17.05.2017 Views

Pan-Pacific Conference XXXIV. Designing New Business Models in Developing Economies

This publication represents the Proceedings of the 34th Annual Pan-Pacific Conference being held in Lima, Peru May 29-31, 2017. The Pan-Pacific Conference has served as an important forum for the exchange of ideas and information for promoting understanding and cooperation among the peoples of the world since 1984. Last year, we had a memorable conference in Miri, Malaysia, in cooperation with Curtin University Sarawak, under the theme of “Building a Smart Society through Innovation and Co-creation.” Professor Pauline Ho served as Chair of the Local Organizing Committee, with strong leadership support of Pro Vice-Chancellor Professor Jim Mienczakowski and Dean Jonathan Winterton.

This publication represents the Proceedings of the 34th Annual Pan-Pacific Conference being held in Lima, Peru May 29-31, 2017. The Pan-Pacific Conference has served as an important forum for the exchange of ideas and information for promoting understanding and cooperation among the peoples of the world since 1984. Last year, we had a memorable conference in Miri, Malaysia, in cooperation with Curtin University Sarawak, under the theme of “Building a Smart Society through Innovation and Co-creation.” Professor Pauline Ho served as Chair of the Local Organizing Committee, with strong leadership support of Pro Vice-Chancellor Professor Jim Mienczakowski and Dean Jonathan Winterton.

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

eported <strong>in</strong> Table 4. Partial F-tests revealed that<br />

threshold models did not statistically better fit the<br />

data compared to l<strong>in</strong>ear models for team altruism,<br />

turnover <strong>in</strong>tention, and violation. Only the threshold<br />

model for violation statistically better fit the data,<br />

with 0.9% additional expla<strong>in</strong>ed variance (p < 0.05),<br />

compared to the quadratic regression. Only<br />

Hypothesis H2 b is accepted. Rigotti (2009) [1]<br />

presented similar results for turnover <strong>in</strong>tention and<br />

violation.<br />

TABLE 2: Regression results (breach as <strong>in</strong>dependent variable)<br />

Team altruism Turnover <strong>in</strong>tention Violation<br />

ß ΔR 2 ΔF ß ΔR 2 ΔF ß ΔR 2 ΔF<br />

Step 1 .182 121.932* .194 131.510* .216 150.369*<br />

Breach −.427* .441* .464*<br />

Step 2 .002 1.512 .004 2.903 .004 2.543<br />

Breach 2 .051 −.070 .065<br />

Adj. R 2 .182 .195 .216<br />

F 61.779* 67.436* 76.668*<br />

n = 548–549 after listwise deletion. Standardized regression coefficients are reported. *p < .001.<br />

Control variables excluded.<br />

TABLE 3: Parameter estimates for segmented regression<br />

Dependent<br />

variables ba0 ba1 bb1 Knot<br />

95% CI<br />

for knot SS R R 2<br />

Team altruism 4.588 −.331 .206 3.667 2.304– 270.197 .187<br />

4.551<br />

Turnover <strong>in</strong>tention 1.551 .491 −.196 2.648 1.221– 448.748 .198<br />

4.075<br />

Rigotti (2009) [1] 1.130 .100 .680 2.840 2.590– 255.980 .110<br />

3.090<br />

Violation 1.343 .104 .458 1.917 1.225– 598.812 .225<br />

2.609<br />

Rigotti (2009) [1] 1.390 .220 .850 2.640 2.460– 403.030 .250<br />

2.820<br />

n = 548–549 after listwise deletion. Control variables excluded. SS R = Sum of squares (residuals)<br />

TABLE 4: Comparisons between segmented regression, l<strong>in</strong>ear, and quadratic models<br />

with partial F-test<br />

Comparisons<br />

Segmented regression<br />

vs. l<strong>in</strong>ear regression<br />

Segmented regression<br />

vs. quadratic<br />

regression<br />

∆F = (R 1 2 −R 2 2 )/(df 1 −df 2 )<br />

[1]. *p < .050<br />

(1−R 2 1 )/ n−df 1 −1<br />

Turnover<br />

Team altruism <strong>in</strong>tention Violation<br />

ΔR 2 .005 .004 .009<br />

ΔF(df1, df2) 1.115 (3, 544) 0.903 (3, 543) 2.106 (3, 544)<br />

p .342 .440 .098<br />

ΔR 2 .005 .003 .009<br />

ΔF(df1, df2) 1.673 (2, 544) 1.016 (2, 543) 3.159 (2, 544)<br />

p .189 .363 .043*<br />

23

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!