KOLEJ UNIVERSITI TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN

FACULTY OF ACCOUNTANCY, FINANCE AND BUSINESS

BBDM3013 BUSINESS RESEARCH

BBDM3014 BUSINESS RESEARCH
Bachelor of logistics and supply chain management

Coursework 2: Quantitative Data Analysis & Finding

Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) in Malaysia: A survey
Name Student ID Mobile Phone & Marks
[Programme] Email Address Awarded

CHONG WENG HONG 20WBR05514 chongwh-wp19@student.tarc.edu.my

HO EN LING 20WBR00340 hoel-wb20@student.tarc.edu.my
LOW JING YEE 20WBR05523 lowjy-wp19@student.tarc.edu.my
ONG HUI CHYI 20WBR05525 onghc-wp19@student.tarc.edu.my
LIM WEI HONG 20WBR04109 whlim-wb20@student.tarc.edu.my

NAME OF LECTURER : MR. KWEK CHOON LING

NAME OF TUTOR : MR. YEE CHOY LEONG

TUTORIAL GROUP : Group 1

DATE OF SUBMISSION : 14/9/2022

1
 EVALUATION SCORE SHEET
Coursework 2: Data Analysis & Finding
Assessment Criteria Excellent Good Average Poor
23-25 18-22 13-17 0-12
Identify & Explain Excellent in Good in identifying Fairly in identifying Poor in identifying
Relevant Statistical identifying and and explaining the and explaining the and explaining the
Concepts & explaining the use use of relevant use of relevant use of relevant
Techniques of relevant statistical concepts & statistical concepts & statistical concepts
statistical concepts techniques in the data techniques in the & techniques in the
& techniques in analysis and finding. data analysis and data analysis and
Allocated Marks: the data analysis finding. finding.
25 and finding.

Interpretation of Excellent Good Average Poor

Statistical Findings 23-25 18-22 13-17 0-12
Offers fined- Convincingly Literally provide Fails to provide
Allocated Marks: grained and provides the basic interpretations basic interpretations
25 original interpretations of of statistical findings of statistical
interpretations of statistical findings with the usages of findings with the
statistical findings with the usages of relevant guidelines usages of relevant
with the usages of relevant guidelines and rules of thumb. guidelines and rules
relevant guidelines and rules of thumb. of thumb.
and rules of
thumb.

Organization Excellent Good Average Poor

Structural 14-15 11-13 8-10 0-7
Development and Writer Paragraph Logical organization; No evidence of
Citation of the Idea demonstrates development present organization of ideas structure or
logical and subtle but not perfected. not fully developed. organization.
sequencing of
Allocated Marks: ideas through well- Some cited works, Few cited works, Absent of citation.
15 developed both text and visual, both text and visual,
paragraphs; are done in the are done in the
transitions are used correct format. correct format.
to enhance Inconsistencies
organization evident

All cited works,

both text and
visual, are done in
the correct format
with no errors.

Appendices and Excellent Good Average Poor

Referencing 9-10 7-8 5-6 0-4
Demonstrate Demonstrate good Able to present Lack of ability to
strong ability to ability to present appendices and present appendices
Allocated Marks: present appendices appendices and referencing fairly and referencing
10 and referencing referencing with a with a coherent with a coherent
with a coherent coherent structure. structure. structure.
structure.

2
Team Work Excellent Good Average Poor
23-25 18-22 13-17 0-12
Demonstrate Demonstrate good Demonstrate Demonstrate lack of
Allocated Marks: excellent commitment to carry moderate commitment to
25 commitment to out team-based commitment to carry carry out team-
carry out team- project. out team-based based project.
based project. project.
Total
(100 Marks)

Tutor’s comments:

3
 FACULTY OF ACCOUNTANCY, FINANCE AND BUSINESS

COURSEWORK FEEDBACK FORM FOR BBDM3013 & BBDM3014

COURSE CODE/ COURSE TITLE:

NAME OF STUDENT(s): ID No:
CHONG WENG HONG 20WBR05514
HO EN LING 20WBR00340
LOW JING YEE 20WBR05523
ONG HUI CHYI 20WBR05525
LIM WEI HONG 20WBR04109
PROGRAMME: RLM
YEAR OF STUDY: 3 SEMESTER: 1 ACADEMIC YEAR: 2022/2023
GROUP NO: 1
COURSEWORK NO: 2 NATURE OF COURSEWORK: MARKS ALLOCATED:
group assignment

COMMENTS :

Student’s Date: Lecturer/Tutor’s Date:

Acknowledgement: Signature:

4
 KOLEJ UNIVERSITI TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN
Faculty of Accountancy, Finance and Business
Plagiarism Declaration Statement

Semester: _______3_________ Course Code & Title: _____BBDM3014________ Declaration We confirm

that we have read and shall comply with all the terms and condition of Tunku Abdul Rahman University
College’s plagiarism policy.

