£ 149
| Frequency | Percent (%) |
Gender |
|
|
Male | 256 | 86.2 |
Female | 41 | 13.8 |
Total | 297 | 100.0 |
Age group |
|
|
<20 | 7 | 2.4 |
21-30 | 142 | 47.8 |
31-40 | 110 | 37.0 |
41-50 | 23 | 7.7 |
>50 | 15 | 5.1 |
Total | 297 | 100.0 |
Education |
|
|
Secondary school | 1 | .3 |
High school | 3 | 1.0 |
High Institute level | 9 | 3.0 |
University level | 108 | 36.4 |
Post graduate level | 176 | 59.3 |
Total | 297 | 100.0 |
Type of Organization |
|
|
Manufacturing | 65 | 21.9 |
Service | 196 | 66.0 |
Others | 36 | 12.1 |
Total | 297 | 100.0 |
Experience |
|
|
<2 years | 137 | 46.1 |
< 4 years | 62 | 20.9 |
< 6 years | 35 | 11.8 |
< 8 years | 29 | 9.8 |
> 8 years | 34 | 11.4 |
Total | 297 | 100.0 |
Your functional area in this organization |
|
|
Accounting | 1 | .3 |
Finance | 4 | 1.3 |
Marketing | 50 | 16.8 |
Manufacturing | 16 | 5.4 |
Research and Development | 19 | 6.4 |
Personnel | 1 | .3 |
Logistics and SCM | 177 | 59.6 |
Information systems | 9 | 3.0 |
Others | 20 | 6.7 |
Total | 297 | 100.0 |
Level of your position within your organization |
|
|
Specialist | 60 | 20.2 |
Manager | 92 | 31.0 |
Team Leader | 48 | 16.2 |
Director | 18 | 6.1 |
Executive / VP | 26 | 8.8 |
Others | 53 | 17.8 |
Total | 297 | 100.0 |
| Outsourcing Logistics Services | Reason for Outsourcing | Outsourcing Logistics Objective | Hindrance factors/ Problems encountered in Outsourcing | In-Sourcing reasons | Criteria for selecting 3 PL Provider (Langey et al., 2009) |
Mean | 3.25 | 3.58 | 6.60 | 6.60 | 3.47 | 3.48 |
Median | 3.30 | 3.55 | 6.91 | 6.91 | 3.50 | 3.37 |
SD | 0.91 | 0.71 | 2.21 | 2.21 | 0.88 | 0.96 |
Skewness | -0.09 | -0.34 | -0.92 | -0.92 | -0.52 | -0.12 |
S. E of Skewness | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 |
Kurtosis | -0.84 | 1.09 | 1.14 | 1.14 | 0.36 | -0.91 |
S.E of Kurtosis | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.28 |
Exploratory data analysis (EDA) was conducted for variables such as Outsourcing Logistics Services, Reason for Outsourcing, Outsourcing Logistics Objectives, Hindrance Factors in Outsourcing, In-Sourcing Reasons, and Criteria for selecting 3PL Providers, using a sample of 297 cases. The analysis included histograms and z-tests for skewness and kurtosis. All variables showed normal distribution:
All variables had significance of p<0.05, indicating normality, allowing for the use of parametric tests.
If you need assistance with writing your proposal, our professional Dissertation Proposal Writing Service is here to help!
