การวิเคราะห์ตัวแบบดัชนีความพร้อมด้านเครือข่ายเทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศและการสื่อสาร [The Analysis of Networked Readiness Index Model]
Article Sidebar
Published:
Aug 31, 2018
Keywords:
Networked Readiness Index Partial Least Square Structural Equation Modelling
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article has a purpose to analyze the Networked Readiness Index (NRI) by using the data between 2012-2015 which cover 151 countries with 53 indicators. The existing model consists of 4 latent variables that are 1) environment (politics and business) 2) readiness (infrastructure, access and skills) 3) usage (individual, business and government level) and 4) impact (economic and social). By using the Partial Least Square (PLS SEM) technique, the analysis of the measurement model reveals that only 47.17% of the observed variables are suitable to be used in the model while all latent variables are not reliable and valid because the observed variables are not properly grouped. Secondly, the analysis of the structural model reveals that the readiness does not directly influence the impact. The environment influences both directly and indirectly through the usage on the impact while the usage influences directly on the impact. Finally, the results reveal an opportunity to improve a more suitable model by using the Resource Based View (RBV).
Article Details
How to Cite
จรัสวิญญู ฉ. (2018). การวิเคราะห์ตัวแบบดัชนีความพร้อมด้านเครือข่ายเทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศและการสื่อสาร [The Analysis of Networked Readiness Index Model]. Journal of Business, Innovation and Sustainability (JBIS), 3(2), 73–91. retrieved from https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/BECJournal/article/view/108428
Section
บทความวิจัย (Research article)
References
1. Amit, R. and Schoemaker, P. J. (1993). Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14(1), 33-46.
2. Alshomrani, S. (2012). A comparative study on United Nations e-government indicators between Saudi Arabia and USA. Journal of Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Sciences, 3(3), 411-420.
3. Barney, J. B. (1986). Strategic factor markets: Expectations, luck and business strategy. Management Science, 32(10), 1231-1241.
4. Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
5. Barney, J., Wright, M. and Ketchen-Jr, D. J. (2001). The resource-based view of the firm: Ten years after 1991. Journal of Management, 27(6), 625-641.
6. Bharadwaj, A. S. (2000). A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 169-196.
7. Breznik, L. (2012). Can information technology be a source of competitive advantage?. Economic and Business Review for Central and South-Eastern Europe, 14(3), 251-269.
8. Collis, D. J. (1991). A resource based analysis of global competition: The case of the bearings industry. Strategic Management Journal, 12(S1), 49-68.
9. Dutta, S. and Osorio, B. (2012). The global information technology report 2012: Living in a hyperconnected world. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
10. Dutta, S., Geiger, T. and Lanvin, B. (2015). The global information technology report 2015: ICTs for inclusive growth. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
11. Gupta, G., Tan, K. T. L., Ee, Y. S. and Phang, C. S. C. (2018). Resource-based view of information systems: Sustainable and transient competitive advantage perspectives. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 22(1), 1-10.
12. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M. and Sarstedt, M. (2013). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). London: SAGE Publications.
13. Henderson, R. and Cockburn, I. (1994). Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management Journal, 15(S1), 63-84.
14. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135.
15. Jarvenpaa, S. L. and Leidner, D. E. (1998). An information company in Mexico: Extending the resource-based view of the firm to a developing country context. Information Systems Research, 9(4), 342-361.
16. Liang, T. P., You, J. J. and Liu, C. C. (2010). A resource-based perspective on information technology and firm performance: A meta-analysis. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 110(8), 1138-1158.
17. Liviu, B. (2015). Information technology and the company performance in the sector of services. Annals-Economy Series, 9(1), 127-133.
18. Miller, D. and Shamsie, J. (1996). The resource-based view of the firm in two environments: The Hollywood film studios from 1936 to 1965. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 519-543.
19. Osorio, B., Dutta, S. and Lanvin, B. (2013). The global information technology report 2013: Growth and jobs in a hyperconnected world. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
20. Osorio, B., Dutta, S. and Lanvin, B. (2014). The global information technology report 2014: Rewards and risks of big data. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
21. Peng, M. W., Wang, D. Y. and Jiang, Y. (2008). An institution-based view of international business strategy: A focus on emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(5), 920-936.
22. Saa-Perez, P. D. and Garcia-Falcon, J. M. (2002). A resource-based view of human resource management and organizational capabilities development. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 13(1), 123-140.
23. Schroeder, R. G., Bates, K. A. and Junttila, M. A. (2002). A resource based view of manufacturing strategy and the relationship to manufacturing performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23(2), 105-117.
