THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC ORGANIZATION TO HIGH … · ABSTRACT (ENGLISH) ABSTRACT (THAI) iv v LIST...

THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC ORGANIZATION TO HIGH PERFORMANCE ORGANIZATION MODEL

WARANYA JIRANGKUL

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

DOCTOR OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION (PUBLIC POLICY AND PUBLIC MANAGEMENT)

FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES MAHIDOL UNIVERSITY

2018

COPYRIGHT OF MAHIDOL UNIVERSITY

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The success of this thesis can be succeeded by the attentive support from

my beloved, father and mother who support both the personal scholarship and

facilitation with great encouragement throughout this doctoral education.

I would like to thank my thesis advisory committee and every instructor

for the support and recommendation in regard to research.

I would like to thank the entire respondent, 10 outstanding public

organizations established by the Royal Decree issued in accordance with the Public

Organization Act of 1999 grouping by a resolution of the Council of Ministers on

September 7, 2004, who were the sampling in this study. The first group of public

organizations of the mission of the development and the specific policy

implementation of the government affairs were the Support Arts and Crafts

International Centre of Thailand (Public Organization), the Highland Research and

Development Institute (Public Organization). The second group of public

organizations of technical services or the interdisciplinary mission were the Healthcare

Accreditation Institute (Public Organization), the Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn

Anthropology Center (Public Organization), the Thailand Greenhouse Gas

Management Organization (Public Organization), the Synchrotron Light Research

Institute (Public Organization), the Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute (Public

Organization), and the National Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand (Public

Organization). The third group of public organizations of the general public services

were Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization), and Film Archive (Public

Organization). I would like to thank all the public relations coordinators for the

assistance which contribute to the successful research and great benefits to the HPO

models of the 3 groups of POs.

Waranya Jirangkul

Fac. of Grad. Studies, Mahidol Univ. Thesis / iv

THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC ORGANIZATION TO HIGH PERFORMANCE ORGANIZATION MODEL

WARANYA JIRANGKUL 5736705 SHPP/D D.P.A. (PUBLIC POLICY AND PUBLIC MANAGEMENT)

THESIS ADVISORY COMMITTEE: KRISH RUGCHATJAROEN, Ph.D., SIRIRAT CHOONHAKLAI, Ph.D., JITLADA AMORNWATTANA, Ph.D., WARUESPORN NATRUJIROTE, Ph.D.

ABSTRACT Due to the expansion of government affairs and the creation of a special agency to implement national policy, studies investigating the proper factors responsible for successful performance in specialist missions are necessary to establish the most efficient high-performance organizational model of public organizations. This study proposes best practices based on a high-performance organizational model including six causal factors leading to the practical guidelines. Employing mixed-methodology, this study constructed a structural equation model based on a sample working in ten public organizations in three group missions in Thailand. The first model includes two public organizations of the mission of the development and the specific policy implementation of the government affairs. The second model includes six public organizations of technical services or the interdisciplinary mission. The third model includes two public organizations of the general public services. To analyze the data, structural equation modeling was performed using the SPSS and LISREL software. The research findings revealed the empirical data fit the three theoretical models. Employee management, which was a crucial mediator variable in the full excellent organizational models of the three models, must be approached and established for successful management according to this study. HPOs of the three models were indirectly affected by employee and design management. Therefore, the practical guidelines of public organizations in three group missions should emphasize on the employee, design management, and HPOs. Leadership, culture and engagement, and change management are also the different significant components that have effects on HPOs leading to the applicable guidelines of the three models. This study revealed best practices for implementing three models consisting of the causal-effect factors shown in this study. KEY WORDS: HIGH-PERFORMANCE ORGANIZATION MODEL/ PUBLIC

ORGANIZATION/ STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING 426 pages

Fac. of Grad. Studies, Mahidol Univ. Thesis / v

การพฒนารปแบบการบรหารจดการองคการมหาชน ทมงสองคการสมรรถนะสง THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC ORGANIZATION TO HIGH PERFORMANCE ORGANIZATION MODEL วรญญา จรางกร 5736705 SHPP/D รป.ด. (นโยบายสาธารณะและการจดการภาครฐ) คณะกรรมการทปรกษาวทยานพนธ: กฤษณ รกชาตเจรญ, Ph.D., ศรรตน ชณหคลาย, Ph.D., จตรลดา อมรวฒนา , Ph.D., วฤษสพร ณฐรจโรจน, Ph.D.

บทคดยอ หนวยงานของรฐรปแบบพเศษในรปแบบองคการมหาชนมภารกจเฉพาะทางเพอด าเนนนโยบายสาธารณะทเกดจากการขยายขอบเขตภารกจของภาครฐ น ามาสการวจยเพอศกษารปแบบขององคการมหาชนทมการบรหารจดการแบบองคการสมรรถนะสง เพอน าเสนอรปแบบทเปนแนวปฏบตทดทสดทประกอบดวยปจจยเชงสาเหตจ านวน 6 องคประกอบ และเพอสรปเปนแนวทางปฏบตรปแบบองคการสมรรถนะสงขององคการมหาชน ดวยวธการวจยแบบบผสมประกอบดวยการสรางและทดสอบโมเดลสมการโครงสรางการบรหารจดการองคการมหาชนทมงสองคการสมรรถนะสงเพอสรปเปนแนวทางปฏบตของรปแบบ กลมตวอยางในการวจยประกอบดวยองคการมหาชนทจดต งตามพระราชบญญตองคการมหาชน พ.ศ.2542 จ านวน 10 แหง ทมการบรหารงานดเลศ แบงเปน 3 กลมภารกจ ไดแก กลมภารกจท 1 พฒนาและด าเนนงานตามนโยบายส าคญของรฐเฉพาะดาน กลมภารกจท 2 บรการทใชเทคนควชาการเฉพาะดานหรอสหวทยาการ และกลมภารกจท 3 บรการสาธารณะทวไป วเคราะหขอมลดวยโปรแกรม SPSS และ LISREL ผลการวจยพบวา โมเดลสมการโครงสรางการบรหารจดการองคการมหาชนทมงสองคการสมรรถนะสงของ 3 กลมภารกจสอดคลองกบขอมลเชงประจกษในระดบดมาก โดยองคประกอบดานการบรหารผปฏบตงานเปนตวแปรสงผานทน าไปสความเปนองคการสมรรถนะสงของทง 3 โมเดล จงเหมาะสมน าไปเปนแนวทางปฏบตเพอการบรหารจดการทเปนเลศ ความเปนองคการสมรรถนะสงของท ง 3 โมเดลไดรบอทธพลทางตรงและอทธพลทางออมจากการบรหารผปฏบตงานและการออกแบบองคการ แนวทางปฎบตของโมเดล 3 กลมภารกจจงควรเนนความส าคญทการบรหารผปฏบตงาน การออกแบบองคการและความเปนองคการสมรรถนะสง ส าหรบภาวะผน า วฒนธรรมและความผกพน และการบรหารการเปลยนแปลงมอทธพลแตกตางกนในแตละโมเดลกลมภารกจซงน าไปสแนวทางปฏบตแตกตางกน งานวจยครงนไดน าเสนอแนวปฏบตทดทสดซงประกอบดวยปจจยเชงสาเหต 6 ดานขององคการมหาชน 3 กลมภารกจทมการบรหารจดการแบบองคการสมรรถนะสง 426 หนา

vi

CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii

ABSTRACT (ENGLISH)

ABSTRACT (THAI)

iv

v

LIST OF CONTENTS vi

LIST OF TABLES ix

LIST OF FIGURES xv

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background and statement of problems 1

1.2 Research Problems 4

1.3 Research Objectives 4

1.4 Scope of Research 5

1.5 Operational definitions 7

1.6 Advantage of research 14

1.7 Variables for research 15

1.8 Research Framework 16

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEWS 18

2.1 The concept of model 18

2.2 The concept of High-performance organization (HPO) 20

2.3 Components affecting the development of HPO and the causal

effects

26

2.4 Independent administrative organizations in foreign countries 67

2.5 Public Organization in Thailand 78

2.6 A summary of public organizations in the research 90

2.7 Related researches 95

2.8 The concept of Structural equation modeling (SEM) 98

2.9 Research Framework 98

vii

CONTENTS (cont.)

Page

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY 103

3.1 Research Design 103

3.2 Step 1: The qualitative research to construct the SEM model 105

3.3 Step 2 The quantitative research to test the SEM model 108

3.4 Step 3: The creation of the best practices of the model of public

organization to high-performance organization.

132

3.5 Ethical Consideration 134

CHAPTER IV RESULTS 136

4.1 Section 1 The results of developing the structural equation model of

public organizations to high-performance organizations

136

4.2 Section 2 The results of the consistency test of the hypothesis models

and empirical data

171

4.3 The results of the analysis of the construct validity of the

measurement model of public organizations (POs) as high-

performance organizations (HPOs)

201

4.4 Section 3 The summary of the practical approach of the models

of the management of public organization (PO) to high-

performance organization (HPO)

248

CHAPTER V DISCUSSIONS 343

5.1 The Discussions on the model of public organizations to high-

performance organizations by the 6 components

5.2 The Discussions on the model of the 3-group mission of public

organizations to high-performance organizations

343

346

CHAPTER VI CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 365

6.1 Conclusion 365

6.2 Recommendations 385

BIBLIOGRAPHY 398

viii

CONTENTS (cont.)

Page

APPENDICES 399

Appendix A 400

Appendix B 402

Appendix C 418

Appendix D 420

Appendix E 423

BIOGRPAHY 426

ix

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

2.1 The meaning of the concept of High-performance organization

(HPO)

24

2.2 The latent variables of culture and engagement 29

2.3 The latent variables of leadership 34

2.4 The latent variables of Change Management 40

2.5 The latent variables of People 45

2.6 The latent variables of Design 53

2.7 The latent variables of High-Performance Organization 60

2.8 Grouping of public organizations established by the Royal

Decree issued in accordance with the Public Organization Act of

1999 under the established by the Royal Decree issued in

accordance with the Public Organization Act of 1999. There were

39 POs. (As of 6 February 2018)

85

2.9 Grouping of public organizations in the same principle utilized

for the state organization set up according to the particular law

without the word “public organization” in parentheses

89

3.1 Public Organizations for the unit of analysis based on criteria

selection

110

3.2 The sample of employees of the excellent public organizations by

the stratified random sampling

118

3.3 The latent variables and observed variable (manifest variables) 121

3.4 The measurement criteria of the opinion level 122

3.5 The catagorized criteria of the opinion level in the question

section 2-6

123

3.6 The validity of questionnaire classified by variable 125

3.7 The Study Instrument 126

x

LIST OF TABLES (cont.)

Table Page

3.8 The Indices Consistent of Hypothesis Model and Empirical Data 132

4.1 The component of variables used in this study constructed by

researcher and confirmed by experts from 10 excellent POs.

167

4.2 The amount and the percentage of the sample identified by the

variable categories 172

4.3 The statistics describe the nature of the variables in the research

model (n=1,022)

175

4.4 The correlation coefficient, mean, standard deviation of variables

in the structural equation model of public organization to high-

performance organization

178

4.5 Mean, Standard Deviation, and Correlation Analysis of observed

variables in measurement model of culture and engagement

(KSI1) (n=1,022)

181

4.6 The Statistics Analysis Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis

of Measurement Model of Culture and Engagement (KSI1)

(n=1,022)

181


variables in measurement model of leadership (KSI2) (n=1,022)

184


of Measurement Model of Leadership (KSI2)

184


variables in measurement model of Change Management (ETA1)

(n=1,022)

187


of Measurement Model of Change Management (ETA1)

188

xi


Table Page


variables in measurement model of People (ETA2) (n=1,022)

191


of Measurement Model of People (ETA2)

191


variables in measurement model of Design (ETA3) (n=1,022)

195


of Measurement Model of Design (ETA3)

195


variables in measurement model of High-Performance

Organization (ETA4) (n=1,022)

199


of Measurement Model of High-Performance Organization

(ETA4)

199

4.17 The Convergent Validity of the component of Culture and

engagement (FKSI1) in the CFA model of the first mission group

of PO to HPO

205


engagement (SKSI1 ) in the CFA model of the second mission

group of PO to HPO

205


engagement (TKSI1 ) in the CFA model of the third mission

group of PO to HPO

205

4.20 The Convergent Validity of the component of Leadership

(FKSI2) in the CFA model of the first mission group of PO to

HPO

206

xii


Table Page


(SKSI2) in the CFA model of the second mission group of PO to

HPO

207


(TKSI2) in the CFA model of the third mission group of PO to

HPO

207

4.23 The Convergent Validity of the component of change

management (FETA1) in the CFA model of the first mission

group of PO to HPO

208


management (SETA1) in the CFA model of the second mission

group of PO to HPO

208


management (TETA1) in the CFA model of the third mission

group of PO to HPO

209

4.26 The Convergent Validity of the component of People (FETA2) in

the CFA model of the first mission group of PO to HPO

210

4.27 The Convergent Validity of the component of People (SETA2) in

the CFA model of the second mission group of PO to HPO

210

4.28 The Convergent Validity of the component of People (TETA2) in

the CFA model of the third mission group of PO to HPO

210

4.29 The Convergent Validity of the component of Design (FETA3)

in the CFA model of the first mission group of PO to HPO

212

4.30 The Convergent Validity of the component of Design (SETA3)

in the CFA model of the second mission group of PO to HPO

212

4.31 The Convergent Validity of the component of Design (TETA3)

in the CFA model of the third mission group of PO to HPO

212

xiii


Table Page

4.32 The Convergent Validity of the component of High-Performance

Organization (FETA4) in the CFA model of the first mission

group of PO to HPO

214


Organization (SETA4) in the CFA model of the second mission

group of PO to HPO

214


Organization (TETA4) in the CFA model of the third mission

group of PO to HPO

215

4.35 The statistical value of comfirmatory factor analysis of the public

organizations (POs) to high-performance organizations (HPOs)

of the 3 group missions

216

4.36 The measure effects of SEM models of the public organizations of 3

group mossions to high-performance organizations

222

4.37 The statistic comparison of the standard coefficient weight of the

components () of the 20 observed variables between CFA model

and SEM model of the first group

225



and SEM model of the second group

226



and SEM model of the third group

227

4.40 The statistic values of the analysis results of SEM models of PO

to HPO of the 3 mission groups

228

4.41 The practical approach of the component of culture and

engagement

249

xiv


Table Page

4.42 The practical approach of the component of Leadership 250

4.43 The practical approach of the component of Change Management 251

4.44 The practical approach of the component of People 253

4.45 The practical approach of the component of Design 254

4.46 The practical approach of the component of High-Performance

Organization

257

4.47 The practical approach by the indicator weight of the

organization success of the first group mission of public

organization prioritized by weight value from maximum to

minimum

262


organization success of the second group mission of public


minimum

290


organization success of the third group mission of public


minimum

317

xv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1.1 Research Framework of the hypothesis model of the three groups 16

2.1 The element of culture and engagement (KSI1) 28

2.2 The element of leadership (KSI2) 33

2.3 The element of change management (ETA1) 39

2.4 The element of people (ETA2) 45

2.5 The element of design (ETA3) 52

2.6 The element of high-performance organization (ETA4) 60

2.7 Research framework (the hypothesis model) 101

3.1 The steps for research methodology 104

3.2 Conceptual Framework 119

3.3 The process of SEM analysis 131

4.1 The component of culture and engagement (KSI1) confirmed by the from 140

the in-depth interviews of experts from 10 excellent POs

4.2 The component of leadership (KSI2) confirmed by the from the in-depth 145

interviews of experts from 10 excellent POs

4.3 The component of change management (ETA1) confirmed by the from 148

the in-depth interviews of experts from 10 excellent POs

4.4 The component of people (ETA2) confirmed by the from the 152

in-depth interviews of experts from 10 excellent POs

4.5 The component of design (ETA3) confirmed by the from the 158


4.6 The component of high-performance organization (ETA4) confirmed 166

by the from the in-depth interviews of experts from 10 excellent POs

4.7 The structural equation modeling (SEM) of public organizations to 168

high-performance organizations of the first group: public organizations of the

mission of the development and the specific policy implementation of the

government affairs before the test.

xvi

LIST OF FIGURES (cont.)

Figure Page

4.8 The structural equation modeling (SEM) of public organizations 169

to high-performance organizations of the second group: public

organizations of technical services or the interdisciplinary mission

before the test

4.9 The structural equation modeling (SEM) of public organizations to 170

high-performance organizations of the third group: public organizations

of the general public services before the test

4.10 The Measurement Model of Culture and Engagement (KSI1) 182

4.11 The Measurement Model of Leadership (KSI2) 186

4.12 The Statistics Analysis Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis 189

of Measurement Model of Change Management (ETA1)

4.13 The Measurement Model of People (ETA2) 193

4.14 The Measurement Model of Design (ETA3) 197

4.15 The Measurement Model of High-Performance Organization (ETA4) 201

4.16 The measurement models of the public organizations to high-performance 217

organizations of the first group (Confirmatory Factor Analysis: CFA)


organizations of the second group (Confirmatory Factor Analysis: CFA)


organizations of the third group (Confirmatory Factor Analysis: CFA)

4.19 A structural equation modeling (SEM) of the first group mission of public 245

organization to high-performance organization

4.20 A structural equation modeling (SEM) of the second group mission 246

of public organization to high-performance organization

4.21 A structural equation modeling (SEM) of the third group mission of public 247

organization to high-performance organization

4.22 The high-performance organization models of the first group of public 260

organization

xvii

LIST OF FIGURES (cont.)

Figure Page

4.23 The high-performance organization models of the second group of public 286

organization

4.24 The high-performance organization models of the third group of public 314

organization

6.1 The causal effects between the components of People, Design and HPO 387

Fac. of Grad. Studies, Mahidol Univ. D.P.A. (Public Policy and Public Management) / 1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background and statement of problems

Public services are generally the main role and mission of the government

sector. Currently, public services are provided by four-types of state agencies, namely,

bureaucracy, state-owned enterprises, public organizations, and special government

agencies for particular cases. According to the paradigm of New Public Management

(NPM) prevailing in Thailand, there is a new widely implemented management

mechanism resulting from the transformation of the system of the state sector. This

became tangible when there was the announcement of the law and regulations of the

administration of State affairs in October 2002. On one side, effort has been made to

reform the organizations in the system into an ‘agencification’ based on the nature of

the applied concept of NPM (Ampawn, 2013). This reorganizes the mission of the

state sector, categorizing it into three parts: the main mission, the subordinate mission,

and the mission that does not need to be performed by the state. The state affairs that

government solely needs to do, but is not able to do effectively, requires it to set up an

independent organization of the third type, one that is not in the business of the state,

but is of the private sector or state-owned enterprises. This kind of agency has arisen

due to reforms of the state sector or to the reinventing of government as has been

observed in developed countries, for example the Etabissement Public (EP) of France,

the Executive Agency or the Next Step Agency of the United Kingdom, the

performance-based organizations (PBOs) of the United States of America (USA), and

the Crown Entities of New Zealand, and also in many other countries (Roberts, 1997;

Secretariat of the House of Representative, 2015). These special agencies are

comparable to a public organization in Thailand, and also fit the pattern of the

establishment of a public organization and special agency in Thailand.

The reformation of the state sector system seeks to establish the Public-

Sector Development Commission as the primary mechanism to alter who determines

Waranya Jirangkul Introduction / 2

the four-year strategic plan to develop Thai government agencies. Currently, the

strategic plan of 2013-2018 to develop the Thai government agencies has proceeded

into a strategy to develop public agencies into modern high-performance organizations

(HPO) and to have professional employees working in the HPO who, with direction,

perform a fundamental role for increasing the capacity of a government agency.

Moreover, the reformation of the organizational system leads to the establishment of a

special kind of agency as a public organization (PO), which was officially established

in 1999 by the Act of Parliament of Public Organizations. A PO is a not-for-profit

agency responsible for public service of a social and cultural dimension or the

performance of public interest of any other kind when it is not appropriate to use the

method of government agencies. The status of a PO is as a juristic person – a legal

entity established by government, receiving subsidies from the government or with

ability to be self-sufficient. The state regulates POs. The officials’ status in a PO are as

government employees. The administration of a PO operates by contract, not by the

one-way power and the rules of the government. In the year 2017, there were 38 POs

which were officially established in 1999 by the Act of Parliament of Public

Organizations. These POs, as one type of government agency, have created a

significant change in the system of the provision of public services in Thailand and

contribute to the country’s development in terms of new choices of the government

agencies to respond to the mission that is required in Thai society today. This type of

organization tends to replace the government sector in missions that require flexible

national policy implementation without a complex bureaucratic process (Sungsatam,

2013). A PO is an organization that implements the national policy and has created

value added for social and economic performance by cooperation with the government

authority to define and enforce policies that affect people directly and indirectly.

There was a range of POs that were established in accordance with the

Public Organization Act of 1999. It became apparent that among these established

POs, the special agencies providing public services, some had performed successful

operations, while some of them had problems in their operations that did not meet the

intent of this law (Secretariat of the House of Representative, 2015). Many restrictions

included the management structure, the internal administration, the public service

provision, as well as the determination of appropriate role, and this led to the agenda


to reform the PO in 2015 and the abolition of some POs in the year 2016. This was an

issue that needed to be considered by the Council of Ministers leading to the law

amendment of Public Organization Act of 1999 and the changes to the other side

which arose from a deliberation between the Council of Ministers, Office of the

Public-Sector Development Commission (OPDC), and POs, as a result of an

assessment of the appropriateness and value of each PO in terms of their efficiency

and productivity.

The PO, which was the agency for policy implementation officially

established in 1999 by the Act of Parliament of Public Organizations, was based on

the concept that flexible operations should lead to the establishment of the highly

productive work of the High-Performance Organization (HPO). This is the outstanding

point to study regarding the third type of government sector. This researcher

concentrates on the creation of HPOs, extracting from among the excellent POs in

Thailand in three mission groups which conform to the Royal Decree issued in

accordance with the Public Organization Act of 1999 by a resolution of the Council of

Ministers on September 7, 2004. Moreover, this researcher has found national and

international academic studies and researches related to HPO based on an array of

technical characteristics. However, no previous studies have examined the public

organizations in this context, and few studies have investigated the alignment of six

key variables, namely, 1) culture and engagement, 2) leadership, 3) change

management, 4) people, 5) design, and 6) mission of the high-performance

organization that were merged into the one hypothesis model of this research.

This research aims to the creation of a structural description of high-

performance organizations and which leads to a test of consistency with empirical data

by a mixed-method research. This research contributes to the HPO model for POs

which were officially established in 1999 by the Act of Parliament of Public

Organizations, segmented in three distinct groups; 1) public organizations with a

mission of the development and specific policy implementation of government affairs,

2) public organizations with a mission for technical services or an interdisciplinary

mission, and 3) public organizations with a mission of providing general public

services. The HPO models of these three groups could be applied to establish a

rational role model for POs who could benefit from more efficient and effective


management. Productivity enhancements from this research can also be a part of the

policy to suggest solutions for management within an agenda to reform the PO, which

needs to carefully follow the purpose for the establishment of POs in Thailand.

1.2 Research Problems

1. What should be a comprehensive descriptive model for the high-

performance organizations in the three groups of public organizations?

2. Are the high-performance organization models of the three groups of

public organizations consistent with the empirical data? and how?

3. What are the appropriate guidelines derived from the high-performance

organization models that can be used to maintain and develop high-performing

organizations within the three groups of public organizations?

1.3 Research Objectives

1. To construct structural equation modeling of the management of public

organizations (PO) that are a high-performance organization (HPO).

1.1 To construct a causal model of the management of POs that

are a HPO with the mission of the development and specific policy implementation of

government affairs.


are a HPO with a technical services or interdisciplinary mission.


are a HPO that have a mission of providing general public services.

2. To examine the constructed structural equation modeling of the

management of public organization (PO) to high-performance organization (HPO)

with the empirical data.

2.1 To examine the constructed causal model of the

management of POs with the mission of the development and specific policy

implementation of government affairs with the empirical data.


2 . 2 To examine the constructed causal model of the

management of POs with a technical services or interdisciplinary mission with the

empirical data.

2 . 3 To examine the constructed causal model of the

management of POs with the mission of general public services with the empirical

data.

3. To summarize the practical approach of the models of the management

of public organizations (PO) that establish and maintain their status as a high-

performance organization (HPO).

3.1 To summarize the practical approach of the models of the

management of POs with the mission of the development and specific policy

implementation of government affairs.

3 .2 To summarize the practical approach of the models of the

management of POs with a technical services or the interdisciplinary mission.

3 .3 To summarize the practical approach of the models of the

management of POs with the mission of general public services.

1.4 Scope of Research

Scope of content

1 ) This research includes the study and test of components that have a

relationship and influence in the management of HPOs selected from POs that were

established by the Royal Decree issued in accordance with the Public Organization

Act of 1999 by a resolution of the Council of Ministers on September 7, 2004. The

organizations in this study are divided into three groups; (1) public organizations with

the mission of the development and specific policy implementation of government

affairs, (2) public organizations with a technical services or interdisciplinary mission,

and (3) public organizations with a mission of general public services. The causal

factors affecting each group of high-performing organizations are considered by the

same set of variables; culture and engagement, leadership, change management,

people, and design of the organization.


2) This research includes a practical approach that applies the concepts of

the research framework of the models to the management of POs in each group,

according to a consistent relationship between the tested causal linear factors affecting

the management of POs that are a HPO within each group of missions. The practical

approach includes consideration of the effective operations of the successful POs.

Scope of areas and population

This research employs the cases of POs established by the Royal Decree

issued in accordance with the Public Organization Act of 1999 that have achieved

distinctly excellent performances. The population is based on stratified levels; each

level represents an individual PO and in sum 10 POs. The scope of areas and

population are present as follows:

( 1) The study employs only the cases of POs established by the Royal

Decree issued in accordance with the Public Organization Act of 1999 in order that the

research areas are in the same context of management under the Act. It does not include

the POs that were established by the Act but are special agencies that have a different

context of management according to the Act of Establishment of the organization itself.

(2) The study employs the cases of excellent POs which show outstanding

performances and the best results of organizational assessment. Their excellence was

clearly seen in annual performance evaluations and the resolution of the Council of

Ministers on the Public Organization. This research excludes POs that have to deal

with known problems in management and POs that have been reported to a resolution

of the Council of Ministers for abolishment by Office of the Public-Sector

Development Commission (OPDC).

(3) The study employs the cases of POs established by the Royal Decree

issued in accordance with the Public Organization Act of 1999 which had certified

operations at a high level for no less than 5 years (from 2015), which is the appropriate

time period for the study of the HPO (Waal, 2012).


Scope of period of time

This study took place during July 2016 to December 2017. Prior approval for

data collection was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee of Mahidol University.

1.5 Operational definitions

Public organization (PO) means an agency set up by the Royal Decree

issued in accordance with the Public Organization Act of 1999. PO is a not-for-profit

agency responsible for public service of a social and cultural dimension or the

performance of any other public interest of which it is not appropriate to use the

method of government agencies. PO acts as a juristic person – as a legal entity –

established by government, receiving subsidies from the government or with the

ability to be financially self-sufficient. The state regulates POs. The officials’ status is

as government employees. The administration of a PO operates by contract, not held

to one-way power and the rules of the government.

The excellent public organization (PO) means a PO established by the

Royal Decree issued in accordance with the Public Organization Act of 1999 with the

best organizational assessment results, apparent productivities, or certified

organization awards. The high performance of the organization has continued for not

less than five years. This kind of PO had been categorized by its efficiency and

effective performances, and by not being reported as a PO with a problem in practice,

such as the problem of exceeding budget, the problem of the management leading to

the change of regulating minister, or difficulty with the organization’s performance,

etc.

Model means a structure that shows the relationship between the various

components or variables in the natural phenomena or any system describing the order

of occurrence in the steps of components or activities in the system. This conforms to

Keeves (1988) who pointed to the type of causal model that developed from a

technique called path analysis and creates a semantic model by a number of variables

and relationships in cause and effect.

The model of public organizations to high-performance organizations

means structural equation modeling (SEM) of public organizations that have attained


the status as high-performance organizations; a model which is required to be tested

with empirical data. The SEM may be described as LISREL (linear structural

relations), which is the causal model between the exogenous variables; culture and

engagement and leadership, and the endogenous variable; change management,

people, and high-performance organization. Each variable is a latent variable

consisting of manifest variable through a mathematical model. The latent variable with

indicators affects directly and indirectly to another latent variable in the model.

Structural equation modeling (SEM) means a multivariate statistical

analysis technique that is used to analyze structural relationships. This technique is

the combination of factor analysis and multiple regression analysis for testing and

estimating the causal relationships, and it is used to analyze the structural relationship

between measured variables and latent constructs and to test hypothesis between

manifest and latent variables (Hoyle, 1995). SEM aims for both theory testing and

theory building. SEM model is also described as LISREL model (linear structural

relations). It also goes by the aliases ‘causal modeling’ and ‘analysis of covariance

structure’. The SEM can be divided into two parts. The measurement model is the

part which relates measured variables to latent variables. The structural model is the

part that relates latent variables to one another.

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) means a special form of factor

analysis describing a multivariate statistical procedure that is used to test how well the

measured variables represent the number of constructs. CFA models are commonly

used to examine patterns of interrelationships among various constructs. Each

construct in a model is measured by a set of observed variables. A key feature of CFA

models is that no specific directional relationships are assumed between the constructs

as they are correlated only with each other (Khine, 2013).

Culture and engagement means the characteristic of value and

relationship between employees which is shaped to achieve strategic goals and

mission, and its employees are motivated to go beyond the call of duty in pursuit of

corporate objectives (American Management Association, 2007; Bhalla et al., 2011).

Culture means culture that accelerates strategic objectives. Culture in

HPO acts to set, manage, and monitor behavior to achieve strategic objectives that

features risk aversion, process, and clear lines of command. Culture comes from the


direction of the organization from the center to create the confidence that the cultural

change will be consistent with the strategy of the organization (Bhalla et al., 2011;

Banerjee and Kamener, 2009).

Engagement means the commitment that is measured and cultivated to

generate discretionary effort from employees. This is a condition of the emotion and

commitment of each person or group to create and maintain the strong performance of

the organization (Bhalla et al., 2011; Hewitt Association, 2009).

Leadership means an aligned leadership that is effective deep within the

organization. This includes an effective leader who thinks strategically, sets the pace,

allocates resources, builds engagement, drives accountability, and delivers results

(American Management Association, 2007; Bhalla et al., 2011, Lussier and Achua,

2007).

Teams of leaders means high-performance teams of leaders that drive

urgency and direction. Leaders are comfortable with complexity, volatility, and

change. In the face of ambiguity, they are able to mobilize the organization. Leaders

need to work cooperatively with their peers and recognize the collective strength

generated through collaboration. They must be comfortable dealing with outsiders

such as nongovernmental organizations, regulators, and other bodies that are now

participating more actively in business. Leadership teams (especially top teams) must

adopt a ‘stewardship’ mindset, in which their focus is on the success of the whole,

rather than just their units (Bhalla et al., 2011; Pickering and Brokaw, 2012).

Future leaders means developing leaders whose skills are matched to

future needs. High-performance organizations have leaders in the wings who have

been rotated through many types of positions and roles in many functions and regions

and are groomed for success. These organizations identify potential leaders early in

their careers and cultivate in them the skills and competencies that will be required in

the future. Senior Management has set expectations for the behavior of leadership and

reviews and edits the management system that rewards performance in achieving

success in the financial goals (Bhalla et al., 2011).

Middle managers means executives of lower to medium level who

embrace and translate strategy. Middle managers oversee the vast majority of

employees, translating the strategy and vision endorsed by senior leaders into concrete


plans for their teams. They also select and elevate the key issues from the frontline that

need senior management’s attention. Leading organizations recognize the importance

of middle managers, invest in their success, and actively monitor and work to

strengthen their engagement and skills (Bhalla et al., 2011).

Change management means organization that has the ability to drive and

sustain large-scale change and to anticipate and adapt to an increasingly volatile

environment. The ability to change in two fundamental ways generates sustained

competitive advantage. First, companies need to have a disciplined approach to drive

shifts in focus, strategy, direction, structure, and culture. Second, they need to have the

ability to adapt to rapidly changing developments in the market (Bhalla et al, 2 0 1 0 ;

Edward E. Lawler III and Christopher G. Worley, 2006; Walter J. M. Kickert, 2014).

Disciplined cascade means organization has a process to change the sort

order in the organization (cascading change). It is the focus on the most important

elements of the work to make changes orderly. For the basic criteria, organization will

eliminate the work load that is not required (Bhalla et al, 2010; Edward E. Lawler III

and Christopher G. Worley, 2006; Walter J. M. Kickert, 2014).

Evolutionary organizations means HPOs are adaptive, continually

detecting changes in the market and making strategic adjustments. They empower the

periphery of their organizations; far away from the classic strategy function, to spring

into action in anticipation of market developments ( Bhalla et al, 2 0 1 0 ; Edward E.

Lawler III and Christopher G. Worley, 2006; Walter J. M. Kickert, 2014).

People means an organization that effectively translates business strategy

into a powerful people strategy, attracting and retaining the most capable individuals.

The HR function acts as a strong advisor to business units on both operational and

strategic people issues. It has short- and long-term plans for identifying, attracting,

developing, and retaining the right people with the right capabilities ( Bhalla et al,

2011).

Employer branding means the employer brand is a core asset. High-

performance organizations have a well-defined employer brand. Employees and

recruits alike know the broad range of benefits—beyond compensation—that

employees enjoy, ranging from career advancement, job rotation, and prestige, to


flexibility and autonomy. This brand—or employee value proposition—contributes to

an organization’s strengths and competitive edge (Bhalla et al, 2011).

The critical roles and key talents means the critical roles and key talents

are clearly identified and treated with care. Talent management is a broader activity

than most organizations realize in practice. It is not just reserved for those on the fast

track. It also covers the people and roles critical to enterprise success. High-

performance organizations identify these critical roles and individuals and focus

retention strategies and contingency plans around them. This list of individuals and

roles should be dynamic, changing with the firm’s strategic priorities ( Bhalla et al,

2011).

Strategic human resource (HR) means HR is a strategic partner and an

enabler of the business. In leading organizations, people strategy is as prominent as

business strategy. The HR function has successfully translated business strategy into

people objectives and enabled business priorities through people initiatives. The

function operates with clear separation of strategic, functional, and transactional

activities. It efficiently completes functional and transactional activities and effectively

influences strategic topics (Bhalla et al, 2011).

Design means a lean structure reflects the organization’s strategic focus

and has clear roles and accountabilities. Organization design can help companies

improve execution and achieve strategic goals. The interplay among its key elements –

structure, individual capabilities, and roles and collaboration – must be carefully

coordinated and tightly linked with a company’s strategy and sources of competitive

advantage (American Management Association, 2007; Alavi, 2003; Bhalla et al, 2011;

Bamber and Dale, 2000; Barker, 1994; Jordan and Michel, 1999; Pickering and

Brokaw, 2012; Barbara Davison, 2003).

Structure and resource allocation means structure and resource

allocation reflect strategic tradeoffs. A well-designed structure should emphasize what

matters most to an organization. Statements of the organizational philosophy are in

accordance with the strategy of the organization (American Management Association,

2007; Bhalla et al. 2011).

Few layers and wide spans of control means lean structures which allow

organizations to focus on meaningful work, rather than coordination. With fewer


organizational layers, communication and decision making are faster, and senior

leaders have a better view of day-to-day operations and customer interactions. With

wider spans of control, managers become more ambitious in applying their leadership

skills (Bhalla et al. 2011).

Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration means an HPO

whose accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration are constructed with

thoughtful consideration, people have clearly defined roles that are carefully

assembled to form a highly efficient organization. People understand what is expected

of them and which decisions are theirs to make (Bhalla et al. 2011).

Matched role requirements means individual capabilities are matched to

role requirements. Roles need to be staffed by the right people with the right skills.

Employees have a wide variety of skills and experience that needs freedom to perform

(Bhalla et al. 2011; Barbara Davison, 2003).

High-Performance Organization (HPO) means an organization that

achieves the organization’s results which show better results than other similar

organizations in the same group in a period of time. This kind of organization will be

able to adjust for changes, to respond to those changes quickly with a long-term

management. The integrated organizational structure is in alignment which is in the

correct position to continuously improve the core competencies. Employees are treated

truly as the main assets of organization (Blanchard, 2010; Waal, 2010; Pickering and

Brokaw, 2012).

Shared information and open communication means sharing

information and facilitating open communication that builds trust and encourages

people to act like owners of the organization. Encouraging dialogue lessens the danger

of territoriality and keeps the organization healthy, agile, flexible, and fluid. In high

performing organizations, information needed to make informed decisions is readily

available to people and is openly communicated (Blanchard, 2009; Waal, 2010).

Compelling vision, purpose and values means the hallmark of a high

performing organization. When everyone supports such an organizational vision –

including purpose, a picture of the future, and values – it creates a deliberate, highly

focused culture that drives the desired business results toward a greater good. In these

organizations, people are energized by, excited about, and dedicated to such a vision.


They have a noble sense of purpose that creates and focuses energy. Their personal

values are aligned with the values of the organization. They can describe a clear

picture of what they intend to create. Everyone is aligned and going in the same

direction (Blanchard, 2009; Waal, 2010).

Ongoing learning means the focus on improving capabilities through learning

systems, building knowledge capital, and transferring learning throughout the organization.

HPOs engage in both organizational learning and individual learning. Everyone is always

striving to get better, both individually and as an organization (Blanchard, 2009).

The focus on customer results means HPOs understand who their

customer is and measures their results accordingly. They produce outstanding results, in

part because of an almost obsessive focus on results. However, what is unique is the way

in which they focus on those results: from the customer’s viewpoint (Blanchard, 2009).

Energizing system and structure means the systems, structures,

processes, and practices in high performing organizations are aligned to support the

organization’s vision, strategic direction, and goals. This makes it easier for people to

get their jobs done. Energizing systems and structures provide the platform for rapid

response to obstacles and opportunities. The bottom-line test of whether the systems

and structures are energizing is to look at whether they help people accomplish their

jobs more easily or make them more difficult (Blanchard, 2009).

Shared power and high involvement means power and decision making are

shared and distributed throughout the organization, not guarded at the top of the hierarchy.

Participation, collaboration, and teamwork are a way of life (Blanchard, 2009).

The first group of public organizations (PO) means POs with the

mission of development and specific policy implementation of government affairs, set

up and authorized by the Royal Decree issued in accordance with the Public

Organization Act of 1999 by a resolution of the Council of Ministers on September 7,

2004. The first group of POs includes two excellent agencies; (1) The Support Arts

and Crafts International Centre of Thailand (Public Organization), and (2) Highland

Research and Development Institute (Public Organization), HRDI.

The second group of public organizations (PO) means POs with a

technical services or interdisciplinary mission, set up and authorized by the Royal

Decree issued in accordance with the Public Organization Act of 1999 by a resolution


of the Council of Ministers on September 7, 2004. The second group of POs includes

six excellent agencies; (1) Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public Organization), (2)

Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology Center (Public Organization), (3)

Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (Public Organization), (4)

Synchrotron Light Research Institute (Public Organization), (5) Hydro and Agro

Informatics Institute (Public Organization), and (6) National Astronomical Research

Institute of Thailand (Public Organization)

The third group of public organizations (PO) means POs of general

public services, set up and authorized by the Royal Decree issued in accordance with

the Public Organization Act of 1999 by a resolution of the Council of Ministers on

September 7, 2004. The third group of POs includes two excellent agencies; (1) Ban

Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization), and (2) Film Archive (Public Organization).

Exogenous variable means latent variable that performs the cause in

structural equation modeling (SEM). The LISREL software use the symbol K or KSI

instead of the symbol with a circle.