We declare that this assignment is free from all forms of plagiarism and for all intents and purposes is
our own properly derived work. We further confirm that the same work, where appropriate, has been
verified by anti-plagiarism software ________turnitin_______.

NAME OF STUDENT(s): ID No:

CHONG WENG HONG 20WBR05514

HO EN LING 20WBR00340

LOW JING YEE 20WBR05523

ONG HUI CHYI 20WBR05525

LIM WEI HONG 20WBR04109

5
4.1: Introduction

A total of 57 responses to the online survey were gathered by the researcher for this study. The
researcher's comprehension of the importance of implementing sustainable supply chain
management (SSCM) in Malaysian businesses is improved by looking at this data in SPSS.

Conceptual Framework

Refer to diagram 1.

4.2 Data Coding and Editing

Data coding is the process of giving raw data a set of numbers and symbols. Every response was
given a numerical value using coding, which converted every string variable in the questionnaire
responses to an integer. The SPSS programme can comprehend and compute the data by
converting the data into integers. Additionally, it makes it easier for the researcher to modify a
variable by combining its categories or values and to quickly obtain the original data in the event
that the variable's values change in the future. In this study, an integer will be used to represent
each of the demographic factors and the 5-point Likert scale. Table 1 displays all the data that
were collected.

Variable Original Data (In String After Recode (In Integer

Values) Values)

Company type Micro-enterprise 1= “Micro-enterprise”

Small Enterprise 2= “Small Enterprise”
Medium-sized Enterprise 3= “Medium-sized Enterprise”
Large Enterprise 4= “Large Enterprise”

Company years in 1 Year - 5 Years 1= “1 Year - 5 Years”

existence 6 Years - 10 Years 2= “6 Years - 10 Years”
11 Years - 20 Years 3= “11 Years - 20 Years”

Number of employees <20 1= “<20”

21 - 50 2= “21- 50”
51 - 200 3= “51- 200”

6
 200 - 500 4= “200- 500”
501-1000 5= “501 -1000”
>1000 6= “>1000”

Position Employee 1= “Employee”

Manager 2= “Manager”
CEO 3= “CEO”
Chairman 4= “Chairman”

Do you know SSCM Yes 1= “Yes”

No 2= “No”
Have little knowledge about it 3= “Have little knowledge about it”

5 Point Likert Scale Strongly Disagree 1 = “Strongly Disagree”

Slightly Disagree 2 = “Slightly Disagree”
Neither Agree or Disagree 3 = “Neither Agree or Disagree”
Slightly Agree 4 = “Slightly Agree”
Strongly Agree 5 = “Strongly Agree”
Table 1: Variables after recoding

Online surveys from Google Forms will be used in this study's data collecting process. Google
Forms has a tool that enables the researcher to set the questions as necessary questions. As a
result, each respondent will only be permitted to go on to the next part after finishing all of the
questions from the previous section. In SPSS, all the demographic variables and construct
variables titles will be transformed into a shorter and more easily understood name. As an
example, demographic variables such as “What is your position?” had been renamed into
“Position” and “What is your company type?” had been renamed into “Company type”. For the
construct variable, “Ability to quickly respond to changes to competitors' product offerings.”
which is under the category of Operation Outcomes has been renamed “OO1”.

4.3: Descriptive Analysis

Company years in existence Frequency Percent

1 Year - 5 Years 33 66

6 Years - 10 Years 12 24

11 Years - 20 Years 5 10

7
 Total 50 100

Number of employees <20 20 40

21 - 50 15 30

51 - 200 8 16

501-1000 3 6

>1000 4 8

Total 50 100

Position Employee 29 58

Manager 9 18

CEO 8 16

Chairman 4 8

Total 50 100
Table 2: Respondents’ Demographics Results

Based on the data we collected from respondents, we manage to collect a total number of 50
respondents.