Reason for outsourcing | Mean | Ranking |
Improve profitability | 3.82 | 1 |
Improve operating efficiency | 3.79 | 2 |
Enhance customer satisfaction | 3.70 | 3 |
Improve cash flow | 3.70 | 3 |
To Increase competitive advantage[SF4] | 3.67 | 4 |
Reduce constraints of organization’s own production | 3.65 | 5 |
Increase responsiveness to market change | 3.64 | 6 |
capital funds more available for core area Make | 3.62 | 7 |
Leverage the firm’s skill and resources | 3.59 | 8 |
Improve Business focus | 3.59 | 8 |
To enable partnering to improve service quality and customer service and increase competitive advantage[EF5] | 3.58 | 9 |
Increase Efficiency | 3.58 | 9 |
To achieve Competitive advantage[SF2] | 3.57 | 10 |
Improve Performance | 3.56 | 11 |
Add value to the product | 3.50 | 12 |
To enable partnering to improve service quality | 3.50 | 12 |
Convert fixed costs to variable costs | 3.48 | 13 |
Improve return on assets | 3.47 | 14 |
Reduce Risk | 3.43 | 15 |
To help companies gain global advantage | 3.40 | 16 |
To meet increase demand for new IS and resource more efficiently and economically | 3.37 | 17 |
In the “Reason for Outsourcing,” the highest-ranked factor is Improve profitability (mean = 3.82), followed by Improve operating efficiency (3.79) and Enhance customer satisfaction & Improve cash flow (both 3.70). Other important reasons include Increase competitive advantage (3.67), Reduce constraints of own production (3.65), and Increase responsiveness to market change (3.64). Make capital funds more available for core areas (3.62) and Leverage firm’s skills/resources & Improve business focus (both 3.59) are also key factors. Further down the list, Enable partnering to improve service quality & increase competitive advantage (3.58) and Achieve competitive advantage (3.57) rank highly, with other factors like Improve performance (3.56) and Add value to product (3.50) also contributing. Convert fixed costs to variable costs (3.48), Improve return on assets (3.47), and Reduce risk (3.43) follow, while Help gain global advantage (3.40) and Meet increasing demand for IS/resources more efficiently (3.37) rank lowest.
Reliability and Validity
Factor | Statement | Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted | Items | Cronbach’s alpha |
Outsourcing logistics services
| International transportation | 0.909 |
21
|
0.912
|
Domestic Transportation | 0.914 | |||
Warehousing(pick& pack) | 0.909 | |||
Freight Forwarding | 0.911 | |||
Customs Brokerage | 0.913 | |||
Reverse Logistics | 0.908 | |||
Cross docking | 0.907 | |||
Product labelling, knitting and packaging | 0.907 | |||
Transportation planning and management | 0.905 | |||
Inventory management | 0.906 | |||
Fright Bill Auditing & Payment | 0.905 | |||
IT Service | 0.907 | |||
Order management | 0.906 | |||
Service parts logistics | 0.904 | |||
Customer Service | 0.906 | |||
Supply Chain Consultancy | 0.908 | |||
Fleet management | 0.905 | |||
Lead logistics service/4PL | 0.907 | |||
Sustainability & green logistics | 0.908 | |||
Financial Services such as Inventory Financing | 0.910 | |||
Financial Services such as Inventory Financing | 0.910 |
Factor Analysis
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted using principal components analysis with varimax rotation in SPSS 18.0 to identify underlying dimensions of multi-item scales (Economic factors, Strategic factors, Environmental enhancement). A minimum eigenvalue of 1.0 and factor loadings above 0.50 were used to retain factors. The factorability of 22 items was examined initially.
Factors | Component | % Total variance explained | ||
1 | 2 | 3 | ||
To Increase competitive advantage [SF4] | 0.770 |
|
| 38.98 |
Increase responsiveness to market change | 0.730 |
|
| |
Enhance customer satisfaction | 0.727 |
|
| |
Improve Business focus | 0.712 |
|
| |
To achieve Competitive advantage [SF2] | 0.675 |
|
| |
Reduce Risk | 0.668 |
|
| |
Convert fixed costs to variable costs | 0.666 |
|
| |
Improve Performance | 0.657 |
|
| |
Reduce constraints of organization’s own production | 0.563 |
|
| |
Leverage the firm’s skill and resources | 0.552 |
|
| |
Improve cash flow |
| 0.837 |
| 50.43 |
Improve operating efficiency |
| 0.713 |
| |
Improve profitability |
| 0.695 |
| |
Make capital funds more available for core area |
| 0.656 |
| |
Increase Efficiency |
| 0.645 |
| |
Add value to the product |
| 0.636 |
| |
Improve return on assets |
| 0.572 |
| |
To improve Customer Service |
|
| 0.860 | 58.99
|
To enable partnering to improve service quality |
|
| 0.797 | |
To help companies gain global advantage |
|
| 0.793 | |
To meet increase demand for new IS and resource more efficiently and economically |
|
| 0.789 | |
To enable partnering to improve service quality and customer service and increase competitive advantage [EF5] |
|
| 0.748 | |
Table 5 presents the results of the factor analysis and a detailed description of each item for of the three main factors. Factor loadings ranged from 0.552 to 0.860. All the factors accounted for 38-58% of the variance.