Endogenous variable means latent variable that performs the effect in

structural equation modeling (SEM). The LISREL software uses the symbol E or ETA

instead of the symbol with a circle.

Manifest variable or Observed variable means the tangible variable that

can be measured directly. This variable uses a square for a symbol.

1.6 Advantage of research

Implications for academic matter

1. To apply the new knowledge about the management of PO that is HPO

that is developed from the study of excellent agencies of the three groups to drive the

performance of POs to be the most effective organizations.

2. To study the body of knowledge in order to create and test a causal

model of the management of PO as HPO with advanced statistical methods that are

derived from real-world practices.


Implications for application

1. To provide information for administrators of POs and the operators at every

level of each group, and to help guide decisions for planning to drive the strategic

management of POs with the elements and the causal factors from the constructed models.

2 . To offer the government agencies involved in public policy in

cooperation and collaboration with the PO some research-based guidelines consistent

with the strengths of the PO, as shown in the tested model.

3 . To offer the related agencies concerned with the performance

assessment of POs, established in accordance with the Public Organization Act of

1999, with a guide to create indicators of the assessment that is appropriate and

consistent with the excellence of POs.

4 . To offer information showing effective performance to a PO which has the

authority to implement the policy and to related public agencies to plan their policy procedures,

with a view toward the process of public policy driven by excellence in the management of POs.

5. To apply the constructed model of POs that are an HPO of each group to

another PO in the same mission group in order to develop it into an outstanding

agency. The constructed model can be applied for POs of each group who have

opportunities to improve management.

6. To apply the constructed HPO SEM model or the excellent management

model to the state sector within the context of PO.

1.7 Variables for research

Exogenous Latent Variables

1) Culture and engagement (KSI1) focuses on the following two elements:

culture (X1), and engagement (X2).

2 ) Leadership (KSI2) focuses on the following three elements: teams of

leaders (X3), future leaders (X4), and middle managers (X5).


Endogenous Latent Variables

1 ) Change management (ETA1) focuses on the following two elements:

disciplined cascade (Y1), and evolutionary organizations (Y2).

2) People (ETA2) focuses on the following three elements: employer

branding (Y3), the critical roles and key talents (Y4), and strategic HR (Y5).

3 ) Design (ETA3) focuses on the following four elements: structure and

resource allocation (Y6); few layers and wide spans of control (Y7); accountabilities,

decision rights, and collaboration (Y8); and matched role requirements (Y9).

4 ) High-performance organization (HPO) (ETA4) focuses on the following

six elements: shared information and open communication (Y10); compelling vision,

purpose and values (Y11); ongoing learning (Y12); the focus on customer results (Y13);

energizing system and structure (Y14); and shared power and high involvement (Y15).

1.8 Research Framework

Group1, Group 2, Group 3

E1

Y Y

E2

Y Y Y

E3

Y Y Y Y

E4

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

K2

X X X

K1

X X

Figure 1.1 Research Framework of the hypothesis model of the three groups.


Remark

KSI1 (K1) = Culture and engagement Y3 = Employer branding

KSI2 (K2) = Leadership Y4 = The critical roles and key talents

ETA1 (E1) = Change management Y5 = Strategic HR

ETA2 (E2) = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation

ETA3 (E3) = Design Y7 = Few layers and wide spans of

control

ETA4 (E4) = High-Performance Organization Y8 = Accountabilities, decision rights,

and collaboration

X1 = Culture Y9 = Matched role requirements

X1 = Engagement Y10 = Shared information and open

communication

X3 = Teams of leaders Y11 = Compelling vision, purpose

and values

X4 = Future leaders Y12 = Ongoing learning

X5 = Middle managers Y13 = The focus on customer results

Y1 = Change is a disciplined cascade. Y14 = Energizing system and structure

Y2 = The organization is evolutionary. Y15 =Shared power and

high involvement

Group 1 = Public organizations of the mission of the development and the specific

policy implementation of the government affairs

Group 2 = Public organizations of technical services or the interdisciplinary mission

Group 3 = Public organizations of the general public services

Waranya Jirangkul Literature Review / 18

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

The researcher reviews here the theories and concepts related to the model

of public organizations that operate as high-performance organizations as follows:

2.1 The concept of model

2.2 The concept of high-performance organization (HPO)

2.3 Components affecting the development of HPO and the causal effects

2.4 Independent administrative organizations in foreign countries

2.5 Public organization in Thailand

2.6 A summary of public organizations in the research

2.7 Related research

2.8 The concept of Structural equation modeling (SEM)

2.9 Research framework

2.1 The concept of model

Many academic researches mention ‘model’ in various dimensions, such

as model, format, paradigm, method, etc. These words may be interpreted from

English with a specific meaning, so to apply the word ‘model’ without direction may

communicate an unclear meaning. So, this research needs to identify the distinct

concept of ‘model’ according to the related literature reviews. The researcher has

synthesized and summarized the meaning of ‘model’ as follows:

1. Model means the format of the actualization and prototype that may be

of larger or smaller size in terms of number of elements (Good, 1973;

Woratebputtipong, 1997; Chadcham, 1995; Smith, 1961; Webster, 1983).

2. Model means a construct that shows the structure of the connection

between a set of factors or variables or the key elements in a relationship, or the reason

for each in order to clearly understand the facts or a particular subject phenomenon


(Bardo and Hartman, 1982; Good, 1973; Keeves, 1988; Chadcham, 1995;

Boonprasert, 2003; Utoompawn, 1998; Willer, 1967).

3. Model means the desirable ideal, or what may ideally happen in the real

world, especially when the things that we would like to have is quite different from the

ability to find them, such as a utopian city (Woratebputtipong, 1997).

4. Model means a set of theories that were tested for validity and

reliability. This can identify and forecast the relationship between the variables by a

mathematical or statistical method (Woratebputtipong, 1997; Willer, 1967).

This research refers to the ideas of Keeves (1988), who indicated that the

form of a causal model may be in four types of model as follows:

1) Analogue Model is the metaphor benchmark phenomena

that helps to understand an abstract phenomenon.

2) Semantic Model is a format that uses language, charts or

pictures as the media to explain the phenomenon under study in order to visualize the

structure of the ideas, components and relationships of the elements of phenomena,

such as in the teaching model of Joyce and Weil (1985).

3) Mathematical Model is arithmetical equations as a channel

to show the relationship of various variables. This format is mostly used in psychology

and behavioral science.

4) Causal Model is a format developed from a technique called

path analysis and a semantic model by arranging the number of variables in the cause

and effect relationships that occurred, for example as a format that shows the

relationship between the economic condition of father and mother, the environment of

the home education, and the level of children’s wisdom.

This research had been summarized into the model of public organizations

as high-performance organizations according to Keeves (1988) who pointed to the

meaning of a model as the structure showing the relationship between the various

components or variables in natural phenomena or in any system describing the steps of

the components or activities in the system. The model in this research is a causal

model developed from a technique called path analysis and a semantic model by

arranging variables and relationships in cause and effect that occurs in the structural

equation modeling of HPOs in three groups of POs. The models in this research shows


the causal effects between the two exogenous variables: 1) culture and engagement

(KSI1) and 2) Leadership (KSI2), and the four endogenous variables: 1) change

management (ETA1), 2) people (ETA2), 3) design (ETA3), and 4) HPO (ETA4). Each

variable is composed of the indicators and the direct and indirect effects on another

variable in this model.

The development of the model may take different steps in performance. In

general, the process may be divided into two major episodes; firstly, to construct the

model and then to examine the validity of the model (Willer, 1967). Each step of

detail for action depends on the nature and ideas that were basic in the development of

the model. For the purposes of this research, a review is utilized to determine

contribution of model components in a 3-step process; 1) to construct structural

equation modeling of the management of a public organization (PO) as a high-

performance organization (HPO) by exploring the developed ideas in the theories of

academic concepts and related researches. This would assist in defining the

components or variables within the model, as well as the relationship between those

components or variables. Each element in a constructed model needs a foundation of

support by the principal of reason and support from the literature, 2) to test the validity

of the 3-step model format for a trial in an actual situation with the empirical data. The

tested model leads to the verification of the consistency of the model by using

expertise in advanced statistics in order to test the consistent indices with a sample of

empirical data, and 3) to summarize the research result of the model into practical

guidelines.

2.2 The concept of High-performance organization (HPO)

High-performance organizations (HPO) arose from the era of reforms in

the government of the United States in the 1990s. It started from the organization of

the state sector, especially from the influence of the concept of reinventing

government, which presented ideas of the new public management (NPM) in 1992

(Osborne and Gaebler, 1992). Osborne and Gaebler’s book Reinventing Government:

How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector, published in 1992,

is a case study of government agencies from the success of the ideas and behavior in


private organizations in practical operation. This influenced the reform of the

government sector of the United States and other countries worldwide. The attention

and awareness of the performance of the state system resulted in practice in the United

States to precipitate the reform of government systems by enacting the law of United

States Federal Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 to develop the

performance in the state sector via the culture in the workplace. This was an effort to

create the High-Performance Organization or HPO, which is the foundation of the

development of the model to increase the capacity of public sector organizations.

The initial HPO in the state sector was a model that was developed and

substantialized in the United States. The legislation of The Government Performance

and Results Act (GPRA) in 1993 called for the government agencies in the states to

create a strategic plan, an action plan, and the indicators of the annual performance.

This model placed importance on the change of culture, values, and the behaviors of

government officials (Muldmow, 2002). HPO was widely used by organizations in the

United States in both the public and private sectors that were categorized as having

high potential. They mostly had good image and results and often received an award

as world-class, especially the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, as well as in

the government sector the award given to the organization that had the best action

result.

HPO in Thailand was of interest by both private and public sector to bring

management tools to develop organizations to be excellent agencies. It had been seen

from the PTT Public Company Limited, which is a state-owned enterprise that applied

the HPO concept as an organization. PTT had highly intended to perform well over the

long term in order to create more capacity and to deliver high quality services to

customers. This company began to develop employees with more productivity,

systems development to global standards, and the determination to be a leader in the

business of gas in Southeast Asia (Lorsuwanrat, 2008). HPO in government sector

commenced to be determined by the guidelines for organizational development to be

high capacity within the framework of the reform of the system of government by the

4-year strategic plan for the development of Thailand’s bureaucracy. This plan was

provided by the Office of the Public-Sector Development Commission (OPDC), which

is the primary organization responsible for the development of the state sector


organization in Thailand since 2002. The first 4-year strategic plan was 2003-2007.

The second plan was 2008-2012. The latest plan was 2013-2018. Streamlining the

second plan until the current plan contained the strategy to create HPO; the statement

of ‘Creativity Simplicity Agility: HPO’ formally enclosed the strategy to develop to a

high-performing and modern organization and with professional employees

(Siriprakob, 2015).

Moreover, HPO was a part of the concept of the new public management

(NPM) stemming from the management of the state sector reform that changed from

the idea of public services with the state as the center to the people as the center, with

the primary objective to improve the performance of the government sector. The NPM

led to the change of the government system and strategy with the guidelines for

management, such as the high quality of public services provided to the people, the

consideration of the needs of people, and that the government should take the specific

role that the state was doing well. The need to adjust the management system of the

more appropriate government-sector organization and the need to support the new

public services led to the implementation of HPO as a guide in the development in the

modern state made of more efficient and effective organizations.

Denotation of High-performance organization (HPO)

HPO was widely used for the development of organizational management

in the public sector and private sector in many dimensions. The researcher summarizes

and synthesizes the meaning of terms in various academic aspects of HPO as follows:

1) ‘Sustainable growth’ means the organization has developed,

progressed, and stepped forward in terms of performance and high-quality

management by a factor of innovation, which uses some creative ideas and desirable

management tools, with innovation applied, to solve problems or to extend the

performances to achieve the organization goal. This meaning includes good corporate

governance to bring about cooperation between the operators in the organization who

perform a major part in pushing the organization forward to achieve its objectives

( Berg & Vries, 2004; Collins & Porras, 1997; Holbeche, 2004; Lorsuwanrat, 2008;

Waal, 2005; Weick & Sutcliffe, 2001).


2) ‘Ability to adjust to the environment’ means the organization has

plans that clearly support the various conditions, and to analyze the surrounding

situation that could affect performance and impact the mission to achieve the

organization objectives (Kotter & Heskette, 1992; Light, 2005; Tacharin, 2007; Waal,

2005; Weick & Sutcliffe, 2001; Wetchayanon, 2009).

3) ‘Reaction to the environment rapidly’ means the organization

operates by following the provided action plan for change in response to the influence

of the external environment. Employees at both executive level and task level are able

to efficiently and timely solve specific problems and are better able to deal with the

pressure from inside and outside the organization ( Brokaw & Mullins, 2006; Light,

2005; McGee, 2004; Lorsuwanrat, 2008; Waal, 2005).

4) ‘Focus on long-term performance’ means the organization is a

partnership between the service provider and client and expands the deal to all

stakeholders in the organization. This includes high potential people ( Light, 2005;

Miller & Miller, 2005; Waal, 2005).

5) ‘Integrated management style to ensure consistency between the

strategy, structure, process and people throughout the organization’ means the

organization creates unique strategies, has a continuous work improvement process,

and has aligned process simplification. People are encouraged to create innovative

products and services and create a new source of the benefits that competitively

responds to market changes. Government agencies that have public services designed

to meet the needs of people and employees also has the opportunities to learn even

from the errors where the operators have the chance to discuss knowledge and to learn

in order to develop new ideas to improve work performance ( Blanchard, 2010;

Epstein, 2004; Lawler et al., 1998; O’Reilly & Pfeffer, 2000).

6) ‘Focus on continuous improvement and the development of the

organization core capacity’ means the organization usually has a diagnostic process

as the first step of HPO and has the identity of the organization to maintain focus on

achieving the main objectives ( Holbeche, 2005; Lawler et al., 1998; O’Reilly &

Pfeffer, 2000).

7) ‘Focus on the improvement of work conditions and the development

of opportunities for people in the organization’ means HPO gathers the various


teams working with a wide range of maximum flexibility. Operators should be trained

to have the flexibility, with support, to develop the skills to achieve the special results

by the responsibility of the operators’ performance, so that the creative result would

add to a higher level of performance ( Brokaw & Mullins, 2006; Epstein, 2004;

Holbeche, 2005; Kling, 1995; Lawler et al., 1998; Lorsuwanrat, 2 0 0 8 ; O’Reilly &

Pfeffer, 2000; Waal, 2005).

To summarize the meaning of HPO, research literature is listed in Table.

Table 2.1 The meaning of the concepts of High-performance organization (HPO)

The meaning of HPO Scholars

1. Sustainable growth Berg & Vries, 2004

Collins & Porras, 1997

Holbeche, 2004

Lorsuwanrat, 2008

Waal, 2005

Weick & Sutcliffe, 2001

2. Ability to adjust to the environment Kotter & Heskette, 1992

Light, 2005

Tacharin, 2007

Waal, 2005

Weick & Sutcliffe, 2001

Wetchayanon, 2009

3. Reaction to the environment rapidly Brokaw & Mullins, 2006

McGee, 2004

Light, 2005

Lorsuwanrat, 2008

Waal, 2005

4. Focus on long-term performance Light, 2005

Miller & Miller, 2005

Waal, 2005


Table 2.1 The meaning of the concept of High-performance organization (HPO)

The meaning of HPO Scholars

5. Integrated management style to ensure

consistency between the strategy, structure,

process, and people throughout the organization

Blanchard, 2010

Epstein, 2004

Lawler et al., 1998

O’Reilly & Pfeffer, 2000

6. Focus on continuous improvement and the

development of the organization core capacity

Holbeche, 2005

Lawler et al., 1998


7. Focus on the improvement of work

conditions and the development of

opportunities to people in organization

Brokaw & Mullins, 2006

Epstein, 2004

Holbeche, 2005

Kling, 1995

Lawler et al., 1998

Lorsuwanrat, 2008


Waal, 2005

Source: Researcher adapted from Waal (2005) cited in Lorsuwanrat (2008)

Moreover, there was another view of HPO proposed by scholars:

(1) HPO was a concept from the application of multiple approaches, such

as the causal model of Rensis Likert's, the six-box model of Marvin Weisbord, the 7-S

model of the McKinsey Company, and other management models ( Pickering &

Brokaw, 2012).

( 2) HPO is an organization that succeeds in the results of financial and

non-financial performance better than other similar organizations in the same peer

group in a time period of five years or more, or the period of time that the organization

was sustainable (Waal, 2012; Kaiser Associates, 2016). This is related to business

performance, innovations, productivity performance, and the operators that engage

with the organization (Scamardo, 2011). HPO is the organization that focuses on how

to have the discipline to do what is essential to the organization.


Therefore, the researcher summarizes the meaning of HPO as the

organizations that have achieved better results than a peer group of similar

organizations in a standard period of time. An HPO would be able to well adjust for

changes, and to respond to those changes quickly with a long-term management, to

arrange the integrated structure and is aligned in the right position, to improve the core

competencies continuously, and in practice truly regards the operators as the core

assets of the organization.

2.3 Components affecting the development of HPO and the causal

effects

According to the related literature review, the structural equation modeling

(SEM) of the public organizations (POs) as high-performance organizations (HPO)

models are composed of causal factors in five groups that affected the variables of

HPO, referring to the framework concept of Bhalla, V., Caye, J.M., Dyer, A., Dymond

L., Morieux Y., Orlander, P. (2011) in ‘High-Performance Organizations: The Secrets

of Their Success’ who studied real-world leading organizations. This also involved

related researches to create the components and causal effects of the model, namely,

culture and engagement, leadership, change management, people and design as

follows:

1. The latent variable of culture and engagement (KSI1)

‘Culture and engagement’ means the characteristic of value and

relationship between employees which is shaped to achieve the strategic goals and

mission, and its employees are motivated to go beyond the call of duty in pursuit of

corporate objectives (American Management Association, 2007; Bhalla et al., 2011).

HPO has a suitable set of beliefs that drive the employees’ behaviors, and the values

are understandable. This component of culture and engagement affects directly to the

HPO. Halm ( 2 0 1 1 ) studied this and found that the culture and engagement of

employees is associated with organizational change for success by five characteristics

to create shared value and commitment among workers: (1) the role determination of

employees to fulfill the organization goals, (2) the selection of the staffs who could


apply their potential performance and passion, (3) supporting and providing value to

employees, (4) creating a system of sustainable rewards, and (5) the development of

feedback and support mechanisms. These elements perform an important role for the

organization in the values, commitment, and symbols by showing their behavior,

loyalty, and spirit in the work of employees and delivery of services to exceed

expectations. This variable is the co-existence of culture and engagement measured by

the two manifest variables deriving from the elemental synthesis as follows:

1) The manifest variable of ‘culture’ means culture accelerates

strategic objectives. Culture in HPO sets, manages, and monitors culture to achieve

strategic objectives that features risk aversion, process, and clear lines of command

(Bhalla et al., 2 0 1 1 ) . Culture comes from the direction of the organization from its

center to create the confidence that cultural change will be consistent with the strategy

of the organization (Bhalla et al., 2011; Banerjee & Kamener, 2009). Culture also

refers to the behaviors and belief characteristics of an organization, as exhibited by the

stated and unstated rules and expectations as well as the prevailing values, norms,

behaviors and systems that define an organization (Hewitt Association, 2009). Culture

might come from an organizational merger. The change of culture needs to be

approved by the senior leaders to agree on the key desired behaviors of the new

organization and consistency of the behaviors with core values. The organization’s top

levels met quarterly to ensure that they are in alignment and to track the progress of

the transformation ( Bhalla et al., 2 0 1 1 ) . This includes training to the specific

challenges of each level of the organization and use of developed tool kits to help

convey each core value.

2) The manifest variable of ‘engagement’ means engagement

is measured and cultivated to generate discretionary effort from employees (Bhalla et

al., 2011). Engagement is the emotional and intellectual commitment of an individual

or group to building and sustaining strong business performance (Hewitt Association,

2009). Engagement in HPO is created through personal motivators, such as an

awareness and regulatory requirements for performance, as in a performance matrix.

In HPO, the conversation with employees is important. It is usually a measurement of

the level of engagement and management activity through a difficult time, such as a

new organizational arrangement or the attempt to change on a large scale. This


conforms to Lussier & Achua (2007) who pointed out that the organization that has a

high-performance culture creates an atmosphere of the pressure that helps to develop

to the best point to achieve operational excellence. This must be based on the culture

related to all excellence dimensions. When an organization is consistently at or near

the maximum competencies, the results would not only be more successful than ever,

but also includes a culture imbued with the spirit of high-level performance.

Moreover, employees’ engagement also involves culture reinforcement tools, such as

symbols and specialized language (such as slogans) to convey meaning and values and

celebrate high‐performing employees and help create an emotional bond among all

employees.

The researcher summarizes the component of culture and

engagement (KSI1) from the synthesis of related studies (American Management

Association, 2007; Banerjee & Kamener, 2009; Bhalla et al., 2011; Hewitt

Association, 2009; Lussier and Achua, 2007) as shown in the figure and table below.

Figure 2.1 The element of culture and engagement (KSI1)

Culture and Engagement

(KSI 1)

Culture (X1)

Engagement (X2)


Table 2.2 The latent variables of culture and engagement

Manifest variables Definition/Description Indicators

1. Culture (X1) Culture accelerates strategic

objectives. Culture in HPO to

set, manage, and monitor

culture to achieve strategic

objectives that features risk

aversion, process, and clear

lines of command. Culture

comes from the direction of

the organization from the

center to create the

confidence that cultural

change will be consistent

with the strategy of the

organization.

Keyword 1.

- The culture determined

to accelerate strategic

objectives.

Keyword 2.

- Culture management set

for accelerating the

strategic goals.

Keyword 3.

- The check of

organizational culture

supporting the strategic

goals.

Keyword 4.

- The direction delivered

from the center to change

culture consistent with all

organization strategies.

2. Engagement. (X2) Engagement is measured and

cultivated to generate

discretionary effort from

employees. It is also a

measurement of the level of

engagement and management

actively through a hard time

such as a new organizational

arrangement or the attempt to

change on a large scale, an

atmosphere of the pressure

that helps to develop to the

Keyword 1.

- Engagement is

measured and cultivated

to generate discretionary

effort from employees

even in a hard time.

Keyword 2.

- An atmosphere of the

pressure that helps to

develop to the best points

to achieve operational

excellence.


Table 2.2 The latent variables of culture and engagement (cont.)


2. Engagement. (X2) best points to achieve

operational excellence, a

culture imbued with the spirit

of high-level performance,

and culture reinforcement

tools, such as symbols and

specialized language (such as

slogans) to convey meaning

and values and celebrate

high‐performing employees,

and help create an emotional

bond among all employees.

Keyword 3.

- A culture embedded to

the spirit of the high-

level performance.

Keyword 4.

- Culture reinforcement

tools, such as symbols

and specialized language

(such as slogans) to

convey meaning and

values and celebrate

high‐performing

employees, and help

create an emotional bond

among all employees.

The path of causal direct and indirect effects of culture and

engagement (KSI1)

Path1 . Culture and engagement (KSI1 ) had a direct effect to

HPO (ETA4).

The researcher has found a group of studies indicating the

relationship between organizational culture, performance management, and

organizational productivity. Organizational culture is important to impact the

performance of the organization to achieve its goals. The work of Brown et al. (2015)

pointed out that culture and engagement are the most important issues faced by

companies worldwide. Indeed, 87 percent of organizations cited culture and

engagement as one of their top challenges, and 50 percent called the issue ‘very

important’. This is consistent with Kotter and Heskett (1992) who viewed that

organizational culture is a key factor of the success and failure of the organization.


Culture focused on positive effects has a positive impact on an organization’s

finances, while a contrary culture negatively impacts on the organization’s finances.

Moreover, culture and engagement were related to the

reinforcement tools as one of a high-performance culture (Lussier and Achua, 2007),

such as symbols and specialized language (such as slogans) to convey meaning and

values and celebrate high‐performing employees and help create an emotional bond

among all employees. These indicate that the component of culture and engagement

co-exist as a latent variable affecting directly on HPO.

Path2. Culture and Engagement ( KSI1) had an indirect effect

on people and change management resulting in strong organizations.

The researcher has found research showing that the component

of culture and engagement (KSI1) directly influences the people in the organization.

Kotter and Heskett (1992) presented that an organization having high-quality staff

arose from the organizational culture stimulating the employees’ behavior in an

appropriate way to participate in supporting strategies and in a contrary way to oppose

change. The right method to make the organizational culture related to strong

performance was: 1) the organization’s goals must be aligned with employees, 2) the

organizational culture must motivate the employees’ behavior and the shared values

that employees were satisfied about the work that they did in the organization, and 3)

the organization without bureaucratic structure and formal control could motivate

employees and innovation. Moreover, the study of SEM model of Wickramaratne

(2014) indicated that there is a positive relationship between employee engagement in

practice and the excellence of the organization, and provided the three elements of

engagement; affective, normative, and continuance.

Besides, Barratt‐Pugh et al. (2013) found that organizational

culture affected employees, which is one of the elements of strategic HR (ETA2), by

the actions of the middle manager, who performs a significant role in a wide range of

embedded cultural change in order to eliminate inconsistency in management with the

employee by using the change management processes of an organization. This

conformed to the American Management Association (2007) pointing out that HPOs

in general are composed of a set of beliefs that drives the employees’ behavior and the

HPO has understandable values. Therefore, from this can be concluded that culture


and engagement (KSI1) have indirect effects on people and change management that

results in strong organizations.

2. The latent variable of leadership (KSI2) means an aligned leadership

that is effective deep within the organization, consisting of leaders who think

strategically, set the pace, allocate resources, build engagement, drive accountability,

and deliver results (American Management Association, 2007; Bhalla et al., 2011;

Lussier & Achua, 2007). In addition, leadership that leads to HPO also relates to

transformational leadership (Bass, 2006) and strategic leadership (Harrison & John,

2003; Lussier & Achua, 2007). Hancott, Daren E. (2005) had found that

transformational leadership was positively correlated with organizational performance,

that transformational leadership became the general form of the state-sector

organization in Canada, and that the duration of the position holder was positively

associated with transformational leadership.

The component of leadership (KSI2), one of the most significant elements

in an organization, is a causal factor in the HPO model. It has direct effect to HPO

(ETA4). Many studies have shown the influence of leadership on supporting the

efficiency and effectiveness of an organization’s performance to be an advantage over

the competition (American Management Association, 2007, Bhalla et al., 2011;

Lussier and Achua, 2007; Pickering and Brokaw, 2012; Podsakoff et al., 1990). HPO

creates leaders through the tools of the three manifest variables as follows:

1 ) ‘ High-performance teams of individual leaders’ means

the teams of leaders driving urgency and direction through cooperation in an

organization (Bhalla et al., 2011). Leaders are comfortable with complexity, volatility,

and change. In the face of ambiguity, they are able to mobilize the organization.

Leaders need to work cooperatively with their peers and recognize the collective

strength generated through collaboration. They must be comfortable dealing with

outsiders such as nongovernmental organizations, regulators, and other bodies that are

now participating more actively in business. Leadership teams (especially top teams)

must adopt a ‘stewardship’ mindset, in which their focus is on the success of the

whole, rather than just their unit’s. (Bhalla et al., 2011; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012)


2) ‘Future leaders’ means leaders in development whose skills

are matched to future needs. High-performance organizations have leaders in the wings

who had been rotated through many types of positions and roles in many functions and

regions and are groomed for success. These organizations identified potential leaders

early in their careers and cultivated in them the skills and competencies that would be

required in the future. Senior Management has set expectations for the behavior of

leadership and reviewed and edited the management system performance to rewarded

the success of the financial goals (Bhalla et al., 2011).

3) ‘Middle managers embrace and translate strategy’

means executives at a lower to medium level who embrace and translate strategy.

Middle managers oversee the vast majority of employees, translating the strategy and

vision endorsed by senior leaders into concrete plans for their teams. They also select

and elevate the key issues from the frontline that need senior management’s attention.

Leading organizations recognized the importance of middle managers, invest in their

success, and actively monitor and work to strengthen their engagement and skills

(Bhalla et al., 2011).

The researcher summarizes the component of leadership (KSI2) from the

synthesis of related studies (American Management Association, 2007; Bass and

Riggio, 2006; Bhalla et al., 2011; Lussier and Achua, 2007; Pickering and Brokaw,

2012; Waal, 2012), as shown in figure and table below.

Figure 2.2 The element of leadership (KSI2)

Leadership

(KSI2)

High-Performance Teams of Individual Leaders

Future Leaders

Middle Managers embrace and translate strategy.


Table 2.3 The latent variables of leadership


1. High-performance

teams of individual

leaders) (X3)

The teams of leaders driving

urgency and direction

through cooperation in

organization. Leaders are

comfortable with

complexity, volatility, and

change. In the face of

ambiguity, they are able to

mobilize the organization.

Leaders need to work

cooperatively with their

peers and recognize the

collective strength generated

through collaboration. They

must be comfortable dealing

with outsiders such as

nongovernmental

organizations, regulators,

and other bodies that are

now participating more

actively in business.

Keyword 1.

- Leaders who drive urgency

and direction through

cooperation in organization.

Keyword 2.

- Leaders who work

coordinating with their

colleagues.

Keyword 3.

- Leaders recognize the

strength through

cooperation.

Keyword 4.

- Leaders must be

comfortable dealing with

outsiders such as

nongovernmental

organizations, regulators,

and other bodies that are

now participating more

actively in business.


Table 2.3 The latent variables of leadership


2. Future leaders (X4) Emerging leaders whose

skills are matched to future

needs. High-performance

organizations have leaders

in the wings who have been

rotated through many types

of positions and roles in

many functions and regions

and are groomed for

success. These organizations

identify potential leaders

early in their careers and

cultivates in them the skills

and competencies that

would be required in the

future. Senior Management

has set expectations for the

behavior of leadership and

review, edits the

management system

performance to the success

of the award financial goals.

Keyword 1.

- The approaching leaders

whose skills are matched to

future needs.

Keyword 2.

- Leaders who have been

rotated through many types

of positions and roles in

many functions and regions

and are groomed for

success.

Keyword 3.

- These organizations

identify potential leaders

early in their careers and

cultivates in them the skills

and competencies and

accountability that would be

required in the future.

Keyword 4.

- Senior Management has

set expectations for the

behavior of leadership and

review, edits the

management system

performance to reward the

success of the financial

goals.


Table 2.3 The latent variables of leadership (cont.)


3. Middle Managers

embrace and translate

strategy. (X5)

Executives of lower to

middle level embrace and

translate strategy. Middle

managers oversee the vast

majority of employees,

translating the strategy and

vision endorsed by senior

leaders into concrete plans

for their teams. They also

select and elevate the key

issues from the frontline that

need senior management’s

attention. Leading

organizations recognize the

importance of middle

managers, invest in their

success, and actively

monitor and work to

strengthen their engagement

and skills (Bhalla et al.

2011).

Keyword 1.

- Executives of lower to

middle level embrace and

translate strategy.

Keyword 2.

- Middle managers oversee

the vast majority of

employees, translating the

strategy and vision endorsed

by senior leaders into

concrete plans.

Keyword 3.

- Middle managers monitor

the work actively.

Keyword 4.

- Leading organizations

recognize the importance of

middle managers, invest in

their success, and actively

monitor and work to

strengthen their engagement

and skills.

The path of causal direct and indirect effects of leadership

(KSI2)

Path1. Leadership (KSI2) had an indirect effect on HPO

(ETA4) via change management (ETA1).

The researcher synthesized the studies related to indirect

effects of leadership. It was found that leadership has an indirect effect on HPO via

change management, which is in the context of evolutionary management. Groves


(2016) discovered the conditional indirect effects of transformational leadership on

follower change resistance and follower extra effort via follower openness to change

and self-transcendence values, respectively, which were stronger in work contexts

characterized by high organizational change magnitude. This conformed to Ghatge et

al. (2015) who found that it was important to account for how a combination of

visionary leadership coupled with strategic decision-making enables a struggling

organization to establish itself into a distinguishably successful one. Moreover, Ford &

Ford (2012) studied the impact of the leadership behaviors and results of

organizational changes and found that the leadership of change was more complex

than envisioned, involving multiple forms of leadership engaged in different

approaches, behaviors and activities, only some of which were effective. Therefore,

leadership has direct effect on organizational changes, and organizational changes

have direct effect on HPO. So, leadership has indirect effect on HPO via change

management.

The researcher concludes from the synthesized studies that the

element of leadership has indirect effect on HPO via change management (ETA1) and

people (ETA2) that led to the effect path in the HPO model.

Path2. Leadership had an indirect effect on HPO (ETA4) via

people (ETA2).

The element of leadership has a direct effect on people as seen

from Adams (2000) who studied the SEM model by exploratory and confirmatory

factor analysis of leadership and found that the performance-oriented leadership factor

had a significant impact on both subordinate and peer perceptions of the managers'

follow-through with the feedback process and the managers' leadership improvement.

This conformed to Peterson (2016) who studied a leadership-driven organization

through people and process, and found that an organization must continuously grow,

expand, improve, or change to effectively and efficiently embrace the future needs of

the global environment through a foundation of learning. The transformational leader

played a critical role within this learning organization by establishing vision,

motivation, influence and guidance to other leaders in the organization. The strategy

and portfolio plan must align to the targeted vision, mission and goals of the

organization. The people and process were guided toward the organizational target


through leadership direction. The implications for the research recognized a

transformational leader’s need to balance focus on leading people and managing

processes throughout change to achieve the desired purpose. Leading people is an

interwoven emphasis on learning and service through leadership action. Therefore,

from this can be concluded that leadership has an indirect effect on HPO through

employee management.

3 . The latent variable of change management) ( ETA1) means the

organization has the ability to drive and sustain large-scale change and to anticipate

and adapt to an increasingly volatile environment, and the ability to change in two

fundamental ways generates sustained competitive advantage. First, companies need

to have a disciplined approach to drive shifts in focus, strategy, direction, structure and

culture. Second, they need to have the ability to adapt to rapidly changing

developments in the market (Bhalla et al., 2010; Kickert, 2015; Lawler III & Worley,

2006). The element of change management in this research conforms to the model of

Pickering and Brokaw (2012) whose HPO model required the internal mechanism of

applied change levers; strategy, structure and systems. The organization has to drive to

the excellent performances needed to create a process of collaboration together with a

vision of the organization. Therefore, the element of change management is composed

of two manifest variables as follows:

1) ‘Disciplined cascade’ (Y1) means the organization has a process to

change in order (cascading change) which is the focus on the most important elements

of the work to make changes in the order. In the most basic criteria, an organization

would eliminate the work load that is not required. Organizations that did this also

relied on hard and soft strategies to deliver change. They defined accountabilities and

metrics for individuals and gave them the tools and authority to succeed at

implementation. They tracked their progress against important milestones, knew when

initiatives were at risk of falling behind schedule, and took corrective action. They

also communicated and engaged with key stakeholders in order to maintain confidence

and commitment during turbulent times (Bhalla et al., 2010).

2) ‘ Evolutionary organizations’ (Y2) means HPOs were adaptive,

continually detecting changes in the market and making strategic adjustments. This


approach supplements rather than replaces the broad strokes of classic strategy. They

empower the periphery of their organizations — far away from the classic strategy

function - to spring into action in anticipation of market developments (Bhalla et al.,

2010).

The researcher summarizes the component of change management

(ETA1) from the synthesis of related studies (Bhalla et al, 2010; Kickert, 2015; Lawler

III & Worley, 2006; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012).

Figure 2.3 The element of change management (ETA1)

Change Management

(ETA1)

Evolutionary organizations

Disciplined cascade


Table 2.4 The latent variables of Change Management


1. Disciplined cascade

(Y1)

Organization has a process to

change in order (cascading

change) which is a focus on

the most important elements

of the work to make changes

in the order. In the basic

criteria, organization would

eliminate the work load that

was not required.

Organizations that did this

also rely on hard and soft

strategies to deliver change.

They define accountabilities

and metrics for individuals

and give them the tools and

authority to succeed at

implementation. They track

their progress against

important milestones, know

when initiatives are at risk of

falling behind schedule, and

take corrective action. They

also communicate and engage

with key stakeholders in order

to maintain confidence and

commitment during turbulent

times.

Keyword 1.

- Organization has a

process to change in order

(cascading change) which

is the focus on the most

important elements of the

work to make changes in

the order.

Keyword 2.

- Organization define

accountabilities and

metrics for individuals

and give them the tools

and authority to succeed

at implementation.

Keyword 3.

- Organization track their

progress against important

milestones, know when

initiatives were at risk of

falling behind schedule,

and take corrective action.

Keyword 4.

- Organization communicates

and engages with key

stakeholders in order to

maintain confidence and

commitment during turbulent

times.


Table 2.4 The latent variables of Change Management (cont.)


2. Evolutionary

organizations (Y2)

HPOs are adaptive,

continually detecting changes

in the market and making

strategic adjustments. This

approach supplements rather

than replaces the broad strokes

of classic strategy. They

empower the periphery of

their organizations – far away

from the classic strategy

function – to spring into

action in anticipation of

market developments.

Keyword 1.

- Organization was

adaptive.

Keyword 2.

- Organization detected

changes in the market.

Keyword 3.

- Organization made

strategic adjustments.

Keyword 4.

- Organization empowers

the periphery of their

organizations – far away

from the classic strategy

function – to spring into

action in anticipation of

market developments.

The path of causal indirect effects of change management

(ETA1)

The element of change management (ETA1) has indirect effect

on HPO (ETA4) via people (ETA2). This was indicated by Cree (2000) who studied

the employee intentions to participate in change, and focused on the influence of

organizational variables, employee beliefs and attitudes, and described the

development of a model of employee intentions to participate in organizational change

initiatives. The resulting model, based on Fishbein and Ajzen's (1975) Theory of

Reasoned Action, suggests that employee intentions to participate were influenced by

employee beliefs and attitudes toward participating in change initiatives, and that

employee beliefs and attitudes are influenced by a number of organizational variables.

The model suggested that the more favorable a person's attitude toward participating in


organizational change initiatives, the more the person perceived that others thought

that they too should participate, and then was higher the person's intention to do so.

The model suggested that the following variables played a role in whether or not

employees were willing to, or intended to, participate in organizational change

initiatives, mediated through their influence on beliefs and attitudes: perceptions of

authenticity, or whether or not the employee believed that their input would be valued

and taken into consideration; perceived organizational support, or the extent to which

the employee believed the organization cared about their well-being; perceptions of

fairness; and an employee's past experience participating within the organization.

Therefore, in order to create a climate that encouraged employee participation,

organizations must ensure that employees are treated fairly, employee contributions

are valued and taken into consideration, and employee input is not asked for unless the

organization intends to use the information. This point conformed to Simmelink

(2012) who qualitatively explored what methods were most effective in implementing

change to enhance employee engagement in a change process from the perspective of

senior leaders. The findings revealed that having a framed communication strategy

was the top method reported by senior leaders for engaging employees in a change

process, followed by: appreciative inquiry, scenario thinking, creating opportunities

for learning and collaboration, ongoing visibility, stretch assignments and flexibility.

Authenticity and a supportive culture were identified as essential for effectively

implementing change and enhancing employee engagement in a change process.

‘Owning one's job’ emerged as a higher level of desired psychological engagement for

employees. Servant leadership emerged as the preferred leadership style of senior

leaders implementing change and enhancing employee engagement in a change

process.

4. The latent variable of People (ETA2) is the element affecting directly

to HPO (ETA4 ) . ‘People’ means the organization effectively translates business

strategy into a powerful people strategy, attracting and retaining the most capable

individuals. The human resource (HR) function acts as a strong advisor to business

units on both operational and strategic people issues. It has short- and long-term plans


for identifying, attracting, developing, and retaining the right people with the right

capabilities (Bhalla et al., 2011).