Among all the respondents, we separated into a few job titles; employee, Manager, CEO, and
Chairman. Manager possess 9 out of 50 (18%), employees- 29 (58%), CEO- 8 (16%), and
Chairman– 4 (8%).

As for the company years in existence, we separate them into 1-5 years, 6-10 years, and 11-20
years. There are 33 (66%) of 50 respondents have 1 year - 5 years of company years in
existence, 12 (24%) of them have 6-10 years of company years in existence, 5 (10%) of them
have 11-20 years of company years in existence.

The number of employees that are handled by the respondent we had also separated into <20, 21-
50, 51-200, 501-1000, and >1000. There are 20 of the respondents (40%) is handling <20
employees, 15 (30%) of the respondent is handling 21-50 employees, 8 (16%) is handling 51-200

8
employees, 3(6%) is handling 501-1000 and there is only 14 person (8%) is handling above 1000
of employees (appendix).

Construct Analysis

Central Tendency (Mean) & Dispersion (Standard Deviation)

The usage of mean is the commonly used method to measure the central tendency. Data
distribution around the mean is measured by standard deviation. On The other hand, the standard
deviation is used to calculate the degree of confidence in a choice. The total squared deviation
from the mean is multiplied by the whole sample size to determine it. From the table (), it can be
seen that the independent variable SP has scored the highest with mean value which is 32.36 also
with the standard deviation value of 6.089. EP as the other independent variable has scored 24.22
for mean and 5.031 for standard deviation. As for the dependent variables OO, Eco, Env and SO
has scored 20.04, 12.02, 11.86 and 12.04 for mean, 3.482, 2.249, 2.406 and 2.338 for standard
deviation respectively. This demonstrates that responders typically exhibit greater agreement
with the SP variable's aspects.

Descriptive Statistics

Aggregate Variables Mean Standard Deviation N

Operation Outcomes (OO) 20.04 3.482 50

Economics Outcomes (Eco) 12.02 2.249 50

Environment Outcomes (Env) 11.86 2.406 50

Social Outcomes (SO) 12.04 2.338 50

Environment Purchasing (EP) 24.22 5.031 50

9
 Sustainable Packaging (SP) 32.36 6.089 50

Table 3: Mean & Standard Deviation for Aggregate Variables

Distribution (Skewness & Kurtosis)

Skewness and kurtosis measurements are used to check the data's normality. Z-score that was
used in this study to check whether the distribution is normal. The z-score for a normal
distribution must be between -1.96 and 1.96. From the table below, the data in the skewness and
kurtosis which includes OO (0.306, 0.395), Eco (0.023, 0.596), Env (0.285, 0.503), SO (0.220,
0.210), EP (0.608, 0.348) and SP (0.059, 0.405) stated that all of them have normal distribution
because their skewness is between -1.96 and 1.96.

Variables Skewness Kurtosis Summary

Value Standard Z-Score Value Standard Z-Score

Error Error

Operation -0.306 0.337 -0.306 -0.395 0.662 -0.395 Normal

Outcomes (OO) (0.306) (0.395)

Economics 0.023 0.337 0.023 -0.596 0.662 -0.596 Normal

Outcomes (Eco) (0.023) (0.596)

Environmental -0.285 0.337 -0.285 -0.503 0.662 -0.503 Normal

Outcomes (Env) (0.285) (0.503)

Social Outcomes -0.220 0.337 -0.220 -0.210 0.662 -0.210 Normal

(SO) (0.220) (0.210)

Environment -0.608 0.337 -0.608 0.348 0.662 0.348 Normal

Purchasing (EP) (0.608) (0.348)

Sustainable -0.059 0.337 -0.059 -0.405 0.662 -0.405 Normal

Packaging (SP) (0.059) (0.405)

Not Normal Normal

Table 4: Z-Score computing for Skewness and Kurtosis of Aggregate Variables

Normality Test (Univariate Normality)

10
The SPSS programme was used to create the histograms and Q-Q plot diagrams for all of the
aggregate variables used in this study. According to the histograms below, all the variables have
a normal distribution. For the Q-Q plot, the majority of the points from the aggregate variables
have successfully avoided crossing the diagonal.

