Table 4.
Multi-group SEM results (H3a and H3b).
| Relationships | Standardized coefficients (t-values) |
|
|---|---|---|
| Low operational disruption condition | High operational disruption condition | |
| Hypothesized paths: | ||
| H3a: Disruption absorption → operational efficiency | .08(.75) | .31(2.12) * |
| H3b: Recoverability → operational efficiency | .36(3.35) *** | .20(1.42) |
| Control paths: | ||
| Slack resource → operational efficiency | .00(.05) | .04(.46) |
| Disruption orientation → operational efficiency | -.05(-.57) | -.12(-1.25) |
| Collaborative resilience-building effort → operational efficiency | .00(.03) | -.20(-1.94) |
| Firm size → operational efficiency | -.23(-2.10) * | -.15(-1.31) |
| Firm age → operational efficiency | .03(.34) | .01(.05) |
| Firm industry (services = 1) → operational efficiency | .12(1.38) | .11(1.20) |
| Slack resource → disruption absorption | .12(1.35) | -.08(-.81) |
| Disruption orientation → disruption absorption | -.04(-.47) | .30(3.30) *** |
| Collaborative resilience-building effort → disruption absorption | .16(1.80) | .29(3.00) ** |
| Firm size → disruption absorption | .23(2.21) * | .18(1.58) |
| Firm age → disruption absorption | -.02(-.24) | -.06(.59) |
| Firm industry (services = 1) → disruption absorption | -.04(-.53) | .10(1.10) |
| Slack resource → recoverability | .10(1.21) | -.05(-.55) |
| Disruption orientation → recoverability | .03(.39) | .37(4.14) *** |
| Collaborative resilience-building effort → recoverability | .00(.03) | .19(2.00) * |
| Firm size → recoverability | .22(2.19) * | .20(1.77) |
| Firm age → recoverability | .03(.33) | -.02(-.15) |
| Firm industry (services = 1) → recoverability | -.16(-1.98) * | .11(1.32) |
Model fit indices: χ2 = 553.71, df = 411, χ2/df = 1.35, RMSEA = 0.05, NNFI = 0.95, CFI = 0.96, SRMR = 0.06.
Notes: *p < .05 (2-tailed), **p < .01 (2-tailed), ***p < .001(2-tailed).