Moreover, Ulrich and Allen (2014) found that investments in managing

current talent had more impact on business performance than hiring new talent or

retaining existing talent. The variances in the impact of talent management depended

on country, strategy and growth pattern. This indicates the talent management for line

managers and HR professionals. Ultimately, this work would inform those charged

with managing talent so that they can accelerate the use of talent to deliver business

results. This conformed to Armitage and Keeble-Allen (2007) who pointed out that the

basis of employee management had shaped the foundation of a high-performance

working system (HPWS). The three main issues that supported the HPWS were: (1)

creative culture and openness, which was centered extensively from the key operators

by the decision to communicate and to share through international competent

organizations, (2) the investment in people through education, training, loyalty,

comprehensive and flexible work, and (3) the result of performance that can be

measured such as benchmarking, goal formation, as well as innovation through

processes and best practices. This was also consistent with Waal (2015) who studied

the ideal employee as high-performing employee (HPE) and found that performance

depended on the employees that had high-performance to be engaged and the

employee must have knowledge, skills, experience and creative ideas in the

organization. So, employees were the critical component to the success of the

organization.

The researcher synthesizes the latent variable of people (ETA2) measured

by three manifest variables as follows:

1) ‘Employer branding’ (Y3) means the employer brand is a

core asset. The HPO has a well-defined employer brand. Employees and recruits alike

know the broad range of benefits – beyond compensation – that employees enjoy,

ranging from career advancement, job rotation, and prestige, to flexibility and

autonomy. This brand – or employee value proposition – contributes to an

organization’s strengths and competitive edge (Bhalla et al., 2011). Moreover, HPO

also improves the employees who have low-quality performance.


2) ‘Critical roles and key talents’ (Y4) means the critical

roles and key talents are clearly identified and treated with care. Talent management is

a broader activity than most organizations realize in practice. It is not just reserved for

those on the fast track. It also covers the people and roles critical to enterprise success.

HPO identifies these critical roles and individuals and focuses retention strategies and

contingency plans around them. This list of individuals and roles should be dynamic,

changing with the firm’s strategic priorities (Bhalla et al., 2011).

3) ‘Strategic human resources (HR)’ (Y5) means HR is a

strategic partner and an enabler of the business. In leading organizations, people

strategy is as prominent as business strategy. The HR function successfully translates

business strategy into people objectives and enables business priorities through people

initiatives. The function operates with clear separation of strategic, functional and

transactional activities. It efficiently completes functional and transactional activities

and effectively influences strategic topics (Bhalla et al., 2011). This significant role

needs to adjust the HR function to be able to provide the recommendations and

organizational analysis for line managers. This conforms to Mir et al. (2002) who

studied the relationship between employees and organization and found that employee

commitment was critical to success and is related to the management of human

resources that must include recruitment training and maintaining the employees.

The researcher summarizes the component of people (ETA2) from the

synthesis of related studies (Armitage & Allen, 2007; Bhalla et al, 2 0 1 1 ; Mir et al,

2002; Ulrich & Allen, 2014; Waal, 2015) as shown in figure and table below.


Figure 2.4 The element of people (ETA2)

Table 2.5 The latent variables of People


1. Employer branding (Y3) The employer brand is a core

asset. HPO has a well-

defined employer brand.

Employees and recruits alike

know the broad range of

benefits – beyond

compensation – that

employees enjoy, ranging

from career advancement,

job rotation, and prestige, to

flexibility and autonomy.

This brand – or employee

value proposition –

contributes to an

organization’s strengths and

competitive edge. Moreover,

HPO also improves the

employees who had low-

quality performance.

Keyword 1.

- HPO invests in the

development of people

through the training,

rotation with the role and

responsibilities.

Keyword 2.

- The powerful motivation

to maintain people with

compensation and

incentives.

Keyword 3.

- The career advancement

Keyword 4.

- HPO also improves the

employees who had low-

quality performance.

People (ETA2)

Critical roles and key talents are clearly identified and treated with care.

HR is a strategic partner and an enabler of the business.

The employer brand is a core asset.


Table 2.5 The latent variables of People (cont.)


2. The critical roles and

key talents (Y4)

The critical roles and key

talents are clearly

identified and treated with

care. Talent management is

a broader activity than

most organizations realize

in practice. It is not just

reserved for those on the

fast track. It also covers the

people and roles critical to

enterprise success. HPO

identifies these critical

roles and individuals and

focuses retention strategies

and contingency plans

around them. This list of

individuals and roles

should be dynamic,

changing with the firm’s

strategic priorities.

Keyword 1.

- The critical roles and key

talents are clearly

identified and treated with

care.

Keyword 2.

- The focus on retention

strategies

Keyword 3.

- The focus on contingency

plans

Keyword 4.

- Employees and roles

should be dynamic,

changing with the firm’s

strategic priorities.


Table 2.5 The latent variables of People (cont.)


3. Strategic human

resource (HR) (Y5)

HR is a strategic partner

and an enabler of the

business. In leading

organizations, people

strategy is as prominent as

business strategy. The HR

function has successfully

translated business strategy

into people objectives and

enabled business priorities

through people initiatives.

The function operates with

clear separation of

strategic, functional, and

transactional activities. It

efficiently completes

functional and

transactional activities and

effectively influences

strategic topics. This

significant role needs to

adjust the HR function to

be able to provide the

recommendations and

organization analysis for

line managers.

Keyword 1.

- People strategy is as

prominent as business

strategy.

Keyword 2.

- The HR function has

successfully translated

business strategy into

people objectives.

Keyword 3.

- The HR function enables

business priorities through

people initiatives.

Keyword 4.

- The adjusted HR function

is able to provide the

recommendations and

organization analysis for

line managers.


The path of causal indirect effects of people (ETA2)

The element of people has indirect effect on HPO via design

(ETA3). Mohrman and Lawler III (2014) found that an organization in the new era is

faced with the high expectations of the stakeholders and environmental issues, which

is a challenge for large organizations that need to design the organization for

sustainable support in the future. This was with respect to the strategy of the human

resource management of the organization. An example is the case of IBM who had

designed the organizational structure, relationships, and a process to create flexibility

in work, and developed the practices in management of human resources into a multi-

functional performance agency and with multi-stakeholder collaboration. This

conforms to Worle and Doolen (2015), who discovered that the component of people

in the organization affected the adjustment of a lean structure. Without collaboration

from the employees into the design, it would obstruct the practices of lean structure.

So, lean implementations influenced the performance of the organization. This also

conforms to Stanica and Peydro (2016) who found that the staff who were trained as

cross-functional teams had extensive positive influence on the transfer of knowledge

process in the department while adding to the performance of the operation.

Moreover, Akbari and Ghaffari (2017) pointed out that

organizations should invest in the design and model of the organization, as well as

have a strategic view from the empowerment of human resource management, which

is a key success factor by focusing on knowledge. This conforms to Jacobi (2015) who

studied organizational design by the simulation that human resource management was

one of the factors that determined the success of the organizational design by

considering the factors that challenged the employees. The results showed that

employees performed best in roles in the organizational design by an informal

consultative process or in a project which emphasized interactions, appreciation, and

cooperation in the organizational system. An organization could inform or share

knowledge, with communication and view based on the situation. Employee

management considers the success, as well as the organizational progress. This also

conforms to Mumby (2016) who indicated that the employer branding had a

relationship with the organization management and the communication within the

organization. Also, in agreement is Worren et al. (2016) who developed and piloted a


simulation that may improve participants’ understanding of two key organization

design concepts of work process interdependency and coordination cost, by the

assumption that the key principle of organization design was a group activity or roles

to reduce the cost of coordination in the organization, which means the time and effort

needed to work from the multiple tasks in the organization. It was found that the

ability of an employee or group of employees affected the organization design at

individual, group, system and organization levels. So, to increase the organization’s

performance, there would be a need to develop the operators as well.

5 . The latent variable of Design ( ETA3) had a direct effect on HPO,

without indirect effect on HPO via another variable. ‘Design’ means a lean structure

that reflects the organization’s strategic focus and has clear roles and accountabilities.

Organizational design can help companies improve execution and achieve strategic

goals. The interplay among its key elements – structure, individual capabilities, and

roles and collaboration – must be carefully coordinated and tightly linked with a

company’s strategy and sources of competitive advantage (American Management

Association, 2007; Alavi, 2003; Bhalla et al., 2011; Bamber and Dale, 2000; Barker,

1994; Jordan and Michel, 1999; Pickering and Brokaw, 2012; Barbara Davison, 2003).

This conforms to Mohrman and Lawler III (2014) who discovered that an organization

in the new era is faced with the high expectations of the stakeholders and

environmental issues, which is a challenge for large organizations that needed to

design the organization for sustainable support in the future. Leaders must assist the

organization by creating a strategy and new obvious goals that the organization can

use to develop a new competency and a basis for changes to the design of the

organization.

Moreover, Ray and John (2011) found the lean process applied to increase

the performance of the organization. The practice of Lean Six-Sigma was effective in

the organization to reduce the work time by changing the process of working with the

idea of ‘improve results by improving the process’, which was the motto of the

organization. This conformed to Pickering and Brokaw (2012) who studied the HPO

model and found that HPO required the ‘applied change levers’; strategy, structure and

systems, which composed organizational design.


Therefore, the element of organizational design is composed of four

manifest variables as follows:

1) ‘Structure and resource allocation’ (Y6) means structure

and resource allocation reflects strategic tradeoffs. A well-designed structure should

emphasize what matters most to an organization. Statements of the organization’s

philosophy were in accordance with the strategy of the organization (American

Management Association, 2007; Bhalla et al., 2011). In the real world, an organization

cannot be allocated to all dimensions equally. So, the executives may need to consider

the steps carefully to ensure that each section has the appropriate support of the

management structure of the organization and should have the dynamics which

focuses on current and future needs. When strategy, performance, or the competitive

environment has changed, organizational structure may need to adjust to the change as

well.

Moreover, organizational design was consistent with Pickering

and Brokaw (2012) who pointed out that structure means the structure of the

organization is viewed through adequate experience to show performances by a more

complex structure, which includes the matrix, business centers and process /

productivity that emphasizes the structure. Organizations needed a project / process

owner with transparent accountability, which was especially important when associated

with multiple parts of an organization. This was to provide integration of the parts of the

organization to create aligned work. Besides, Sanchez (2012) presented the structure and

resource allocation by the study of the productivity and process architecture of an

organization to identify the key characteristics of the system design and an aligned

strategy of the organization that was needed to be successful. This architecture can be

designed to support the change and integration of the organization’s resources,

cooperation, and collaboration which meet the new structural design.

2) ‘Few layers and wide spans of control’ ( Y7) means the

lean structures which allow organizations to focus on meaningful work, rather than on

coordination. With fewer organizational layers, communication and decision making

are faster, and senior leaders have a better view of day-to-day operations and customer

interactions. With wider spans of control, managers become more ambitious in

applying their leadership skills (Bhalla et al., 2011). The managers may not have the


time to check details in all the steps, but they can grow with the ability to apply coaching

and inspiration. The lean structure results in lower costs of operating, and other benefits

that are beyond only a financial dimension. Davison (2004) pointed out that the spans of

control for the large organization generally tended to have a wider span of control more

than a smaller organization. Organizations needed to have a management system in a

balance that is valid for employees and need to rely on priorities and carefully to

consider the factor of a wide range of controls. So, organizations needed to consider the

focus, the goals, and main markets of the organization, in that each organization has

different key stakeholders, competitors and markets. The assessment of the spans of

control have a direct relationship with the specific characteristics of the organization.

The wider spans of control and the empowerment to employees increasingly brought

about benefits to the organization, and also challenges to both the line managers and

subordinate employees to control their own work and their results. This means that

organizations would have lower costs of operating and the employees have a wide

variety of skills and experiences leading to them working independently.

3) ‘Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration’

(Y8) means HPO whose accountabilities, decision rights and collaboration were

constructed with thoughtful consideration, and the organization had clearly defined

roles that were carefully assembled to form a highly efficient organization. People

understood what was expected of them and which decisions were theirs to make

(Bhalla et al., 2011). Employees who were responsible for their individual tasks

needed to know about the organization’s strategy in order to work effectively

(American Management Association, 2007). When accountability was shared,

employees understood clearly when and with whom they needed to collaborate (Bhalla

et al., 2011). Employees can help the organization to determine the role charters, and

have a path to achieve clear accountabilities, decision rights and behavioral

expectations. The obvious roles would eliminate slow decision making and improve

the potential for performance and employee engagement in the organization. This

conforms to Davison (2003) who discovered that each person could control their own

work and results. This means that the organization would have lower costs of

operating and the employees had a wide variety of skills and experiences leading to

them working independently.


4) ‘Matched role requirements’ (Y9) means individual

capabilities were matched to role requirements. Roles needed to be staffed by the right

people with the right skills. Employees had a wide variety of skills and experiences

that needs freedom to perform (Bhalla et al., 2011; Davison, 2003). In filling positions,

it would be helpful to consider whether a role required a change agent, domain expert,

or safe pair of hands. Leading companies ensured that they had a balance of these

capabilities across the organization and recognize that their needs for particular roles

would change over time (Bhalla et al., 2011). From the need of a changed role, the

suitability of employees who had the role should have a new view. Brown et al. (2016)

found that organizations that had a management system associated with assessment of

external impacts had a unique role in the organization purposed to maintaining the

organization’s stability. Understanding this role was to create the opportunity by the

change agent to target the organization’s unique identity and to design intervention in

harmony with the organization’s mission. This includes the possible need to change

some characteristics of the management system.

The researcher summarizes the component of design (ETA3) from the

synthesis of related studies (American Management Association, 2007; Alavi, 2003;

Bamber & Dale, 2000; Barker, 1994; Bhalla et al, 2011; Davison, 2003; Jordan &

Michel, 1999; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012) as shown in figure and table below.

Figure 2.5 The element of design (ETA3)

Design (ETA3)

Structure and resource allocation

Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration

Maatched role requirements

Few layers and wide spans of control.


Table 2.6 The latent variables of Design


1. Structure and resource

allocation (Y6)

Structure and resource

allocation reflect strategic

tradeoffs. A well-designed

structure should emphasize

what matters most to an

organization. Statements of

the organization philosophy

are in accordance with the

strategy of the organization.

The executives may need to

consider the steps carefully

to ensure that each section

has the appropriate support.

The management structure of

the organization should have

the dynamics which is

focused on current and future

needs. When strategy,

performance, or the

competition environment

change, organizational

structure may need to adjust

the change as well. The

structure of the organization

is viewed through adequate

experience to show

performance by a more

complex structure, which

includes the matrix, business

center, process / productivity

Keyword 1.

- To emphasize what

matters most to an

organization.

Keyword 2.

- The structure of the

organization through the

experience adequately to

show performances by the

more complex structure.

Keyword 3.

- When strategy,

performance, or the

environment in a

competition changed,

organization structure may

need to adjust the change as

well.

Keyword 4.

- Organization needed the

project/process owner with

the transparent

accountability.


Table 2.6 The latent variables of Design (cont.)


that emphasize the structure.

Organization needs a

project/process owner with

transparent accountability,

which is especially important

when associated with

multiple parts of

organization. This is to

provide integration of the

parts of the organization to

create aligned work.

2. Few layers and wide

spans of control (Y7)

The lean structures which

allow organizations to focus

on meaningful work, rather

than coordination. With

fewer organizational layers,

communication and decision

making are faster, and senior

leaders have a better view of

day-to-day operations and

customer interactions. With

wider spans of control,

managers become more

ambitious in applying their

leadership skills and they can

grow with the ability to

apply coaching and

inspiring.

Keyword 1.

- Few layers and wide

spans of control in

organization.

Keyword 2.

- The lean structures which

allow organizations to

focus on meaningful work.

Keyword 3.

- Fewer organizational

layers leads to faster

communication and

decision making.

Keyword 4.

- Wide spans of control

make managers become

more ambitious in applying

their leadership skills.




3. Accountabilities,

decision rights, and

collaboration (Y8)

HPO whose accountabilities,

decision rights, and

collaboration were

constructed with thoughtful

consideration have clearly

defined roles that are

carefully assembled to form

a highly efficient

organization. People

understand what is expected

of them and which decisions

were theirs to make.

Employees who are

responsible for individual

tasks need to know about the

organization strategy in

order to work effectively.

When accountability is

shared, employees

understand clearly when and

with whom they needed to

collaborate. Employees can

help the organization to

determine the role charters,

and a path to achieve clear

accountabilities, decision

rights, and behavioral

expectations.

Keyword 1.

- Accountabilities, decision

rights, and collaboration,

are constructed with

thoughtful consideration

for performance and

employee engagement.

Keyword 2.

- Employees understand

what is expected of them

and which decisions are

theirs to make.

Keyword 3.

- Shared accountability

cause employees who

understand clearly when

and with whom they need

to collaborate.

Keyword 4.

- Employees who can help

the organization to

determine the role charters,

and a path to achieve clear

accountabilities, decision

rights, and behavioral

expectations.




4. Matched role

requirements (Y9)

Individual capabilities are

matched to role

requirements. Roles need to

be staffed by the right people

with the right skills.

Employees have a wide

variety of skills and

experience that needs

freedom to perform. In

filling positions, it could be

helpful to consider whether a

role required a change agent,

domain expert, or safe pair

of hands. Leading companies

ensure that they have a

balance of these capabilities

across the organization and

recognize that their needs for

particular roles would

change over time. With need

for a changed role, the

suitability of employees who

had the role should have a

new view.

Keyword 1.

- Roles need to be staffed

by the right people with the

right skills.

Keyword 2.

- A role requires a change

agent.

Keyword 3.

- Domain expert

Keyword 4.

- A safe pair of hands


6. The latent variable of High-Performance Organization (HPO)

(ETA4) ‘High-Performance Organization’ means organizations which achieve better

organizational results than other organizations in the same peer group in a similar

period of time. This kind of organization will be able to adjust for changes and to

respond to those changes quickly with a long-term management. The integrated

organizational structure is in alignment and is in the correct position to continuously

improve its core competencies. Employees are truly treated as the main assets of the

organization (Blanchard, 2010; Waal, 2010; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012). HPO

composed of six components as follows:

1 ) ‘Shared information and open communication’ (Y10)

means sharing information and facilitating open communication that builds trust and

encourages people to act like owners of the organization. Encouraging dialogue

lessens the danger of territoriality and keeps the organization healthy, agile, flexible

and fluid. In HPO, information needed to make informed decisions is readily available

to people and is openly communicated. HPO allows a trial and error to occur in the

learning. The line manager has an important role that would support the employee’s

development, to lead to improvement in performance and to create implementation of

the organization’s performance (Blanchard, 2010; Waal, 2010).

2) ‘Compelling vision, purpose and values’ (Y11) means the

hallmark of a high performing organization. When everyone supports such an

organizational vision – including purpose, a picture of the future, and values – it

creates a deliberate, highly focused culture that drives the desired business results

toward a greater good. In these organizations, people are energized by, excited about,

and dedicated to such a vision. They have a noble sense of purpose that creates and

focuses energy. Their personal values are aligned with the values of the organization.

They can describe a clear picture of what they intend to create. Everyone is aligned

and going in the same direction. This is a process of implementing a strategy to

improve a new choice that could replace an old inefficient strategy, in order to respond

to the environment efficiently and effectively, as well as to eliminate extrinsic

processes and information (Blanchard, 2010; Waal, 2010).

3 ) ‘Ongoing learning’ (Y12) means the focus on improving

capabilities through learning systems, building knowledge capital, and transferring


learning throughout the organization. HPOs engage in both organizational learning

and individual learning. Everyone is always striving to get better, both individually

and as an organization. HPO support continuous learning by inspiring each person to

add new skills and to support the use of the best practices and the transfer of

knowledge that would lead to high productivity and job satisfaction. This also includes

coaching, which is the one-to-one or the group process that helps people perform

according to their good intentions and transfer what they have learned to the

workplace. The ongoing learning embraces the online and virtual classroom for the

person in a distant location or to learn lessons in a short period of time. There may be

pre- and post- performance assessments which are to intended to measure norms and

timeliness of each person, each team and the organization (Blanchard, 2010; Waal,

2010).

4 ) ‘Focus on customer results’ (Y13) means HPOs

understand who their customer is and measures their results accordingly. They

produce outstanding results, in part because of an almost obsessive focus on results.

However, what is unique is the way in which they focus on those results – from the

customer’s viewpoint (Blanchard, 2010). The organizational performance is targeted

at the key stakeholders; the key stakeholders including employees, suppliers and wider

society. Organizations maintain good relationships with all stakeholders (Waal, 2010),

namely, from the viewpoint of the customer of the organization to drive the vision for

success, developing a strategy to discover what the customer needs. Organizations had

to learn what the customer wants, to understand the values, to create a superb

relationship, to be responsible for the customer, and to create a broad network of the

organization. This includes a win-win relationship. The line manager performs a role

in creating a balance between the general goals and the self-interest and teaching

members of the organization to prioritize the needs of business of the first order.

Moreover, line managers encourage employees to become leaders and to develop

better talent within the organization, including possibility for promotion for positions

in the internal organization. In this organization, the operators have a sense of security

regarding their body and mind, and job safety without fear of being immediately

dismissed (Waal, 2010).


5 ) ‘Energizing system and structure’ (Y14) means the

systems, structures, processes, and practices in HPOs are aligned to support the

organization’s vision, strategic direction, and goals. This makes it easier for people to

get their jobs done. Energizing systems and structures provide the platform for rapid

response to obstacles and opportunities. The bottom-line test of whether the systems

and structures are energizing is to look at whether they help people accomplish their

jobs more easily or make them more difficult. This is also to identify the gaps in the

employees’ performances and in the organization system and its partners, and then to

develop solutions to reduce the gap. Performance management helps an organization

to create accountability and a reward system based on the organization’s success, and

departmental and personal goals (Blanchard, 2010).

6) ‘Shared power and high involvement’ (Y15) means power

and decision making are shared and distributed throughout the organization, not

guarded at the top of the hierarchy. Participation, collaboration and teamwork are a

way of life (Blanchard, 2010). This involves building high-performing teams to create

the opportunity for all team members to influence the decisions and to share their

knowledge and skills, to help the unit or department in the development of shared

goals and strategies with each other through the work group, to teach the managers to

transfer the power and decisions to the employees for developing successful work, and

to help the individuals build the skills and attitude which is necessary to the work

goals, and to become partners who have the responsibility to create the organization’s

success (Blanchard, 2010).

The researcher summarizes the component of HPO (ETA4) from the

synthesis of related studies (Blanchard, 2010; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012; Waal, 2010)

as shown in figure and table below.


Figure 2.6 The element of high-performance organization (ETA4)

Table 2.7 The latent variables of High-Performance Organization


1. Shared information

and open

communication (Y10)

The sharing of information

and facilitating open

communication that builds

trust and encourages people

to act like owners of the

organization. Encouraging

dialogue lessens the danger

of territoriality and keeps

the organization healthy,

agile, flexible, and fluid. In

HPO, information needed to

make informed decisions is

readily available to people

and is openly

Keyword 1

- The information needed to

make informed decisions is

readily available to people.

Keyword 2.

- The empowerment and

team of high-quality

workers.

Keyword 3.

- Information needed to make

informed decisions is readily

available to people and is openly

communicated and allows a trial

and error to occur in the learning.

SHARED POWER and HIGH INVOLVEMENT

Energizing System and Structure

High Performance Organization

(ETA4)

Shared Information and Open Communication

COMPELLING VISION: PURPOSE and VALUES

ONGOING LEARNING

RELENTLESS FOCUS on CUSTOMER RESULTS


Table 2.7 The latent variables of High-Performance Organization (cont.)


1. Shared information

and open

communication (Y10)

communicated. The line

manager has an important

role that supports the

employee’s development to

lead to improve performance

and to create

implementation of the

organizational performance.

Keyword 4.

- The line manager has an

important role that supports the

employee’s development to

lead to improve the

performance and to create

implementation to the


2. Compelling vision,

purpose and values

(Y11)

The hallmark of a high

performing organization. When

everyone supports such an

organizational vision –

including purpose, a picture of

the future, and values – it

creates a deliberate, highly

focused culture that drives the

desired business results toward

a greater good. In these

organizations, people are

energized by, excited about,

and dedicated to such a vision.

They have a noble sense of

purpose that creates and focuses

energy. Their personal values

are aligned with the values of

the organization. They can

describe a clear picture of what

they intend to create. Everyone

is aligned and going in the same

direction.

Keyword 1.

- Vision, goals, and values are

clear to understand and help

people to be able to link

personal goals with the

organizational goals.

Keyword 2.

- Vision, goals, and values are

supported from all the sections

in the organization.

Keyword 3.

- The focus on value-driven for

desirable business results.

Keyword 4.

- The process of implementing

a strategy to improve the new

choice that could replace the

old inefficient strategy to

respond to environment

efficiently and effectively, as

well as to eliminate the extrinsic

process and information.




3. Ongoing learning

(Y12)

The focus on improving

capabilities through learning

systems, building

knowledge capital, and

transferring learning

throughout the organization.

HPO engages in both

organizational learning and

individual learning.

Everyone is always striving

to get better, both

individually and as an

organization. HPO

supported the continuous

learning with inspiring the

person to add new skills and

to support the use of the best

practices and the transfer of

knowledge leading to the

high productivity and job

satisfaction. This also

includes coaching which is

one-to-one or a group

process that helps people

perform according to their

good intentions and

transfers what they have

learned to the workplace.

The ongoing learning

embraced the

Keyword 1.

- HPO supports the continuous

learning with inspiring the

person to add new skills and to

support the use of the best

practices and the transfer of

knowledge leading to the high

productivity and job

satisfaction.

Keyword 2.

- The focus on improving

capabilities through learning

systems, building knowledge

capital, and transferring

learning throughout the

organization.

Keyword 3.

- The coaching which is

one-to-one or a group

process that helps people

perform according to their

good intentions and

transfers what they have

learned in the workplace.

Keyword 4.

- Pre- and post- performance

assessments measure norm of

each person, team, and the

organization.




online and virtual classroom

for the person in a distant

location or to learn a lesson

in a short period of time.

Pre- and post- performance

assessments measure norm

of each person, team, and

the organization.

4. The focus on

customer results (Y13)

HPO understands who their

customer is and measures

their results accordingly. They

produce outstanding results, in

part because of an almost

obsessive focus on results.

However, what is unique is

the way in which they focus

on those results, from the

customer’s viewpoint. The

organizational performance

that is targeted at the key

stakeholders including

employees, suppliers and

wider society. Organization

maintains good relationships

with all stakeholders, namely,

the viewpoint of the customer

of the organization to drive

Keyword 1.

- The focus on customer

results to assist the

department create a vision to

achieve success.

Keyword 2.

- The development of a

strategy to discover what the

customer needs and deliver

services to the customer,

more than the customers’

expectations

Keyword 3.

- The organizational

performance that is targeted

at the key stakeholders.




the vision for success,

developing a strategy to

discover what the customer

needs. Organization had to

learn what the customer wants,

to understand the values, to

create a superb relationship, to

be responsible for the

customer, to create a broad

network of organization. This

includes a win-win

relationship. The line managers

perform a role in creating a

balance between the general

goals and the self-interest and

teaching members of the

organization to prioritize the

needs of business for the first

order. Moreover, line

managers encourage

employees to become a leader

and to develop better talent

within the organization,

including promotion for

positions from the internal

organization. Organizational

operators have a sense of

security in their body, mind,

and job safety without a fear of

dismissal.

Keyword 4.

- The line managers perform

a role in creating a balance

between the general goals

and self-interest and

encouraging employees to

become a leader and to

develop better talent within

the organization.




5. Energizing system

and structure (Y14)

The systems, structures,

processes, and practices in

HPOs are aligned to support the

organization’s vision, strategic

direction, and goals. This

makes it easier for people to get

their jobs done. Energizing

systems and structures provide

the platform for rapid response

to obstacles and opportunities.

The bottom-line test of whether

the systems and structures are

energizing, is to look at whether

they help people accomplish

their jobs more easily or make

them more difficult. This is also

to define the gaps in the

employees’ performance and

the organizational system and

its partners to develop solutions

to reduce the gap. Performance

management helps an

organization to create

accountability and has a reward

system based on the

organizational success, and

department and personal goals.

Keyword 1.

- The systems, structures,

processes, and practices in

HPOs were aligned to

support the organization’s

vision, strategic direction,

and goals. This made it

easier for people to get their

jobs done.

Keyword 2.

- This was also to define the

space in the employees’

performances of and the

organization system and its

partners to develop solutions

to reduce the gap.

Keyword 3.

- The performance

management helps an

organization to create

accountability.

Keyword 4.

- The reward system is

based on the organizational

success, and department and

personal goals.




6. Shared power and

high involvement (Y15)

Power and decision making

are shared and distributed

throughout the organization,

not guarded at the top of the

hierarchy. Participation,

collaboration, and teamwork

are a way of life. This

involves building high-

performing teams to create

the opportunity for all team

members in order to

influence the decisions and

to share their knowledge and

skills, to help the unit or

department in the

development of shared goals

and strategies with each

other through the work

group, to teach the managers

to transfer the power and

decisions to the employees

for developing work

success, and to help the

individual build the skills

and attitudes which are

necessary to the work goals,

and to become partners who

have the responsibility to

create organizational

success.

Keyword 1.

- Power and decision

making are shared and

distributed throughout the

organization.

Keyword 2.

- To help the unit or

department in the

development of shared goals

and strategies with each

other through the work

group

Keyword 3.

- To teach the managers to

transfer the power and

decisions to the employees

for developing the work

success.

Keyword 4.

- To help the individual

build the skills and attitudes

for work goals, and to

become partners who have

the responsibility to create

organizational success.


2.4 Independent administrative organizations in foreign countries

The independent administrative organizations in foreign countries,

especially in the developed countries, generally originated from their systematic

reform of the state sector management. Public organization (PO) was the third-type

organization of the state sector that had an important role the same as the other public-

sector organizations. In many countries there also appeared a group of these

organizations that had grown in number and size as determined by the proportion of

budget and the number of employees and also in the scope of functions in which PO

started to replace other government organizations (Secretariat of the House of

Representative, 2015). The researcher reviewed the points of the distinct independent

administrative organizations in foreign countries that can be considered as a prototype

of a public organization in Thailand, which is consistent and relevant to this research,

including France, the United Kingdom, the United States of America (USA), New

Zealand and Germany, as follows:

2.4.1 The independent administrative organizations in France

The independent administrative organizations in France are juristic

persons, referring to the legal entities recognized by law as having rights and duties,

separately isolated from the direct control of government agencies under the name in

French ‘Etabissement Public’ or translated into English as ‘Public Organization’. This

type of agency arose after the great French revolution in 1789. Later, France had

juristic persons in the form of more than 8000 independent public organizations which

were composed of the central public organizations and local public organizations. The

largest number of PO included more than 7000 high schools and more than 70

universities throughout the country (Surapon Nitikripot, 2000).

The independent PO in the law of France is the organization of the

government administration which has been assigned the tasks from the top

administration, the Council of Ministers, to implement the mission of public service

under the control of corporate governance in both the individual (tutelle sur les

personnes) and in compliance in action (tutelle sur les actes). So, PO of France was

the implementing organization that operated in accordance with the policies and

guidelines of the administrative section. The independence was limited to only


freedom in a format that had been assigned in order to operate the mission effectively.

This was different from an independence in context, which means it was independent

of the state (autorite administrative independente in French); the organization that was

not under the authority control (Surapon Nitikripot, 2000).

POs in France were composed of several categories and a wide variety of

difference in terms of the objectives, and can be divided into four main categories

(Pokin Palakun, 1987), as follows:

1. POs of industry and commerce (Tablissement Public Industrials et

Commerciaux [in French]) were classified as:

1) Production and transportation: most of this was the state-

owned enterprises and as a juristic person in a PO, such as French coal (Charbonnages

de France [in French]), the Electricity Authority of France (electricity de france [in

French]). However, in the French system there was confusion in that some activities

could be a juristic person in the form of a PO, such as Air France, and some activities

had been transferred to the state (nationalization).

2) Fiscal Management: for example, the Office of deposit

Asset (Caissse des dnots et Consignations [in French]), but the banks and the

insurance companies that had been transferred to the state were not a juristic person in

the form of a PO.

3) Agencies of interest groups: for example, Chambers of

Commerce, Chambers of Agriculture (Chambers d’Agriculture [in French]),

Chambers of occupation of the craftsmen etc. However, the Chambers of physician,

lawyer, and architect were not a juristic person in a PO; they were the juristic persons

of the private sector who have created public services.

4) The economic intervention: only some organizations were a

PO, such as the fund for arrangement and regulation of the agriculture market (Fonds

d’Organisation et de Regularization des Marches Sgricoles-FORMA [in French]).

2. POs of social services were generally the National Social Security

Funds such as under the National Health Insurance Fund (Caisse Nationale

d’Assurancemaladie [in French]) and hospitals.

3. POs of culture were those such as secondary school, university or

college in the other higher education. The word ‘culture’ was used in the wider


meaning, which included research and the Royal Institute of France (Academic

Francoise [in French]).

4. POs of government administration (Tablissment Publics Adminstratifs

[in French]) utilized the format of the juristic person as PO for their administration,

especially in the context of a geopolitical area due to reasons of need to establish a

local government organization so that the administrations of these areas were

temporarily the juristic person as PO, such as communal cooperation (Syndicates de

Communes [in French]), or Districts, Province (Syndicates Mixtes [in French]), and the

establishment of a new city (Villes Nouvelles [in French]).

2.4.2 The independent administrative organizations in the United

Kingdom

The independent administrative organizations in the United Kingdom

originated from the ideas to improve the operational performance of the Government

of England by the establishment of an independent administrative organization that is

called the Executive Agency. As a result of the study report titled “Improving

Management: The Next Step” by Sir Robin Ibbs which was published in 1987, Mrs.

Margaret Thatcher, who was the leader in that period, had determined this project to

be a significant policy of the government called the ‘Next Step Programme: Executive

Agencies’, and assigned this special agency to be responsible for some missions which

belonged to the former administrative agencies. Up to the year 1995, England had

established the Executive Agency to perform the various missions of not less than 110

units, which covered the former tasks responsibilities (Rangsiyokrit, 1997).

The Executive Agency was one of the model of a Non-Departmental

Public Body: NDPB or Quangos, which was a new style of management set up under

the policy of the freedom to manage and reduce the hierarchy control in the

Government of England. These authorities did not need to directly work with the

management of the involved minister, but it was under the supervision of the English

Parliament. In order to be more flexible in the management and delivery of public

services, these Quangos can be classified by their missions and operations of four

major styles:


1) The policy consultants of the Council of Ministers (Advisory NDPBs) –

228 units.

2) The executive agency – 272 units.

3) The agency of prosecutor and law (Tribunal NDPBs) – 54 units.

4) The agency of warden and prison (Independent Monitoring Boards or

Boards of Visitors) – 3 units.

However, this did not include the organizations established under the

special mission, namely, state enterprise – 21 units, National Bank of England, the

public media organization – 2 units, and National Health Service (NHS) – 23 units.

According to a survey of Quangos Economic Research Council, it was found that the

executive agency was a group of the organizations, one of those four types of

agencies, that was most important to the management of the state sector. This can be

seen from the size of the subsidy which the central government provided to this type

of organization. More than 60% of Quangos received subsidies and the most, up to the

top 100, was the Executive Agency.

The Executive Agenda or ‘Next step agency’ was the integrated

management that uses their internal resources without the need to report directly to

any entity (Self Contained Unit). This agency was independent from the state

organization which had the traditional structure of the administration, the ministry. It

is more flexible in budget, as well as set up to be more flexible in organization and law

enforcement under the Act of Parliament. Meanwhile, it was still bonded to the

original affiliation ministry in terms of their responsibilities and correspondence to the

people who gained their services under their mission framework of the original

affiliation ministry, which the agency belonged to, through a contract of the mission

between the administrators of the executive agency and the original affiliation ministry

(A Performance Partnership Agreement).

Many missions that belonged to the original affiliation ministry had been

determined to be operated by the Executive Agency, especially the executive

functions, such as Civil Service College. Whereas, the mission of policy formulating

and advice was still the work of the government agency (Secretariat of the House of

Representative, 2015; The Office of the Board of the Reform of Government

Bureaucracy, 2001).


2.4.3 The independent administrative organizations in the United

State of America

The independent administrative organizations in the United States of

America are the performance-based organizations (PBOs) that are a part of the civil

service reform of the government of the United States of America in the 1990s. In

fiscal year 1998, the Government of President Bill Clinton had announced the policy

for the establishment of PBOs which was determined to be the long-term operation of

the civil service reform. President Clinton implemented the method of the civil service

reform by the establishment of the organization called the National Performance

Review (NPR) which was set up in his first term under the direction of Vice President

Al Gore. This was influenced by the concept in the book Reinventing the Government,

written by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler, published in 1992, which was to find a

way to make the government work better with lower costs. In the second term of

President Bill Clinton in 1997, the NPR had changed to the National Partnerships for

Reinventing Government also with the initials of NPR. The National Performance

Review provided the information on the issues associated with the relationship of the

National Assembly, which was the relationship between the PBO and the organization

as a parent department and provided examples of the agreement and the document

concept. In year 1996, President Clinton had announced the policy for the

establishment of PBOs, which assigned the long-term civil service reform in which the

government agency was expected to transform the PBO more in the future (The Office

of the Board of the Reform of Government Bureaucracy, 2001).

PBO was a unit designed to improve performance with targeted results

which can be measured, along with the incentives and flexibility to manage to the

goals for success (National Performance Review (NPR), 1997). The Government of

the United States brought the idea of PBOs from the Executive Agencies of the United

Kingdom, which in the UK had proven to work better and with an economical budget.

In fiscal year 1998, the Government of President Clinton had determined

the tasks for PBOs as follows (The Office of the Board of the Reform of Government

Bureaucracy, 2001):

1) The technical information dissemination of the National

Technical Information Service of the Ministry of Commerce.


2) The intellectual property rights of the Patent and

Trademark Office of the Ministry of Commerce.

3) The seafood inspection of the Ministry of Commerce.

4) The defense commissary services of the Ministry of

Defence.

5) The St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation of the

Ministry of Transportation and Communications.

6) The mortgage insurance services of the Government

National Mortgage Association and Federal Housing Administration belonging to the

Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD).

7) The retirement benefits services of the Federal Retirement

and Insurance Service belonging to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).

8) The US Mint belonging to the Ministry of Treasury.

9) The inspection of international shipments of agricultural

products of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service belonging to the Ministry

of Agriculture.

In practice, the organization which is still using the concept of PBO into

the present included the Student Financial Assistance Administration of the Ministry

of Education (Department of Education), and the Patent and Trademark Office of the

Ministry of Commerce.

2.4.4 The independent administrative organizations in New Zealand

New Zealand was one of the countries to join the reform of the public-

sector reform at the end of the 1980s, and to adopt widely the ideas of the new public

management (NPM) by expanding the experience from the NPM to the practice of

management, strategy, and integrated governance (Thammasat University Research

and Consultancy Institute, 2004).

The aim of the reform was to reduce expenses in the state-sector

administration and to focus on frugality and efficacy, as well as to focus on the value

of the new concept deriving from the private sector, with performance-based

management. The results from the reform caused the adjustment of the organizational

structure, and the establishment of a new agency which grew quickly and led to the


expansion of the public organization called the ‘crown entities’ (Orapin Sobchokchai,

2004).

The ‘crown entities’ agency was categorized as a public-sector

organization, including approximately 3000 units that were organized as part of the

state in accordance with the normal governance system in terms of the format of both

the Ministries and the Departments. Less than 50 units were state-owned enterprises,

and less than 20 units of all the rest were independent organizations under

management of the state (Secretariat of the House of Representative, 2015).

Although the agency of Non-Departmental Bodies had appeared over 100

years earlier, the organizations under the name of ‘crown entities’ were recently used

under the applicable law referred to in the ‘Public Finance Amendment Act 1992’.

This amendment instituted financial and management control systems to monitor the

group of organizations that had been set up by both the government and the National

Assembly, which were organizations not in the normal government system or were a

state-owned enterprise.

The main concept was that normal government agencies would conduct

only the activities that were in the main administrative domain of the government, and

not be commercial operations. If the organization did not meet this definition, it would

be required to be in the form of an independent organization under management of the

state. So, in an overview, the independent organization administration of the state had

important characteristics; it has a legal status separated from the normal management

system of the state sector, carrying a focus on the responsibility of the ministry to

which the independent organizations belong, and to report results of the operation to

the state. In addition, the independent organization administration in New Zealand

would have a variety of differences in the activities, the form of organization, the

scope, the size, and the relationship format with the Ministry Administrator. This was

because each independent organization under administration of the state was

established under their own purpose and requirements.

This condition brought about the enactment of the specific independent

organization administration (Crown Entities, 2004) to arrange the system and place the

terms about the original organizational group, as well as set the criteria for the

establishment of a new organization. The study report for the draft law classified the


type of the state management as the following six types; the first two formats were

subject to private law, and the rest were subject to public law:

1) Crown-Owned Companies (CROCs): If the mission of the organization

was in a commercial function, it would be evaluated on the basis of defined financial

and performance standards, and under private law that would change its status to be

state-owned enterprises. However, if the task was obviously not commercial activity

or aimed at commercial activities with mixed objectives, it would be considered an

organization of quasi-commercial form as an independent organization under

management of the state, known as Crown Owned Companies (CROCs).

2) Trusts are organizations that have a mission of management of funds

and assets subjected to the Private Trust Law. There are currently located

approximately seven units. The mission of these organizations was quite narrow and

clear, but with a lot of employees and large size.

3) Independent Crown Entities (ICE): performing important activity to the

whole of society, arranged to have a more independent structure and be more focused

on the associated civil society. It operates without needless political intervention from

the former Minister, to which it was subordinate, and with the prevention of decisions

made in accordance with political pressure.

4) Crown Agent: This is the largest group, as these are organizations who

have a role in the creation of public services. This activity is within the boundary of

the government policy, with the operation under public law.

5) Autonomous Crown Entities (ACE): This group of organizations is

designed to meet the policies of a particular government, especially in response for the

administrative activities of the government. This activity is usually provided by the

normal bureaucratic organization. However, it was included in this group because of

the need for the flexibility and free from control to raise the level of work.

6) Schools: Schools and educational institutions were actually in the

‘Crown Agent’ category. Due to the need for management to have independence and

management systems of their own under the committee system, it was provided as a

separate group.

There also appears to be a difference in details of the structure between the

organizations which displayed three formats:


(1) The first form: Crown Owned Companies (CROCs).

CROCs focused on commercial activities and operated under

private law even though they would be required to meet the purposes for public policy.

So, the structure and the role of the administrative section were similar to the state-

owned enterprises. Apart from the former ministry, the Ministry of Finance would also

be a major shareholder in an organization.

(2 ) The second form: Statutory (non-company) Crown

Entities.

Most organizations were categorized in this form; that is, the

management was under the jurisdiction of the executive committee (governing

boards). In operational level, the chief executive of the organization (CEO) was

responsible to the committee, without the right to perform on the organization’s board.

The reason was to prevent the CEO from having ability to dominate and interfere in

the role of the Board of Directors.

(3) The third form: Sole Corporation

In some organizations, such as the Retirement Commission

and the Police Complaints Authority, these were arranged with a specific structure,

different from the general independent administrative organizations of the state. In

other words, this did not use the format of the Executive Committee, but it was under

the responsibility of a single executive management, a CEO, who had the role and

responsibility for all the work of the organization as in the role of the Board of

Directors in the independent administrative organizations of the state.

2.4.5 The independent administrative organizations in Germany

POs of Germany had specific characteristics different from other countries

previously examined. Germany is governed as a federal state, so the state sector

management in Germany applied the concept of a state organization, which for a long

time has been outside of the normal bureaucracy, at both the federal and the region or

state level. The first unit to appear that to applied this organization format was the

Imperial Railway Authority (Reichseisenbahnamt [in Germany]) set up in the late

1870s. In a later period, more organizations of this kind were established. After the

year 1949, the adjustment to this kind of organization was embedded in the


management of the German state. The Constitutional Law of the year 1949 (Basic Law

of 1949) noted the legal code for the consent provision to the establishment of the

organization in the form of a PO at the federal level (Federal Agencies) under the

consent of the state (Bundeslander [in Germany]) (Secretariat of the House of

Representative, 2015).

The devolution for the provision of government public services to the

organization or agency in the PO system was widespread in order to lighten the load

from the bureaucratic organization of federal state in Non-Ministerial activities. The

PO system was intended to encourage these agencies to focus on the work set out by

the law draft and policy formulation, to support the operation of the Council of

Ministers, and to control the second-level organization. The customary administration

distributed the role between the government at the federal level, which focused on the

activities of policy formation and law regulation, and the government of the state that

focused on the activities in policy implementation. The organization at the ministry

level of the federal government was the stand-alone organization which was not

focused on the organizational expansion to the regional or local operation. As a result,

organizations in the form of PO of the federal government had been few in number.

However, after the year 1949, the role of the federal government began to expand

more, especially to perform a role of policy implementation which caused a significant

expansion of the member organizations, particularly organizations in the PO system.

The main reason for administration in Germany under the federal system mostly came

from the attempt to resolve the management problem of centralization such as in

England, New Zealand, or France (Thammasat University Research and Consultancy

Institute, 2004).

One of the main reasons for the establishment of PO in Germany may be

said that it was the need to attract the experts and scientists to have a role in the state

sector, which was part of a long-term tradition. In the past, a group of experts and

scientists often had a role in government as well as in the advisory committee.

However, to avoid the problem of structure in the normal bureaucratic system, and to

have more flexible management, especially the people management, it was leading to

the establishment of the organization in the form of PO. Whereas the reason for the

efficiency and performance savings was not the main cause even if it was recently


given priority to. It was just the idea to improve the management of the existent

organization, and not the reason for the establishment of a new organization.

Moreover, the reason for the independence and to be free from the political

intervention of the Council of Ministers was not the primary reason as well. The

concept for the establishment of PO in Germany did not occur to work in the tasks that

were part of the former bureaucratic government, but it would be set up to a new

mission, especially a mission on the rules and law enforcement rather than a practical

mission.

POs established in Germany had a key characteristic that differed from

other countries and Thailand, in that most POs were not a juristic person. Depending

on the constitutional law that provided the basis to these organizations, they may work

widely without the restrictions of the law, because it is considered these organizations

would work in the public administration as public-sector organizations in accordance

with other laws. So, it is difficult to identify the organization of the government in

different types. This may be set to these types of organization in the form of PO

(Secretariat of the House of Representative, 2015):

The first type: PO of Federal Agencies or Ummittelbare

Bundesverwaltung [in German] (Direct Federal Administration) performed a role to

provide the mission of the core government functions under their own regulatory

enforcement, such as banks, insurance, health care control, and price control, etc.

The second type: PO of the Bodies of Public Law or Mittelbare

Bundesverwaltung [in German] (Indirect Federal Administration) performed the role

to provide the other mission which did not belong to the main state tasks, such as

social security office, labor mission, and research institutions, etc. Under the context

of German management, the mission of social security or the labor mission did not

constitute the mission of the government directly, as it appeared in other countries

(Thammasat University Research and Consultancy Institute, 2004).

Moreover, the comparative study of the group of POs of foreign countries

revealed differences leading to the complexity of the study and a shared framework of

concept. It was found in a variety of POs in name even within the same country.

Depending on the specific features of the organization, POs that appeared in each

country can also be classified as a subdivided type of agency; for example, in Canada


there are at least four categories of PO, two types of PO in France, four types of PO in

Germany, two types of PO in Netherlands, two types of PO in New Zealand, three

types of PO in Spain, three types of PO in Sweden, two types of PO in UK, and four

types of PO in United States of America. (Thammasat University Research and

Consultancy Institute, 2004).

2.5 Public Organization in Thailand

The Public Organization (PO) in Thailand had adopted the concept of

establishment of independent administrative organizations such as seen in foreign

countries. These POs had a variety of characteristics in their size, mission and

appearance of mission, the initial reason for establishment, budget and the subsidy

support, organizational arrangement and legal status, the internal administration, a

mechanism of checks and balances, and a relationship with the ministry (Thammasat

University Research and Consultancy Institute, 2004). The researcher has reviewed the

concept of POs in Thailand and has described it as follows.

Background

The PO was the new government agency which was set up to support the

mission of the state to provide public services in an additional format apart from the

bureaucratic organization and the state enterprises. The new organizational form arose

because the public services arranged by the two types confronted a problem of

restrictions and barriers for some public services that needed highly flexible operation.

It was also the mission that did not have the characteristics of commercial activity for

profit or a self-contained income. Besides, a developed and more complex society

leads to the provision of public services in a wide variety of ways, such that the new

public services may be inappropriate in the original state agency (Secretariat of the

House of Representative, 2015). Examples of the modern mission of public services

are the education and training mission, or academic research at a high level, or

missions in specific public services carried out with high efficiency and high

effectiveness that differed from the general government tasks.


The method to conduct a modern mission of public services did not seem

appropriate to the operations in the government and state enterprise, because this

method does not require a single-force power of the government, did not require

protection under official penal code, and did not require the special authority over the

people, and there was not commercial profit from the action. The conditions that were

required to achieve the mission by objectives included the flexibility, the short

hierarchy, enough supportive budget from the state, and administrative organizations

that made their own decisions (Secretariat of the House of Representative, 2015). The

restrictions of government and state enterprise, and the need for a more flexible

organizational nature led to a new state organization in the form of PO.

The characteristic of public organization

1) The PO is the agency responsible for social and cultural public services

and technical public services, such as research studies, training, the maintenance of

arts and culture, the promotion and development of sport, the development and

knowledge delivery of science and technology, the environmental conservation and

natural resources, the public health and medical services, and the social welfare,

recreation, zoos, the services facilitated to people, or other operations of public

interests in which were not appropriate to use the method of government agencies.

Furthermore, the public services of POs must not be in a business that has competition

with the private sector, which is prohibited under the Constitution of the Kingdom of

Thailand.

2) PO does not have the purpose of profit.

3) PO is an independent legal entity, referred to as a juristic person.

4) PO has a relationship with the state:

(1) PO was established by the state.

(2 ) PO receives a subsidy from the state or has self-contained

income (Except for the University in accordance with the Act of Establishment).

(3) The state has the power to supervise by regulation (such as

through the appointment or removal of the Board of Directors and high-level

executives, budget approval, policy assignation, etc.).

(4) The investments of PO must be approved by the state.


(5) Employees of PO have the status of government official.

(6 ) The operation of PO does not use singular force of

government power, but rather uses contracts. It does not use the rules of government

(except the activity that needs to be enacted by use of singular power, such as the case

of the establishment of a university in the supervision of the state).

The classification of the public organization in accordance with the

law establishment performed in the 2 types

1 ) POs established by the Royal Decree issued in accordance with the

Public Organization Act 1999, presently 39 units (as of 6 February 2018).

2 ) POs established according to specific legislative act (of the regulatory

agency), such as the Thailand Research Fund, the National Science and Technology

Development Agency, and the Health Systems Research Institute (HSRI).

The regulation of public organization

According to the principle by the law of establishment, the supervisory

ministry would have a relationship with the PO. This was dissimilar to the government

agency that would be assigned the role of minister to the PO for purpose of control,

not the ministry of the government agency that was specified in the Government

Administration Act.

The Public Organization Act 1999 Section 43 assigned the supervisory

Minister who was responsible directly for the supervision of the PO to achieve success

in accordance with the intention of the establishment of the PO.

For the legal provision of the role of the Council of Ministers and the

Minister designated in the law, the Council of Ministers officiated as legal supervisor

in matters such as the appointment of qualified experts, and the criteria for

determining meeting allowance and other benefits of the Board of Directors. The role

of Minister mostly acted as the chairman of the committee or as committee member.

The Board of Directors performed a role in the policy formulation and supervision of

the organizational affairs.

For the relationship with the Ministry, both of the two types of PO would

have a relationship in two main aspects:


1) A representative of the ministry was a director by position in the

committee.

2) The operation of the government is according to the administration plan

of the state affairs, which must be consistent with the action plan of the ministry that

was associated with the PO.

Legal Status

Section 6 of the Public Organization Act 1999 set the basic principle of the

status of the PO as: “Public Organization is an organization of the state and a juristic

person.”

Section 45 of the Public Organization Act 1999 mentioned that “the

property of the Public Organization is the property of the state”. Section 15 provided

the protection of the properties of the public organization that was the property of the

state, saying that “the property of the public organization was not in the liability of the

compulsory execution.”

The supervisory minister

The Public Organization Act had defined and designed the management

structure of PO to be under the control of the Board of Directors. This Board was

under the supervision of the supervisory Minister.

In summary, the role of the Minister to the Public Organization was as

follows:

(1 ) The appointment of the Board of Directors of PO to the

Council of Ministers.

(2 ) The determination of the rules for the recruitment of

Committee Chairman and qualified members.

(3 ) The policy formulation, direction of the performance and

the overall goals, the signing of the testimonials between the Minister and to the

Chairman of the board, and the check and follow-up to evaluate the performance of

PO.

(4) The supervision and recruitment of the director of PO with

transparency and the benefit of check and follow-up.


(5 ) The determination of salaries and other benefits of the

director and the meeting allowances and other benefits of the Board of Directors.

(6) The Minister may ask a state officer to operate as an officer

or employee in the PO temporarily by the approval from the commander or employer

case by case.

(7 ) The Minister may command PO to clarify the opinions,

feedback reports, or to suppress the action of PO which was contrary to the objectives

of the establishment of PO, government policies, or the resolution of the Council of

Ministers related to that PO, as well as to command investigating the facts about the

action.

The Board of Directors of Public Organization

The board of directors of public organization is the highest organizational

level whose function is decision, policy formulation, and regulating the principle of

PO. The Council of Ministers designated the board with the number of members as

defined in the establishing Royal Decree; not more than 11 people. The members of

the board may be representatives of government in position of director, but they must

not be more than one-half of the Board of Directors. The board must include at least

one qualified member who was not a government official or operator in the state

agency.

The tenure of the President and members was in accordance with the

establishing Royal Decree and must not exceed a term of four years and they could not

hold a position for more than two consecutive terms.

The Board of Directors of PO has the authority to control PO to conduct

their affairs according to the set objectives and specified authority as follows:

(1) Formulating the administrative policy and approving of the action plan

of PO.

(2) Approving the investment plan and the financial plan of PO.

(3 ) Controlling the operations and general management as well as the

regulations or the requirements of PO as follows:

(a) The provision of the work of PO and the scope of the tasks.

(b) The determination of positions, the special properties of

positions, rate of salary, and another income of the officers and employees of PO.


(c) The selection, appointment, dismissal, regimentation and

disciplinary action, retirement, the complaint and appeal against punishment of

officers and employees of PO as well as method and conditions for hiring employees

of PO.

(d) The management and financial management, procurement,

and the property of PO.

(e) Welfare and other benefits to government officials and

employees of PO.

(f) The scope of authority and the rules about the performance

of the internal auditor.

(4) Other powers and duties according to the establishing Royal Decree.

Director of Public Organization

Director of PO had the functions of management of PO in accordance with

the laws, the purpose of PO, regulations, policy, announcement of the Board of

Directors, and is the superior of the officers and employees of PO in all positions.

Director of PO was responsible to the Board for the administration and

affairs of PO and to perform as the representative of PO in the affairs related to

external matters. The Director would hold a position tenure which was defined in the

establishing Royal Decree not to exceed four years and may be reappointed to the

position at the end of the term, but for not more than two consecutive terms. The

Board of Directors had the power to appoint and dismiss the director and to set the

rates of salaries and other benefits of the director in accordance with the rules

prescribed by the Council of Ministers.

The personnel of the public organization

The personnel of the public organization who worked regularly in PO were

called the ‘officials of the Public Organization’, and the operators who worked

temporarily in PO were called the ‘employees of the Public Organization’. Moreover,

there were also the state employees who worked temporarily in PO by the approval

from the supervisor. Benefits and welfare of the personnel of PO would be no less than


the minimum standards according to the law of the Labor Protection, the law of the

social security and the law of compensation.

The relationship between public organization and the state

Due to PO being a government agency set up to provide public services by

using the national budget, PO must be under the supervisory control of the state.

However, the report of budget allocation and the supervision of PO would respect the

independence in the performance of PO.

Grouping of public organizations

The resolution of the Council of Ministers, on September 7, 2004 divided

public organizations into three groups; the first group of public organizations involved

the development and implementation of specific policies of government affairs, the

second group of public organizations provided technical services or performed

interdisciplinary missions, and the third group of public organizations provided

general public services. Grouping of POs was in accordance with the criteria for the

work assessment that developed from three dimensions; management responsibility,

the dimension of the experience of the director, and the dimension of situation. This

can be described as shown in the table below.


Table 2.8 Grouping of public organizations established by the Royal Decree issued in

accordance with the Public Organization Act of 1999. There are 39 POs (as of 6

February 2018).

The first group of POs: the development and implementation of specific policies

of government affairs

POs established to develop and to execute

the key policies of government into

practice under the limited time. This kind

of PO required high-competency

administrators to direct the strategic and

network management or organization

management in both domestic and

international branches. POs who were

categorized in the first group must be

approved by the Council of Ministers.

1) Designated Areas for Sustainable

Tourism Administration (Public

Organization)

2) Office of Knowledge Management and

Development (Public Organization)

3) Thailand Convention & Exhibition

Bureau (Public Organization)

4) The Support Arts and Crafts

International Centre of Thailand (Public

Organization)

5) Highland Research and Development

Institute (Public Organization)

6 ) Pinkanakorn Development Agency

(Public Organization)




February 2018). (cont.)

The second group of POs: the technical services or performed interdisciplinary

missions.

POs established to provide the services by

high-level complex professions, or the

research of science that had a target to

initiate or create the innovations that

needed experts for the organization

management with a wide range of

activities, the scope of work covered in

the country level, or conducting activities

to achieve objectives by collaborating

with foreign countries.

1) Geo-Informatics and Space

Technology Development Agency (Public

Organization)

2) Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn

Anthropology Center (Public

Organization)

3 ) The Office for National Education

Standards and Quality Assessment


4) Agricultural Research Development

Agency (Public Organization)

5) Software Industry Promotion Agency


6) The Gem and Jewelry Institute of

Thailand (Public Organization)

7) National Institute of Educational

Testing Service (Public Organization)

8) Thailand Institute of Nuclear

Technology (Public Organization)

9) Biodiversity-Based Economy

Development Office (Public

Organization)

10) Thailand Greenhouse Gas

Management Organization (Public

Organization)






missions.

11) Synchrotron Light Research Institute


12) Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute


13) National Astronomical Research

Institute of Thailand (Public

Organization)

14) Defence Technology Institute (Public

Organisation)

15) Healthcare Accreditation Institute


16) National Innovation Agency (Public

Organization)

17) Electronic Transactions Development

Agency (Public Organization)

18) Electronic Government Agency

(Public Organisation)

1 9 ) Thailand Centre of Excellence for

Life Sciences (Public Organisation)

The third group of POs: the general public services.

POs established to do the general research

or general services, the normal common

work, or the services to the customer

group/particular client in

1) Mahidol Wittayanusorn School (Public

Organization)

2) Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public

Organization)






missions.


limited scope, having experts who had

ability to manage a small agency with not

a variety of transactions.

3) Community Organizations Development

Institute(Public Organization)

4) The Energy Fund Administration


5) International Institute for Trade and

Development (Public Organization)

6 ) Neighbouring Countries Economic

Development Cooperation Agency


7) The Golden jubilee Museum of

Agriculture Office (Public Organization)

8) Film Archive (Public Organization)

9) Moral Promotion Center (Public

Organization)

10) Thailand Professional Qualification


11) The Land Bank Administration


12) Thailand institute of Justice (Public

Organization)

13) National Vaccine Institute (Public

Organization)

1 4 ) Thailand Institute of Occupational

Safety and Health (Public Organization)


Table 2.9 a Grouping of public organizations set up according to a particular act of

law. There are presently 15 POs in this class of PO (as of 6 February 2018).



POs established to develop and to execute

the key policies of government into

practice under the limited time. This kind

of PO required the high-competency

administrators to direct the strategic and

network management or organization

management in both domestic and

international branches. POs who were

categorized in the group 1 must be

approved by the Council of Ministers.

1 . National Science and Technology

Development Agency


missions.

POs established to provide the services by

the accounting high-level complex

profession, or the research of science that

had a target in the initiate or create the

innovations that needed the experts for the

organization management with a wide

range of activities, the scope of work

covered at the national level, or

conducting activities to achieve objectives

by collaborating with foreign countries.

1. The Thailand Research Fund

2. Health Systems Research Institute

3. National Institute of Metrology

(Thailand)

4. The institute for the Promotion of

Teaching Science and Technology

5 . National Institute for Emergency

Medicine

6. National Science Technology and

Innovation Policy Office


Table 2.9 a Grouping of public organizations set up according to a particular act of

law. There are presently 15 POs in this class of PO (as of 6 February 2018). (cont.)




POs established to do the general research

or general services, the normal common

work, or the services to the customer

group/particular client in the limited

scope, having the expert who had ability

to manage a small agency with the not a

variety of transaction.

1. Office of Small and Medium Enterprise

Promotion

2. Thai Health Promotion Foundation

3. National Health Security Office

4. National Village and Urban

Community Fund Office

5. National Health Commission Office

6. The Teachers’ Council of Thailand

7. Office of the Welfare Promotion

Commission for Teachers and Education

Personnel

8. Thailand Arbitration Center

2.6 A summary of public organizations in the research.

The researcher summarizes the basic information of the three groups of

best-performing organizations that are part of this research, comprised of 10 units, as

follows.

1) The first group includes two public organizations with the mission of

the development and specific policy implementation of government affairs.

1 .1 ) The Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of

Thailand ( Public Organization) , located at Bang Sai district, Phra Nakhon Si

Ayutthaya Province, is an organization established under the Royal Decree

establishing the Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of Thailand (Public

Organization) in 2003, in the supervision of the Minister of Commerce. This PO has


the objectives of an organization to promote and support combined occupations to

create products of local art and crafts by a program of Her Majesty the Queen Sirikit,

and to promote and support the market for such products in both domestic and

overseas markets.

1.2) Highland Research and Development Institute (Public

Organization), located at the Headquarters, Muang District, Chiang Mai Province and

the coordinator office in Bangkok Chatuchak District, Bangkok, is an organization

established under the Royal Decree establishing the Highland Research and

Development Institute (Public Organization) which was effective from October 15,

2005, and the Royal Decree establishing the Highland Research and Development

Institute (Public Organization) Issue 2 on the date of June 9, 2009, in the supervision

of the Minister of Agriculture and Cooperatives. This PO was set up by a government

policy to support the royal projects and to expand sustainability of their royal projects

in economic and social development and the environment in the highland of Thailand.

This PO conducted the process and the mechanism to enhance the research and

development for new innovations, to enhance and secure the local knowledge, to retain

the value of the biological diversity, to share the knowledge from the royal projects

that mixed with the local knowledge, to build a strong community on the highland as

well as to encourage participation in the restoration of the forests and river sources,

and have academic exchange at the international level for the development of

knowledge and new innovation to benefit of the nation. The Royal Decree had

expanded the objectives to include management of the garden of His Majesty

Ratchaphruek 2006, which was the area of world garden plants of His Majesty’s 60-

year enthronement and His Majesty’s 80th year birthday celebration. The royal garden

became Royal Park Rajapruek. Later, on 25 April 2016, there was a change in the

name "Program of the Extension of the Royal Project" to "Highland Development

Project Using Royal Project System".

2) The second group includes six public organizations of technical services

or the interdisciplinary mission.

2. 1) Healthcare Accreditation Institute ( Public

Organization), located at the National Health Building, Mueang District, Nonthaburi

Province, is an organization established under the Royal Decree establishing the


Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public Organization) which was effective on June

22, 2009, in the supervision of the Minister of Public Health. This PO had the

objectives to review the system and the quality of healthcare, and to set the standard of

healthcare as a guideline to assess the development and quality assurance of health

care, to collect the data, to analyze, and to provide recommendations to encourage and

to develop a system to provide better service quality and safety standards of care. The

missions were also to encourage and support a mechanism to develop the distribution

of knowledge and support the access and utilization of services, and quality assurance

of healthcare in collaboration with the state organizations or agencies in foreign

countries and the private sector, the provision of courses and training for healthcare

employees to better understand the process of the assessment. This PO has a mission

to encourage, to support, and to drive the development of the quality of the health

service system by using self-assessment, and to visit and explore the quality

assessment process, which is a mechanism seeking to encourage the quality

development of healthcare.

2. 2) Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology

Center ( Public Organization) , located at Taling Chan District, Bangkok, is an

organization established under the Royal Decree establishing the Princess Maha

Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology Center (Public Organization) in 2000, in the

supervision of the Minister of Culture. This PO has the objective to be the information

knowledge center of the anthropology, archeology, history of art, culture and the local

knowledge of Thailand and Southeast Asia. This PO performs collection and recording

of the information in a variety of formats and supports the creation of new knowledge

and the promulgation of the research.

2.3) Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization

( Public Organization) , located at the Government Complex Commemorating His

Majesty, Laksi District, Bangkok, is an organization established under the Royal

Decree establishing the Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (Public

Organization) in 2007, in the supervision of the Minister of the Ministry of Natural

Resources and Environment. This PO has the objectives of analysis, screening, and

providing comments related to the project certification for the reduction of the release

of greenhouse gas emissions as a mechanism of clean air development. The mission


also includes the project monitoring of certified projects, the promotion of project

development, the certified greenhouse gas marketing, a center of information about the

situation on the greenhouse gas emissions, the provision of the project database of the

certified project and the sales of the amount of certified greenhouse gas, and the

promotion, development as well as providing guidance to government agencies and

the private sector on the management of greenhouse gas emissions.

2. 4) Synchrotron Light Research Institute ( Public

Organization) , located at the Headquarters Mueang Nakhon Ratchasima District,

Nakhon Ratchasima Province, and the coordinator office at Ratchathewi District,

Bangkok, is an organization established under the Royal Decree establishing the

Synchrotron Light Research Institute (Public Organization), on September 19, 2008, in

the supervision of the Minister of Science and Technology. This PO has the objectives

of research on the synchrotron light, the utilization of synchrotron light, the services of

synchrotron light and the technology of synchrotron light, and the encouragement of

teaching and learning of the technology of synchrotron light. The mission also

includes the operation in accordance with the government policy to develop the

country, the development of the infrastructure of science technology and innovation of

the country which indicates the foundation of the country’s development and is a main

factor for increasing the competitiveness of the country.

2. 5) Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute ( Public

Organization) , located at the Ratchathewi District, Bangkok, was an organization

established under the Royal Decree establishing the Hydro and Agro Informatics

Institute (Public Organization) in 2008, in the supervision of the Minister of Science

and Technology. This PO had objectives of the organization such as the research and

development of science and technology for water resource management and

agriculture, the services and propagation of the published researches, development and

information provided to organizations to take advantage in water resource

management and agriculture, the creation of network of research and development and

cooperation in water resource management and agriculture in the country and with

foreign countries. The mission also included the teaching services of technology and

the support of the utilization of the application of the Institute’s research and


development to people and community, and the development of successful water

resource management in the community with the potential to expand the results.

2.6) National Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand

( Public Organization) , headquarters located at the, Maerim District, Chiang Mai

Province, and the coordinator office in Ratchathewi District, Bangkok, is an

organization established under the Royal Decree establishing the National

Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand (Public Organization) in 2008, in the

supervision of the Minister of Science and Technology. This PO has the objectives of

research and development of astronomy, the creation of a network for research and

academic astronomy at national and international institutions in the country and

foreign countries. The mission also includes the promotion, support, and the

collaboration of astronomy with other state agencies, the educational institutions, the

private sector in the country and foreign countries, and the teaching services of

astronomy knowledge and technology.

3) The third group is public organizations of general public services.

3.1) Ban Phaeo Hospital ( Public Organization) , located at

the Ban Phaeo District, Samut Sakhon Province, is an organization established under

the Royal Decree establishing the Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization) in 2000,

in the supervision of the Minister of the Ministry of Public Health. This PO has the

objectives of healthcare in Ban Phaeo District, Samut Sakhon Province and the nearest

areas. The mission also includes the services by the establishment of the service

branches and health centers in the community.

3. 2) Film Archive ( Public Organization) , located at the

Phutthamonthon District, Nakhon, Pathom Province, is an organization established

under the Royal Decree establishing the Film Archive (Public Organization) in 2009,

in the supervision of the Minister of the Ministry of Culture. This PO has the

objectives of provision, collection, evaluation, selection, and the creation of a movies

registration system and the integral parts needed to retain the intellectual property and

the heritage of arts and culture of the nation, the creation of a body of knowledge

about the conservation of movies and the integral services associated with the support

for movie research and the encouragement of movie utilization as a tool for research in

other disciplines. The mission also includes integrating the study, review, and


application of movies as a part of public services. Moreover, this PO arranges the

activities to promote and to distribute movies as a media for study of the arts and

entertainment and is also the source of non-formal education, education in civility and

life-long learning. This PO provides the printed media, audiovisual media, and

electronic media about the movies to publish the study of movies to the public. This

PO is the center of movie information associated with the international film archive,

educational institutions, and the other film agencies in Thailand and in foreign

countries. This PO also has membership and participates in activities of other

organizations and the international organizations associated with the activities of the

film archive as assigned by the Cabinet or Minister.

2.7 Related researches

Waal ( 2005) studied “The Characteristics of a High-Performance

Organization” which aimed to identify the features of the high-performance

organization (HPO) by the meta-analysis method in 91 organizations in the past 10

years. The analysis results revealed the image of the modern HPO with five

characteristic features that managers needed to focus on to change a company into

HPO: (1) quality of management, (2) openness and action orientation, (3) long-term

orientation, (4) continuous improvement and renewal, and (5) quality of employees.

These characteristics related to the internal factors, namely, design, structure,

processes, technology, leadership, people and culture, and the factors of the external

environment that influenced the ability of organization to achieve excellent

performance. These features were the guidelines to determine the mode of operation

necessary for the manager to bring the organization to better results.

Cree (2000) studied “Employee intentions to participate in change: The

influence of organizational variables, employee beliefs and attitudes” to describe

the progress of the model of employee intention to participate in the change initiatives

of the organization. The result of the model referred to Fishbein and Ajzen's (1975)

theory of the reasoned action that the employee’s intention to participate in the change

initiative of the organization is influenced by the beliefs and attitudes of the employee.

The beliefs and attitudes of employee were influenced by a number of organizational


variables. The model showed that when the attitude of the staff was to more likely

participate in the organizational change, the awareness of each person to participate in

the change initiative of the organization increased. Moreover, the model showed the

dependent variable to be whether the employee had the intention or not to engage in

the change initiative of the organization. This all relates to the employee’s perception

about the value of ideas which had been reviewed and the supported by the

organization, and it is related to the employee’s belief about how the organization

treated them, their perceptions of justice and their experiences in the organization.

Therefore, to create an environment that encourages employee engagement, an

organization needs to be dedicated to ensuring that employees are treated fairly.

Simmelink (2012) studied “Effective methods for implementing change

and enhancing employee engagement in a change process: A qualitative study of

leader perceptions”. The results showed that a structured communication strategy

was the way the senior leader indicated the creation of employee engagement to the

process of change, scenario thinking created an opportunity to learn and to participate,

a vision in succession and flexibility in work. Moreover, the right culture and support

mattered to the application of change and the expansion of employee engagement in

the change process.

Groves (2016) studied “Testing a Moderated Mediation Model of

Transformational Leadership, Values, and Organization Change” focused on the

organization leader and the subordinate employees to investigate: 1) the mediator role

associated with whether subordinate employees are open to changed values, the values

of self-transcendence and the amount of resistance of employees to the changes, 2) the

mediator role which is associated with transformational leadership in the

organizational change. The transformational leadership assumes that at least the

performance results and the attitude of the followers could be explained by the

behavior of a leader to influence to the values of employees in support of

organizational change. This research utilized the concept of Preacher, Rucker, and

Hayes’s moderated mediation framework to extend the transformational leadership by

model testing. The test revealed that transformational leadership had an indirect effect

to the resistance to change of employees. The stronger leadership in work contexts was

affected by the high organization change magnitude.


Thammasat University Research and Consultancy Institute (2 0 0 4 )

created a study project to assess the public organization and the regulatory agency of

16 units, in the employment of the Office of the Public-Sector Development

Commission (OPDC). This study proposed four important objectives: 1) to study the

suitability of the Public Organization Act 1999 and the law enforcement, 2) to evaluate

the management of the state organization in the form of PO and the regulatory agency

compared with the intention of the establishment law, 3) to evaluate the performance

of PO compared to the objectives of the establishment, and 4) to study the guidelines

for the development of efficiency and productivity of the PO and the regulatory

agency of the state.

The results revealed the type of outcome for public organization and

regulatory agency in four groups as follows:

The Group 1: The organization who had outcomes in achieving the

mission and the condition of public organization contributed to its success.

The Group 2: The organization who had outcomes in achieving the

mission, but the condition of public organization did not support the success directly.

The Group 3: The organization who had a difficult assessment of

outcomes, but the condition of public organization contributed to mission.

The Group 4: The organization who must be considered for a review in

both the scope of mission and the organizational status in the system of public

organization.


2.8 The concept of Structural equation modeling (SEM)

Structural equation modeling (SEM) is a technique to analyze data of

several variables by multivariate analysis. This technique can find the relationship and

the cause of variables. This technique could be used for the analysis of both the

observed variables and the latent variable or unobserved variables (Wanichbancha,

2014).

SEM is a combination of statistical models which can describe the

relationship of the multiple variables at the same time. This is, on the other hand, the

analysis and check of the structural relationship of multiple variables in the form of

equations (multiple equations). The study of the relationship structure is covariance

between variables. SEM has various names which identified the covariance, such as

Covariance Structure Analysis, or Covariance Structure Modeling. Moreover, in the

SEM, the relationship structure is linear in form, so SEM is called the Linear Structure

Relationship Model or LISREL Model.

The basic elements of SEM are in two sections as follows:

( 1 ) Measurement Model is a model that the researcher needs to confirm

whether or not the indicators of many observed variables can be the indicators of the

latent variable. The measurement model often used is Confirmatory Factor Analysis

(CFA).

(2) Structural Model is a causal model which uses regression analysis. This

may be an analysis of simple linear regression, or multiple linear regression.

2.9 Research Framework

According to the literature review related to the research of the model of

public organizations as high-performance organizations, the researcher has applied the

concept of research of the high-performance organization under the idea of the state of

modern organizations, with the scope and content covering the creation and

development of the model as follows:

1) The concept of model means the structure that shows the relationship

between the various components or variables. The researcher has applied the concept

of model to describe the relationship between the various components or variables in


the natural phenomena or in the system, as well as the order in which the steps of the

components or activities in the system occur. This research concludes with the

creation of a ‘model’, which is the causal model derived from the technique called

path analysis and semantic modeling by bringing together how variables are related to

each other and defining the cause and effect (Bardo & Hartman, 1982; Good, 1973;

Keeves, 1988; Chadcham, 1995; Boonprasert, 2003; Utoompawn, 1998; Willer, 1967).

This research defines the relationship between the exogenous variables; culture and

engagement (KSI1) and leadership (KSI2); and the endogenous variables; change

management (ETA1), people (ETA2), design (ETA3) and high-performance

organization (ETA4). Each variable is composed of indicators which affected directly

and indirectly to other variables in the model.

2 ) The development of the model of public organizations as high-

performance organizations, in accordance with the concept of model, is a hypothesis

model leading to testing. The framework of HPO or the excellent organization is

comprised of the significant elements, deriving from the synthesis and summary of

related studies, namely; shared information and open communication (Y10),

compelling vision, purpose and values (Y11), ongoing learning (Y12), the focus on

customer results (Y13), energizing system and structure (Y14) and shared power and

high involvement (Y15) (Blanchard, 2010; Waal, 2010; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012).

Meanwhile, the components which are composed of the causal factors of

HPO from the synthesis of the documents and related researches can be divided into

five groups as follows:

The Group 1: Culture and engagement (KSI1 ) The synthesized

concepts pointed out that the discrete indicators of culture and engagement are culture

(X1) and engagement (X2) (American Management Association, 2 0 0 7 ; Banerjee &

Kamener, 2 0 0 9 ; Bhalla et al, 2 0 1 1 ; Hewitt Association, 2 0 0 9 ; Lussier & Achua,

2007).

The Group 2: Leadership (KSI2 ) The synthesized concepts pointed out

that indicators of leadership are; high-performance teams of individual leaders (X3),

future leaders (X4) and middle managers who embrace and implement strategy (X5)

(American Management Association, 2007; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Bhalla et al. 2011;

Lussier & Achua, 2007; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012; Waal, 2012).


The Group 3: Change management (ETA1 ) The synthesized concepts

pointed that indicators of change management were disciplined cascade (Y1 ) , and

evolutionary organizations (Y2 ) (Bhalla et al, 2 0 1 0 ; Kickert, 2015; Lawler III &

Worley, 2006; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012).

The Group 4: People (ETA2) The synthesized concepts pointed out that

indicators of people are employer branding (Y3), the critical roles and key talents (Y4)

and strategic human resources (Y5) (Armitage & Allen, 2007; Bhalla et al, 2011; Mir

et al, 2002; Ulrich & Allen, 2014; Waal, 2015).

The Group 5: Design (ETA3) The synthesized concepts pointed out that

indicators of design are structure and resource allocation (Y6), few layers and wide

spans of control (Y7), accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8) and

matched role requirements (Y9) (American Management Association, 2007; Alavi,

2003; Bamber & Dale, 2000; Barker, 1994; Bhalla et al, 2011; Davison, 2003; Jordan

& Michel, 1999; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012).


Remark

Figure 2.7 Research framework (the hypothesis model)

Remark






control


and collaboration


E1

Y1 Y2

E2

Y3 Y4 Y5

E3

Y6 Y7 Y8 Y9

E4

Y10

Y11

Y12

Y13

Y14

Y15

K2

X3 X4 X5

K1

X1 X2




communication


and values





high involvement





Waranya Jirangkul Methodology / 103

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This research has the details for methodology and the process as follows:

3.1 Research Design

This research utilizes the mixed method approach which combines two

ideas of qualitative research and quantitative research to answer the research question

in accordance with the research objectives. The process of research is described by the

three objectives in the following figure.


Figure 3.1 The steps for research methodology

The in-depth interview - Experts in public

organizations not less than 10 people

The SEM model of public organizations high-performance organizations

(Draft)

Objective 1

To construct the SEM

model of POs as HPO

Step 1 The qualitative research

To construct the model Document analysis - The literature review for

constructing the variables and the causal relationship between

the variables

The field surveys - The sample consisted of the officials of 1,022 people of the 10 excellent POs The hypothesis model fit the empirical data

Step 2 The quantitative research

To test the model

The questionnaire 80 items

- Verified by 5 experts

Model test

The inconsistent model

The model alteration

Objective 2

To test the SEM

model of POs as HPO

The information analysis 4 stages

1. Preparing information for analysis

2. analyze the basic information

3. The check of information quality

4. The analysis for research problem

The SEM model of public organizations as high-performance organizations

The results discussion based

on the quantitative research by

describing the qualitative

research enhancement

Step 3 The qualitative research

To summarize the practical approach

The practical approach of the model of POs as HPOs

The in-depth interview The representatives of the

excellent POs in 3 groups

Objective 3

To summarize the

practical approach of

the SEM model of

POs to HPO The appropriate assessment and the creation of the best practices

of the model of POs to HPOs


3.2 Step 1: The qualitative research to construct the SEM model

This was the first step in the qualitative research to answer Objective 1,

that is to construct the SEM model of public organizations (POs) as high-performance

organizations (HPOs).

3.2.1 Source of information

This research was conducted from data collection of two types; the

primary data, and secondary data.

1 ) The primary data originated from field surveys by means of in-depth

interviews during the period after the researcher’s dissertation exam proposal;

September 2016 - January 2017.

2) The secondary data is composed of a variety of data sources including

announcements, commands, and the Cabinet Resolutions concerning public

organizations and quality management in government organizations related to the

background and progress of POs of Thailand since the Public Organization Act 1999

and the reform of the bureaucracy of Thailand in 2002. This secondary data also

includes: the strategic plans, annual reports and the document publications of the POs

who are the sample in this research; the foreign documents related to the concept and

the format of the independent public organizations as a source of the best practices in

the establishment of POs of Thailand; research results and articles in the international

journals and national journals published by the government agencies, such as the

Office of the Public-Sector Development Commission (OPDC), and the Secretariat of

the House of Representative, etc.

3.2.2 Key Informants

The sample of the qualitative research by in-depth interviews

The researcher defined the sample from non-probability sampling by

purposive selection to ask the opinions of experienced people (Boonyarattapan, 2013) in

accordance with the qualitative research method for in-depth interviews. The researcher

selected proficient executives for interviewing of at least one person per PO from each

of three groups to confirm and verify the hypothesis model. The three groups in this

research are represented by 10 POs with the following details:


The first group: Two POs with the mission of the development and the

specific policy implementation of government affairs provided at least one person per

PO, namely; 1) the Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of Thailand (Public

Organization), and 2) the Highland Research and Development Institute (Public

Organization).

The second group: Six POs with a mission of technical services or an

interdisciplinary mission provided at least one person per PO, namely; 1) the

Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public Organization), 2) the Princess Maha Chakri

Sirindhorn Anthropology Center (Public Organization), 3) the Thailand Greenhouse

Gas Management Organization (Public Organization), 4) the Synchrotron Light

Research Institute (Public Organization), 5) the Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute

(Public Organization), and 6) the National Astronomical Research Institute of

Thailand (Public Organization).

The third group: Two POs with a mission of general public services

provided at least one person per PO, namely; 1) Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public

Organization), and 2) Film Archive (Public Organization).

3.2.3 Instrument

The instrument of this stage was the structured interview format for the

constructed model conducted by asking the interview questions in six topics based on

the measurement elements, namely; 1) culture and engagement (KSI1), 2) leadership

(KSI2), 3) change management (ETA1), 4) people (ETA2), 5) design (ETA3), and 6)

high-performance organization (ETA4).

3.2.4 Data Collection

The data collection was conducted to determine the variables and the

indicators for measurement, and the appropriate assessment of the hypothesis model

by the steps as follows:


Steps in the construction of the SEM model

1) To study the concepts, theories, academic documents, and researches

related to HPO.

2) To apply the acquired concepts and theories for determining the

variables and the elements affecting the HPO model.

3) To determine the basic hypothesis model which shows the causal

relationship of the elements affecting the HPO model. Steps 1 and 2 were synthesized

into the draft of the SEM model of PO as HPO based on theories, concepts and

research methodology.

4) To prepare to send the hypothesis model, based on the assumptions that

show the causal relationships of the elements affecting the created SEM model of PO

as HPO, to the experts in 10 POs of the three groups for consideration before the in-

depth interviews for the assessment.

The model adjustment and model development

Next, the construction of SEM model of PO as HPO utilized the in-depth

interviews as follows:

1) The researcher sent the constructed model and the points of questions

related to each element to the proficient executives from 10 POs in three groups of

missions who were assigned for the interviews prior to the interview appointment.

2) The appointment and interview proceeded by the points of questions in

the structured interview format.

3) The researcher summarized the answers, comments and suggestions

from the interviews to assess the appropriateness of model elements in order to further

develop the model of PO as HPO, as well as to expand the scope of the definition of

the terms, with clear and complete meanings.

3.2.5 Data Analysis

The researcher applied the interview information to explain rationale for

data collection. This employed the study of the framework for deductive reasoning,

which begins with the idea and uses the data to confirm or negate the idea (hypothesis

testing) (Holloway, 1997) as a guide for summarizing and composing a cohesive

system based on the purpose of the research.


3.2.6 Data validation

The purpose of this step is to examine the data adequacy (Potisida, 2011).

(1) The internal validation was to consider the suitability of the analysis

method and to attempt to answer the questions of to what extent the findings and

conclusions appeared to be strongly supported by evidence contained in the data, and

to check whether the presentation method, operating procedures and the process of

data analysis were in a transparent manner or not.

(2) The external validation was triangulation done in several ways. One

way was the consideration of the information from other sources analyzing the same

subject to see whether the summary was consistent. Another way was to study the

same issue using different data types, such as the use of the information of in-depth

interviews to verify the information of the focus group method, and to consider

whether the summary would be in the same direction or not. If the results were

consistent in different materials, the researcher could assure that the conclusions and

the interpretation of the research were valid and could be trusted.

3.3 Step 2 The quantitative research to test the SEM model

This step was conducted in fulfilment of the Research Objective 2, to test

the accordance of SEM model of POs as HPO with the empirical data by the

quantitative research.

3.3.1 Unit of Analysis

Unit of Analysis in this phase of the research was the group level, that is

the three groups of employees at all levels from 10 excellent POs operating under the

missions set by a resolution of the Council of Ministers on September 7, 2004,

established under the Royal Decree establishing the Public Organization Act of 1999.

The first of the three groups are employees in two POs with the mission of the

development and specific policy implementation of government affairs. The second

group are employees from six POs with a mission of technical services or an


interdisciplinary mission. The third group are employees from two POs with a mission

of general public services.

3.3.2 Population

Population in this research were employees in all levels from 10 excellent

POs, as mentioned, to acquire the empirical data to measure POs about the possibility

of the constructed model.

3.3.3 Sample and Sampling

The sample for the quantitative method consisted of employees in all levels

from 10 excellent POs in accordance with the criteria for the selection as follows:

(1) POs selected were established by the Royal Decree issued

in accordance with the Public Organization Act of 1999, to make this research under

the same context of administration in accordance with the provisions of the law.

Independent administrative organizations of the state that were set up according to a

particular act had their own different administration.

(2) POs were selected who had distinctly excellent

performances as considered by the results of the assessment by the annual

performance commitment. Especially excluded are any PO that was subject to

abolition by the resolution of the Council of Ministers on the Public Organization. So,

this research excluded POs who confront a problem in practice and who were reported

in a resolution of the Council of Ministers, or PO who was reported by the Office of

the Public-Sector Development Commission (OPDC) in the meeting with the Council

of Ministers to be abolished formally.

(3) POs selected were established by the Royal Decree issued

in accordance with the Public Organization Act of 1999 who had established a not less

than 5-year performance count down from 2014; the starting year of the research and

of the results assessment of the PO. The period of five years or more than that is the

appropriate time period for the study of the HPO (Waal, 2012), and it isn’t possible to

gauge the new PO still in the stage of the organizational formation with no

productivity results, background, and experience on the job.

(4) The excellent POs, according to the criteria of (1) - (3)

were further screened based on information from an interview of an expert in the


Office of the Public-Sector Development Commission (OPDC) in the Bureau of

Public Organization and the Independent Administrative Organizations to finally

identify the distinctive POs by the appropriate context. This brought about the 10 POs

from the three groups for the analysis of the model as shown in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Public Organizations for the unit of analysis based on criteria selection

No. Public organization which

was officially established in 1999 by the Act of

Parliament of Public Organizations

The results of the assessment by the annual performance

commitment in an overview of 5

years

Other evidences Organization age more

than 5 years.

1. Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization) (The third group: public organizations of the general public services)

Medium well - Good

- The resolution of the Council of Ministers on 10 November 2015 declared as a group award 1 fiscal year 2013 and the fiscal year 2014.

✔

2. Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public Organization) (The second group: public organizations of technical services or the interdisciplinary mission)

Good - Very Good

- In 2014 was found a subscription to receive the award TQA for access to the global standard - a resolution of the Council of Ministers on 10 November 2015 declared as a group award 1 fiscal year 2014.

✔

3. Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology Center (Public Organization) (The second group: public organizations of technical services or the interdisciplinary mission)

Good - Very Good

- ✔

4. The Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of Thailand (Public Organization) (The first group: public organizations of the mission of the development and the specific policy implementation of the government affairs)

Medium - Very Good

- ✔

5. Highland Research and Development Institute (Public Organization) (The first group: public organizations of the mission of the development and the specific policy implementation of the government affairs)

Very good - ✔

6. Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (Public Organization) (The second group: public organizations of technical services or the interdisciplinary mission)

Good - Very Good

- ✔


Table 3 . 1 Public Organizations for the unit of analysis based on criteria selection

(cont.)

No. Public organization which was officially established in

1999 by the Act of Parliament of Public

Organizations

The results of the assessment by the annual performance

commitment in an Overview of

5 years

Other evidences Organization age more

than 5 years.

7. Synchrotron Light Research Institute (Public Organization) (The second group: public organizations of technical services or the interdisciplinary mission)

Good - ✔

8. Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute (Public Organization) (The second group: public organizations of technical services or the interdisciplinary mission)

Medium well - Very Good

- ✔

9. National Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand (Public Organization) (The second group: public organizations of technical services or the interdisciplinary mission)

Good - Very Good

- ✔

10. Film Archive (Public Organization) (The third group: public organizations of the general public services)

Good - ✔

Source: The synthesis by research in accordance with the selection criteria

This research employed the multistage stratified cluster sampling. Because

POs have a wide variety in the population, the stratified sampling was intended to

make each layer similar. Then, the researcher sampled from each layer by independent

selection, that was the larger layer had more in the sample than the smaller layer

(Boonyarattapan, 2013). This could be described as follows:

(1) The determination of the sample size is based on the

concept of Kline (1998) who recommended that the criteria of the sample size in SEM

model has three levels; the first level sample that is five times the number of variables

means a few sample, the second level sample is 10 times the number of variables and

means it is an adequate sample, and a sample 20 times the number of variables means

an excellent sample. Meanwhile, Nunnally (1967) recommended that the number of

samples should have the size 10 times the number of variables. This research has 20

manifest variables. So, the sample size of this research should be at least equal to 20 x

10 = 200 per mission group. To compensate for the case of incompletely answered

questionnaires, the researcher then adjusted the number of the minimum sample from


200 to 400 people which conformed to the concept of Kline (1998) and Nunnally

(1967) who recommended the adequate sample for SEM analysis.

(2) Sampling

This research employed probability sampling by stratified

random sampling, to calculate the sample from each PO of the total of 10 POs based

the sample range from 200 to 400 people, as mentioned. This involved the steps to

calculate the ratio of the sample by the formula as follows:

The number of all sample x the number of population of each group The number of total population

The researcher calculated a 200-400 sample for each mission group

identified by the PO groups described as follows:

1) The first group: two public organizations with the mission of

development and specific policy implementation of government affairs:

1.1) The Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of

Thailand (Public Organization)

According to the formula,

the number of all sample x the number of population of each group the number of total population

The minimum sample was 200 x 74 = 21.95846 which was approximated to 22 people.

674

The maximum sample was

400 x 74 = 43.91691 which was approximated to 44 people.

674

Therefore, the sample of the Support Arts and Crafts

International Centre of Thailand (Public Organization) for distributing questionnaires

was at least 22 people and at most 44 people.


1.2 Highland Research and Development Institute (Public

Organization)



The minimum sample was 200 x 600 = 178.0415 which was approximated to 179 people.

674



674

Therefore, the sample of the Highland Research and

Development Institute (Public Organization) for distributing questionnaire was at least

179 people and at most 357 people. From this unit data was collected from 193 people,

because this was a group of employees of a PO who were assigned to official

permanent positions and were requested to answer the questionnaire. However, the

number of 193 people could combine with the sample of 30 from the Support Arts and

Crafts International Centre of Thailand (Public Organization). So, the total sample

number of the first mission group was 223 people, which was a sufficient number for

the analysis based on the maximum sample as referred above.

2) The second group: six public organizations with a mission of technical

services or the interdisciplinary mission:

2.1 Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public Organization)




The minimum sample was


518


400 x 64 = 49.42085 which was approximated to 50 people. 518

Therefore, the sample of the Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public

Organization) for distributing questionnaire was at least 25 people and at most 50

people.

2.2) Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology

Center (Public Organization)





The maximum sample was 400 x 70 = 54.05405 which was approximated to 55 people.

518

Therefore, the sample of the Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn

Anthropology Center (Public Organization) for distributing questionnaire was at least

28 people and at most 55 people.

2.3) Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization









Therefore, the sample of the Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management

Organization (Public Organization) for distributing questionnaire was at least 24

people and at most 47 people.

2 . 4 ) Synchrotron Light Research Institute (Public

Organization)






518

Therefore, the sample of the Synchrotron Light Research

Institute (Public Organization) for distributing questionnaire was at least 56 people

and at most 112 people.

2.5) Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute (Public

Organization)








518 Therefore, the sample of the Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute (Public

Organization) for distributing questionnaire was at least 43 people and at most 85

people.

2.6) National Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand







518 Therefore, the sample of the National Astronomical Research Institute of

Thailand (Public Organization) for distributing questionnaire was at least 28 people

and at most 55 people.

3) The third group: two public organizations with missions of general public services.

3.1) Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization)





200 x 1,010 = 193.1166 which was approximated to 194 people. 1,046

The maximum sample was 400 x 1,010= 386.2333 which was approximated to 387 people.

1,046

Therefore, the sample of the Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization) for

distributing questionnaires was at least 194 people and at most 387 people.

3.2) Film Archive (Public Organization)


The number of all sample x The number of population of each group The number of all population


200 x 36 = 6.883365 which was approximated to 7 people. 1,046


1,046

Therefore, the sample of the Film Archive (Public Organization) for

distributing questionnaires was at least 7 people and at most 14 people.

Researcher concluded the calculated number of 200-400 sample of each

mission group and the actual number of collected sample according to the criteria

described in the table:


Table 3.2 The sample of employees of the excellent public organizations by stratified

random sampling

Public organizations

Population of each group

The calculated number of 200-400

sample of each mission group

The actual number of collected sample

The first group: POs of the mission of the development and the specific policy implementation of the government affairs 1. The Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of Thailand (Public Organization) 2. Highland Research and Development Institute (Public Organization)

Total The second group: POs of technical services or the interdisciplinary mission 3. Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public Organization) 4. Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology Center (Public Organization) 5. Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (Public Organization) 6. Synchrotron Light Research Institute (Public Organization) 7. Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute (Public Organization) 8. National Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand (Public Organization)

Total The third group: public organizations of the general public services 9. Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization) 10. Film Archive (Public Organization)

Total

74

600

674

64

70

60

144

110

70

518

1,010

36 1,046

22-44

179-357

201-401

25-50

28-55

24-47

56-112

43-85

28-55

204-404

194-384

7-14 201-398

30

193

223

30

46

41

106

58

41

322

451

26 477

Total 2,238 606-1,023 1,022


3.3.4 Conceptual Framework

Figure 3.2 Conceptual Framework

Remark






control


and collaboration


E1

Y1 Y2

E2

Y3 Y4 Y5

E3

Y6 Y7 Y8 Y9

E4

Y10

Y11

Y12

Y13

Y14

Y15

K2

X3 X4 X5

K1

X1 X2




communication


and values





high involvement





3.3.5 Variables

Considering the concept in the study of SEM model with a synthesis of

documents and related research, it can be divided into the causal factors affecting

directly and indirectly on the model of POs as HPOs which is composed of six latent

variables. Each latent variable was measured by the manifest variable. There were 20

manifest variables with four questions per observed variable described as follows:


Table 3.3 The latent variables and observed variable (manifest variable)

No. Latent Variable Observed Variable Number of

question item

1. Culture and Engagement (KSI1) (Exogenous variable)

- Culture (X1) - Engagement (X2)

8

2. Leadership (KSI2) (Exogenous variable)

- High-Performance Teams of Individual Leaders (X3) - Future Leaders (X4) - Middle Managers embrace and translate strategy (X5)

12

3. Change Management (ETA1) (Endogenous variable)

- Disciplined cascade (Y1) - Evolutionary organizations (Y2)

8

4. People (ETA2) (Endogenous variable)

- Employer branding (Y3) - The critical roles and key talents (Y4) - Strategic human resource (Y5)

12

5. Design (ETA3) (Endogenous variable)

- Structure and resource allocation (Y6) - Few layers and wide spans of control (Y7) - Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8) - Matched role requirements (Y9)

16

6. High-Performance Organization (ETA4)

- Shared information and open communication (Y10) - Compelling vision, purpose and values (Y11) - Ongoing learning (Y12) - The focus on customer results (Y13) - Energizing system and structure (Y14) - Shared power and high involvement (Y15)

24

Total 80


3.3.6 Instrument

The instrument in this section of this research was one questionnaire of the

respondent’s opinions as input to the model of public organizations as high-performance

organizations. The questionnaire was created from the hypothesis SEM model.

Section 1: The personal information of the respondents of seven items by

a checklist, namely, gender, age, highest level of education, status, work time in PO,

position level, and type of work/division.

Section 2-6: The questions of the elements affecting the model of public

organizations as high-performance organizations. The questionnaire employed 5-rating

scales by the scoring criteria in accordance with the Likert scale method. Each item

was scored according to the table:

Table 3.4 The measurement criteria of the opinion level

Opinion level Score of opinion

Strongly agree 5

Agree 4

Neither agree nor disagree 3

Disagree 2

Strongly disagree 1

According to the criteria of the opinion level, the researcher divided the class

interval by opinion levels to show the scoring difference of opinion by the calculation.

range score = Maximum score - Minimum score

5 Number of level = 5 – 1 5

= 0.80

The researcher determined the possible criteria in practice of the model of

POs as HPOs as shown in the following table.


Table 3.5 The catagorized criteria of the opinion level in the question section 2-6

Point average

Meaning

1.00-1.80 The possible criteria in practice of the model of POs as HPOs according to the item element of latent variable is in the smallest level.

1.81-2.60 The possible criteria in practice of the model of POs as HPOs according to the item element of latent variable is in the small level.

2.61-3.40 The possible criteria in practice of the model of POs as HPOs according to the item element of latent variable is in the medium level.

3.41-4.20 The possible criteria in practice of the model of POs as HPOs according to the item element of latent variable is in the high level.

4.21-5.00 The possible criteria in practice of the model of POs as HPOs according to the item element of latent variable is in the highest level.

Section 2 was an eight item-questionnaire of the element of culture and

engagement (KSI1).

Section 3 was a 12 item-questionnaire of the element of leadership (KSI2).

Section 4 was an eight item-questionnaire of the element of change

management (ETA1).

Section 5 was a 12 item-questionnaire of the element of people (ETA2).

Section 6 was a 16 item-questionnaire of the element of design (ETA3).

Section 7 was a 24 item-questionnaire of the element of High-Performance

Organization (ETA4).

Section 8 was one open-ended question related to additional

recommendations.

3.3.7 The steps to create the instrument

The questionnaire was created by the steps as follows:

1) A review of related literatures was done to inform the basis

of the operational definitions and the variable structures that required measurement.

Learning the operational definitions led to descriptive operational variable definitions.

2 ) The operational variable definitions brought about the

detailed instrument of the study.


3 ) The constructed items of the questionnaire were based on

the operational definitions. For the developed and experimented variables, the

researcher applied the understanding of the context, content and sample for this study

and fine-tuned the questionnaire in order to propose a suitable instrument of the

developed constructed model. To construct the draft survey instrument, this process

assured the validity of content between the operational definitions and the questions.

4 ) The draft survey instrument was scrutinized by five experts

with regard to the details of the study topic, the objectives, the study framework, the

operational variable definitions, and the detail table of the instrument. Therefore, these

experts investigated whether the draft instrument had content validity that was

consistent with the question items, the operational definitions, the coverage and the

transparency of the question items and the accuracy of the language used and made

additional recommendations. The Index of Item Objective Congruence (IOC) for the

available question items ought to be more than 50% or between .50 – 1.0.

5) The question item adjustments according to the experts’

recommendations were applied to the questionnaire and then tested with 30 officers in

an independent administrative organization, which is close in nature to PO but was not

in the selected PO sample. Specifically, this test sample was the employees of Mahidol

University, established by the Mahidol University Act. The purpose of this test was to

examine the reliability of the instrument by the Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient research

paradigm. The validity of each variable showed values of 0.814-0.909 as displayed in

the table.


Table 3.6 The validity of questionnaire classified by variable Latent Variable Manifest Variable

Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient

1. Culture and engagement) (KSI1)

1.1 Culture 1.2 Engagement

0.882 0.814

2. Leadership (KSI2)

2.1 High-performance teams of individual leaders 2.2 Future leaders 2.3 Middle managers who embrace and implement strategy

0.933 0.861 0.939

3. Change Management (ETA1)

3.1 Disciplined cascade 3.2 Evolutionary organizations

0.883 0.873

4. People (ETA2) 4.1 Physical 4.2 Environment 4.4 Economic

0.894 0.916 0.932

5. Design (ETA3)

5.1 structure and resource allocation 5.2 few layers and wide spans of control 5.3 accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration 5.4 matched role requirements

0.890 0.893 0.901 0.892

6. High-Performance Organization (ETA4)

6.1 shared information and open communication 0.835

6.2 compelling vision, purpose and values 0.864

6.3 ongoing learning 0.872

6.4 the focus on customer results 0.923

6.5 energizing system and structure 0.909

6.6 shared power and high involvement 0.858


Table 3.7 The Study Instrument

variable name/ indicator Number of Item

Section

Item Measurement Quality Reference of Instrument

1. The personal information of the respondents

5 1 1-7 Check List and Fill in the blanks.

Constructed by researcher

2. Culture and engagement (KSI1) 8 items 2.1 Culture (X1) 4 2 1-4 5 degrees of Rating Scales:

the level 1-5 ranged from Strongly disagree to Strongly agree

Constructed from the concepts and related researches; American Management Association, 2007; Banerjee & Kamener, 2009; Bhalla et al, 2011; Hewitt Association, 2009; Lussier and Achua, 2007

2.2 Engagement (X2) 4 2 5-8

3. Leadership (KSI2) 12 items

3 .1 High-Performance Teams of Individual Leaders (X3)

4 3 9-12 5 degrees of Rating Scales: the level 1-5 ranged from Strongly disagree to Strongly agree

Constructed from the concepts and related researches; American Management Association, 2007; Bass and Riggio, 2006; Bhalla et al. 2011; Lussier and Achua, 2007; Pickering and Brokaw, 2012; Waal, 2012

3 . 2 Future Leaders (X4)

4 3 13-16

3 . 3 Middle Managers embrace and translate strategy (X5)

4 3 17-20

4. Change Management (ETA1) 8 items 4.1 Disciplined cascade (Y1)


Constructed from the concepts and related researches; Bhalla et al, 2010; Kickert, 2015; Lawler III and Worley, 2006; Pickering and Brokaw, 2012

4 . 2 Evolutionary organizations (Y2)

5 4 25-28

5. People (ETA2) 15 items 5 .1 Employer branding (Y3)


Constructed from the concepts and related researches; Armitage & Allen, 2007; Bhalla et al, 2011; Mir et al, 2002; Ulrich & Allen, 2014; Waal, 2015

5 . 2 The critical roles and key talents (Y4)

5 5 33-36

5 . 3 Strategic human resource (Y5)

5 5 37-40

6. Design (ETA3) 16 items 6 . 1 Structure and resource allocation (Y6)


Constructed from the concepts and related researches; American Management Association, 2007; Alavi, 2003; Bamber & Dale, 2000; Barker, 1994; Bhalla et al, 2011; Davison, 2003; Jordan & Michel, 1999; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012

6 . 2 Few layers and wide spans of control (Y7)

5 6 45-48

6 . 3 Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8)

5 6 49-52

6 . 4 Matched role requirements (Y9)

5 6 53-56

7. High-Performance Organization 24 items 7.1 Shared information and open communication (Y10)


Constructed from the concepts and related researches; Blanchard, 2010; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012; Waal, 2010 7 .2 Compelling vision,

purpose and values) (Y11)

5 7 61-64

7 .3 Ongoing learning) (Y12)

5 7 65-68

7 . 4 The focus on customer results (Y13)

5 7 69-72

7 .5 Energizing system and structure (Y14)

5 7 73-76

7 .6 Shared power and high involvement (Y15)

5 7 77-80

8. Open-ended question 1 8 - Filled in the blank Constructed by researcher



This process was conducted as follows:

1 ) Writing the official letter for data gathering to be issued by the faculty

of Social Science and Humanities, Mahidol University.

2) Pretesting the field survey to gather empirical data before delivering the

official letter to ask permission for data gathering in the target POs.

3 ) Collecting the returned questionnaires, checking for completion, and

examining the score based on the specified criteria preceding statistical analysis.

3.3.9 Data Analysis and Statistics

The data analysis was divided into four steps as follows:

1) Preparing the data for the readiness to analyze

a) Editing: In case the gathered questionnaires showed

incomplete or missing data, the researcher cleaned data by using the SPSS program for

frequency count.

b) Creating the data file for analysis using the SPSS statistical

program located in Mahidol University of Thailand. The data was prepared in the

necessary format for investigating the causal impacts and to confirm the legitimacy of

the SEM using empirical data and the LISREL program (Linear Structural Relations).

2) Analyzing the initial data

a) Analyzing the variables related to demographic attributes of

the sample by using SPSS program.

b) Analyzing the basis statistics of each observed variables in

questionnaire by using SPSS program for statistical analysis of mean, standard

deviation (S.D), skewness, kurtosis in order to study the variable distribution.

c) Using SPSS Program to scrutinize the preliminary statistical

analysis for the following: Normality, Homogeneity of Variance, Homogeneity of

Homoscedasticity, Linearity, and Multicollinearity.


3) The analysis for data quality verification

The researcher examined the validity and reliability of collected data

(Thompson, 2003).

1) This step applied to measure the available questions or

answers for desired measurements by the scrutiny of experts (Wanichbancha, 2014;

Creswell, 2005). The researcher proposed the adjusted questionnaire to the five

diverse-field experts of to examine and to revise the study instrument before try out by

content validity method. The five experts were as follows:

(1) One expert in the field of public administration

( 2 ) Two experts in the field of statistics and assessment and

evaluation

(3) One expert in the field of Thai Language

(4) One expert in PO who had input in determining the sample

in this study and had administrative experience in a PO of not less than 5 years.

One expert in PO who had input in determining the sample in this study

and had administrative experience in a PO of not less than 5 years.

+1 = consistent or the question item was certain valued to the operational

definitions.

0 = the question item was uncertain valued to the operational definitions.

-1 = inconsistent or the question item was certain valued to the operational

definitions.

The formula in the calculation (Jaikaew, 2008) displayed as follows:

N

R=IOC

Σ

IOC indicated the Item-Objective Congruence Index

R indicated the expert marks.

RΣ indicated the sum of individual expert marks.

indicated the number of experts.

The criteria of question-item selection showed that IOC with a value

greater than or equal to 0.50 seemed utilizable and available to measure the desired


objective. However, the IOC showing value less than 0.50 suggested the question item

could not measure the target objective (Jaikaew, 2008).

2 ) Reliability: The researcher utilized a questionnaire which

had been scrutinized and adjusted by the experts to try out with 30 respondents

resembling the total sample. The results were used to analyze the reliability of the

question set of each variable to test the within stationarity by the Cronbach’s Alpha

(Cronbach, 1990); the statistic for the questionnaire quality. A good reliability should

have a value more than 0.70.

The formula for calculation (Wanichbancha, 2002)

Cronbach’s Alpha =

k covariance / variance

1+ (k-1) covariance / variance

k represented the number of question items.

covariance represented the average of covariance among items.

variance represented the average of variance among items.

Consideration of the suitable variable in each component by statistical

analysis consisted of two dimensions:

1 ) Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Statistic; the statistic for the

identity matrix testing. Statistical significance showing values equal or less than .05

seemed the correlation matrix could not be identity matrix which was appropriated for

confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

2 ) Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO); by using SPSS Program, the

statistic for comparing the dimension of partial correlation between a pair of variable.

After the covariance of other variables were eliminated, the available measure of

sampling adequacy to the factor analysis for the KMO ought to be closer to 1 which

showed the high appropriation. Meanwhile, the KMO showing valued less than .50

showed the inappropriate value.


4) Analyzing to answer the research problem.

( 1 ) Analyzing the average of 20 observed variables in SEM

model of each group mission

(2) Analyzing the primary statistic consisting of six dimensions

of the three groups (N=1,022), namely, culture and engagement (KSI1), leadership

(KSI2), change management (ETA1), people (ETA2), design (ETA3), and high-

performance organization (ETA4).

(3) Analyzing the construct validity of the model and empirical

data by using the LISREL program (Linear Structural Relations) for the Confirmatory

Factor Analysis (CFA). The parameter estimation applied the ML method (Maximum

Likelihood), 2 - test, 2 / df, Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Adapted Goodness-of-Fit

Index (AGFI), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), and

Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR), in order to scrutinize the

accordance of hypothesis model and empirical data before applying it to analyze the

SEM model. This process was conducted to each of the three mission groups.

Afterwards, the researcher examined the convergent validity by the criteria:

a) The Standardized Factor Loading must be at

least 0.50. This value indicated that each manifest variable should be accounted as a

component of the latent variable by at least 50%.

b) The Average Variance Extracted (AVE) or Pv

must be a value from 0.5. This value indicates the ability of the variables to account as

a component of the latent variable.

c) The Construct Reliability (CR) or Pc must be a

value from 0.6.

(4) Analyzing the causal effect and examining the SEM validity

of the three mission groups with the empirical data by using the LISREL program.

(5) Summarizing the goodness of fit measures to study whether

an overview of the three models fitted to the empirical data.

The process of SEM analysis to answer the research problem is shown in

the figure.


Figure 3.3 The process of SEM analysis

Source: Wanichbancha (2014)

The Indices criteria for considering the consistent hypothesis model and

empirical data is shown in the following table.

1. Model Specification

2. Data Preparation

Flow Chart

4. Parameter Estimation

6. Result Interpretation

Model Adjustment 5. Model Consistency Check

Inconsistent Stage

Fitted Model

Model Adjustment

3. Model Possibility

Possible Model


Table 3.8 The Indices Consistent of Hypothesis Model and Empirical Data

No. Measurement Statistic of the Consistent Level

Criteria of the Consistent Level

Reference

1 2- test p0.05 Diamantopoulos and Siguaw (2000:83)

2 2/df 2 Bollen (1989:278);

Diamantopoulos and Siguaw (2000:83)

3 Comparative Fit Index (CFI) 0.95 Diamantopoulos and Siguaw (2000:88)

4 Adapted Goodness-of-Fit Index (AGFI) 0.95


5 Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) 0.05


6 Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR)

0.05 Diamantopoulos and Siguaw (2000:88)

0.08 Hu and Bentler (1999)

Source: Aungsuchod, Vichitwanna, and Pinyopanuwat, (2011)

3.4 Step 3: The creation of the best practices from the model of

public organization as high-performance organization.

This process was the last step of study to answer to the third objective, that

was to create the practical approach of the model of POs as HPOs.

3.4.1 Key Informants

In-depth interviews were completed with the key informants, namely, the

10 executives or experts of POs of the three mission groups from the previous process.

This employed the purposive samples of one or two experts, namely, a senior

executive, executive of primary level, and executives of middle level, to confirm the

practical approach of the model of POs as HPOs which was to be tested by the

empirical data of each group. The criteria for selection were: 1) holding the current

executive level and having performance no less than three years, and 2) proficient

experiences in a PO which was officially established in 1999 by the Act of Parliament


of Public Organizations. The organizations were selected by the same criteria as for

the sample for this study, namely: 1) experts of the Support Arts and Crafts

International Centre of Thailand (Public Organization), 2) experts of the Highland

Research and Development Institute (Public Organization), 3) experts of the

Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public Organization), 4) experts of the Princess

Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology Center (Public Organization), 5) experts of the

Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (Public Organization), 6) experts

of the Synchrotron Light Research Institute (Public Organization), 7) experts of the

Synchrotron Light Research Institute (Public Organization), 8) experts of the National

Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand (Public Organization), 9) experts of the

Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization), and 10) experts of the Film Archive

(Public Organization).

3.4.2 Instrument

The instrument in this stage was an interview format related to the

practical approach of the model of POs as HPOs of the three mission groups. This had

been tested in the previous process.


The process for data collection to create the practical approach of the

model is shown as follows:

1) The first step applied the data and the research result,

according to Objective 2, to analyze the content for constructing the draft of the

practical approach of the model.

2 ) The second step was to invite the experts to obtain an in-

depth interview.

3) The third step was to summarize the experts’ ideas for the

practical approach of the model of public organizations as high-performance

organizations of the three mission groups.


3.4.4 Data Analysis

This process applied the interview information to analyze the content of

the model in order to construct the analytic induction for the practical approach.

3.4.5 Data validation

This step was to examine the data adequacy from the in-depth interviews

(Potisida, 2011).

1) The internal validation was to consider the suitability of the

analysis method and to attempt to answer the questions of to what extent the findings

and conclusions were evidence to strongly support and to confirm the data, and to

check whether or not the presentation method and procedures of the operation in the

process of data analysis were in a transparent manner.

2) The external validation was by triangulation in several

ways. This might be the consideration of the information from other sources to analyze

the same subject to see whether the summary matched or not. Another way was to

study the same issue in different data types, such as the use of the information of in-

depth interviews to verify the information of the focus group method, to consider

whether the summary would be in the same direction or not. If the results were

consistent in different materials, the researcher could be assured that the conclusions

and the interpretation of the in the research were valid and could be trusted.

3.5 Ethical Consideration

Pre-established guidelines were utilized for the data collection. Prior

approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee of Mahidol University in

July 2016. Subsequently, an official letter requesting research involvement from the

Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Mahidol University, Thailand was

submitted. The data were collected and studied from July to September of 2017. The

researcher protected the confidentiality rights of the subjects before the data collection

by clarifying the objectives of the study to the respondents. In each step of the study,

the respondents had the right to accept or refuse to give answers. Therefore, obtaining

responses for the study proceeded voluntarily. The respondents read the research


consent letter before signing the agreement, prior to completing the questionnaire

answers, and in-depth interview. The in-depth interview included voice recording and

prior to the interview it was explained to the respondent that the information would be

kept as confidential, only the researcher would have access to the data and the

information would be destroyed after the completed study. If the informants felt

uncomfortable to give the information, they were freely able stop at any time. All data

from the questionnaire and interview phase of the research has been carefully and

concisely aggregated and summarized in overview and is not individually identifiable.

This study will not refer to the names of the respondents and no personal data in the

documents related to this study will be given except with the respondent’s permission.

Waranya Jirangkul Results / 136

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS

The detailed research results are given here in three sections. Section 1

presents the results of developing the structural equation model of public organizations

as high-performance organizations by the qualitative research results from in-depth

interviews. Section 2 presents the results of the quantitative research to examine the

consistency between hypothesis models and empirical data. Section 3 presents the

summary of the practical approach derived from the models of the management of a

public organization (PO) as high-performance organization (HPO) by qualitative

research.

4.1 The results of developing the structural equation model of public

organizations to high-performance organizations This research constructed the structural equation modeling (SEM) model

of public organizations regarded as high-performance organizations according to

Objective 1. This step utilized the qualitative research by the in-depth interviews of

experts of 10 POs, in order to request ideas on the appropriate assessment, as well as

suggestions for the created draft model.

4.1.1 The component of culture and engagement (KSI1)

All experts provided the opinion that the model can be applied to the

concept of culture and engagement from the synthesis of related research (American

Management Association, 2007; Banerjee & Kamener, 2009; Bhalla et al., 2011;

Hewitt Association, 2009; Lussier & Achua, 2007) to suitably construct the

measurement model. Experts in each of the mission groups offered suggestions that

reinforce this element as follows:


The manifest variable of Culture (X1) is appropriate for testing. The

researcher summarizes from the in-depth interviews that the excellent POs of the three

mission groups agree that organizational culture is a key factor driving the

organization to achieve its goals. All POs give precedence to a determination that

organizational culture is a substantial symbol conforming to organizational targets and

relates to strategic management by organizational objectives. Symbols of

organizational culture are displayed in a variety of organizational functions, such as,

short messages published via the web site, advertisements, declarations from

executives, and in a code of ethics. The main point of organizational culture

determination is that it is required of employees because it is focused on the

importance of the employees’ performance, and is fostered by a strong culture that

represents the expected behaviors in practice.

“ . . . There is a brainstorming meeting of executives and staffs of the

institution together to study the relevant data analysis of the environment

in order to set the organization values, to see whether the people and

organizations have some shared values or not, and to consider what

makes an organization strong or weak…”

National Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand (Public Organization).

In-depth interviews.

19 December 2016

“ . . .We manage organization culture by particular method which drives

employees to write the routine behaviors with good feeling and benefits to

work. These good behaviors would become the category of a concrete

format...”

Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public Organization).


21 February 2017


“...The important organization culture is to fight, to overcome difficulties,

and to get through to the service with a heart which present the motto of

the hospital by the goal to provide services to people and to go beyond the

ASEAN countries....”

Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization).


26 December 2016

The manifest variable of Engagement (X2) is appropriate for testing. The

researcher summarizes from the in-depth interviews that the excellent POs of the three

mission groups agree that engagement is a key factor driving an organization to

achieve its goals. Organizations typically measure the level of employees’

engagement. The senior and mid-level executives are close to the employees more to

communicate directly about the direction of the work. Communication has not been

blocked by the chain of command, which is a key for achieving higher engagement.

“ . . . We measure the level of employees’ engagement annually which is

tested by third party. This leads to encourage employees to love and

commit to work....”

Synchrotron Light Research Institute (Public Organization).


19 December 2016

“ . . . This institute encourages faith and trust among employees through

conversations, planning by workers, and actual practice....”

Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute (Public Organization).


5 January 2017


“ . . .We are new agency which includes the original system and the new

system. People who are in between the old and new can see the progress

of here leading to the engagement in the work....”

Film Archive (Public Organization).


2 December 2016

“...All public organization have distinctive task, so employees have spirit

to work by inner emotion which reflects in the high intention, and

seriousness for the field work....”

The Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of Thailand (Public Organization).


16 January 2017

As a result, all excellent POs realize the importance of their role within the

three mission groups, as it was set by a resolution of the Council of Ministers on

September 7, 2004. The component of culture and engagement is also related to the

organization’s leader; that the leader will deliver a vision and strategy to employees

with shared values and engagement in the organization. For example, in the first

group, public organizations with the mission of development and specific policy

implementation of government affairs, the leader involves staff with the values of

working as a team, accountability, and concise work responding to the state policies.

In the second group, public organizations with a mission of technical services or an

interdisciplinary mission, the leader utilizes vision and strategy to set the values of

integrity and transparency in the operation of all processes associated with the

procurement of expensive equipment used in tasks. In the third group, public

organizations with a mission of general public services, a strong leader determines the

values to highlight dedication and respect to the clients.

Moreover, the in-depth interviews showed that some excellent POs

manage organizational culture by encouraging employees to set routine behaviors to

become a satisfactory category of traits. POs check and manage the values for work to

make sure the culture aligns with strategy and develops the goals of the organization.


