, if the author still wishes to clearly specify that it is a PAO (provincial administration organization), it can be done by stating in the research method that the local government organizations in this research are PAOs in the upper northeastern region of Thailand.

The Introduction is very short, it still needs to be expanded accordingly. The author needs to have a clearer direction in highlighting the importance of the subject to be studied. The author may make it clear that government organizations here refer to local government organizations. With this clarity, the author will be able to begin clearly that local governments are critical in providing public services to the people. The most basic explanation is that it is the agency closest to the people. Therefore, its performance means something that will benefit the people. Subsequently, the author should point out that the performance of local government organizations differs from country to country. Anyway, what factors are involved? These issues should be cited by a number of research papers to give a brief overview without going into details but to show that they are of great academic importance and have been studied extensively. In this Introduction, the author may also mention the situation in Thailand. There are related reports suggesting that the performance of local governments in the country is still poor. There are many reasons for this. The question of this research is, what factors will improve the performance of these local government organizations?

Literature reviews need to be updated to a higher standard than they are. A synthesis of really relevant research needs to be produced in order to develop hypotheses and form a research conceptual framework accordingly. The big problem with this research paper is citations. The sources the author refer to are not mentioned, as the author tries to say they do. It becomes a problem that, in fact, what the author is trying to bring up, to convince readers, is information that does not exist. For example, it is said that Oyebanji & Olanrewaju (2020) is referring to local government organizations in Thailand, but it is actually a general organization and is conducted in Nigeria. Or saying that government policy affects organizational performance is based on two studies that looked at the underlying variables: technology and e-government, not government policy.

In the Research methods, the author did not mention the population size. Indeed, the biggest problem and at the heart of the matter that render the results of this article's analysis useless is the questionnaire. It is clear that the author did not actually design the questionnaire for research on this issue, but on another issue. Attempting to convert an issue from the original questionnaire to a new issue that the content of the questionnaire could not reflect, would cause problems that could not be resolved.

As for the results of the research, the author must be aware that the demographic data of the samples are not the results of the research. Because it is not an answer to a research question, and no one cares about what gender or monthly income the respondents are in the sample.

The conclusions and discussions were not very good. Author need to point out the findings of the research, what it means, and discuss other research, especially overseas, which is the big picture. However, since the questions in this questionnaire are problematic from the beginning. When examined in detail to describe the results of statistical analysis and their origins, there are large gaps or discrepancies in the matter.

The number of references used is relatively small. And as I said, they were incorrectly referenced.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

No
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

No
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

No
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

No

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Political Science, Public & Private Management, International Political Economy, Social Research

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

[1] Akinyemi FO, Adejumo OO: Government policies and entreprenuership phases in emerging economies: Nigeria and South Africa. J Entrepr Res. 2018: 1–18. Publisher Full Text

[2] Antoncic B, Scarlat C: Corporate entrepreneurship and organizational performance: A comparison between Slovenia and Romania. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference of the faculty of management Koper Congress Centre Bernardin. Slovenia; November 2005. 71–89.

[3] Banda P, Kazonga E: The effect of public sector corporate entrepreneurship on organizational performance in the health sector: A case of selected public hospitals in Lusaka, Zambia. IOSR J Business Management (IOSR-JBM). 2018; 20(4): 8–18.

[4] Fahim MA: The impact of entrepreneurship on performance in public sector organizations with application to the Egyptian electricity holding company. Arab J Admin. 2018; 38(2): 227–256. Publisher Full Text

[5] Greatbanks R, Tapp D: The impact of balanced scorecard in a public sector environment: Empirical evidence. Int J Operations Production Management. 2007; 27(8): 846–873. Publisher Full Text

[6] Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, et al.: Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs; 2010.

[7] Ismanu S, Kusmintarti A: Government policies and firm size as a moderating effect of innovation on business performance. Adv Economics, Business Management Res. 2019; 136: 123–128. Publisher Full Text

[8] Jones C, Pimdee P: Innovative ideas: Thailand 4.0 and the fourth industrial revolution. Asian Int J Soc Sci. 2017; 17(1): 4–32. Publisher Full Text

[9] Kareem MA, Haseeni ZJ: E-Government and its impact on organizational performance. Int J Management Commerce Innovations. 2015; 3(1): 664–672.

[10] Karinda JM, Noermijati, Armanu, et al.: The effect of organizational culture, and entrepreneurship characteristics of knowledge management on company performance (Study on contruction services company first small qualification Papua in Jayapura). South East Asia J Contemporary Business, Economics Law. 2016; 11 (2), 80–86.

[11] Karnsomdee P: Input-SaNooK_Scopus (English). figshare. Dataset. 2021. Publisher Full Text

[12] Karnsomdee P: Questionnaires-Sanook-Scopus. figshare. Dataset. 2021. Publisher Full Text

[13] Karnsomdee P: Questionnaires-Sanook-Scopus (English). figshare. Dataset. 2021. Publisher Full Text

[14] Karnsomdee P: Data Key for Questionnaire Responses. figshare. Dataset. 2021. Publisher Full Text

[15] Karungani WP, Ochiri G: Effect of policy and regulatory framework on organizational performance: A case of Nairobi country, Kenya. Int J Economics, Commerce Management. 2017; 5(6): 565–573.

