Un13fla1tTh1nfj

HATYAI UNIVERSITY

Good Governance in Internation&. Maritime Business Administration in ThaiIand

- ' °
wv gnJ1 ii€rin6 i n''ni
Charm Nuannim1 and Aniwat Kaewjomnong2

1 nn,nJ11,1, nU u'1, JnoJ

1Graduate student, Department of Business, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration,
Thaksin University.

ui'ncij
2Asst.Prof.Dr., Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Economics and Business
Administration, Thaksin University.
Corresponding author: anthonythai8hotmail.com

lwwJ
- -
fl1''J

J NU fl fl 1
flfl fl UflflL 5 iJ1i
qlmt ia€'i JflL 1 tJ' 1nT
if
6Wn o fl.fl 11 nwi'i L IJ 1W1JI
NL J YJ1
-inJ,i LilnJ i''1ii nJ iJ1nm
1N 5TJ LI
LLLd 'n trrvi nNi n i
n4h
W1'WWj: fl flflI1tW), flflUA1', flL LI11

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to study the concept of governance in the
management of international. shipping business in Thailand and describe the management
that has applied good governance in the international marine business management. The
key informants was an executive working in the international working in the international.
maritime business office in Bangkok, who were homogeneously selected from executives
with over 5 years of experience and were selected by convenience. The research
instrument used a semi-structured interview form by conducting in-depth interviews with
 uni5ninii1nrj
-flj. HATYAI UNIVERSITY
NRCI'

key informants after finishing their daily work, the data were saturated at 11 people. The
data was analyzed by thematic data analysis and used triangular analysis. The analysis of
the data found that the management has a concept of good governance in managing the
international shipping business in Thailand in terms of responsibility, rule of laws,
transparency, participation, efficiency, effectiveness and value of money. As for the
management of that organization, the executives have applied the principles of good
governance clearly including efficiency principles, effectiveness, transparency, participation
and value for money.
Keywords Good Governance, Management, International Shipping Business Typing

Thj'i (Good Corporate Governance) nnunin

L16?J1 tn1L1 1.T3J UJL
'nn' (Principles) ''i (Guidelines)
nn L
in rH' n n nnniJnra n nn
nniini i
(Thaithong, 2017: 607) bJ'hA

L6 fl1 flfl1-
th01hJ

0 0 9) 9) 91 __ a., V d V 11 V V I
flL'L ) flh 1 fl Y1

n1 Nd1v uc un- ,Jn n

(Kaewjomnong, 2013: 139)

N iiti,i
fl flJ '
-1JTh1 '1
01 V I 11 I V I 91 0 0
fl J3J1fl6?J
9' 01 - I V 0 V 9' 9/01 0/
 unoni1 ri1I211nrg

3L HATYAI UNIVERSiTY
NRCF

n nnn flhi - 1L WnJi

th
JJnnlJ Jnv'1

niin'i
_Jw_r]n
(Stakehotders) niii

&

2019
Unn1n n
66 lJ

ni n i
nJ- n
Jfl JE11YW1 JJ 4fl JV1flW

n -1nlJ

uninrn
1

V1JWJ

ad — a_f, ci vci ad ai - I v a,

uu J1Ni

n1Yr1'TU flfl flLUEJfl

 un13ni1âan1t11nt-Ij
HATYAI UNIVERSITY

C I I Cl V QJ __ 0 - I -
n1 nJ n1 JnJfflJ
n_un ln1. nflnt
nJnJ ,1 61 Jfl1 nfl 1')1 tVIVn
uJIc1uL1 ILNU
(Daokongkaew,et aL, 2021: 149) n
fl 1ftJNU
_'l 1Ll41fl ni fl0?JJ

1'nl5
Ifl 9 fl LI6
YflUT?JJ n flfl1'Lfl41 flfluWl'n
flhJ'Th
LL h'1n" UL N flUfl1J
LL1J'j LflJ L L1€lflT
61 Lwin nnin
iN n nth
L 10

1)
2) nui 'n

L'tfl
0Cl Cl I V Cl 01 I

2542 ci flllfl'
iJn'i 6 lc'u,r
'niJ 0 i'nn'j niiij

61

Cl Cl 0

c (Good Governance)

61
1Jwi fl1lfl'1 flJJ V1'
i'
(Santiwong, 1999)
 unnáimci1nnj
NRc
HATYAI UNIVERSITY

v _ o .' o (

nThjn uunn
nn ftn
'Hi
(Office of the Public Sector Development
Commission, 2009)
-

nn nn n1 -1 1
(Kaewjomnong, 2013)
1) nA na (Right Understanding) I nhn'
fllJ ,1
nwt
2) ni (Right Thinking) (Positive
Thinking) n flTflJ I
njn u i1u
2 ci ci 2l I 2 I 0 2.1 qi
fl fl1JWlI I,flJ' 2 nfln'1''d flflflj
ncjni
1ci'ri n'i (Structure) n un'r (Process) (Integrity and
Ethics) n n' nij'i (Competence) n1b0a i'1i
n' (Wisdom) (Principles of Management)
3) nn n (Right Action) ann ii
't

1
finnIa. un JaIJ''uJ jnn ni,
4) (Right Commitment)
I 21 V ci C I a 01 21 a ci o a 2?
LL fl fl flLfl
nJ
5) nnIa (Right Monitoring)
VO ci O
nn d'N'l,n
fl Yfl1JJ Jfl1

6) n'i' na (Right Evaluation)

1JflJ flTJflfl3J1 11JflJ1fl.J

ItJ
ann (Set.f-Assessment) nuum
 union naanit1nnj
HATYAI UNIVERSITY

(QuaLity Assurance Review) n

21
- 1 flfl6?J

Pramote Saenk(.a (2019) y€i

rn.ni -i n NUJ''] 'rnJn
nn jn aci'-n wj'i'i vin*mdcunn
1 ii iian-wi

J LUIJ1 flflVJ flVJ1 L11

01 ci 01 ci I I - I ci 01 0 01
3) nn nin winjvn
.01
55.50
Worauck Wannakoon (2016) via
€.fl n'irnn vu'i ii0 ju

01 01 01 ci 01 Cl ci 01
tJi0 uin nvujwJl nnm nj
bj WU1Nfl1J
ci 0 Cl
'n nic
1) clu Law1 flLlJUfl
2
rLJfl1a1P n ii irni Lfl fl?i
Jnn1J-1vw
2) grn (Informants) nn
LlY1rJ
(Homogeneous Sampling)
w1

Jlflfl1 5 ni vhn nuutiiwn (Convenient Sampling)

in n n
(In-depth Interview)
th -i
4fl
nw n1nLn1J fl1 EJ (Data
Saturation) 11 nnn, JU 30 -45
ci
1UTv1

3)
1Y1?l U fl JW1UA fl1hA
w n'wr
 HATYAI UNIVERSITY

I,
4) (Instrument) c nrn (Interview Form) niu,jnj
(Semi-structured Interview)
(Primary Data)
5) nia (Collecting Data)
(Secondary Data) nni h'n ia iiri JJJJ
(Primary Data) nnnnii n
6) n (Data Analysis) Wn u an th
(Thematic Analysis)
fl nn 'N fllJ1 lJ.1
(Theme) n nnngj vhnnaIu
IiJ
(Krueger, 1998)
iifluaan (Data Reduction) 'hn "ci'iii (Interpret) nJ'i
n (Ritchie
and Spencer, 2002) v'LiThI Theme

7) niai (Data Validation)

''au uui1 (Triangulation) (Denzin, 1970) Jn Lij
(Data Triangulation) ie iii LflHri'u
aJ LLn (Theory Trngulation) J latJYmfl L1J'1
JflU
InLn€J LJ'Li

41
Nifl'J
1. LL U qLL L JNI
ii itnn 5 nu
niihJ njni rnnn niha nii 1,ciu
Ji'?ia'J flT

TJ 11 Jcn
V1Y1:
J5'fr1
(jiniigii A2, 'u 30 i. F'.2566)
aiZ' JL "liLt Z?JnV P? U
Lv,7Zu7J'nna" (g'vnmgilA3, U7' 2 ii. w2566)
T?ITT LL1
(inif AS,
7JØ 12 ni''.2566)
 1 uni3naiáanitilnrg
T HATYAI UNIVERSITY
Ic4

(Theme) (Fina Thematic Anatysis) 1

1
1,v1J

L1fl Jth U
(Theme) (Good Governance Concepts)

yim - ru1 nj',j

L IN tJJi na l
ru'm
thIv1c1 ( virni nii, Qicj hw7JZ1)

JiN 5'5J LJ IJ1bJI1J1JIThA

gn n
u4n III jini 4innij
n'i Ifri Ji)
V I V V V V V
nninva inIn nna inniui
IIJJiiau inn
n i'iviu (tin,v LL 1f)

1lhtn?j0 fl?fl
(qJ)

2) U fli UIi4T1fli IWI

tflJY) Jfl1. JJJ
navhrnih 4
ln ini i'ivi''hi wni rnjiij iin II 1II919 Tji.n
fl flI Ifl fl1flTh fl'1N fl1Y13J
J5L1 1flfl 11'J II Rfl1J13J1 cflnflTh:
J'êiA
U7U 7U Wfl7 7-eJu7P1E?1Z) iucwi ,m
fl7Z fleJ?i I fl UOJI7fr. ieJv" (in'mitii A3, 2 i.w.2566)
"r nZLnJI LIhI UIO 271V
J7 1flJ I57Z1 4t4 wvuZu7iø
(Jn7nfA4, uø 10 n.w2566)
"f qJ ,7 WL ?17J1 IEJ?J

(inmnf A5, 12 ii. w.2566)

 ZL HATYAI UNIVERSITY
NRCT

(Theme) ni(Final Thematic Analysis) 2

- - V 0 V -
ri 2

L1flJ LU fl11'fl1Ji1 flfl1J1Th W Vd flSL 1?I

(Theme) avwi (Good Governance)

1) niui*lJ LflflYflJ fliL irw
3J fl i3J15Th
JIfl (n u7thThqNa)
2)
Jta (7iTtthZv)
3) iunn 1fl 1J 1
n,1 Jivm1 flflLfl J1f1
LL
nj'i ' uniivh (nnflu,j)
8) L/11 utuinm n
(n'iiqrni)

-1Jvi
1) 'inN
1 J wJ''1 1Jw ni n 'J njn-r fl11?flfl

nJ L
c'ILf nJ in
ii'inm flJ LflJ1'i fl1JJ
Nodthaisong & Rabob (2017: 15) nnuj'ij Lfl-flfll.fl1
N1J
b1LLfl fl 1'U'J 1T1J
J'i° i 'iwjj uou Daokongkaew et al. (2021)
n'i ni'itin'i' 1'i1Jf11 fl TUc1'
nJ''i rn'iit
'nn1 1flTh 6?iflJ flfl1lJ JI11 fl
lfl/1'1J n in'i fl'1NI flflTfl'iJJ'i1.TR1 1J1'111J

2)
L'iL W1h1J
LL UYL,Jfl'i'5Ufl'iflcWl'1

t,L'i '1
 LJ unl3narilAll9nj
HATYAI UNIVERSITY

ln fl 1nTh fl'1 flJ flfl flYflJ

ULiFJ Mahapirom (2017) u1J
fYi I O4
f j °'l 1A fl J J' fl qj J fl Ii 'J Wi ' tJ J
flW1j lUfl
nn'j nJ1 'n iJ 'nn nJ iulii
Noonin (2016)
flL€flfl : fliflfliflT
1
nj
t,Lfl flU 1fl1

V
JI,L
1)
1.1
NL N

1.2
uuniiu'J ciun -iu
nnunitiJdiu 1Lr
n-wi niL nnii'j nrni iii

nunn'.nl

0 tl S

2. ni ikJ
2.1 nJ1'JLL 4inu nuffLnf(iu
vih

2.2 nN uJ 'fi uuni,j 1

N uvi
iic1
 j un3náanicilrir
HATYA! UNIVERSITY

2/
1JflNJ
Daokongkaew, S., Chanwichian, J., Chansongpol, T., Somanee, B., et al. (2021). Using good
governance principles in administration Prawet District office Bangkok Metropolis.
Raja park Journal, 15(40), 147-159.
Denzin, N. (1970). The Research Art in Sociology. London: Butterworth.
Kaewjomnong, A. (2013). Ethics for Business (3C ed.). Songkhla: Numsin Advertizing.
Krueger, R. A. (1998). Moderating Focus Groups. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Mahapirom, P. (2017). Green Governance of Thai Industry. Journal of MCU Social Science
Review. Contributor(s), 6(2), 293-30 1.
Nodthaisong, S., & Rabob, C. (2017). Awareness and Acceptance on Good Environmental
Governance Criteria: A Case Study of Industrial Factory Participated in
Environment Governance Project of Samut Prakan Province. Journal of Social
Synergy, 11(2), 15-24.
Noonin, 5. (2016). Good Governance in Private Organization: Service Business. Silpakorn
University Journal, 32(2), 57-76.
Office of the Public Sector Development Commission. (2009). Good Governance Rating.
Bangkok: Office of the Public Sector Development Commission.
Ritchie, J., & Spencer, L. (2002). Qualitative Data Analysis for Applied Policy Research.
U.S.A.: SAGE Publications.
Saenkla, P. (2019). Good Governance Affecting Effectiveness of Schools Attached to the
Office of Primary Educational in Nakhon Ratchasima Province. A Dissertation,
Doctor of Public Administration Program, Pathumthani: Pathumthani University.
(10th ed.). Bangkok: Thai Wattanapanich.
Santiwong, T. (1999). Personnel Management.
Thaithong, P. (2017). Good Governance and Public Administration, Thailand's New 4.0,
Journal of MCU Social Science Review. Contributor(s), 6(2), 609-6 15.
Wannakoon, W. (2016). Management Following the Good Governance of Sup-district
Administration Organizations in Bang Pahun District Phranakhon Si Ayutthaya
Prpvomce. An Independent Study, Master of Public Administration, Phranakhon Si
Ayutthaya: Phranakhon Si Ayutthaya Rajabhat University.