All excellent POs support organizational culture which focuses on the

success and the excellence of the organization. This includes the operation under

pressures from the external environment where each employee has the values and

commitment to the organization to create high-quality performance for the

organization that leads to efficient and effective results. Moreover, the flat

organizational structure also supports the high involvement with cooperation leading

to engagement for organizational success.

The researcher concludes that results from the in-depth interviews of

experts from 10 excellent POs confirmed the component of culture and engagement in

the measurement model to be a causal factor affecting the high-performance

organization (HPO). This leads to the model testing in the next research objective.

Figure 4.1 The component of Culture and Engagement (KSI1) confirmed by the in-

depth interviews of experts from 10 excellent POs

4.1.2 The component of Leadership (KSI2)

All experts provided opinions that the model can be applied to the concept

of Leadership from the synthesis of related research (American Management

Association, 2007; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Bhalla et al., 2011; Lussier & Achua, 2007;

Pickering & Brokaw, 2012; Waal, 2012) to construct the measurement model

properly. Experts in each mission group offered the suggestions that reinforce this

element as follows:

4.1.2 .1 The manifest variable of high-performance teams of

individual leaders (X3) is appropriate for testing. The researcher summarizes from

the in-depth interviews that the excellent POs of the three mission groups agree that

Culture and Engagement

(KSI1)

Culture (X1)

Engagement (X2)


leader teams are a key factor driving organizations to achieve goals. The in-depth

interviews pointed out that the excellent POs in practice apply a two-way operation

and a top-down and bottom-up work process where executives empower employees to

be able to display their potential in their work and the employees can regularly offer a

performance plan through consultation and agreement.

“ . . . Director have to hold a meeting with heads of various divisions to

make a decision and to talk about future projects to achieve all its

goals....”

Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology Center (Public Organization).


19 December 2016

“...We have the work style by the two-way operation and top-down and the

bottom-up, so that the administrators can give authority to employees to

bring out the potential to work....”



5 January 2017

“ . . . Each team has a supervisor with talking to communicate to work

together with the small meeting. This is to adjust the plan and place a

player (employee) to be in the right position in order to drive the work to

achieve goals....”



19 December 2016

4.1.2 . 2 The manifest variable of future leaders (X4) is

appropriate for testing. The researcher summarizes from the in-depth interviews that

the excellent POs of the three mission groups agree that a desirable leader is a key

factor driving an organization to achieve its goals. All POs give precedence to

determine leaders consistent with an organization’s future, vision and mission. Firstly,


this is evident in the annual plan of public organization assessments which consists of

the leadership indicator for success according to the master evaluation plan. This also

conforms to the the guidelines of the Board of Directors to Develop and Promote

Public Organization when meeting to consider approval in evaluating the POs and the

directors of the POs for each fiscal year. Secondly, POs apply the future leader

concept for the development plan to prepare the leaders of the future, especially, by

the Supervisory Skills and Mentoring System. Finally, POs apply work assignments to

practice leadership with role playing.

“ . . . We work by the leadership plan under the annual plan of public

organization assessment and director assessment that includes a measure

of leadership to the organization success as a master plan to evaluate the

public organization. This can determine leadership and organization by

future vision and mission that we always concentrate....”



21 February 2017

“ . . . The concept of future leader is important to all levels of the

organization. The excellent public organization should apply the

development plan for employees to prepare for being leaders, especially,

the plan of Supervisory Skills and Mentoring System. In addition, public

organization has to offer special mission or work assignment by important

role in order to practice leadership as role playing....”



5 January 2017


“ ...Leaders and executives need to understand the matched vision in the

same direction. Director who is the important leader must have leadership

that creates trust and faith in the employees to accept the work

together....”



2 December 2016

4.1.2.3 The manifest variable of middle managers embrace and

translate strategy (X5) is appropriate for testing. The researcher summarizes from the

in-depth interviews that the excellent POs of the three groups agree that middle

managers who embrace and translate strategy is a key factor driving an organization to

achieve its goals. All POs give precedence to the middle managers or heads of bureaus

as the key person to implement strategy to monitor overall employees’ performance.

The organization interprets the strategy and vision from a high-level executive into a

concrete plan for the operation of each team. Therefore, middle managers have

become an important part of the organizational plans, connecting to employees with

interaction and communication.

“ . . .Line managers and head of department play a part in the drive for

success by joining a work closely with the employees in the workplace and

the area. The organization determines the positions of middle managers to

serve all tasks by the proportion of 30-40 percent which is enough to

oversee the work. Middle managers perform the significant duties to

deliver strategies from senior management....”



16 มกราคม 2560


“ . . . Leadership affects organization management that leads to high-

performance organization, especially, the need to transform the changes.

This must be clear that leaders are not just the CEO, which includes the

line managers....”



19 December 2016

“...Leaders including middle managers have collaborative role to monitor

and to deliver key indicators to employees. We need to connect the

indicators of organization with the indicators of workers....”

Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (Public Organization).


30 December 2016

“ . . .Middle managers perform the significant role to implement policies

and to communicate with people to understand and to know the practical

method....”



26 December 2016

Moreover, all excellent POs are also related to

transformational leadership and strategic leadership which hugely contributed the

HPO. The three manifest variables of leadership as mentioned are able to reinforce the

significance of leadership in effective and efficient public organizations, because the

executives presenting the leading role empower their employees with the ability to

perform, and by the workers being able to propose their work plans through

consultation and approval. Meanwhile, strategic leadership is the way that both

executives and shared values support employees to think and work systematically with

their project assignments, and this promotes working as a team.


Therefore, the researcher summarizes that results from the in-depth

interviews of experts from 10 excellent POs confirmed the component of leadership in

the measurement model as a causal factor affecting the high-performance organization

(HPO). This leads to the model testing in the next research objective.

Figure 4.2 The components of Leadership (KSI2) confirmed by the in-depth


4.1.3 The component of Change Management (ETA1)


of change management from the synthesis of related research (Bhalla et al., 2010;

Kickert, 2015; Lawler III & Worley, 2006; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012) to construct

the measurement model suitably. Experts in each mission group offer the suggestions

that reinforce this elements as follows:

4.1.3 .1 The manifest variable of disciplined cascade (Y1) is


the excellent POs of the three mission groups agree that an organization needs to focus

on the most important mission with the strategic plan of each organization that is

reviewed each year and the assignments to employees are based on their mission

which is evaluated by SWOT Analysis, to review the strengths, weaknesses,

opportunities and threats to the organization.

Future Leaders (X4) Leadership

(KSI2)

Middle Managers embrace and translate strategy. (X5)

High-Performance Teams of Individual Leaders (X3)


“ . . .The work consists of both the focus on the current task which is the

critical mission to do, and tasks in the future which is a concept of the

leader who would like to open the change...”



2 December 2016

“ . . .The Institute studies the environment in organization to analyze the

strengths - weaknesses in the work and studies the external environment

on the status and the development of the Astronomy of the country and of

the current world to analyze opportunities - obstacles....”



19 December 2016

“ .. .The Institute analyzes the internal circumstances associated with the

high land, the trouble condition that is still on the high land, and analyzes

the situation, so it is the challenge for the development of the high area,

such as, the variance of the weather that caused the damage to the

agricultural products, or the development of communications technology

to contribute to the community to access information quickly....”

Highland Research and Development Institute (Public Organization).


14 December 2016

4.1.3.2 The manifest variable of evolutionary organizations

(Y2) is appropriate for testing. The researcher summarizes from the in-depth

interviews that the excellent POs of the three mission groups agree that it is important

to notice changes in the operating context and to adjust the strategy properly, in

accordance with the performance plan. All POs make an annual report that shows the

progress of the organization and the program for the future, such as the results of the

operation, the expansion of the work scope, budget, and manpower, etc.


Moreover, the meeting and annual indicator negotiations with

the Office of the Public-Sector Development Commission (OPDC) reveals that all POs

implement the government policies and practical guidelines according to the

contingency situation. All POs can be adjusted and developed with performance

measurements leading to the organizations’ success. Only Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public

Organization) creates an indicator with high performance measurement to challenge

itself to accelerate their development, which is a part of its strategy.

“...We have a measure to challenge ourselves for a better development. It

was adjusted later because some indicators did not match the real

situation, such as, the indicator to increase the rate of the cervical cancer

examination of the people as a challenge measure, but it must be adjusted

as yet the people did not dare to check....”



26 December 2016

“ . . .The goal of organization strategy should not change easily and

the main strategy of organization should not change readily. Meanwhile,

this needs the adjustment of tactic-strategy for line management in order

to achieve the goals of KPIs....”



19 December 2016

“...The Institute analyzes the external environment, such as an analysis of

the environment and the current society for the development of Astronomy,

the trend of the technology development associated with Astronomy, the

trend of economy, politics, law, and policy including the trend in foreign

countries with the research in conjunction with foreigners....”



19 December 2016


The researcher summarizes that results from the in-depth interviews of

experts from 10 excellent POs confirmed the component of Change Management

(ETA1) in the measurement model is a causal factor affecting the high-performance

organization (HPO). This leads to the model testing in the next research objective.

Figure 4.3 The component of Change Management (ETA1) confirmed by the in-depth


4.1.4 The component of people (ETA2)


of People (ETA2) from the synthesis of related research (Armitage & Allen, 2007;

Bhalla et al., 2011; Mir et al., 2002; Ulrich & Allen, 2014; Waal, 2015) to suitably

construct the measurement model. Experts in each of the mission groups offered the

suggestions that reinforce this elements as follows:

4.1.4.1 The manifest variable of employer branding (Y3) is


all POs give precedence to employer branding with human investment in training to

develop the employees’ abilities and encouraging employees to continue with their

scholarship in the organization. This includes rotation for learning through their roles,

mission, and responsibilities. The flat organization calls for more cross-function

performance to achieve the mission. The employee performance management system

is tied to their annual compensation (salary increase/bonus). Overall, POs provide

support for career advancement of employees.

Change Management

(ETA1)

Disciplined cascade. (Y1)

Evolutionary organizations (Y2)


“ . . . The system of Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute (Public

Organization) applies the performance management system of employee is

tied to the annual compensation (salary increase/bonus). We also promote

a higher-level knowledge by offering scholarships at the masters and

doctoral level to overseas educational institutions. Administrators and

employees set the thesis topic to be studied to bring about the knowledge

to benefit for the Institute in the future....”



5 January 2017

“ .. .The rotation is for learning not the punishment. We also explore the

need for analysis of the rate prescribed in the branch shortage by the

recruitment of the high-performing experts both in Thailand and

abroad...”



19 December 2016

“...The growth in the work of employee is from a clear career path in the

level of director, vice-chairman, and officers....”



30 December 2016

4.1.4 . 2 The manifest variable of the critical roles and key

talents (Y4) is appropriate for testing. The researcher summarizes from the in-depth

interviews that all POs give precedence to encouraging and to bringing out employee

potential by cross-function teams with administrators, especially in ad-hocracy

management with adaptive strategy. Experts point out that employee teamwork can

drive the organization’s success with cross-functional teams or with integrated multi-

party operations. Moreover, experts suggest that employees in the HPO must have the


knowledge of their own work. Most people will need to have positive behaviors with

high emotional intelligence (EQ).

“ ...Employees in HPO must have the knowledge of their own work.

Most people will need to be good friendly behavior with emotional

intelligence (EQ)...”



19 December 2016

“ . . . Our employees, especially the film conservation need to have

particular knowledge because this is significant for the task. So, they it

must be trained or practiced in the organization by the knowledge that

does not have to be taught in university....”



2 December 2016

“ . . . The Institute has the rising star project to support the high-

potential employees which is tied to the succession plan for employees for

the progress in their career....”



19 December 2016

“ . ..The Institute has teamwork system without the fixed-person and

cross-function teams or the operation of the integrated multi-party which

are the important mechanisms to work together between the division

level...”



5 January 2017


4.1.4 .3 The manifest variable of strategic human resources


interviews that all POs give precedence to human resources management which

focuses on developing people by working to link human resource strategy consistent

with the organizational strategy. The employees’ evaluation uses performance

management by their results (KPI – key performance indicators) along with the

individual performance program assessment. The human resources management has

an important role in the relationships in the organization.

“ . . .Manpower needs to be adjusted based on the mission and structure.

There is a new bureau to support critical mission with more

comprehensive work and a strategic point to increase the organization

performance management by the development of human resources

management systems and employee’s capability continuously. There is the

personnel allocation, rules, and regulations to facilitate the performance

and the service....”



30 December 2016

“...The human resources usually participate and join in the meetings with

senior management to give some opinion and to create a plan of personnel

which supports the policy and quick decisions....”



26 December 2016


“ ...We support employees to gain the knowledge and skills needed to the

performance for today and in the future by giving employees the

opportunities to set goals for their work and self-development through the

annual performance plan. This also includes an individual action plan to

evaluate the performance of employees....”



5 January 2017

“ .. .The policy of the Board of Directors has focused on the support the

human resource management. Now we explore what each job should know

and then we send to school for training....”



19 December 2016


experts from 10 excellent POs confirmed the component of People (ETA2) to the

measurement model as a causal factor affecting the high-performance organization


Figure 4.4 The component of People (ETA2) confirmed by in-depth interviews of

experts from 10 excellent POs

People (ETA2)

Employer branding

The critical roles and key talents

Strategic human resource


4.1.5 The component of design (ETA3)


of Design (ETA3) from the synthesis of related research (American Management

Association, 2007; Alavi, 2003; Bamber & Dale, 2000; Barker, 1994; Bhalla et al.,

2011; Davison, 2003; Jordan & Michel, 1999; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012) to suitably

construct the measurement model. Experts in each mission group offered the

suggestions that reinforce this elements as follows:

4.1.5.1 The manifest variable of structure and resource

allocation (Y6 ) is appropriate for testing. The researcher summarizes from the in-

depth interviews that all POs give the aligned opinion that organizational strategy is a

vital link to the performance level of people and the organization. The operation of a

PO will be assigned to a person who is clearly responsible for the project or the

mission. In addition, experts point out that the strategic goals should not change easily.

It should be changed only for the sub-strategy for a specific situation. Meanwhile, this

needs the adjustment of tactical-strategy for line management in order to achieve the

goals of KPIs (Key Performance Indicators).

Moreover, an organization needs to have a quality

management system for the most efficient performance according to the determined

purpose. All POs update and review their operational strategies, including the rules

and regulations every year to ensure compliance with the internal situation and

external changes.

“ ...The Philosophy of organization is in accordance with the intention of

the establishment to create the perpetuity of the Royal Project to a leader

organization of the research and development and the source of

knowledge of the development of high areas of the region. This leads to

the determined purpose, work strategy, plan, and project in any bureau,

namely, 1. Research Bureau 2. Development Bureau, and 3. Royal Park

Rajapruek. We have the meeting of working group to explain the process

details of the strategy time frame and the person and involved person who

is responsible for the project....”

Highland Research and Development Institute (Public Organization).



14 December 2016

“...The function of the institute will not be overlapped. If it is overlapped,

we will be talking and placing a player to the right position....”



19 December 2016

“ ...The strategic goal should not change easily and the main strategy of

organization should not change readily. Meanwhile, this needs the

adjustment of tactic-strategy for line management in order to achieve the

goals of KPIs....”



19 December 2016

4.1.5.2 The manifest variable of few layers and wide spans of

control (Y7) is appropriate for testing. The researcher summarizes from the in-depth

interviews that all POs have wide spans of control. All experts commented in the same

way that it can help them to work flexibly and efficiently by thorough communication

in order to quickly make decisions for the mission that are timely and matches the

goals. This is to communicate the goals of the leader as well.

“ .. .The structure of the institute is distinctive because it comes from the

organization structure of National Aeronautics and Space Administration

or NASA which focuses on the wide control and each section can be

working across....”



19 December 2016


“ . . . The organization structure is flat, so it brings about the sensitivity

decision that some issue may not need to approve by the director....”



26 December 2016

“ ...Few layers cause the easy communication that employees can access

the Director and high-level Executive closely. It is opposite to the

bureaucratic system that the government officials are generally difficult to

meet the director....”



16 January 2017

“...The wide structure and few officers cause more efficient operation than

the vertical. If there are insufficient employees, we can find the supported

manpower with flexibility. This is different from the vertical which

considers only the primary work....”



30 December 20169

4.1.5.3 The manifest variable of accountabilities, decision rights,

and collaboration (Y8) is appropriate for testing. The researcher summarizes from the

in-depth interviews that all POs determined the obvious accountability. There is a sort of

individual plan in the assigned tasks of a supervisor, the tasks in the work function to

develop or improve and the other supported tasks. Supervisors and operators define the

plan and the success measurements, the work done, including the determination of

accountability and clear roles to operate in accordance with the rules of authority.

“ . . . The structure of the work is divided into three levels: 1. senior

management 2. department level and 3. group level by team working that


executives of all levels to supervisors give precedence from start to finish.

This can be seen from the meeting to discuss the work periodically for the

presentation of work / progress at the executive meeting continuously.

There are also informal discussions between executives and employees

regularly....”

Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute (Public Organization). In-depth interviews.

5 January 2017

“...We have already set up ad hoc for the specific tasks which is other than

assigned tasks. The role assignment is also governed by the established

law. So, there is a systematic work process....”



16 January 2017

“ . . . The brainstorming workshop was organized by the institute's

management Board and the staff of the institute to share information

related to the implementation of the plan, and the internal and external

situational analysis and to develop SWOT Analysis as a strategic plan....”



19 December 2016

4.1.5.4 The manifest variable of matched role requirements


interviews that all POs give precedence to determining the employees’ roles consistent

with the mission. Flexibility in work performance and proximity to employees causes

the employees to better understand the work system and goals of the job.

All POs have close discussion through communication with the

social network of the organization, including meetings / workshops. In addition,

coaching is provided through various mechanisms such as direct coaching, on the job

training, and so on. Therefore, the roles of employees are in accordance with the


organization’s work. Moreover, in some cases, POs have considered to work in

conjunction with outside agencies who have higher proficiency.

“ . . . For the adjustment of the work plan, we have to talk and put the

players in the right position. It may need the rotation to set the concept of

work, but not punishment...”



19 December 2016

“ . . .For the implementation to achieve the goal, executives, supervisors,

and employees will have close discussions through communication with

the social network of the organization, meetings / workshops including

coaching, mentoring, and on the job training, and so on....”



5 January 2017

“...We have outsourced work, for example, in the rounded visit, there is a

team of people that we control to get the extensive job and to use less

workers with wider management....”



21 February 2017


experts from 10 excellent POs confirmed the component of Design (ETA3) to the

measurement model as a causal factor affecting the high-performance organization



Figure 4.5 The component of design (ETA3) confirmed by in-depth interviews of

experts from 10 excellent POs

4.1.6 The component of High-performance organization (ETA4)


of High-performance organizations (ETA4) from the synthesis of related research

(Blanchard, 2010; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012; Waal, 2010) to suitably construct the

measurement model. This element exists in every high-potential PO. Experts in each

mission group offered the suggestions that reinforce this elements as follows:

4.1.6.1 The manifest variable of shared information and

open communication (Y10) is appropriate for testing. The researcher summarizes

from the in-depth interviews that all POs have the same opinion that open

communication and thorough information are essential to continuous improvement.

This must be practiced with internal communications between executives and staffs

closely in the formal format, and informal regular suggestion / discussion of the work.

This is one factor that drives work to achieve the organizational goals.

Design (ETA3)


Few layers and wide spans of control


Matched role requirements


“ ...Information is shared in the middle providing for people who want to

use immediately. The development of information technology is an

important part to update the information....”



19 December 2016

“...Openness and action are needed to develop the work continuously, not

stop. We have internal communication between executives and staffs

closely in the formal form, and the informal suggestion / discussion of the

work regularly....”



5 January 2017

“ . . . We have KM (Knowledge Management) activities every Monday to

communicate on a regular work by giving value to the employee’s

opinions to improve their operations....”



21 February 2017

4.1.6.2 The manifest variable of (Y11) is appropriate for

testing. The researcher summarizes from the in-depth interviews that all PO experts

insist that a PO must set a vision, goals and values clearly which appears in the

strategic plan of the organization. In practice, the strategic compelling vision,

purpose and values plan is a guideline for an operation that is effective and efficient.

The accomplishments are based on annual indicators in accordance with the

testimonials negotiated with the Office of the Public-Sector Development Commission

(OPDC), which leads to the rating of good to very good.

Moreover, POs have a flexible operation in which executives

have communicated their core values, vision, and operational goals in accordance with


the strategic plans and annual work plans. There is an annual seminar in which

executives and staff spends a lot of time in the workshop together. It also emphasizes

the values and goals of the work with the interaction between the meeting and

employees.

“ . . .Each year, we develop a performance indicator that negotiates with

Office of the Public-Sector Development Commission (OPDC). We have

set a challenge indicator. In practice, if the indicator is not reached, it

needs to adjust, such as the rate of cervical cancer is not reaching the

target because people do not know and do not dare to check....”



26 December 2016

“ … Our executives have communicated core values, vision, and

operational goals consistent to the strategic plans and annual work plans

through the annual seminar which executives and staffs spend a lot of time

in the workshop together. We emphasize the values and goals of the work

with the interaction between the meeting and employees....”



5 January 2017

“...We have set a strategy to goals, indicators, as well as strategy for the

project with duration clearly. Office of the Public-Sector Development

Commission (OPDC) lauds that the indicators are applicable. We are very

good at scoring 4 and up....”



19 December 2016


4.1.6.3 The manifest variable of ongoing learning (Y12) is


all PO experts have the same opinion that organizational learning is essential to

success. Trial and error is permitted in the context of learning. Each organization has

different ways of promoting learning and encouraging employees to be inspired to add

new skills and competencies to work in order to create a higher standard of operation.

There is continuous learning in the organization, such as by organizing knowledge

management activities (KM) early in the week or regular exchanging of knowledge

between colleagues in the organization.

“ . . . Continuous learning keeps throughout work quality. It has been

encouraging workers to do the R2R on a regular routine work. This leads

to the show of their work and to win awards for innovative production....”



26 December 2016

“ . . . We organize a brainstorming session for all staffs to review the

organization's strengths and weaknesses, and to find the appropriate ways

to manage them. This is an organizational strategy for the organizational

framework to let all staffs use their own planning effectively....”



5 January 2017

“ . . . We have KM activities scheduled on Monday to exchange learning

between employees. It is an important activity of the institute to develop as

a knowledgeable person. This also works effectively and implements the

policy quickly....”



21 February 2017


4.1.6.4 The manifest variable of the focus on customer results


interviews that all POs give precedence to customers by delivering work to various

types of service providers. The organization's operations take into account the goals of

all stakeholders, including employees. The client is comparable to the customer.

Clients or customers determine the format of each operation.

Experts give the same opinion about the organization's

customer perspective. It is another factor that drives a vision to success and leads to

the development of a better corporate strategy. This is also the adaptation of the

organization to respond to the service. According to the basic principles established by

the law, POs are not seeking to profit for the existence of the organization. POs aim to

serve the needs of the clients.

Moreover, experts also advise that focusing on the customer

involves corporate social responsibility or CSR, which means corporate social

responsibility and environment responsibility. It operates under principles of good

ethics and management, with responsibility for society and the environment, both

inside and outside the organization. This leads to sustainable development. Many POs

have this activity as part of their operations. POs give precedence to CSR as they have

a division of Corporate Social Responsibility; CSR to set the work group responsible

for the policy and social and environmental responsibility in the service area. So, there

must be a department responsible for the effects that should be taken care of.

“...We have CSR with external agencies taking into account the impact on

society and service recipients. We focus on providing services that are

highly satisfied with service mind, which is a factor of success as a service

that is different from another public hospital....”



26 December 2016


“ . . .We have CSR activities every year up to the current year have been

operating for 10 years in collaboration with 6 major agencies, including

Coke, Honda, SCG, SCB. Bangkok Bank, Foundation, The Crown

Property Bureau....”



5 January 2017

“ . . . We have focused more on customer service based on customer

satisfaction. We know delivering services to customers must be real and

tangible. Customer surveys are grouped to meet the needs....”



19 December 2016

4.1.6.5 The manifest variable of energizing system and

structure (Y14) is appropriate for testing. The researcher summarizes from the in-

depth interviews that all POs give precedence to the management which is aligned to

support the organization to achieve its goals by the system of work and the structure of

accountability based on the government law. POs manage their performance at the

individual level with a reward system that depends on the success of the organization,

work department and personal goals. This includes the routine system monitoring to

provide mission and practice in accordance with the establishment law and operating

system supporting the success of the organization.

“ . . .POs also has the characteristics of the bureaucracy, so the process

must comply with the principles of law and regulation. Every operation

follows the whole process and document mandated by the same

management....”



16 January 2017


“...We have the management system which is tied to the operational goals

of the organization and the goals of the agency at all levels. This is to

convey the organization KPIs to the division KPIs, and to the individual

level KPIs. Performance is tied to annual return of an investment (annual

salary increase / bonus)....”



5 January 2017

“...We have strategic targets of the unit in accordance with the established

law. The sub-committee for Performance Monitoring determine what each

group is responsible for. There is a competition among each group to

achieve the goal collected by head of department....”



2 December 2016

4.1.6.6 The manifest variable of shared power and high

involvement (Y15) is appropriate for testing. The researcher summarizes from the in-

depth interviews that all POs give precedence to the point of power and decision

making. In practice, administrators empower employees to work creatively.

Employees are given the opportunity to offer opinions and new ideas that are

interesting in the development of work and leads to practical solutions. Preliminary

research was conducted on the topic based on reliable theories. When it becomes

successful, a project would be established to request a formal budget.

Moreover, administrators in all levels work closely with their

staffs by receiving opinions without being blocked by the chain of command. They

involved employees of POs in the actual operation.


“ ...Each group helps each other which is the highlight of the work of us,

especially when there is a big job, employees get involved in the work.

Employees can be consulted with management easily....”



19 December 2016

“ . . . Our staff gets the opportunity to offer opinions and new

interesting ideas to develop a job. This may be a small-scale research

topic, based on credible theories. When it becomes success, the project

was established to request a formal budget....”



5 January 2017

“...We have a strong focus on promoting employees with learning by

experience to build on their success. People invent innovations for

practical work, so we do not need to buy expensive tools....”



19 December 2016


experts from 10 excellent POs confirmed the component of High-Performance

Organization (ETA4) to the measurement model of HPO. This leads to the model

testing in the next research objective.


Figure 4.6 The component of High-Performance Organization (ETA4) confirmed by


An overview of the in-depth interviews of experts from 10 excellent POs

suggests opinions in the same direction and agreement with the constructed model as

shown in the table.

Compelling vision, purpose and values

Ongoing learning

The focus on customer results

Energizing system and structure

Shared information and open communication

Shared power and high involvement

High-Performance Organization

(ETA4)


Table 4.1 The components of variables used in this study constructed by the

researcher and confirmed by experts from 10 excellent POs.

No. Latent Variables Observed Variables before in-dept interview Confirmation of

experts

1. Culture and engagement

(KSI1)

Culture (X1)

Engagement (X2)

2. Leadership (KSI2) High-performance teams of individual leaders (X3)

Future leaders (X4)

Middle managers embrace and translate strategy (X5)

3. Change Management

(ETA1)

Disciplined cascade (Y1)

Evolutionary organizations (Y2)

4. People (ETA2) Employer branding (Y3)

The critical roles and key talents (Y4)

Strategic human resource) (Y5)

5. Design (ETA3) Structure and resource allocation (Y6)

Few layers and wide spans of control (Y7)

Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8)

Matched role requirements (Y9)

6. High-Performance

Organization (ETA4)

Shared information and open communication (Y10)

Compelling vision, purpose and values (Y11)

Ongoing learning (Y12)

The focus on customer results (Y13)

Energizing system and structure (Y14)

Shared power and high involvement) (Y15)

The researcher can take the in-depth interviews of experts to develop the

structural equation modeling of HPO models of the three groups of POs as follows:


Remark Group1 (F= First)

FKSI1 = Culture and Engagement Y3 = The employee brand is a core asset. FKSI2 = Leadership Y4 = Critical roles and key talents are clearly

identified and treated with care. FETA1 = Change Management Y5 = HR is a strategic partner and an enabler of

the business. FETA2 = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation reflect

strategic tradeoffs. FETA3 = Design Y7 = Few layers separate the CEO and the

frontline, and spans of control are wide. FETA4 = High-Performance Organization Y8 = Accountabilities, decision rights, and

collaboration are constructed with thoughtful consideration.

X1 = Culture accelerates strategic objectives.

Y9 = Individual capabilities are matched to role requirements.

X1 = Engagement is measured and cultivated to generate discretionary effort from employees.

Y10 = Shared Information and Open Communication

X3 = High-Performance Teams of Individual Leaders

Y11 = COMPELLING VISION: PURPOSE and VALUES

X4 = Future Leaders Y12 = ONGOING LEARNING X5 = Middle Managers embrace and

translate strategy. Y13 = RELENTLESS FOCUS on CUSTOMER

RESULTS Y1 = Change is a disciplined cascade. Y14 = Energizing System and Structure Y2 = The organization is

evolutionary. Y15 = SHARED POWER and HIGH

INVOLVEMENT

Figure 4.7 The structural equation modeling (SEM) of public organizations as high-

performance organizations of the first group: public organizations of the mission of

development and specific policy implementation of government affairs before the test.

X3

X4

X5

X1

X2

Y2 Y1

Y3 Y4 Y5

Y7 Y6 Y8

Y10

Y11

Y12

Y13

Y14

Y15

Y9

FKSI2

FKSI1

FETA1

FETA2

FETA3

FETA4

Group 1


Remark Group2 (S= Second)

SKSI1 = Culture and Engagement Y3 = The employee brand is a core asset. SKSI2 = Leadership Y4 = Critical roles and key talents are clearly

identified and treated with care. SETA1 = Change Management Y5 = HR is a strategic partner and an enabler of

the business. SETA2 = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation reflect

strategic tradeoffs. SETA3 = Design Y7 = Few layers separate the CEO and the

frontline, and spans of control are wide. SETA4 = High-Performance Organization Y8 = Accountabilities, decision rights, and












INVOLVEMENT


performance organizations of the second group: public organizations of technical

services or an interdisciplinary mission before the test.

X3

X4

X5

X1

X2

Y2 Y1

Y3 Y4 Y5

Y7 Y6 Y8

Y10

Y11

Y12

Y13

Y14

Y15

Y9

SKSI2

SKSI1

SETA1

SETA2

SETA3

SETA4

Group 2


Remark Group3 (T= Third)

TKSI1 = Culture and Engagement Y3 = The employee brand is a core asset. TKSI2 = Leadership Y4 = Critical roles and key talents are clearly

identified and treated with care. TETA1 = Change Management Y5 = HR is a strategic partner and an enabler of

the business. TETA2 = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation reflect

strategic tradeoffs. TETA3 = Design Y7 = Few layers separate the CEO and the

frontline, and spans of control are wide. TETA4 = High-Performance Organization Y8 = Accountabilities, decision rights, and












INVOLVEMENT


performance organizations of the third group: public organizations of general public

services before the test.

X3

X4

X5

X1

X2

Y2 Y1

Y3 Y4 Y5

Y7 Y6 Y8

Y10

Y11

Y12

Y13

Y14

Y15

Y9

TKSI2

TKSI1

TETA1

TETA2

TETA3

TETA4


4.2 The results of the consistency test of the hypothesis models and

empirical data Part 1 The results of the general information of the questionnaire

respondents.

Part 2 The results of the primary statistics and correlation of variables in

this study.

Part 3 The results of the analysis of the construct validity of the

measurement model.

Part 4 The results of the analysis of the construct validity of the

measurement model of the public organizations (POs) as high-performance

organizations (HPOs).

Part 5 The results of the analysis of the Structural Equation Modeling

(SEM) of Public Organizations as High-Performance Organizations.

To provide data analysis results and the understanding of the results of

data analysis, the researcher defines the symbols and meanings to represent the

statistics and variables as follows:

means Mean

S.D. means Standard Deviation

CV means Coefficient of Variation

SE means Standard Error

SK means Skewness

KU means Kurtosis

2 means Chi-Square

df means Degree of Freedom

p means Level of Significance

R2 means Coefficient of Determination

β means Standardized Factor Loading Coefficient

FS means Factor Score Coefficients

TE means Total Effect

IE means Indirect Effect

DE means Direct Effect

x


Part 1 The results of the general information of the questionnaire

respondents

The results of the data analysis in this section is presented as the variable

categories from the sample group for six variables: Gender, Age Range, Level of

Education, Status, and Career position and time in position as follows:

Table 4.2 The amount and the percentage of the sample identified by the variable

categories

Categorized

variables

Category Group mission of public organizations Total

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3

Amount Percentage Amount Percentage Amount Percentage Amount Percentage

1. Gender 1.1 Female 141 63.23 205 63.66 386 80.92 732 71.62

1.2 Male 82 36.77 117 36.34 91 19.08 290 28.38

Total 223 100.00 322 100.00 477 100.00 1022 100.00

2. Age

Range

2.1 18 – 20 years - - - - 13 2.73 13 1.27

2.2 21 – 30 years 46 20.63 84 26.09 245 51.36 375 36.69

2.3 31 – 40 years 135 60.54 148 45.96 168 35.22 451 44.13

2.4 41 – 50 years 29 13.00 73 22.67 35 7.34 137 13.41

2.5 51 – 60 years 12 5.38 16 4.97 16 3.35 44 4.31

2.6 above 60 years 1 0.45 1 0.31 - - 2 0.20

Total 223 100.00 322 100.00 477 100.00 1022 100.00

3. Level of

Education

3.1 Junior High

School or below

- - 2 0.62 33 6.92 35 3.42

3.2 Senior High

School or

Vocational

Certificate

1 0.45 6 1.86 143 29.98 150 14.68

3.3 Diploma /High

Vocational

Certificate or equal

6 2.69 15 4.66 37 7.76 58 5.68

3.4 Bachelor

Degree

112 50.22 177 54.97 252 52.83 541 52.94

3.5 Master Degree 99 44.39 112 34.78 12 2.52 223 21.82

3.6 Doctoral Degree 5 2.24 10 3.11 - - 15 1.47

Total 223 100.00 322 100.00 477 100.00 1022 100.00

4. Status 4.1 Single 118 52.91 195 60.56 286 59.96 599 58.61

4.2 Married 101 45.29 122 37.89 182 38.16 405 39.63

4.3 Other 4 1.79 5 1.55 9 1.89 18 1.76

Total 223 100.00 322 100.00 477 100.00 1022 100.00


Table 4.2 The amount and the percentage of the sample identified by the variable

categories (cont.) Categoriz

ed

variables

Category Group mission of public organizations Total

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3

Amount Percentage Amount Percentage Amount Percentage Amount Percentage

5. Position 5.1

Operating level

37 16.59 82 25.47 133 27.88 252 24.66

5.2 Expert Level 135 60.54 186 57.76 297 62.26 618 60.47

5.3 Manager level

or supervisor

47 21.08 48 14.91 45 9.43 140 13.70

5.4 Director level 4 1.79 6 1.86 2 0.42 12 1.17

รวม 223 100.00 322 100.00 477 100.00 1022 100.00

6. Work

Times

7.1 below 5 years 14 6.28 61 18.94 85 17.82 160 15.66

7.2 6-10 years 127 56.95 110 34.16 192 40.25 429 41.98

7.3 11-15 years 30 13.45 68 21.12 88 18.45 186 18.20

7.4 16-20 years 25 11.21 40 12.42 49 10.27 114 11.15

7.5 20 years above 27 12.11 43 13.35 63 13.21 133 13.01

Total 223 100.00 322 100.00 477 100.00 1022 100.00

The results of analysis from the table shows the general background data

distribution in the sample from the questionnaires collected from the excellent POs in

three mission groups: the first group, public organizations with the mission of

development and specific policy implementation of government affairs; the second

group, public organizations of technical services or an interdisciplinary mission, and

the third group, public organizations of general public services. Most of the informants

are females, 732 people in total (71.62%) which divided into the first mission group of

141 people (63.23%), the second mission group of 205 people (63.66%), and the third

mission group: 386 people (80.95%) who are female. Most of informants had the age

range of 31-40 years old, 451 in total (44.13%), which divided into the first group of

135 people (60.54%), the second group of 148 people (45.96%), and the third group of

168 people (35.22%) who are in the age range of 31-40 years old.

Level of Education is mostly Bachelor Degree: 541 people in total

(52.94%), which divided into the first group of 112 people (50.22%), the second group

of 177 people (54.97%), and the third group of 252 people (52.83%) who had bachelor

degree. Most of informants are single: 599 people in total (58.61%), which divided

into the first group consisting of 118 people (52.91%), the second group consisting of


195 people (60.56%), and the third group consisting of 286 people (59.96%) who are

single.

Most positions are professionals with 618 people in total (60.47%), which

divided into the first group consisting of 135 professionals (60.54%), the second group

consisting of 186 professionals (57.76%), and the third group consisting of 297

professionals (62.26%). Most informants have work time of 6-10 years: 429 people in

total (41.98%), which divided into the first group of 127 people (56.95%), the second

group of 110 people (34.16%), and the third group of 192 people (40.25%) with work

time of 6-10 years.

Part 2 The results of the primary statistics and correlation of

variables in this study

This part is to check the univariate normality. The statistic used to analyze

the distribution of data are Mean ( ), Standard Deviation (S.D.), MAX, MIN, Range,

Skewness (SK), and Kurtosis (KU) to describe the characteristics of distribution and

the continuous variable distribution. The models of the three groups of POs consisted

of 1,022 people, namely, the first group: public organizations with the mission of the

development and specific policy implementation of government affairs, the second

group: public organizations of technical services or an interdisciplinary mission, and

the third group: public organizations of general public services. The results of the

analysis are presented in two parts: 1) The results of the analysis of the basic statistics

of the variables in the research and 2) the results of the correlation analysis of the

variables in the research, as follows:

2 .1 The results of the analysis of the basic statistics of the

variables in the research

The results of basic statistical analysis of component variables

and observed variables in the research model show that most of the observed variables

display skewness as a minus value which means the variables are high-value. The

observed variables with high values are: high-performance teams of individual leaders

(X3) (skewness = -0.618, kurtosis = 0.642) and future leaders (X4) (skewness = -

0.604, kurtosis = 0.922) in the component of Leadership (KSI2). This shows that most


of the sample gives precedence to determine leadership of the PO at a high level. The

manifest variable of culture (X1) (skewness = -0.612, kurtosis = 1.086) in the

component of Culture and Engagement (KSI1) shows that most of the sample gives

precedence to determine culture of a PO at a high level. Despite the observed variables

of research model with the skewness value and kurtosis value that differ from zero, the

variables distribute on a normal curve due to being near zero.

Table 4 . 3 The statistics describe the nature of the variables in the research model

(n=1,022)

Variables The statistics of sample (N=1,022)

S.D. Level Min Max Range SK KU

Culture and Engagement (KSI1)

1. Culture (X1) 3.62 0.70 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.612 1.086

2. Engagement (X2) 3.42 0.80 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.317 -0.027

Leadership (KSI2)

1. High-Performance Teams of

Individual Leaders (X3)

3.88 0.71 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.618 0.642

2. Future Leaders (X4) 3.77 0.70 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.604 0.922

3. Middle Managers embrace and

translate strategy. (X5)

3.72 0.66 high 1.50 5.00 3.50 -0.303 0.073

Change Management (ETA1)

1. Disciplined cascade (Y1) 3.74 0.64 high 1.25 5.00 3.75 -0.433 0.551

2. Evolutionary organizations. (Y2) 3.57 0.67 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.268 0.241

People (ETA2)

1. Employer branding (Y3) 3.74 0.62 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.388 0.490

2. The critical roles and key talents

(Y4)

3.72 0.66 high 1.25 5.00 3.75 -0.442 0.385

3. Strategic human resource (Y5) 3.69 0.64 high 1.25 5.00 3.75 -0.305 0.263

Design (ETA3)

1. Structure and resource allocation

(Y6)

3.79 0.66 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.322 0.310

2. Few layers and wide spans of

control (Y7)

3.39 0.78 medium 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.186 0.135

3. Accountabilities, decision rights,

and collaboration (Y8)

3.45 0.76 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.222 0.264

4. Matched role requirements (Y9) 3.34 0.81 medium 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.409 0.258

x


Table 4 . 3 The statistics describe the nature of the variables in the research model

(n=1,022) (cont.)