[16] Kearney C, Hisrich R, Roche F: A conceptual model of public sector corporate entrepreneurship. Int Entrep Manag J. 2008; 4: 295–313. Publisher Full Text

[17] Kearney C, Hisrich R, Roche F: Public and private sector entrepreneurship: similarities, differences or a combination? J Small Business Enterprise Devel. 2009; 16(1): 26–46. Publisher Full Text

[18] Kim Y: Stimulating entrepreneurial practices in the public Sector: The roles of organizational characteristics. Admin Society. 2010; 42(7): 780–814. Publisher Full Text

[19] Nikolov GB, Botseva D: Role and importance of government policies and strategies for long-term economic development. Synthesis of Science and Society in Solving Global Problems Conference, Shioda GmbH, Steyr, Austria. 2018; 2018: 34–38.

[20] Northcott D, Taulapapa TM: Using the balanced scorecard to manage performance in public sector organization: Issues and challenges. Int J Public Sector Management. 2012; 25(3): 166–191. Publisher Full Text

[21] Obaji NO, Olugu MU: The role of government policy in entrepreneurship development. Sci J Business Management. 2014; 2(4): 109–115. Publisher Full Text

[22] Oyebanji AS, Olanrewaju FK: Fostering corporate entrepreneurial culture through performance appraisal in organizations. IOSR J Business Management (IOSR-JBM). 2020; 22(7): 43–48. Publisher Full Text

[23] Pearl J: An introduction to causal inference. Int J Biostat. 2010; 6(2). PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[24] Peters BG: Policy capacity in public administration. Policy Society. 2015; 34: 219–228. Publisher Full Text

[25] Rezaeikar EM, Azadehdel MR: Relationship between entrepreneurship and organizational performance in executive organization in Guilan. Science J (CSJ). 2015; 36(3): 3425–3431. Publisher Full Text

[26] Rodrigo MR, Victor J, M G, et al.: Technological antecedents of entrepreneurship and its consequences for organizational performance. Technological Forecasting Social Change. 2019; 147: 22–35. Publisher Full Text

[27] Rusticus S: Content validity. In: Michalos AC (eds) Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2014. Publisher Full Text

[28] Sandfort J, Selden SC, Sowa JE: Do government tools influence organizational performance? Examining their implementation in early childhood education. Am Rev Public Admin. 2008; 38(4): 412–438. Publisher Full Text

[29] Sangwanna S, Pupat P: Thai industrial cluster promotion model development for Region 8: Rajamangala University of Technology and Suvarnabhumi Airport. Asian Int J Soc Sci. 2014; 14(2): 84–103. Publisher Full Text

[30] Sarfat G: Do public policies for entrepreneurship make a difference? Prospective scenarios for Canada, Ireland, and Italy. Future Studies Res J. 2012; 4(1): 114–139. Publisher Full Text

[31] Svensson P: Formalized policy entreprenuership as a governance tool for policy integration. Int J Public Admin. 2019; 42(14): 1212–1221. Publisher Full Text

[32] Syam H, Lamangida T, Madubun J: Public entreprenuership perspective in management of the Limboto Lake in Gorontalo Regency, Indonesia. Acad Entreprenuership J. 2018; 24(4): 1528–2686.

[33] Wahyuni H: The role of government in economic growth: Evidence from Asia and Pacific countries. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis Indonesia. 2004; 19(1): 71–81. Publisher Full Text

[34] Yamane T: Statistics an Introduction Analysis. 2nd ed New York: Harper and Row; 1973.

[35] Zastempowski M: The balanced scorecard in the public sector organization. Managing Public Organizations in Theory and Practice. 2015: 53–64.

[36] Zerbinati S, Souitaris V: Entrepreneurship in the public sector: a framework of analysis in European local governments. Entrepreneurship Regional Devel. 2005; 17: 43–64. Publisher Full Text

The effects of government policy on organizational performance of provincial administration organization: mediating role of public entrepreneurship

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Government policy

Public entrepreneurship

Organizational performance

Conceptual framework and hypotheses development

Figure 1. Conceptual framework.

(1)

(2)

Methods

Ethical approval

Sampling and data collection

Table 1. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of variables.

Data analysis

Results

Description of the respondents

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of the respondents.

Hytotheses testing

Table 3. Correlation analysis of the independent variables (GOVP, government policy; PUBE, public entrepreneurship; ORGP, organizational performance).

Table 4. Research results from hypotheses testing (GOVP, government policy; PUBE, public entrepreneurship; ORGP, organizational performance).

Discussion

Conclusion

Data availability

Underlying data

Extended data

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated