Role of government as moderator: Porter’s diamond firm strategy, structure, and rivalry attribute and industry’s performance

Abstract

The prime purpose of the research was to examine, through empirical study, and help determine the government’s role as moderator in the relationship between Porter’s diamond firm strategy, structure, and rivalry construct and the firm’s performance in Pakistan’s automotive sector. In the study, the research philosophy was positivism, and a deductive approach was applied as the main reason to establish generalizations in the results. With a view to determining the magnitude, direction, and significance, researchers emphasized descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. Data was solicited from 166 sample respondents through a structured questionnaire. To establish the reliability perspective and validity context of the questionnaire constructs, a pilot study was part of the research study. Parametric and nonparametric statistical techniques also became an integral part of analysis for drawing objectively based conclusions. For moderation purposes, the tool was macro, Process v3.0 (model 1). The study findings aptly indicate that in a theoretical context, the relationship is not significant, whereas the practical perspective reflects that government policy does influence industry firms’ performance; however, the mediating role of government between Porter’s constructs, viz., firm strategy, structure, and rivalry, and industry firms’ performance documented no impact. In the constituencies of academia, automotive sector players, and policymakers, the moderation results shed light on theoretical and practical contextualization.

Keywords: {'name': 'Firm’s Performance, Firm Strategy, Structure and Rivalry, Government Policy, Moderator'}

Authors & affiliations

Muhammad Ahmed Butt
Affiliation not supplied

Paul Katuse
Affiliation not supplied

Deposited references

Supplied references, not a list of publications citing this article.

DOI: 10.4236/ajibm.2013.35055

DOI: 10.1108/09564239610109393

DOI: 10.1007/s10843-010-0053-y

DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.04.050

DOI: 10.5465/amj.2008.30708624

DOI: 10.1108/17468801211209956

DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2007.03.003

DOI: 10.1146/annurev-financial-110613-034331

DOI: 10.1108/IJLMA-03-2014-0023

Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: The Guilford Press

DOI: 10.1108/JFRC-02-2014-0006

Kaplan, R.S., & Norton, D.P. (1992). The balanced scorecard: measures that drive Performance. Harvard Business Review, 69 (1), pp. 71-79.

DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9302.2007.00601.x

Malyshev, N. (2002). The Evolution of Regulatory Policy in OECD Countries. A series of OECD Regulatory Reform Reviews.

DOI: 10.5547/01956574.38.SI1.zche

Moeljadi, Sumiati, Anselah, S., &Yuniarsa, S. (2015). The Influence of Government as a Moderating Variable in the Relationship between Orientation Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Market Orientation on Business Performance (Case Study: Tutul Village, Jember, East Java). International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, 7(2) (Aug.) ISSN 2289- 1552

DOI: 10.1108/JMTM-05-2013-0062

DOI: 10.11130/jei.2016.31.4.932

DOI: 10.13189/ujm.2017.051002

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-349-11336-1_1

Porter, M. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, 76(6): 77-90.

DOI: 10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd

Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich, and Rosati. (2016). 2016 Antitrust Year in Review. California: Author. Retrieved from http://www.wsgr.com/email/antitrust- report/2016/ Antitrust.2016.pdf.

Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics: An Introductory Analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Harper and Row.