Variables The statistics of sample (N=1,022)

S.D. Level Min Max Range SK KU

High-Performance Organization (ETA4)

1. Shared information and open

communication (Y10)

3.55 0.68 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.248 0.024

2. Compelling vision, purpose and values

(Y11)

3.68 0.68 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.338 0.168

3. Ongoing learning s(Y12) 3.52 0.73 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.463 0.386

4. The focus on customer results (Y13) 3.66 0.67 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.482 0.700

5. Energizing system and structure (Y14) 3.52 0.70 high 1.00 5.00 4.00 -0.333 0.351

6. Shared power and high involvement

(Y15)

3.58 0.70 high 1.25 5.00 3.75 -0.270 0.137

The average of all observed variables in an overview shows

that the observed variables have an average level of medium to high. The observed

variables with high value are culture (X1) (3.62) and engagement (X2) (3.42) in the

component of Culture and Engagement (KSI1). This means the samples place

culture and engagement at a high level of importance.

The results show that samples give precedence to the high-

performance teams of individual leaders (X3) (3.88), future leaders (X4) (3.77),

and middle managers embrace and translate strategy (X5) (3.72) in the component

of Leadership (KSI2) at a high level.

The results show that samples give precedence to disciplined

cascade (Y1) (3.74) and evolutionary organizations (Y2) (3.57) in the component of

Change Management (ETA1) at a high level.

The results show that the sample gives precedence to

structure and resource allocation (Y6) (3.79), and accountabilities, decision rights,

and collaboration are constructed with thoughtful consideration (Y8) (3.45) in the

component of Design (ETA3) at a high level.

The results show that samples give precedence to shared

information and open communication (Y10) (3.55), compelling vision, purpose

and values (Y11) (3.68), ongoing learning (Y12) (3.52), the focus on customer

results (Y13) (3.66), energizing system and structure (Y14) (3.52), and shared

power and high involvement (Y15) (3.58) in the component of High-Performance

x


Organization (ETA4). This means samples give precedence to high-performance

organization at a high level.

2.2 The results of the correlation analysis of the variables

in the research

The results of the correlation analysis of the variables in this

research indicate the relationship between the 20 observed variables in the model of

the sample of 1,022 people, and indicate 136 variable relations in which the values

differ from zero at a statistical significance level 0.01 and 0.05 for 190 variable pairs.

All correlation coefficients between variables display a positive relationship. The

maximum correlation coefficient is 0.812, which is the relationship in the component

of Leadership (KSI2) between observed variables of high-performance teams of

individual leaders (X3) and future leaders (X4). The minimum correlation

coefficient is 0.443 which is the relationship in the component of Leadership (KSI2)

between observed variables of high-performance teams of individual leaders (X3)

and matched role requirements (Y9) in the component of Design (ETA3).

The Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity values the Approx. Chi-

Square = 19224.611, df=190, Sig. = 0.000 which shows it it significantly different

from zero at the 0.01 level. This is consistent with the analysis results of Kaiser-

Meyer-Olkin (KMO) being close to 1 (Measure of Sampling Adequacy = 0.923) that

the correlation matrix of variables is not the identity matrix and the relationship of

variables is valid for analyzing the component for the construct validity test or

analyzing the causal relationships.


Table 4.4 The correlation coefficient, mean, standard deviation of variables in the structural equation model of public organization as

high-performance organization.

Culture and

Engagement

Leadership Change

Management

People Design High-Performance Organization

X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 Y7 Y8 Y9 Y10 Y11 Y12 Y13 Y14 Y15

X1 1

X2 0.639** 1

X3 0.467** 0.524** 1

X4 0.535** 0.562** 0.812** 1

X5 0.542** 0.587** 0.672** 0.694** 1

Y1 0.554** 0.585** 0.627** 0.639** 0.699** 1

Y2 0.493** 0.568** 0.521** 0.535** 0.639** 0.645** 1

Y3 0.478** 0.546** 0.587** 0.569** 0.658** 0.625** 0.627** 1

Y4 0.529** 0.579** 0.586** 0.630** 0.683** 0.666** 0.603** 0.715** 1

Y5 0.568** 0.609** 0.615** 0.634** 0.676** 0.661** 0.631** 0.708** 0.742** 1

Y6 0.503** 0.533** 0.594** 0.602** 0.614** 0.652** 0.555** 0.635** 0.664** 0.728** 1

Y7 0.501** 0.605** 0.513** 0.561** 0.580** 0.560** 0.556** 0.557** 0.610** 0.660** 0.564** 1

Y8 0.533** 0.621** 0.510** 0.599** 0.594** 0.584** 0.576** 0.548** 0.625** 0.669** 0.602** 0.780** 1

Y9 0.565** 0.643** 0.443** 0.538** 0.556** 0.534** 0.561** 0.517** 0.598** 0.640** 0.556** 0.719** 0.786** 1

Y10 0.551** 0.600** 0.569** 0.590** 0.640** 0.594** 0.579** 0.632** 0.655** 0.701** 0.633** 0.695** 0.694** 0.675** 1

Y11 0.538** 0.583** 0.571** 0.568** 0.637** 0.631** 0.539** 0.614** 0.667** 0.701** 0.688** 0.623** 0.633** 0.637** 0.766** 1

Y12 0.579** 0.630** 0.517** 0.598** 0.626** 0.577** 0.574** 0.598** 0.654** 0.712** 0.605** 0.710** 0.725** 0.747** 0.745** 0.705** 1

Y13 0.549** 0.587** 0.564** 0.599** 0.650** 0.638** 0.560** 0.638** 0.677** 0.727** 0.676** 0.624** 0.659** 0.642** 0.681** 0.751** 0.745** 1

Y14 0.571** 0.636** 0.534** 0.595** 0.631** 0.611** 0.585** 0.629** 0.667** 0.737** 0.637** 0.700** 0.723** 0.743** 0.726** 0.723** 0.798** 0.790** 1

Y15 0.494** 0.598** 0.564** 0.586** 0.638** 0.582** 0.563** 0.652** 0.667** 0.683** 0.609** 0.643** 0.625** 0.649** 0.711** 0.712** 0.745** 0.728** 0.799** 1

Mean 3.617 3.415 3.875 3.766 3.715 3.739 3.572 3.742 3.717 3.686 3.794 3.389 3.446 3.339 3.548 3.681 3.522 3.659 3.523 3.578

S.D. 0.704 0.802 0.709 0.703 0.662 0.641 0.672 0.624 0.660 0.644 0.659 0.778 0.761 0.811 0.676 0.679 0.733 0.674 0.702 0.703

Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square = 19224.611, df=190, Sig. = .000, KMO : Measure of Sampling Adequacy = .973, n=1,022

Remark: **p .01


Part 3 The results of the analysis of the construct validity of

measurement model

The purpose of the analysis in this part is to examine the validity or the

consistency of the variable measurement model, the proposed model to the empirical

data, and to examine whether the observed variables represent a suitable measurement

of the latent variables. Because the variables used in the research are constructed from

the theories, this could not be measured directly. It must be measured through six

latent variables, namely, Culture and Engagement (KSI1), Leadership (KSI2),

Change Management (ETA1), People (ETA2), Design (ETA3), and High-

Performance Organization (ETA4). Before the analysis to answer the objectives of

this study, it must be inquired as to the construct validity of these latent variables by

the single level comfirmatory factor analysis. LISREL 8.72 Program is used for the

analysis to comply with the SEM. If the analysis results find that the model is fit to the

empirical data, the model would match the construct validity. This could be done

-statistical significance, Comparative Fit Index

(CFI), Adjust Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI), Root Mean Square Error of

Approximation (RMSEA), Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR). The

researcher will adjust the model by considering the Modification Indices and the basis

theories from the documentary analysis and the related research until the model has a

construct validity.

Before the analysis to verify the structure validity, it requires the

correlation analysis to verify whether all observed variables in the model have a

relationship or not, and proceed to consider the direction and the size of the

relationships by Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation. The details of the construct

validity of measurement model of variables are as follows:

3 .1 The results of validity analysis of measurement model

of Culture and Engagement (KSI1)

Culture and Engagement (KSI1) is measured from the two

manifest variables, namely, culture (X1) and engagement (X2). The result of the analysis

of relation between two variables of the measurement model of Culture and

Engagement (KSI1) finds the relationship between this pair of variables different from


zero at the statistical significance of 0.01 that is a positive relationship, and the correlation

coefficient R2=0.639. This indicates that the observed variables of model are a

relationship in the same direction. If one of the variables is a higher value, the other

variable will also have a higher value. If the value of one of the variables is lower, the

other variable will similarly be lower. For the size of relationship, there is a high level

positive correlation (0.61 r 0.80).

The result of examination of Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity is

Approx. Chi-Square = 536.103, df=1, Sig. = 0.000 which shows it is significantly

different from zero at 0.01 level and conforms to the result of analysis of Kaiser-

Meyer-Olkin (KMO) being close to 1 (Measure of Sampling Adequacy = 0.500). This

proves it is not an identity matrix and the relationships of variables are valid for

analyzing the component for the construct validity test and analyzing the causal

relationship.

The result of single level CFA by LISREL 8.72 finds that the

measurement model of Culture and Engagement (KSI1) shows the construct validity

considering the values of 2 = 0.27, df = 1, p = 0.606, 2 /df = 0.27, CFI = 1.00, GFI =

1.00, RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.003. The p-value is valid and therefore does not

rule out the main assumption. This reflects the test results as the value of 2 with non-

statistical significance different from zero, which means to accept the main assumption

that the theoretical model is consistent with the empirical data and the measurement

model matches the construct validity. Thus, this is consistent with the results of the

analysis of the CFI and GFI that have a value greater than 0.95. RMSEA is lower than

0.05. SRMR is lower than 0.05. 2 /df value is less than 2.

Considering the importance of the elements of each observed

variables in the measurement model of Culture and Engagement (KSI1) from the

coefficient standardized factor loading (β) of the two observed variables, it is found

that all coefficient standardized factor loading of components have the statistical

significance level 0.01 (t 2.58). The variable that has the weight of the highest

importance is engagement (X2) (β =0.86), and the second is culture (X1) (β =0.75).

These observed variables explain the covariance with the measurement model of

Culture and Engagement (KSI1) of approximately 56% to 73% by the correlation

coefficient of validity (R2) values between 0.56 to 0.73.


Table 4.5 Mean, Standard Deviation, and Correlation Analysis of observed variables

in measurement model of Culture and Engagement (KSI1) (n=1,022).

Observed Variables Correlation Analysis (r)

X1 X2

X1 1

X2 0.639** 1

3.617 3.415

S.D. 0.704 0.802

KMO: Measure of Sampling Adequacy = 0.500,

Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity: Chi-Square = 536.103, df = 1, p = 0.000

Remark: *p 0.05, **p 0.01

Table 4.6 The Statistics Analysis Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis of

Measurement Model of Culture and Engagement (KSI1) (n=1,022)

Observed

Variables

The Statistics Analysis Results of Single Level CFA Model

Component

Weight (b)

SE t Factor Score

Coefficient (FS)

R2

X1 0.75** 0.02 25.58 0.43 0.56

X2 0.86** 0.02 33.24 0.71 0.73

2 = 0.27, df = 1, p = 0.606, 2/df = 0.27, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 1.00, AGFI = 1.00,

RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.003

Remark: t 1.96 means p 0.05, t 2.58 means p 0.01

The results from the analysis leads to the application of Factor

Score Coefficient: FS to create an equation for the elements of Culture and

Engagement (KSI1) in the raw score as follows:

x


Culture and Engagement = 0.43 (Culture: X1)

+ 0.71(Engagement: X2)

The conclusion from this is the measurement model of

Culture and Engagement (KSI1), generated by the theory, is valid and consistent

with the empirical data. The two observed variables are the indicators which are the

important components in the measurement of Culture and Engagement (KSI1), both

with positive weight. It means that if the sample in POs gives precedence to culture

(X1) and engagement (X2) at a higher-level, this also leads to a high-level of Culture

and Engagement (KSI1). On the other hand, if the sample of POs gives precedence to

these indicators in lower level, it leads to Culture and Engagement (KSI1) at a

lower-level. Moreover, all manifest variables are in a high-level positive relationship.

This indicates that the measurement elements of Culture and Engagement (KSI1) are

supportable relationships.


RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.003 (Lisrel 8.72 Standardized Estimates)

Figure 4.10 The Measurement Model of Culture and Engagement (KSI1)



of leadership (KSI2)

Leadership (KSI2) is measured from the three manifest

variables, namely, high-performance teams of individual leaders (X3), future

leaders (X4), and middle managers embrace and translate strategy (X5). The

result of analysis of the relation between three variables of the measurement model of

Leadership (KSI2) finds the relationship between three pairs of variables different

from zero at statistical significance of 0.01 and have positive correlation coefficient R2

between 0.672 – 0.812. This indicates that the observed variables of the model are

related in the same direction. If one of the variables is a higher value, the other

variables will also have a higher value. If the value of one of the variables is lower, the

other variables will similarly be lower. For the size of the relationships in the

leadership component, it is found to be a high level positive correlation (0.61 r 0.8).



different from zero at 0.01 level and conforms to the result of analysis of Kaiser-Meyer-

Olkin (KMO) being close to 1 (Measure of Sampling Adequacy = 0.725). This proves it

is not an identity matrix and the relationship of variables is valid for analyzing the

component for the construct validity test and analyzing the causal relationship.


measurement model of Leadership (KSI2) shows the construct validity considering

the values of 2 = 0.46, df = 1, p = 0.499, 2/df = 0.46, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 1.00,

RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.005. The p-value is valid and therefore does not rule out

the main assumption. This reflects the test results as the value of 2 with non-

statistical significance different from zero, which means to accept the main assumption




0.05. SRMR is lower than 0.05. 2/df value is less than 2.


variables in the measurement model of Leadership (KSI2) from the coefficient

standardized factor loading (β) of the three observed variables, it is found that all


coefficient standardized factor loading of components have a statistical significance

level 0.01 (t 2.58). The variable that has the weight of the highest importance is

future leaders (X4) (β =0.91), the second is high-performance teams of individual

leaders (X3) (β =0.89), and the third is middle managers embrace and translate

strategy (X5) (β =0.76). These observed variables explain the covariance in the

measurement model of Leadership (KSI2) approximately 58% to 84% by the

correlation coefficient of validity (R2) values between 0.58 to 0.79.


in measurement model of leadership (KSI2) (n=1,022)


X3 X4 X5

X3 1

X4 0.812** 1

X5 0.672** 0.694** 1

3.875 3.766 3.715

S.D. 0.709 0.703 0.662



Remark: **p 0.01

Table 4.8 The Statistics Analysis Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis of

Measurement Model of Leadership (KSI2)

Observed

Variables


Component

Weight (b)

SE t Factor Score

Coefficient (FS)

R2

X3 0.89** 0.02 34.29 0.52 0.79

X4 0.91** 0.02 35.98 0.71 0.84

X5 0.76** 0.02 28.25 0.25 0.58


RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.005


x


The results from the analysis lead to the application of Factor

Score Coefficient: FS to create an equation for the elements of the Leadership (KSI2)

in the raw score as follows:

Leadership = 0.52 (High-performance teams of individual leaders: X3)

+ 0.71(Future leaders:X4)

+ 0.25(Middle managers embrace and translate strategy:X5)

The conclusion from this is the measurement model of

Leadership (KSI2) generated by the theory is valid and consistent with the empirical

data. The three observed variables are the indicators which are the important

components in the measurement of Leadership (KSI2), all with positive weight. It

means that if the sample in POs give precedence to the high-performance teams of

individual leaders (X3), future leaders (X4), and middle managers embrace and

translate strategy (X5) in a higher-level, this also leads to a high-level of Leadership

(KSI2). On the other hand, if the sample of POs give precedence to these indicators in

lower level, it leads to Leadership (KSI2) in lower-level. Moreover, all manifest

variables show a high-level positive correlation. This indicates that the measurement

elements of Leadership (KSI2) are supportable relationships.




Figure 4.11 The Measurement Model of Leadership (KSI2)


of Change Management (ETA1)

Change Management (ETA1) is measured from the two

manifest variables disciplined cascade (Y1) and evolutionary organizations (Y2).

The result of the analysis of the relation between two variables of the measurement

model of Change Management (ETA1) finds the relationship between one pair of

variables different from zero at statistical significance of 0.01 and have a positive

correlation coefficient of R2=0.645. This indicates that the observed variables of the

model are related in the same direction. If one of the variables is a higher value, the

other variable will also have a higher value. If the value of one of the variables is

lower, the other variable will similarly be lower. The size of the relationship is positive

at a high level (0.61 r 0.80).


Approx. Chi-Square = 571.771, df=1, Sig. = 0.000 which shows a significant difference

from zero at the 0.01 level and conforms to the result of analysis of Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin

(KMO) being close to 1 (Measure of Sampling Adequacy = 0.500). This proves it is not

an identity matrix and the relationship of variables is valid for analyzing the component

for the construct validity test and analyzing the causal relationship.



measurement model of Change Management (ETA1) shows the construct validity by

considering the values of 2 = 0.46, df = 1, p = 0.499, 2/df = 0.46, CFI = 1.00, GFI =

1.00, RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.004. The p-value is valid and therefore does not

rule out the main assumption. This reflects the test results as the value of 2 with non-

statistical significance different from zero which means to accept the main assumption






variables in the measurement model of Change Management (ETA1) from the

coefficient standardized factor loading (β) of the two observed variables, it is found

that all coefficient standardized factor loading of components have the statistical

significance level 0.01 (t 2.58). The variable that has the weight of the highest

importance is disciplined cascade (Y1) (β =0.81), and the second is evolutionary

organizations (Y2) (β =0.80). These observed variables explain the covariance in the

measurement model of Change Management (ETA1) approximately 64% to 66% by

the correlation coefficient of validity (R2) values between 0.64 – 0.66.


in measurement model of Change Management (ETA1) (n=1,022)


Y1 Y2

Y1 1

Y2 0.645** 1

3.739 3.572

S.D. 0.641 0.672



Remark: *p 0.05, **p 0.01

x


Table 4 . 10 The Statistics Analysis Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis of

Measurement Model of Change Management (ETA1)

Observed

Variables


Component

Weight (b)

SE t Component

Weight (FS)

R2

Y1 0.81** - - 0.60 0.66

Y2 0.80** 0.02 26.45 0.54 0.64


RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.004



Score Coefficient: FS to create an equation for the elements of the Change

Management (ETA1) in the raw score as follows:

Change Management = 0.60 (Disciplined cascade: Y1)

+ 0.54 (Evolutionary organizations: Y2)

The conclusion from this is the measurement model of Change

Management (ETA1), generated by the theory, is valid and consistent with the

empirical data. The two observed variables are the indicators which are the important

components in the measurement of Change Management (ETA1) all with positive

weight. It means that if the sample in POs gives precedence to the disciplined cascade

(Y1) and evolutionary organizations (Y2) at a higher-level, this also leads to a high-

level of Change Management (ETA1). On the other hand, if the sample of POs gives

precedence to these indicators at a lower level, it leads to the Change Management

(ETA1) at lower-level. Moreover, all manifest variables are at a high-level positive

relationship. This indicates that the measurement elements of Change Management

(ETA1) are supportable relationships.




Figure 4.12 The Measurement Model of Change Management (ETA1)


of People (ETA2)

People (ETA2) is measured from three manifest variables,

namely, employer branding (Y3), critical roles and key talents (Y4), and strategic

human resources (Y5). The result of the analysis of the relation between three

variables of the measurement model of People (ETA2) finds the relationship between

three pairs of variables different from zero at a statistical significance of 0.01 and a

positive correlation coefficient of R2 between 0.708 – 0.742. This indicates that the

observed variables of the model are correlated in the same direction. If one of the

variables is a higher value, the other variables will also have a higher value. If the

value of one of the variables is lower, the other variables will similarly be lower. For

the size of relationship, it is a high level positive correlation (0.61 r 0.8).




Olkin (KMO) getting close to 1 (Measure of Sampling Adequacy = 0.725). This proves

it is not an identity matrix and the relationship of variables is valid for analyzing the

component for the construct validity test and analyzing the causal relation.

The results of single level CFA by LISREL 8.72 finds that the

measurement model of People (ETA2) shows the construct validity considering the


values of 2 = 1.79, df = 1, p = 0.108, 2/df = 1.79, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 1.00, RMSEA

= 0.028, SRMR = 0.005. The p-value is valid and therefore does not rule out the main

assumption. This reflects the test results as the value of 2 with non-statistical

significance different from zero which means to accept the main assumption that the

model of theory is consistent with the empirical data and the measurement model

matches the construct validity. Thus, this is consistent with the results of the analysis

of the CFI and GFI that have a value greater than 0.95. RMSEA is lower than 0.05.

SRMR is lower than 0.05. 2/df value is less than 2.


variables in the measurement model of People (ETA2) from the coefficient

standardized factor loading (β) of the three observed variables, it is found that all

coefficient standardized factor loading of components have the statistical significance


strategic human resources (Y5) (β =0.87), the second is the critical roles and key

talents (Y4) (β =0.86), and the third is employer branding (Y3) (β =0.82). These

observed variables explain the covariance with the measurement model of People

(ETA2) approximately 68% to 76% by the correlation coefficient of validity (R2)

values between 0.68 – 0.76.



in measurement model of People (ETA2) (n=1,022)


Y3 Y4 Y5

Y3 1

Y4 0.715** 1

Y5 0.708** 0.742** 1

3.742 3.718 3.686

S.D. 0.624 0.659 0.644



Remark: **p 0.01

Table 4 . 1 2 The Statistics Analysis Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis of

Measurement Model of People (ETA2)

Observed

Variables


Component

Weight (b)

SE t Factor Score

Coefficient (FS)

R2

Y3 0.82** - - 0.45 0.68

Y4 0.86** 0.02 30.68 0.55 0.74

Y5 0.87** 0.02 32.74 0.61 0.76


RMSEA = 0.028, SRMR = 0.005


x



Score Coefficient: FS to create an equation for the elements of the People (ETA2) in

the raw score as follows:

People = 0.45 (Employer branding: Y3)

+ 0.55(The critical roles and key talents: Y4)

+ 0.61(Strategic human resource: Y5)

The conclusion from this is the measurement model of People (ETA2)

generated by the theory is valid and consistent with the empirical data. The three

observed variables are the indicators which are important components in the

measurement of People (ETA2), all with positive weight. It means that the sample in

POs gives precedence to employer branding (Y3), the critical roles and key talents

(Y4), and strategic human resources (Y5) in a higher-level, this also leads to a high-

level of People (ETA2). On the other hand, if the sample of POs give precedence to

these indicators in lower level, it leads to the People (ETA2) in lower-level. Moreover,

all manifest variables are in high-level positive relationship. This indicates that the

measurement elements of People (ETA2) are supportable relationships.




Figure 4.13 The Measurement Model of People (ETA2)

3.5 The results of validity analysis of measurement model

of Design (ETA3)

Design (ETA3) is measured from the four manifest variables,

namely, structure and resource allocation (Y6), few layers and wide spans of control

(Y7), accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8), and matched role

requirements (Y9). The result of the analysis of relation between four variables of the

measurement model of Design (ETA3) finds the relationship between four pairs of

variables different from zero at the statistical significance 0.01 that are positive

relationships, and the correlation coefficient R2 between 0.556 – 0.786. This indicates

that the observed variables of the model are related in the same direction. If one of the

variables is a higher value, the other variable will also have a higher value. If the value

of one of the variables is lower, the other variable will similarly be lower. For the size

of relationship, it is found to be a high level relationship (0.61 r 0.8) and a medium

level relationship (0.41 r 0.6).


Approx. Chi-Square = 2524.015, df = 6, p = 0.000 which shows it is significantly


Olkin (KMO) being close to 1 (Measure of Sampling Adequacy = 0.826). This proves it


is not the identity matrix and the relationship of the variables is valid for analyzing the

component for the construct validity test and analyzing the causal relation.

The result of single level CFA by LISREL 8.72 is found that

the measurement model of Design (ETA3) shows the construct validity considering

the values of 2 = 0.64, df = 2, p = 0.725, 2/df = 0.32, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 1.00,

RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.003. The p-value is valid and therefore does not rule out

the main assumption. This reflects the test results as the value of 2 with non-

statistical significance different from zero which means to accept the main assumption

that the model of theory is consistent with the empirical data and the measurement




Considering the importance of the elements of each of the

observed variables in the measurement model of Design (ETA3) from the coefficient

standardized factor loading (β) of the four observed variables, it is found that all

coefficient standardized factor loading of components have the statistical significance


accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8) (β = 0.92), the second is

matched role requirements (Y9) (β = 0.85), the third is few layers and wide spans of

control (Y7) (β = 0.85), and fourth is structure and resource allocation (Y6) (β = 0.66).

These observed variables explain the covariance in the measurement model of Design

(ETA3) approximately 43% to 85% by the correlation coefficient of validity ( R2)

values between 0.43 to 0.85.



in measurement model of Design (ETA3) (n=1,022)


Y6 Y7 Y8 Y9

Y6 1

Y7 0.564** 1

Y8 0.602** 0.780** 1

Y9 0.556** 0.719** 0.786** 1

3.794 3.389 3.446 3.339

S.D. 0.659 0.778 0.761 0.811



Remark: **p 0.01


Measurement Model of Design (ETA3)

Observed

Variables


Component

Weight (b)

SE t Factor Score

Coefficient (FS)

R2

Y6 0.66** - - 0.14 0.43

Y7 0.85** 0.03 23.12 0.31 0.72

Y8 0.92** 0.03 24.38 0.64 0.85

Y9 0.85** 0.03 23.22 0.30 0.73


RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.003



Score Coefficient: FS to create an equation for the elements of the Design (ETA3) in

the raw score as follows:

x


Design = 0.14 (Structure and resource allocation: Y6)

+ 0.31 (Few layers and wide spans of control: Y7)

+0.64 (Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration:Y8)

+ 0.30 (Matched role requirements:Y9)

These are concluding that the measurement model of Design

(ETA3), generated by the theory, is valid and consistent with the empirical data. The

four observed variables are the indicators which are the important components in the

measurement of Design (ETA3) all with positive weight. It means that if the sample in

POs gives precedence to the structure and resource allocation (Y6), few layers and

wide spans of control (Y7), accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8),

and matched role requirements (Y9) in a higher level, this also leads to a higher level

of Design (ETA3). On the other hand, if the sample of POs gives precedence to these

indicators in lower level, it leads to the Design (ETA3) in lower level. Moreover, all

manifest variables are in a high-level positive relationship. This indicates that the

measurement elements of Design (ETA3) are supportable relationships.


2 = 0.64, df = 2, p = 0.725, 2/df = 0.32, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 1.00, RMSEA = 0.000,

SRMR = 0.003 (Lisrel 8.72 Standardized Estimates)

Figure 4.14 The Measurement Model of Design (ETA3)

3.6 The results of validity analysis of measurement model

of High-Performance Organization (ETA4)

High-Performance Organization (ETA4) is measured from

six manifest variables, namely, shared information and open communication (Y10),

compelling vision, purpose and values (Y11), ongoing learning (Y12), focus on

customer results (Y13), energizing system and structure (Y14), and shared power

and high involvement (Y15). The result of the analysis of relation between six

variables of the measurement model of High-Performance Organization (ETA4)

finds the relationship between 15 pairs of variables different from zero at the statistical

significance 0.01, that all are positive relationships, and the correlation coefficient is

between 0.681-0.799. This indicates that the observed variables of the model are a

relationship in the same direction. If one of the variables is a higher value, the other

variables will also have a higher value. If the value of one of the variables is lower, the


other variables will similarly be lower. For the size of relationship, it is found to be a

high level relationship (0.61 r 0.80).


Approx. Chi-Square = 5513.983, df = 10, p = 0.000 which shows it is significantly


Olkin (KMO) getting close to 1 (Measure of Sampling Adequacy = 0.916). This proves

it is not an identity matrix and the relationship of variables is valid for analyzing the

component for the construct validity test and analyzing the causal relationship.


measurement model of High-Performance Organization (ETA4) shows the construct

validity considering the values of 2 = 2.73, df = 3, p = 0.435, 2/df = 0.91, CFI =

1.000, GFI = 1.00, AGFI =0.99, RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.003. The p-value is valid

and therefore does not rule out the main assumption. This reflects the test results as the

value of 2 with non-statistical significance different from zero which means to accept

the main assumption that the model theory is consistent with the empirical data and the

measurement model matches the construct validity. Thus, this is consistent with the

results of the analysis of the CFI and GFI that have a value greater than 0.95. RMSEA is

lower than 0.05. SRMR is lower than 0.05. 2/df value is less than 2.

Considering the importance of the elements of each of the

observed variables in the measurement model of High-Performance Organization

(ETA4) from the coefficient standardized factor loading (β) of the six observed

variables, it is found that all have coefficient standardized factor loading of

components at the statistical significance level 0.01 (t 2.58). The variable that has

the weight of the highest importance is the energizing system and structure (Y14) (β

= 0.90), the second is the ongoing learning (Y12) (β = 0.89), the third is shared

power and high involvement (Y15) (β = 0.88), the fourth is focus on customer

results (Y13) (β = 0.83), the fifth is shared information and open communication

(β = 0.81), and the sixth is the compelling vision, purpose and values (β = 0.81).

These observed variables explain the covariance in the measurement model of High-

Performance Organization (ETA4) approximately 65% to 81% by the correlation

coefficient of validity (R2) values between 0.65 to 0.81.



in measurement model of High-Performance Organization (ETA4) (n=1,022)

Observed

Variables

Correlation Analysis (r)

Y10 Y11 Y12 Y13 Y14 Y15

Y10 1

Y11 0.766** 1

Y12 0.745** 0.705** 1

Y13 0.681** 0.751** 0.745** 1

Y14 0.726** 0.723** 0.798** 0.790** 1

Y15 0.711** 0.712** 0.745** 0.728** 0.799** 1

3.548 3.681 3.522 3.659 3.523 3.578

S.D. 0.676 0.679 0.733 0.674 0.702 0.703



Remark: **p 0.01


Measurement Model of High-Performance Organization (ETA4)

Observed

Variables


Component

Weight (b)

SE t Factor Score

Coefficient (FS)

R2

Y10 0.81 - - 0.12 0.65

Y11 0.81 0.02 35.46** 0.14 0.65

Y12 0.89 0.02 34.77** 0.38 0.79

Y13 0.83 0.02 29.58** 0.14 0.69

Y14 0.90 0.02 33.03** 0.35 0.81

Y15 0.88 0.02 32.76** 0.38 0.78


RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.003


x



Score Coefficient: FS to create an equation for the elements of the High-Performance

Organization (ETA4) in the raw score as follows:

High-Performance Organization = 0.12 (Shared information and open communication: Y10)

+ 0.14 (Compelling vision, purpose and values: Y11)

+ 0.38 (Ongoing learning: Y12)

+ 0.14 (The focus on customer results: Y13)

+ 0.35 (Energizing system and structure: Y14)

+ 0.38 (Shared power and high involvement: Y15)

The conclusion from this is the measurement model of High-

Performance Organization (ETA4) generated by the theory is valid and consistent

with the empirical data. The six observed variables are indicators which are important

components in the measurement of High-Performance Organization (ETA4), all

with positive weight. It means that if the sample in POs give precedence to shared

information and open communication (Y10), a compelling vision, purpose and

values (Y11), ongoing learning (Y12), a focus on customer results (Y13),

energizing system and structure (Y14), and shared power and high involvement

(Y15) in a higher-level, this also leads to a higher level of High-Performance

Organization (ETA4). On the other hand, if the sample of POs give precedence to

these indicators in lower level, it leads to the High-Performance Organization

(ETA4) at a lower level. Moreover, all manifest variables are in a high-level positive

relationship. This indicates that the measurement elements of High-Performance

Organization (ETA4) are supportable relationships.


2 = 2.73, df = 3, p = 0.435, 2/df = 0.91, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 1.00, AGFI =0.99,


Figure 4.15 The Measurement Model of High-Performance Organization (ETA4)

4.3 The results of the analysis of the construct validity of the

measurement model of public organizations (POs) as high-

performance organizations (HPOs) The construct validity of the measurement model utilizes the statistical

method of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to analyze the three mission groups,

namely, the first group, public organizations with the mission of development and

specific policy implementation of government affairs; the second group, public

organizations with a mission of technical services or an interdisciplinary mission; and

the third group, public organizations of general public services. This includes an

examination of the direct and indirect effects of the public organizations (POs) as

high-performance organizations (HPOs) in order to study whether the variance of the


variables of the HPO model could be predictive variables of the three mission groups

(Muthėn, 1994).

For the data presentation of SEM analysis, the researcher presents the analysis results

by starting from (1) the analysis of construct validity of measurement models of POs as high-

performance organizations of the three mission groups, and (2) the analysis of construct validity of

SEM models of the three mission groups to answer the second objective of this research.

4 .3.1 The analysis of construct validity of measurement models of the

Public Organizations (POs) as High-Performance Organizations (HPOs) of the

three mission groups

The analysis of construct validity of measurement models by confirmatory

factor analysis (CFA) are examined before the analysis of SEM models for the three

models. The model of the first group, public organizations with the mission of

development and specific policy implementation of government affairs, is based on a

223 person sample. The model of the second group, public organizations of technical

services or an interdisciplinary mission, is based on a 322 person sample. The model

of the third group, public organizations of general public services, is based on a 477

person sample.

The analysis results show that the measurement model of the first group

fits to the construct validity and is consistent with the empirical data in a ‘good’ level

by considering the statistical values to check the validity of the model, specifically, 2

= 96.05, df = 88, p = 0.261, 2/df = 1.091, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 0.97, RMSEA = 0.017,

SRMR = 0.018. The measurement model of the second group fits to the construct

validity and is consistent with the empirical data in ‘good’ level by considering the

statistical values to check the validity of the model, specifically, 2 = 80.15, df = 79, p

= 0.443, 2/df = 1.015, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 0.97, RMSEA = 0.008, SRMR = 0.025. The

measurement model of the third group fits to the construct validity and is consistent

with the empirical data at a ‘good’ level by considering the statistical values to check

the validity of model, specifically, 2 = 73.13, df = 83, p = 0.772, 2/df = 0.881, CFI =

1.00, GFI = 0.98, RMSEA = 0.000, SRMR = 0.011.

This shows that the p-value of the three mission groups is valid and

therefore does not rule out the main assumption. This reflects the test results as the


value of 2 with non-statistical significance different from zero which means to accept

the main assumption that the models of theories are consistent with the empirical data

and the measurement models of the three groups matches the construct validity. Thus,

the three models are consistent with the results of the analysis of the CFI and GFI that

have a value greater than 0.95. RMSEA is lower than 0.05. SRMR is lower than 0.08

(Hu and Bentler, 1999). 2/df value is less than 2.

Considering the importance of the elements of each observed variables in

the measurement model of POs as HPOs of the three mission groups from the

coefficient standardized factor loading (β) of the 20 observed variables, it is found that

all coefficient standardized factor loading in the first group shows the close values (β =

0.67 to 0.92) and the statistical significance level 0.01 (t 2.58). This indicates that the

20 observed variables of the first mission group are the components pointing to Culture

and Engagement (KSI1), Leadership (KSI2), Change Management (ETA1), People

(ETA2), Design (ETA3), and High-Performance Organization (ETA4). All the

variables are important almost equally. The maximum variable correlation coefficient

weight is strategic human resources (Y5) (=0.92), the second highest are middle

managers embrace and translate strategy (X5) and few layers and wide spans of

control (Y7) (=0.87), and the lowest weight is culture (X1) (=0.67).

The Correlation Coefficient Weight () of the second group shows the close

values (β = 0.75 to 0.92) and the statistical significance level 0.01 (t 2.58). This

indicates that the 20 observed variables of the first group are the components pointing to

Culture and Engagement (KSI1), Leadership (KSI2), Change Management (ETA1),

People (ETA2), Design (ETA3), and High-Performance Organization (ETA4). All

the variables are important almost equally. The maximum correlation coefficient

weights are strategic human resources (Y5) and energizing system and structure

(Y14), which are equal weight (=0.92), the second set of variables are equal in value,

namely, engagement (X2), shared information and open communication (Y10),

ongoing learning (Y12), focus on customer results (Y13) (=0.89), and the lowest

weight is high-performance teams of individual leaders (X3) (=0.75).

The Correlation Coefficient Weight () of the third group shows close values (β

= 0.78 to 0.89) and the statistical significance level 0.01 (t 2.58). This indicates that the 20


observed variables of the third group are components pointing to Culture and Engagement

(KSI1), Leadership (KSI2), Change Management (ETA1), People (ETA2), Design

(ETA3), and High-Performance Organization (ETA4). All the variables are important

almost equally. The maximum correlation coefficient weight are accountabilities, decision

rights, and collaboration (Y8) and energizing system and structure (Y14) which are

equal weight (=0.89), the second set are equal values, namely, few layers and wide spans

of control (Y7), and ongoing learning (Y12) (=0.88), and the lowest weight set are equal

in values, namely, culture (X1) and employer branding (Y3) (=0.78).

The convergent validity check of the component of culture and

engagement (KSI1)

The results show good consistency of the component of Culture and

Engagement (KSI1) by the convergent validity check based on three criteria:

1 ) Standardized Factor Loading must be over 0.50. The processing

shows that the standardized factor loading of the indicator variable of culture (X1)

and engagement (X2) exceed 0.50. So, these two indicators are part of the component

of Culture and Engagement (KSI1) exceeding 50%.

2 ) Average Variance Extracted (AVE) or must be over 0.5

(Diamantopoulos & Siguaw, 2000 cited in Aungsuchod, Vichitwanna, & Pinyopanuwat,

2011). The processing shows that the average variance extracted of culture (X1) and

engagement (X2) exceed 0.50. This shows the ability of the two indicators to be a ‘very

good’ part of the component of Culture and Engagement (KSI1).

3) Construct Reliability (CR) or must be over 0.6 (Diamantopoulos

& Siguaw, 2000 cited in Aungsuchod, Vichitwanna, & Pinyopanuwat, 2011). The

processing shows that the construct reliability of culture (X1) and engagement (X2)

exceed 0.6. This shows the two indicators are ‘very good’ predictors of the elements of

Culture and Engagement (KSI1).


Table 4.17 The Convergent Validity of the component of Culture and Engagement

(FKSI1) in the CFA model of the first mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

Culture and engagement (FKSI1)

Standardized Factor Loading

> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

X1 0.67 0.537 0.726

X2 0.84


(SKSI1) in the CFA model of the second mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

Culture and engagement (SKSI1)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

X1 0.76 0.685 0.812

X2 0.89


(TKSI1) in the CFA model of the third mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

Culture and engagement (TKSI1)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

X1 0.78 0.631 0.774

X2 0.81

The convergent validity check of the component of leadership (KSI2)

The results show good consistency of the component of Leadership

(KSI2) by the convergent validity check based on three criteria:


shows that the standardized factor loading of the indicator variables of high-


performance teams of individual leaders (X3), future leaders (X4), and middle

managers embrace and translate strategy (X5) exceed 0.50. So, these three

indicators are part of the component of Leadership (KSI2) exceeding 50%.

