Organizational excellence 0881 0000 organization

Organizational excellence 0.881 0.000
Organization Commitment << Organizational excellence 0.481 0.000
The final measurement models of IMS, organization innovation, and organizational
excellence reveals that all fit indices within the cut-off points of SEM standards and all estimates
of correlations are satisfactory. Figure 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5 illustrates the measurement models
between constructs and related dimensions.
Table 4.13: Standardized regression weights

15
Endogenous variable Effect direction Exogenous Variable Beta coefficient
Organization innovation << IMS 0.719
Organizational excellence << IMS 0.460
Organizational excellence << Organization innovation 0.557
The hypothesis statements in Table 4.14 are evaluated according to the magnitude of
critical ratio and significance level. Reading the output data shows that all direct relationships
between the constructs are significant (Sig. ≤ 0.05). Hypothesis (1) states that “IMS has a
significant effect on organizational excellence” (Sig. = 0.000, C.R = 3.532 ≥ 1.96), whereas
Hypothesis (2) states that “IMS has a significant effect on organization innovation” (Sig. =
0.000, C.R = 6.273 ≥ 1.96), finally Hypothesis (3) states that “Organization innovation has a
significant effect on organizational excellence” (Sig. = 0.000, C.R = 4.360 ≥ 1.96). Based on
these results, it is concluded that Hypothesis (1), Hypothesis (2), and Hypothesis (3) have been
accepted and not rejected. While the opposites to these hypotheses are rejected (Null-
Hypotheses).
Table 4.14: Hypothesis validation and significance
Hypothesis Hypothesis Statement C.R Result Sig. ≤ 0.05
Hypothesis 1 IMS has a significant effect on organizational
excellence
3.532 Validated 0.000
Hypothesis 2 IMS has a significant effect on organization
innovation
6.273 Validated 0.000
Hypothesis 3 Organization innovation has a significant 4.360 Validated 0.000

16
effect on organizational excellence
Figure 4.8: The indirect and total effects in the mediation model
As shown in Figure 4.8, one indirect path starts in IMS towards organizational
excellence, then from organization innovation and end in organizational excellence. The indirect
effects could be either partially or fully explaining the mediation influence of the organization's
innovation. At the same time, all the direct effects between the variables have been found
statistically significant in the earlier analysis. But the causal associations between the variables
should be significant in all cases. In addition to that, while the total effect = indirect effect
(path b, c) + direct effect (path a).
Discussion
After accomplishing the CFA analysis in the earlier section, the last stage in SEM
analysis is evaluating the structural model. In this section, the researcher examines how the
constructs defined in this study are related to one another in one model (e.g., indirect and direct
relationships). In other words, the exact nature of direct and indirect relationships is specified. In
this section. In addition to that, the validation of the conceptual framework (structural model) is
shown in Figure 4.6. Results from Table 4.13 shows the scale of relationships between IMS and