24. Schwab, K. (2016). The global competitiveness report 2016-2017. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
25. Silverman, B. S. (1999). Technological resources and the direction of corporate diversification: Toward an integration of the resource-based view and transaction cost economics. Management Science, 45(8), 1109-1124.
26. Subriadi, A. P., Hadiwidjojo, D., Rahayu, M. and Sarno, R. (2013). Information technology productivity paradox: A resource-based view and Iinformation technology strategic alignment perspective for measuring information technology contribution on performance. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 54(3), 541-552.
27. Ueasangkomsate, P. (2016). Barriers to e-commerce adoption in Thai Small and Medium Enterprises. Journal of Business, Economics and Communications, 11(2), 33-45.
28. United Nations. (2017a). United Nations e-government survey 2016. S.L.: United Nations.
29. United Nations. (2017b). Measuring the information society report 2016. S.L.: United Nations.
30. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180.
2. Alshomrani, S. (2012). A comparative study on United Nations e-government indicators between Saudi Arabia and USA. Journal of Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Sciences, 3(3), 411-420.
3. Barney, J. B. (1986). Strategic factor markets: Expectations, luck and business strategy. Management Science, 32(10), 1231-1241.
4. Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
5. Barney, J., Wright, M. and Ketchen-Jr, D. J. (2001). The resource-based view of the firm: Ten years after 1991. Journal of Management, 27(6), 625-641.
6. Bharadwaj, A. S. (2000). A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 169-196.
7. Breznik, L. (2012). Can information technology be a source of competitive advantage?. Economic and Business Review for Central and South-Eastern Europe, 14(3), 251-269.
8. Collis, D. J. (1991). A resource based analysis of global competition: The case of the bearings industry. Strategic Management Journal, 12(S1), 49-68.
9. Dutta, S. and Osorio, B. (2012). The global information technology report 2012: Living in a hyperconnected world. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
10. Dutta, S., Geiger, T. and Lanvin, B. (2015). The global information technology report 2015: ICTs for inclusive growth. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
11. Gupta, G., Tan, K. T. L., Ee, Y. S. and Phang, C. S. C. (2018). Resource-based view of information systems: Sustainable and transient competitive advantage perspectives. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 22(1), 1-10.
12. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M. and Sarstedt, M. (2013). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). London: SAGE Publications.
13. Henderson, R. and Cockburn, I. (1994). Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management Journal, 15(S1), 63-84.
14. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135.
15. Jarvenpaa, S. L. and Leidner, D. E. (1998). An information company in Mexico: Extending the resource-based view of the firm to a developing country context. Information Systems Research, 9(4), 342-361.
16. Liang, T. P., You, J. J. and Liu, C. C. (2010). A resource-based perspective on information technology and firm performance: A meta-analysis. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 110(8), 1138-1158.
17. Liviu, B. (2015). Information technology and the company performance in the sector of services. Annals-Economy Series, 9(1), 127-133.
18. Miller, D. and Shamsie, J. (1996). The resource-based view of the firm in two environments: The Hollywood film studios from 1936 to 1965. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 519-543.
19. Osorio, B., Dutta, S. and Lanvin, B. (2013). The global information technology report 2013: Growth and jobs in a hyperconnected world. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
20. Osorio, B., Dutta, S. and Lanvin, B. (2014). The global information technology report 2014: Rewards and risks of big data. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
21. Peng, M. W., Wang, D. Y. and Jiang, Y. (2008). An institution-based view of international business strategy: A focus on emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(5), 920-936.
22. Saa-Perez, P. D. and Garcia-Falcon, J. M. (2002). A resource-based view of human resource management and organizational capabilities development. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 13(1), 123-140.
23. Schroeder, R. G., Bates, K. A. and Junttila, M. A. (2002). A resource based view of manufacturing strategy and the relationship to manufacturing performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23(2), 105-117.
24. Schwab, K. (2016). The global competitiveness report 2016-2017. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
25. Silverman, B. S. (1999). Technological resources and the direction of corporate diversification: Toward an integration of the resource-based view and transaction cost economics. Management Science, 45(8), 1109-1124.
26. Subriadi, A. P., Hadiwidjojo, D., Rahayu, M. and Sarno, R. (2013). Information technology productivity paradox: A resource-based view and Iinformation technology strategic alignment perspective for measuring information technology contribution on performance. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 54(3), 541-552.
27. Ueasangkomsate, P. (2016). Barriers to e-commerce adoption in Thai Small and Medium Enterprises. Journal of Business, Economics and Communications, 11(2), 33-45.
28. United Nations. (2017a). United Nations e-government survey 2016. S.L.: United Nations.
29. United Nations. (2017b). Measuring the information society report 2016. S.L.: United Nations.
30. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180.