AD ALTA
JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH
Model consists of three main constructs: innovation-oriented
CSR, proactive innovation and innovation management.
Four items were excluded from the model (three from the first
construct, one from the second construct) due to low loading
values. Those were specifically items – Q12 (innovation culture
tolerating failure), Q33 (CSR activities mitigating impact of
business activities on local community), Q37 (CSR activities
mitigating impact of business activities on the environment) and
Q42 (predefined metrics usage). These items showed very low
loading values (Q12: 0.539, Q33: 0.434, Q37: 0.385, Q42:
0.396). Item Q44 (anticorruption policies) was excluded as
correlation between variables Q44 and Q43 (internal code of
conduct) was nearly 1.0.
In the first step, quality of model fit has been evaluated. Chi-
square/degrees of freedom with values less than 2 (Tabachnick
and Fidell, 2007) show good fit, Comparative Fit Idex CFI and
Tucker-Lewis Index TLI greater than 0.95 demonstrate very
good fit (Hu and Bentler, 1999). CFI index is used by many
authors in structural equation modelling as it is affected by
sample size the least (Fan et al., 1999; Hooper et al. 2008).
RMSEA has values lower than 0.05 which supports the validity
of the created model. Cut-off value for considering a good fit is
set at 0.06 (Hu and Bentler, 1999). To be able to state a good fit
of the model SRMR should be lower than 0.08 (Kline, 2005).
It can be stated that the model is good fitting and consistent with
the data – conditions as described above were met. Table 4
consists of data recommended by Kline (2005).
Table 4 – Quality of model fit
Country
AT
CZ
SK
Chi-square/ Degrees of freedom
1.493
1.277
1.580
Comparative Fit Index (CFI)
0.996
0.998
0.984
Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI)
0.995
0.998
0.984
RMSEA
0.050
0.037
0.054
90% confidence interval for RMSEA - lower
0.043
0.029
0.047
90% confidence interval for RMSEA - upper
0.056
0.045
0.060
Size of confidence interval for RMSEA
0.013
0.016
0.013
P value (H0: RMSEA<=0,50)
0.542
0.998
0.174
SRMR
0.034
0.028
0.052
Source: author`s own – based on empirical research
Validation of the intensity of influence of an item (question of
the questionnaire) on the construct was performed as the next
step. As it can be seen from table 5, all values are > 0.7
(recommended value by Hooper et. al. 2008), which is a
minimum required absolute value so that the influence of an item
on a construct can be considered as positive and valid.
Table 5 Intensity of the influence of items on constructs
Loading
Construct
Item
AT
CZ
SK
Innovation-
oriented CSR
Q19 Process innovation
0.950
0.935
0.853
Q20 Value associated with
process innovation
0.938
0.937
0.862
Q21 Marketing innovation
0.866
0.844
0.566
Q22 Sustainability
0.958
0.970
0.920
Q23 Transparency of
supply chain
0.926
0.869
0.820
Q24 Transparency of
procurement process
0.944
0.893
0.884
Q25 Effectivity of risk
management
0.812
0.907
0.702
Q26 Impact on local
community
0.976
0.943
0.796
Q27 Employee satisfaction
and loyalty
0.966
0.960
0.901
Q28 Customer satisfaction
and loyalty
0.937
0.949
0.933
Q29 Adherence to health
and safety regulations
0.924
0.931
0.859
Q30 Open and responsible
0.971
0.944
0.910
communications
Q31 Talent management
0.909
0.921
0.819
Q32 Diverse workforce
0.930
0.939
0.678
Q34 Environmental impacts
of products/services
0.950
0.959
0.866
Q35 Adherence to
environmental regulations
0.904
0.908
0.852
Q36 Environmental impact
of innovation activity
0.927
0.967
0.911
Q38 Integration of
sustainable practices into
strategy
0.927
0.960
0.884
Q39 CSR as part of the
organizational culture
0.906
0.949
0.901
Q40 Mission, vision, values
0.939
0.944
0.906
Q41 CSR as part of
organizational strategy
0.902
0.939
0.918
Q43 Internal code of
conduct
0.882
0.915
0.583
Q45 Business model
0.919
0.930
0.905
Q46 Profitability
0.974
0.962
0.860
Q47 Business strategy
0.959
0.950
0.889
Proactive
innovation
Q6 Business model
innovation
0.862
0.856
0.705
Q7 Frequency of business
model innovation
0.835
0.842
0.762
Q11 Involvement of top
management on innovation
0.932
0.911
0.803
Q13 Introduction of new
products
0.973
0.960
0.902
Q14 Significance of new
products introduction
0.922
0.971
0.939
Q15 Increase in sales
0.996
0.964
0.900
Q16 R&D expenditure
0.867
0.872
0.845
Q17 R&D investments vs.
revenue
0.842
0.863
0.801
Q18 Innovation with
respect to society and
environment
0.978
0.954
0.950
Innovation
management
Q10 Idea management
0.845
0.933
0.789
Q8 Open innovation
0.898
0.927
0.950
Q9 Business collaboration
0.993
0.875
0.645
*Values of all loadings are statistically significant (p-values of
test statistics are 0.000) at the significance level alpha = 0.05
Source: author`s own – based on empirical research
Those loading values that are closest to 1 can be considered as
the highest. All loading values in the model used in this article
are positive which means they significantly impact the
corresponding constructs. If negative values would also emerge,
absolute value of loading would be taken into consideration. In
this study that was not the case.
Overall, it can be stated that the results are considerably
homogenous, especially for Austria and Czech Republic.
Slovakia has slightly lower loading values in general but there is
no significant deviation in the pattern what has been crucial for
the purposes of this research.
When taking closer look at the loading values of the first
construct, innovation-oriented CSR, the highest values, meaning
the strongest influence of an item on the construct can be seen in
the area of process innovation and in the added value associated
with the process innovation (Q19, Q20), sustainability (Q22),
impact on local community (Q26), employee and customer
satisfaction and loyalty (Q27, Q28), open and responsible
communication (Q30), profitability (Q46) and business strategy
(Q47). High, and interestingly homogenous loading values can
also be seen in the area of CSR being part of the organizational
culture (Q39), mission, vision, values (Q40), CSR as part of the
organizational strategy (Q41) and the business model (Q45).
On the other hand, lower values can be seen in all tested
countries in the area of marketing innovation (Q21), risk
management (Q25) and internal code of conduct (Q43). Those
are seen based on the results of the statistical analysis as
marginal activities that SMEs in the tested CEE region do not
consider to be crucial for their business operations and results.
- 76 -