4.4 Scale Measurement

4.4.1 Reliability Analysis

Variables Cronbach’s Alpha

Operational Outcome 0.678

Environmental Outcome 0.722

Economics Outcome 0.578

Social Outcome 0.544

Environmental Purchasing 0.821

Sustainable Packaging 0.861

Table 5: Reliability test (Cronbach’s Alpha of Variables)

The reliability analysis may be used to investigate the properties of measuring scales and the
items that form the scales. The Reliability Analysis procedure evaluates a number of commonly
used scale reliability indices as well as information on the correlations between specific scale
items. Intraclass correlation coefficients can be used to calculate inter-rater reliability estimates
(IBM, 2021). Despite that, Cronbach's Alpha is used in the results evaluating as it evaluates the
dependability, or internal consistency, of a group of scale or test items said by Chelsea Goforth
in 2015. In addition, the range and acceptability of Cronbach’s Alpha values are stated in
Appendix 3 Figure X. The result for the reliability test for the predictors of this research ranged
from the highest 0.722 (Environmental outcome) to lowest 0.544 (Social outcome) with
Economics outcome (0.678) and Operational outcome (0.678) while the two dependent variable
which is the Environmental Purchasing’s Cronbach’s Alpha and Sustainable Packaging’s
Cronbach’s Alpha was 0.821 and 0.861. As we know, the acceptance rules of Cronbach’s Alpha
are indicated at 0.7 to 0.95. Therefore, from the results, we can observe that only the

11
Environmental outcome (Dependent variable) and two of the independent variables reached the
acceptance rate.

4.5 Inferential Analysis

4.5.1 Multiple Regression Analysis

Multiple regression is a statistical technique for studying the relationship between several
independent variables and a single dependent variable by using the known values of independent
variables to predict the value of the dependent variable (Moore et al. 2006). The multiple
regression analysis was carried out to test all eight hypotheses and the results for both dependent
variables are presented in Table.

Based on the findings from both tables, the multicollinearity problem does not exist among all
the independent variables in this research. This is because the range of tolerance values is
between 0.282 to 0.547 which is above 0.25 while the range of VIF values is between 1.827 to
3.543 which is below 4 (CFI Education Inc. 2022).

Table 6: Result of Multiple Regression for Dependent Variable: Environmental Purchasing

Independent Unstandardized Standardized t Sig. Collinearity

Variables Coefficients Coefficients Statistics

Outcomes B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF

(Constant) 7.174 4.197 1.71 0.094

Operational 0.033 0.338 0.021 0.098 0.922 0.326 3.07

Economic 0.484 0.508 0.219 0.953 0.346 0.282 3.543

Environmental 0.341 0.319 0.18 1.067 0.292 0.525 1.904

Social 0.541 0.356 0.251 1.521 0.135 0.547 1.827

R = 57.2%; R Square = 32.7%; Adjusted R Square = 26.8

F = 5.474; P = 0.001 (p < 0.05)

12
Based on the findings from table 6, the p-values for operational, economic, environmental, and
social outcomes (p = 0.922; 0.346; 0.292; 0.135) are more than the alpha value of 0.05,
indicating that operational, economic, environmental, and social outcomes may not positively be
related to environmental purchasing and therefore Hypothesis 4, 2, 1 and 3 is not supported.

On the other hand, the values of the Unstandardized Beta Coefficient among the independent
variables tested in the hypotheses ranged from the weakest significant relationship of 0.033
which is operational outcomes to the strongest relationship of 0.541 which is social outcomes.
We may conclude that social outcomes are the most critical antecedent in affecting
environmental purchasing followed by economic outcomes, environmental outcomes, and
operational outcomes.

Furthermore, the change in environmental purchasing is explained by 32.7% (R Square = 0.327)

by a combination of the four independent variables including operational, economic,
environmental, and social outcomes. Moreover, the data of Standardized Coefficients explains
the intensity among variables which are ranked as social outcomes (0.251), economic outcomes
(0.219), environmental outcomes (0.18), and operational outcomes (0.021).

Table 7: Result of Multiple Regression for Dependent Variable: Sustainable Packaging

Independent Unstandardized Standardized t Sig. Collinearity

Variables Coefficients Coefficients Statistics

Outcomes B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF

(Constant) 6.155 3.609 1.705 0.095

Operational -0.114 0.291 -0.061 -0.391 0.697 0.326 3.07

Economic 0.212 0.437 0.081 0.485 0.630 0.282 3.543

Environmental 0.954 0.274 0.425 3.475 0.001 0.525 1.904

Social 1.215 0.306 0.476 3.969 < 0.001 0.547 1.827

R = 80.4%; R Square = 64.6%; Adjusted R Square = 61.5

F = 20.535; P < 0.001 (p < 0.05)

13
Based on the findings from table 7, the p-values for operational and economic outcomes (p =
0.697; 0.630) are more than the alpha value of 0.05, suggesting that operational and economic
outcomes may not positively be related to sustainable packaging and hence Hypothesis 8 and 6 is
not supported.

However, the p-value for environmental outcomes (p = 0.001) is less than the alpha value of
0.05, implying that environmental outcomes are positively related to sustainable packaging and
hence Hypothesis 5 is supported.

Besides that, the p-value for environmental outcomes (p < 0.001) is less than the alpha value of
0.05, indicating that social outcomes are positively related to sustainable packaging and hence
Hypothesis 7 is supported.

On the other hand, the values of the Unstandardized Beta Coefficient among the independent
variables tested in the hypotheses ranged from the weakest significant relationship of -0.114
which is operational outcomes to the strongest relationship of 1.215 which is social outcomes.
We may conclude that social outcomes are the most critical antecedent in affecting sustainable
packaging followed by environmental outcomes, economic outcomes, and operational outcomes.

Furthermore, the change in environmental purchasing is explained by 64.6% (R Square = 0. 646)

by a combination of the four independent variables including operational, economic,
environmental, and social outcomes. Moreover, the data of Standardized Coefficients explains
the intensity among variables which are ranked as social outcomes (0.476), environmental
outcomes (0.425), economic outcomes (0.081), and operational outcomes (-0.061).

14
Appendices:
Diagram 1:

Central Tendency (Mean)

Dependent

Independent

Frequency Table

15
  Company_years_in_existence

Frequenc Valid Cumulative

y Percent Percent Percent

Vali 1 Year - 5 Years 33 66.0 66.0 66.0

d
6 Years - 10 12 24.0 24.0 90.0
Years

11 Years - 20 5 10.0 10.0 100.0

Years

Total 50 100.0 100.0

  

Number_of_employees

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid <20 20 40.0 40.0 40.0

21 - 50 15 30.0 30.0 70.0

51 - 200 8 16.0 16.0 86.0

501-1000 3 6.0 6.0 92.0

>1000 4 8.0 8.0 100.0

Total 50 100.0 100.0

Position

16
 Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Employee 29 58.0 58.0 58.0

Manager 9 18.0 18.0 76.0

CEO 8 16.0 16.0 92.0

Chairman 4 8.0 8.0 100.0

Total 50 100.0 100.0

17
 

 
 

18
 Variable: OO Variable: Eco

Histogram Histogram

Normal Q-Q Plot Normal Q-Q Plot

Variable: Env Variable: SO

Histogram Histogram

Normal Q-Q Plot Normal Q-Q Plot

19
 Variable: EP Variable: SP

Histogram Histogram

Normal Q-Q Plot Normal Q-Q Plot

20
Dispersion (Standard Deviation)

Dependent

Independent

21
 Distribution (Skewness & Kurtosis)

Dependent

Independent

22
Multiple Regression results for Dependent Variable: Environmental Purchasing

  

23
  

24
Charts of Multiple Regression for Dependent Variable: Environmental Purchasing

25
 

Multiple Regression results for Dependent Variable: Sustainable Packaging

26
  

27
  

Charts of Multiple Regression for Dependent Variable: Sustainable Packaging

28
 

29
 Table 8: Cronbach’s Alpha rating table 

30
References:

CFI Education Inc. 2022, ‘Variance Inflation Factor (VIF)’, viewed 6 September 2022,
<https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/other/variance-inflation-factor-vif/>.

IBM Corporation 2021, ‘Reliability Analysis’, viewed 5 September 2022,

<https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/spss-statistics/25.0.0?topic=features-reliability-analysis>.

Moore, AW, Anderson, B, Das, K & Wong WK 2006, Handbook of Biosurveillance, Elsevier
Academic Press, London.

University of Virginia n.d., ‘Using and Interpreting Cronbach’s Alpha’, viewed 7 September
2022, <https://data.library.virginia.edu/using-and-interpreting-cronbachs-alpha/
#:~:text=Cronbach's%20alpha%20is%20a%20measure,of%20scale%20or%20test%20items.>.

31