2 ) Average Variance Extracted (AVE) or must be above 0.5

(Diamantopoulos & Siguaw, 2000 cited in Aungsuchod, Vichitwanna, & Pinyopanuwat,

2011). The processing shows that the average variance extracted of high-performance

teams of individual leaders (X3), future leaders (X4), and middle managers

embrace and translate strategy (X5) exceed 0.50. This shows the ability of the three

indicators to be ‘very good’ predictors of the component of Leadership (KSI2).



processing shows that the construct reliability of high-performance teams of

individual leaders (X3), future leaders (X4), and middle managers embrace and

translate strategy (X5) exceed 0.6. This shows the three indicators are ‘very good’

elements of Leadership (KSI2).

Table 4.20 The Convergent Validity of the component of Leadership (FKSI2) in the

CFA model of the first mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

Leadership (FKSI2)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

X3 0.78 0.667 0.857

X4 0.80

X5 0.87


Table 4.21 The Convergent Validity of the component of Leadership (SKSI2) in the

CFA model of the second mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

Leadership (SKSI2)

Standardized Factor

Loading > 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

X3 0.78 0.653 0.849

X4 0.80

X5 0.87

Table 4.22 The Convergent Validity of the component of Leadership (TKSI2) in the

CFA model of the third mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

Leadership (TKSI2)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

X3 0.81 0.700 0.875

X4 0.83

X5 0.87

The convergent validity check of the component of change

management (ETA1)

The results show the good consistency of the component of Change

Management (ETA1) by the convergent validity check based on three criteria:


shows that the standardized factor loading of the indicator variables of disciplined

cascade (Y1) and evolutionary organizations (Y2) exceed 0.50. So, these two

indicators are part of the component of Change Management (ETA1) exceeding 50%.

2 ) Average Variance Extracted (AVE) or must be over 0.5

(Diamantopoulos & Siguaw, 2000 cited in Aungsuchod, Vichitwanna, &

Pinyopanuwat, 2011). The processing shows that the average variance extracted of


disciplined cascade (Y1) and evolutionary organizations (Y2) exceed 0.50. This

shows the ability of the two indicators to be a ‘very good’ part of the component of

Change Management (ETA1).



processing shows that the construct reliability of disciplined cascade (Y1) and

evolutionary organizations (Y2) exceed 0.6. This shows these two indicators are

‘very good’ elements of Change Management (ETA1).

Table 4.23 The Convergent Validity of the component of Change Management

(FETA1) in the CFA model of the first mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

Change Management (FETA1)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

Y1 0.80 0.562 0.719

Y2 0.70


(FETA1) in the CFA model of the first mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

Change Management (SETA1)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

Y1 0.83 0.652 0.789

Y2 0.79



(TETA1) in the CFA model of the third mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

Change Management (TETA1)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

Y1 0.86 0.742 0.852

Y2 0.87

The convergent validity check of the component of People (ETA2)

The results show good consistency of the component of People (ETA2) by

the convergent validity check based on three criteria:


shows that the standardized factor loading of the indicator variables of employer

branding (Y3), critical roles and key talents (Y4), and strategic human resources

(Y5) exceeds 0.50. So, these three indicators are part of the component of People

(ETA2) exceeding 50%.




employer branding (Y3), critical roles and key talents (Y4), and strategic human

resources (Y5) exceed 0.50. This shows the ability of the three indicators to be a ‘very

good’ part of the component of People (ETA2).



processing shows that the construct reliability of employer branding (Y3), critical roles

and key talents (Y4), and strategic human resources (Y5) exceed 0.6. This shows the

three indicators are ‘very good’ elements of People (ETA2).


Table 4.26 The Convergent Validity of the component of People (FETA2) in the CFA

model of the first mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity)

People (FETA2)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

Y3 0.79 0.679 0.863

Y4 0.76

Y5 0.92

Table 4.27 The Convergent Validity of the component of People (SETA2) in the CFA

model of the second mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

People (SETA2)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

Y3 0.82 0.757 0.903

Y4 0.87

Y5 0.92

Table 4.28 The Convergent Validity of the component of People (TETA2) in the CFA

model of the third mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

People (TETA2)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

Y3 0.78 0.700 0.875

Y4 0.87

Y5 0.86


The convergent validity check of the component of Design (ETA3)

The results show good consistency of the component of Design (ETA3) by

the convergent validity check based on three criteria:

1 ) Standardized Factor Loading must be over 0.50. The processing shows

that the standardized factor loading of the indicator variables of structure and resource

allocation (Y6), few layers and wide spans of control (Y7), accountabilities, decision

rights, and collaboration (Y8), and matched role requirements (Y9) exceed 0.50. So,

these four indicators are part of the component of Design (ETA3) exceeding 50%.




structure and resource allocation (Y6), few layers and wide spans of control (Y7),

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8), and matched role

requirements (Y9) exceed 0.50. This shows the ability of the four indicators to be a

‘very good’ part of the component of Design (ETA3).

3 ) Construct Reliability ( CR) or must be at over 0.6


Pinyopanuwat, 2011). The processing shows that the construct reliability of the

structure and resource allocation (Y6), few layers and wide spans of control (Y7),

accountabilities, decision rights and collaboration (Y8), and matched role

requirements (Y9) exceed 0.6. This shows the four indicators are ‘very good’

elements of Design (ETA3).


Table 4.29 The Convergent Validity of the component of Design (FETA3) in the CFA

model of the first mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

Design (FETA3)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

Y6 0.75 0.673 0.891

Y7 0.87

Y8 0.85

Y9 0.81

Table 4.30 The Convergent Validity of the component of Design (SETA3) in the CFA

model of the second mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

Design (SETA3)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

Y6 0.80 0.685 0.897

Y7 0.83

Y8 0.84

Y9 0.84

Table 4.31 The Convergent Validity of the component of Design (TETA3) in the CFA

model of the third mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

Design (TETA3)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

Y6 0.80 0.737 0.918

Y7 0.88

Y8 0.89

Y9 0.86


The convergent validity check of the component of High-Performance

Organization (ETA4)

The results show good consistency of the component of High-Performance

Organization (ETA4) by the convergent validity check based on three criteria:

1) Standardized Factor Loading must be over 0.50. The analysis shows

that the standardized factor loading of the indicator variables of shared information

and open communication (Y10), compelling vision, purpose and values (Y11),

ongoing learning (Y12), focus on customer results (Y13), energizing system and

structure (Y14), and shared power and high involvement (Y15) exceed 0.50. So,

these six indicators are part of the component of High-Performance Organization

(ETA4) and exceed 50%.



Pinyopanuwat, 2011). The analysis shows that the average variance extracted of

shared information and open communication (Y10), compelling vision, purpose

and values (Y11), ongoing learning (Y12), focus on customer results (Y13),

energizing system and structure (Y14), and shared power and high involvement

(Y15) exceed 0.50. This shows the ability of the six indicators to be a ‘very good’ part

of the component of High-Performance Organization (ETA4).



analysis shows that the construct reliability of shared information and open

communication (Y10), compelling vision, purpose and values (Y11), ongoing

learning (Y12), focus on customer results (Y13), energizing system and structure

(Y14), and shared power and high involvement (Y15) exceed 0.6. This shows the

six indicators are ‘very good’ elements of High-Performance Organization (ETA4).


Table 4.32 The Convergent Validity of the component of High-Performance

Organization (FETA4) in the CFA model of the first mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

High-Performance Organization (FETA4)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

Y10 0.79 0.665 0.922

Y11 0.74

Y12 0.85

Y13 0.82

Y14 0.85

Y15 0.84


Organization (SETA4) in the CFA model of the second mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

High-Performance Organization (SETA4)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

Y10 0.89 0.785 0.956

Y11 0.88

Y12 0.89

Y13 0.89

Y14 0.92

Y15 0.84



Organization (TETA4) in the CFA model of the third mission group of PO as HPO

Observed

Variables

Convergent Validity

High-Performance Organization (TETA4)


> 0.5

AVE

> 0.5

CR

> 0.6

Y10 0.85 0.734 0.943

Y11 0.84

Y12 0.88

Y13 0.85

Y14 0.89

Y15 0.83


Table 4.35 The statistical values of Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Public

Organizations (POs) as High-Performance Organizations (HPOs) of the three mission

groups

Observed

Variable

The first group of public

organization

The second group of public

organization The third group of public organization

Standardized

Factor

Loading

()

SE t R2

Standardized

Factor

Loading

()

SE t R2

Standardized

Factor

Loading

()

SE t R2

KSI1:

X1 0.67** 0.04 10.59 0.44 0.76** 0.04 15.54 0.58 0.78** 0.03 18.90 0.61

X2 0.84** 0.05 13.91 0.70 0.89** 0.04 19.03 0.79 0.81** 0.03 19.61 0.65

KSI2:

X3 0.78** 0.04 12.98 0.61 0.75** 0.04 14.80 0.56 0.81** 0.03 19.64 0.65

X4 0.80** 0.04 12.88 0.63 0.81** 0.04 16.91 0.65 0.83** 0.03 21.21 0.69

X5 0.87** 0.03 15.22 0.76 0.86** 0.03 18.65 0.75 0.87** 0.02 22.70 0.76

ETA1:

Y1 0.80** 0.03 12.99 0.64 0.83** 0.03 17.41 0.68 0.86** 0.02 22.55 0.73

Y2 0.70** 0.04 11.01 0.48 0.79** 0.04 16.37 0.62 0.87** 0.02 22.89 0.75

ETA2:

Y3 0.79** 0.03 13.80 0.62 0.82** 0.03 17.76 0.67 0.78** 0.03 18.80 0.60

Y4 0.76** 0.03 13.16 0.57 0.87** 0.03 19.30 0.76 0.87** 0.02 23.43 0.76

Y5 0.92** 0.03 17.46 0.84 0.92** 0.03 21.08 0.84 0.86** 0.02 22.96 0.74

ETA3:

Y6 0.75** 0.03 12.57 0.56 0.80** 0.03 16.91 0.64 0.80** 0.03 18.20 0.63

Y7 0.87** 0.04 15.43 0.75 0.83** 0.04 17.83 0.68 0.88** 0.03 22.54 0.78

Y8 0.85** 0.04 15.23 0.73 0.84** 0.04 18.24 0.71 0.89** 0.03 24.26 0.80

Y9 0.81** 0.04 14.27 0.65 0.84** 0.04 18.41 0.71 0.86** 0.03 22.90 0.74

ETA4:

Y10 0.79** 0.03 13.91 0.62 0.89** 0.03 20.19 0.79 0.85** 0.02 22.88 0.73

Y11 0.74** 0.03 12.46 0.55 0.88** 0.03 19.66 0.78 0.84** 0.02 22.42 0.70

Y12 0.85** 0.04 15.61 0.72 0.89** 0.04 20.52 0.80 0.88** 0.02 24.02 0.77

Y13 0.82** 0.03 14.87 0.68 0.89** 0.03 20.07 0.79 0.85** 0.02 22.78 0.73

Y14 0.85** 0.03 15.51 0.72 0.92** 0.03 21.21 0.84 0.89** 0.02 24.54 0.79

Y15 0.84** 0.03 15.19 0.70 0.84** 0.04 18.70 0.71 0.83** 0.03 21.84 0.68

Remark: *p 0.05, **p 0.01 and t 1.96 means p 0.05, t 2.58 means p 0.01


2 = 80.15, df = 79, p = 0.443, 2/df = 1.116, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 0.97, AGFI= 0.91, RMSEA = 0.008, SRMR = 0.026

(Lisrel 8.72 Standardized Estimates)

Remark Group1

FKSI1 = Culture and Engagement Y3 = The employee brand is a core asset.

FKSI2 = Leadership Y4 = Critical roles and key talents are clearly identified and

treated with care.

FETA1 = Change Management Y5 = HR is a strategic partner and an enabler of the

business.

FETA2 = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation reflect strategic

tradeoffs.

FETA3 = Design Y7 = Few layers separate the CEO and the frontline, and

spans of control are wide.

FETA4 = High-Performance Organization Y8 = Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration are

constructed with thoughtful consideration.

X1

= Culture accelerates strategic objectives.

Y9 = Individual capabilities are matched to role

requirements.

X1 = Engagement is measured and cultivated

to generate discretionary effort from

employees.


X3 = High-Performance Teams of Individual

Leaders


X4 = Future Leaders Y12 = ONGOING LEARNING

X5 = Middle Managers embrace and translate

strategy.

Y13 = RELENTLESS FOCUS on CUSTOMER RESULTS

Y1 = Change is a disciplined cascade. Y14 = Energizing System and Structure

Y2 = The organization is evolutionary. Y15 = SHARED POWER and HIGH INVOLVEMENT

Figure 4.16 The measurement models of the public organizations as high-performance

organizations of the first mission group (Confirmatory Factor Analysis: CFA)


2 = 96.05, df = 88, p = 0.261, 2/df = 1.091, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 0.97, AGFI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.017, SRMR = 0.018


Remark Group2

SKSI1 = Culture and Engagement Y3 = The employee brand is a core asset.

SKSI2 = Leadership Y4 = Critical roles and key talents are clearly identified and

treated with care.

SETA1 = Change Management Y5 = HR is a strategic partner and an enabler of the

business.

SETA2 = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation reflect strategic

tradeoffs.

SETA3 = Design Y7 = Few layers separate the CEO and the frontline, and


SETA4 = High-Performance Organization Y8 = Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration are


X1



requirements.



employees.



Leaders




strategy.





organizations of the second mission group (Confirmatory Factor Analysis: CFA)




Remark Group3

TKSI1 = Culture and Engagement Y3 = The employee brand is a core asset.

TKSI2 = Leadership Y4 = Critical roles and key talents are clearly identified and

treated with care.

TETA1 = Change Management Y5 = HR is a strategic partner and an enabler of the

business.

TETA2 = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation reflect strategic

tradeoffs.

TETA3 = Design Y7 = Few layers separate the CEO and the frontline, and


TETA4 = High-Performance Organization Y8 = Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration are


X1



requirements.



employees.



Leaders




strategy.





organizations of the third mission group (Confirmatory Factor Analysis: CFA)


The explanation of covariance in the latent variables of Culture and

Engagement (KSI1), Leadership (KSI2), Change Management (ETA1), People

(ETA2), Design (ETA3), and High-Performance Organization (ETA4) are

considered from all R2values of the observed variables. The first group presents the

validity coefficient of individual levels (R2=0.44 to 0.84). This means that these

manifest variables could explain the covariance in the six latent variables 44% to 84%.

The second group presents the validity coefficient of individual levels (R2=0.56 to

0.84). This means that these manifest variables could explain the covariance in the six

latent variables 56% to 84%. The third group presents the validity coefficient of

individual levels (R2=0.60 to 0.80). This means that these manifest variables could

explain the covariance in the six latent variables 60% to 80%. The conclusion is that

the manifest variables could explain the covariance in the six latent variables at a

‘medium to high’ level. The second group could be measured better than the first

group and the third group.

4 .3.2 The results of the analysis of the Structural Equation Modeling

(SEM) of Public Organizations as High Performance Organizations

This part is important to answer the main research question of Objective 2,

that is to construct the structural equation model of the three mission groups of public

organizations. In order to examine the construct validity or the consistency of the SEM

model, the researcher determines the assumption for the test that the five latent

variables; Culture and Engagement (KSI1), Leadership (KSI2), Change

Management (ETA1), People (ETA2), and Design (ETA3) could predict the latent

variable of High-Performance Organization (ETA4) by a significant degree.

The analysis results of the SEM model finds that the SEM model of PO as

HPO of the first group is fit to the construct validity or consistency with the empirical

data at a ‘high’ level by considering the statistical values used to check the construct

validity of model: 2 = 97.28, df = 81, p = 0.105, 2/df = 1.201, CFI = 1.00, GFI =

0.96, AGFI= 0.91, RMSEA = 0.030, SRMR = 0.030. The SEM model of PO as HPO

of the second group is fit to the construct validity or consistency with the empirical

data at a ‘high’ level by considering the statistical values used to check the construct



0.98, AGFI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.028, SRMR = 0.021. The SEM model of PO as HPO

of the third group is fit to the construct validity or consistency with the empirical data

at a ‘high’ level by considering the statistical values used to check the construct


0.98, AGFI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.023, SRMR = 0.013. This shows that the p-value of

the three mission groups is valid to not rule out the main assumption. This reflects the

test results as the value of 2 with non-statistical significance different from zero,

which means to accept the measurement models of the three groups as it matches the

construct validity. Thus, the three models are consistent with the results of the analysis


SRMR is lower than 0.08 (Hu and Bentler, 1999). 2/df value is less than 2.

W

aranya Jirangkul Results / 222

Table 4.36 The measured effects of SEM models of the public organizations of three mission groups of high-performance organizations

Dependent variable Independent variable

DE IE TE DE IE TE DE IE TE DE IE TE DE IE TE

The first group FKSI1 FKSI2 FETA1 FETA2 FETA3

FETA1 0.59** - 0.59** 0.41** - 0.41** - - - - - - - - -

(0.10) - (0.10) (0.10) - (0.10) - - - - - - - - -

FETA2 0.39* 0.19 0.58** 0.25* 0.13 0.38** 0.33 - 0.33 - - - - - -

(0.19) (0.15) (0.09) (0.10) (0.11) (0.08) (0.26) - (0.26) - - - - - -

FETA3 - 0.52** 0.52** - 0.35** 0.35** - 0.29 0.29 0.89** - 0.89** - - -

- (0.09) (0.09) - (0.09) (0.09) - (0.26) (0.26) (0.08) - (0.08) - - -

FETA4 0.13 0.48** 0.61** -0.03 0.32** 0.29** -0.09 0.30 0.21** 0.68** 0.24* 0.92* 0.27* - 0.27*

(0.14) (0.13) (0.09) (0.07) (0.10) (0.08) (0.20) (0.24) (0.12) (0.18) (0.10) (0.10) (0.10) - (0.10)

2 = 97.28, df = 81, p = 0.105, 2/df = 1.201, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 0.96, AGFI= 0.91, RMSEA = 0.030, SRMR = 0.030 (Lisrel 8.72 Standardized Estimates)

The second group SKSI1 SKSI2 SETA1 SETA2 SETA3

SETA1 0.37** - 0.37** 0.59** - 0.59** - - - - - - - - -

(0.11) - (0.11) (0.12) - (0.12) - - - - - - - - -

SETA2 0.28* 0.23* 0.51** 0.08 0.36* 0.44** 0.61** - 0.61** - - - - - -

(0.12) (0.09) (0.10) (0.15) (0.15) (0.10) (0.20) - (0.20) - - - - - -

SETA3 - 0.48** 0.48** - 0.41** 0.41** - 0.57** 0.57** 0.95** - 0.95** - - -

- (0.09) (0.09) - (0.09) (0.09) - (0.19) (0.19) (0.06) - (0.06) - - -

SETA4 0.11 0.32** 0.43** 0.36* 0.14 0.49** -0.51 0.61* 0.10 0.69** 0.31* 1.00** 0.33* - 0.33*

(0.11) (0.11) (0.10) (0.14) (0.15) (0.10) (0.28) (0.27) (0.17) (0.24) (0.13) (0.18) (0.14) - (0.14)

2 = 82.06, df = 66, p = 0.088, 2/df = 1.243, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 0.98, AGFI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.028, SRMR = 0.021 (Lisrel 8.72 Standardized Estimates)

Fac. of G

rad. Studies, Mahidol U

niv. D.P.A

. (Public Policy and Public Managem

ent) / 223

Table 4.36 The measure effects of SEM models of the public organizations of 3 group mossions to high-performance organizations (cont.)

Dependent variable Independent variable

DE IE TE DE IE TE DE IE TE DE IE TE DE IE TE

The third group TKSI1 TKSI2 TETA1 TETA2 TETA3

TETA1 0.23* - 0.23* 0.69** - 0.69** - - - - - - - - -

(0.11) - (0.11) (0.11) - (0.11) - - - - - - - - -

TETA2 0.22* 0.11 0.33** 0.29* 0.33** 0.62** 0.47** - 0.47** - - - - - -

(0.12) (0.07) (0.13) (0.15) (0.12) (0.14) (0.14) - (0.14) - - - - - -

TETA3 - 0.29** 0.29** - 0.55** 0.55** - 0.43** 0.43** 0.90** - 0.90** - - -

- (0.09) (0.09) - (0.09) (0.09) - (0.09) (0.09) (0.07) - (0.07) - - -

TETA4 0.11 0.26** 0.37** 0.06 0.47** 0.53** -0.09 0.41** 0.32** 0.55** 0.30** 0.85** 0.34** - 0.34**

(0.10) (0.08) (0.10) (0.14) (0.11) (0.10) (0.16) (0.11) (0.11) (0.13) (0.07) (0.10) (0.09) - (0.09)


Remarks: 1. *p .05, **p .01 and t 1.96 means p .05, t 2.58 means p .01

2. DE = Direct Effect, IE = Indirect Effect, TE = Total Effect


Considering the importance of the elements of each observed variables in the

measurement model of Culture and Engagement (KSI1), Leadership (KSI2), Change

Management (ETA1), People (ETA2), Design (ETA3), and High-Performance

Organization (ETA4), it is found that the coefficient standardized factor loading (β) of 20

observed variables of the first mission group of PO are close in value ( = 0.67 to 1.00)

which is statistically significant at the 0. 01 level ( t 2.58). This means that the 20

observed variables of the first group are important elements in indicating the six latent

variables. All observed variables are quite close in importance. The maximum correlation

coefficient standardized factor loading is middle managers embrace and translate

strategy (X5) (= 1.00), the second is strategic human resources (Y5 ) (=0.92), and

third is few layers and wide spans of control (Y7) (= 0.87).

The comparison statistics of the standard coefficient weight of the

components () of the 20 observed variables between CFA model and SEM model of

the first mission group are shown in the table.


Table 4.37 The comparison statistics of the standard coefficient weight of the


the first mission group.

Observed

Variables

The statistical values of CFA model of the first group

of public organization

The statistical values of SEM model of the first group

of public organization

Standardized Factor

Loading

()

SE t R2

Standardized

Factor Loading

()

SE t R2

KSI1:

X1 0.67** 0.04 10.59 0.44 0.67** 0.04 10.44 0.44

X2 0.84** 0.05 13.91 0.70 0.81** 0.05 13.10 0.65

KSI2:

X3 0.78** 0.04 12.98 0.61 0.84** 0.04 14.25 0.70

X4 0.80** 0.04 12.88 0.63 0.85** 0.04 14.57 0.72

X5 0.87** 0.03 15.22 0.76 1.00** 0.04 14.62 0.99

ETA1:

Y1 0.80** 0.03 12.99 0.64 0.83** - - 0.69

Y2 0.70** 0.04 11.01 0.48 0.69** 0.05 10.23 0.47

ETA2:

Y3 0.79** 0.03 13.80 0.62 0.81** - - 0.66

Y4 0.76** 0.03 13.16 0.57 0.75** 0.03 13.24 0.57

Y5 0.92** 0.03 17.46 0.84 0.92** 0.03 17.74 0.85

ETA3:

Y6 0.75** 0.03 12.57 0.56 0.78** - - 0.61

Y7 0.87** 0.04 15.43 0.75 0.87** 0.05 11.35 0.75

Y8 0.85** 0.04 15.23 0.73 0.81** 0.04 12.35 0.65

Y9 0.81** 0.04 14.27 0.65 0.79** 0.04 12.27 0.63

ETA4:

Y10 0.79** 0.03 13.91 0.62 0.79** - - 0.63

Y11 0.74** 0.03 12.46 0.55 0.75** 0.03 13.67 0.56

Y12 0.85** 0.04 15.61 0.72 0.85** 0.04 14.56 0.73

Y13 0.82** 0.03 14.87 0.68 0.85** 0.04 13.69 0.72

Y14 0.85** 0.03 15.51 0.72 0.86** 0.04 14.63 0.74

Y15 0.84** 0.03 15.19 0.70 0.83** 0.04 14.08 0.69

The coefficient standardized factor loading (β) of 20 manifest variables of

the second mission group of PO are close in value ( = 0 .7 6 to 0 .9 2 ) which is

statistically significant at the 0.01 level ( t 2.58). This means that the 20 observed

variables of the second group are important elements in indicating the six latent

variables. All observed variables are quite close in importance. The two maximum

correlation coefficient standardized factor loadings are the strategic human resources


(Y5 ) and energizing system and structure equally (Y14) ( = 0.92), the third is

shared information and open communication (Y10) ( =0.90), and the lowest is

culture (X1) (= 0.76).

Table 4 . 38 The comparison statistics of the standard coefficient weight of the


the second mission group.

Observed

Variables

The statistical values of CFA model of the second

group of public organizations

The statistical values of SEM model of the second


Standardized Factor

Loading

()

SE t R2

Standardized

Factor Loading

()

SE t R2

KSI1:

X1 0.76** 0.04 15.54 0.58 0.76** 0.04 15.52 0.58

X2 0.89** 0.04 19.03 0.79 0.88** 0.04 18.84 0.78

KSI2:

X3 0.75** 0.04 14.80 0.56 0.89** 0.04 18.98 0.79

X4 0.81** 0.04 16.91 0.65 0.85** 0.04 18.78 0.73

X5 0.86** 0.03 18.65 0.75 0.86** 0.03 18.59 0.74

ETA1:

Y1 0.83** 0.03 17.41 0.68 0.82** - - 0.68

Y2 0.79** 0.04 16.37 0.62 0.79** 0.04 15.60 0.62

ETA2:

Y3 0.82** 0.03 17.76 0.67 0.83** - - 0.69

Y4 0.87** 0.03 19.30 0.76 0.85** 0.03 18.60 0.72

Y5 0.92** 0.03 21.08 0.84 0.89** 0.03 20.04 0.79

ETA3:

Y6 0.80** 0.03 16.91 0.64 0.80** - - 0.65

Y7 0.83** 0.04 17.83 0.68 0.85** 0.04 17.41 0.72

Y8 0.84** 0.04 18.24 0.71 0.89** 0.05 16.46 0.79

Y9 0.84** 0.04 18.41 0.71 0.86** 0.05 15.08 0.75

ETA4:

Y10 0.89** 0.03 20.19 0.79 0.90** - - 0.80

Y11 0.88** 0.03 19.66 0.78 0.88** 0.03 23.56 0.77

Y12 0.89** 0.04 20.52 0.80 0.89** 0.03 23.48 0.79

Y13 0.89** 0.03 20.07 0.79 0.89** 0.03 20.70 0.78

Y14 0.92** 0.03 21.21 0.84 0.92** 0.03 22.36 0.85

Y15 0.84** 0.04 18.70 0.71 0.85** 0.03 20.37 0.73

The coefficient standardized factor loading (β) of 20 manifest variables of

the third mission group of PO are close in value ( = 0.77 to 0.90) which is statistically


significant at the 0.01 level (t 2.58). This means that the 20 observed variables of the

third group are important elements indicating the six latent variables. All observed

variables are quite close in importance. The maximum correlation coefficient

standardized factor loading are energizing system and structure (Y1 4 ) (= 0.90), the

second is accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8 ) (=0.89), and the

third is middle managers embrace and translate strategy (X5) (= 0.88).

Table 4.39 The comparison statistics of the standard coefficient weight of the


the third mission group.

Observed

Variables

The statistical values of CFA model of the third


The statistical values of SEM model of the second


Standardized Factor

Loading

()

SE t R2

Standardized

Factor Loading

()

SE t R2

KSI1:

X1 0.78** 0.03 18.90 0.61 0.80** 0.03 19.39 0.64

X2 0.81** 0.03 19.61 0.65 0.79** 0.03 19.31 0.63

KSI2:

X3 0.81** 0.03 19.64 0.65 0.79** 0.03 19.33 0.63

X4 0.83** 0.03 21.21 0.69 0.82** 0.03 21.02 0.68

X5 0.87** 0.02 22.70 0.76 0.88** 0.02 22.84 0.77

ETA1:

Y1 0.86** 0.02 22.55 0.73 0.86** - - 0.74

Y2 0.87** 0.02 22.89 0.75 0.86** 0.02 22.90 0.74

ETA2:

Y3 0.78** 0.03 18.80 0.60 0.77** 0.03 10.51 0.59

Y4 0.87** 0.02 23.43 0.76 0.84** 0.04 10.83 0.71

Y5 0.86** 0.02 22.96 0.74 0.83** 0.04 10.90 0.69

ETA3:

Y6 0.80** 0.03 18.20 0.63 0.82** - - 0.67

Y7 0.88** 0.03 22.54 0.78 0.86** 0.04 16.50 0.73

Y8 0.89** 0.03 24.26 0.80 0.89** 0.03 18.27 0.80

Y9 0.86** 0.03 22.90 0.74 0.86** 0.03 17.33 0.74

ETA4:

Y10 0.85** 0.02 22.88 0.73 0.85** - - 0.72

Y11 0.84** 0.02 22.42 0.70 0.85** 0.02 25.83 0.71

Y12 0.88** 0.02 24.02 0.77 0.87** 0.02 24.25 0.75

Y13 0.85** 0.02 22.78 0.73 0.86** 0.03 21.34 0.74

Y14 0.89** 0.02 24.54 0.79 0.90** 0.02 23.58 0.80

Y15 0.83** 0.03 21.84 0.68 0.84** 0.02 22.73 0.70


Table 4.40 The statistic values of the analysis results of SEM models of PO as HPO of

the three mission groups.

Observed

Variables

The first group of public

organizations

The second group of public

organizations

The third group of public

organizations

Standardized

Factor

Loading

()

SE t R2

Standardized

Factor

Loading

()

SE t R2

Standardized

Factor

Loading

()

SE t R2

KSI1:

X1 0.67** 0.04 10.44 0.44 0.76** 0.04 15.52 0.58 0.80** 0.03 19.39 0.64

X2 0.81** 0.05 13.10 0.65 0.88** 0.04 18.84 0.78 0.79** 0.03 19.31 0.63

KSI2:

X3 0.84** 0.04 14.25 0.70 0.89** 0.04 18.98 0.79 0.79** 0.03 19.33 0.63

X4 0.85** 0.04 14.57 0.72 0.85** 0.04 18.78 0.73 0.82** 0.03 21.02 0.68

X5 1.00** 0.04 14.62 0.99 0.86** 0.03 18.59 0.74 0.88** 0.02 22.84 0.77

ETA1:

Y1 0.83** - - 0.69 0.82** - - 0.68 0.86** - - 0.74

Y2 0.69** 0.05 10.23 0.47 0.79** 0.04 15.60 0.62 0.86** 0.02 22.90 0.74

ETA2:

Y3 0.81** - - 0.66 0.83** - - 0.69 0.77** 0.03 10.51 0.59

Y4 0.75** 0.03 13.24 0.57 0.85** 0.03 18.60 0.72 0.84** 0.04 10.83 0.71

Y5 0.92** 0.03 17.74 0.85 0.89** 0.03 20.04 0.79 0.83** 0.04 10.90 0.69

ETA3:

Y6 0.78** - - 0.61 0.80** - - 0.65 0.82** - - 0.67

Y7 0.87** 0.05 11.35 0.75 0.85** 0.04 17.41 0.72 0.86** 0.04 16.50 0.73

Y8 0.81** 0.04 12.35 0.65 0.89** 0.05 16.46 0.79 0.89** 0.03 18.27 0.80

Y9 0.79** 0.04 12.27 0.63 0.86** 0.05 15.08 0.75 0.86** 0.03 17.33 0.74

ETA4:

Y10 0.79** - - 0.63 0.90** - - 0.80 0.85** - - 0.72

Y11 0.75** 0.03 13.67 0.56 0.88** 0.03 23.56 0.77 0.85** 0.02 25.83 0.71

Y12 0.85** 0.04 14.56 0.73 0.89** 0.03 23.48 0.79 0.87** 0.02 24.25 0.75

Y13 0.85** 0.04 13.69 0.72 0.89** 0.03 20.70 0.78 0.86** 0.03 21.34 0.74

Y14 0.86** 0.04 14.63 0.74 0.92** 0.03 22.36 0.85 0.90** 0.02 23.58 0.80

Y15 0.83** 0.04 14.08 0.69 0.85** 0.03 20.37 0.73 0.84** 0.02 22.73 0.70

Remarks: *p .05, **p .01 and t 1.96 means p .05, t 2.58 means p .01

The ability to explain variance in latent variables, namely, Culture and

Engagement (KSI1), Leadership (KSI2), Change Management (ETA1), People

(ETA2), Design (ETA3), and High-Performance Organization (ETA4) could

determine the value of R2 of all observed variables by the reliability coefficient. The

first group of PO has R2 between 0 . 44 to 0.99 which means that these manifest

variables could explain the covariance of the six latent variables about 44 to 99


percent. The second group of PO has R2 between 0.58 to 0.85 which means that these

manifest variables could explain the covariance of the six latent variables about 58 to

85 percent. The third group of PO has R2 between 0.59 to 0.80 which means that these

manifest variables could explain the covariance of the six latent variables about 59 to

80 percent. Therefore, the manifest variables could explain the covariance of the six

latent variables in ‘medium to high’ level. The second group could be measured better

than the first group and the third group.

1) The analysis results of the effects of latent variables in

the PO model of the first mission group.

The analysis results of the effects of latent variables in the PO

model of the first mission group is shown as follows:

a) Culture and Engagement (FKSI1) has a direct

effect on Change Management (FETA1) at the statistically significant level of 0. 01

which has the approximate impact of 0 .59. Culture and Engagement (FKSI1) has a

direct effect on People (FETA2) at the statistically significant level of 0.05 which has

the approximate impact of 0 .39. Culture and Engagement (FKSI1) does not affect on

High-Performance Organization (FETA4) at the statistically significant level of 0.05.

This finding could explain that the first group of

POs gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (FKSI1) consisting of giving

attention to organizational culture and engagement in high level which will also

increase indicators of change management and people in the organization.

b) Leadership (FKSI2) has a direct effect on

Change Management (FETA1) at the statistically significant level of 0.01 which has

the approximate impact of 0 .41. Leadership (FKSI2) has a direct effect on People

(FETA2) at the statistically significant level of 0.05 which has the approximate impact

of 0 .2 5 . Leadership (FKSI2) does not affect on High-Performance Organization

(FETA4) at the statistically significant level of 0.05.


POs gives precedence to Leadership (FKSI2) consisting of having high-performance

teams of individual leaders (X3), future leaders (X4), and middle managers who

embrace and translate strategy (X5) in high level which will also increase the

indicators of change management and people in the organization.


c) Change Management (FETA1) does not affect

on People (FETA2) and High-Performance Organization (FETA4) at the

statistically significant level of 0.05.

d) People (FETA2) has a direct effect on Design

(FETA3) and High-Performance Organization (FETA4) at the statistically

significant level of 0. 01. People (FETA2) has the highest direct effect on Design

(FETA3) with the approximate impact of 0.89. People (FETA2) is the second highest

direct effect on High-Performance Organization (FETA4) with the approximate

impact of 0.68.


POs gives precedence to People (FETA2), consisting of clear employer branding (Y3),

the focus on critical roles and key talents (Y4), and using strategic human resources

(Y5) in high level which will also increase Design (FETA3) and High-Performance

Organization (FETA4) in an organization.

e) Design (FETA3) has a direct effect on High-

Performance Organization (FETA4) at the statistically significant level of 0. 01

which has the approximate impact of 0 .2 7 . This finding could explain that the first

group of PO gives precedence to Design (FETA3) consisting of structure and

resource allocation (Y6 ) , few layers and wide spans of control (Y7 ) ,

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8 ) , and matched role

requirements (Y9 ) in high level which will also increase High-Performance

Organization (FETA4) in an organization.

The details of the analysis results of the direct effect, indirect effect,

and total effect of latent variables in the model of the first mission group are as follows:

1. Culture and Engagement (FKSI1)

a) Culture and Engagement (FKSI1)

has a total effect on Change Management (FETA1). The approximate impact is 0.59

which is a direct effect of 0.59 without an indirect effect.

b) Culture and Engagement (FKSI1)

has a total effect on People (FETA2). The approximate impact is 0.58 which is a direct

impact of 0.39, and an indirect effect of 0.19 via Change Management (FETA1).


c) Culture and Engagement (FKSI1)

has a total effect on Design (FETA3). The approximate direct impact is 0.52 which is

not a direct effect, but it is an indirect effect of 0.52 via Change Management

(FETA1) and People (FETA2).

d) Culture and Engagement (FKSI1)

has a total effect on High-Performance Organization (FETA4). The approximate

impact is 0 .61 which is a direct effect of 0.13, and it is also an indirect effect of 0.48

via Change Management (FETA1), People (FETA2), and Design (FETA3).

2. Leadership (FKSI2)

a) Leadership (FKSI2) has a total

effect on Change Management (FETA1). The approximate impact is 0.41 which is a

direct effect of 0.41 without an indirect effect.

b) Leadership (FKSI2) has a total

effect on People (FETA2). The approximate impact is 0.38 which is a direct effect of

0.25 and an indirect effect of 0.13 via Change Management (FETA1).

c) Leadership (FKSI2) has a total effect

on Design (FETA3). The approximate direct impact is 0.35 which is not a direct effect, but

it is an indirect effect of 0.35 via Change Management (FETA1) and People (FETA2).

d) Leadership (FKSI2) has a total

effect on High-Performance Organization (FETA4). The approximate direct impact

is 0 .2 9 which is a direct effect o f 0 .0 3 , and it is also an indirect effect of 0.32 via

Change Management (FETA1), People (FETA2), and Design (FETA3).

3. Change Management (FETA1)

a) Change Management (FETA1) has

a total effect on People (FETA2). The approximate impact is 0 .3 3 which is a direct

effect of 0.33 without an indirect effect.

b) Change Management (FETA1) has

a total effect on Design (FETA3). The approximate direct impact is 0.29 which is not a

direct effect, but it is an indirect effect of 0.29 via People (FETA2).

c) Change Management (FETA1) has

a total effect on High-Performance Organization (FETA4). The approximate direct


impact is 0 .21 which is a direct effect -0 .09, and it is also an indirect effect 0.30 via

People (FETA2), and Design (FETA3).

4. People (FETA2)

a) People (FETA2) has a total effect on

Design (FETA3). The approximate impact is 0 .8 9 which is a direct effect of 0 .8 9

without an indirect effect.

b) People (FETA2) has a total effect on

High-Performance Organization (FETA4). The approximate impact is 0.92 which is

a direct effect of 0.68, and it is also an indirect effect of 0.24 via Design (FETA3).

5) Design (FETA3) has a total effect on High-

Performance Organization (FETA4). The approximate impact is 0 .2 7 which is a



the PO Model of the second mission group.

The analysis results of the effects of latent variables in the

second group of PO model has shown as follows:

a) Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) has a direct

effect on Change Management (SETA1) at the statistically significant level of 0. 01

which the approximate impact is 0 .37. Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) has a direct

effect on People (SETA2) at the statistically significant level of 0. 05 which has the

approximate impact of 0 . 28. Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) does not affect on

High-Performance Organization (SETA4) at the statistically significant level of 0.05.

This finding could explain that the second group of

PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) consisting of giving


increase the indicators of change management and people in an organization.

b) Leadership (SKSI2) has a direct effect on

Change Management (SETA1) at the statistically significant level of 0.01 which has

the approximate impact of 0 . 59. Leadership (FKSI2) has a direct effect on High-

Performance Organization (SETA4) at the statistically significant level of 0. 05

which has the approximate impact of 0 .3 6 . Leadership (FKSI2) does not affect on

People (SETA2) at the statistically significant level of 0.05.



PO gives precedence to Leadership (SKSI2) consisting of having high-performance

teams of individual leaders (X3), future leaders (X4), and middle managers who

embrace and translate strategy (X5) in high level which will also increase indicators of

change management and HPO in an organization.

c) Change Management (SETA1) has a direct

effect on People (SETA2) at the statistically significant level of 0.01 which has the

approximate impact of 0.61. Change Management (SETA1) does not affect on High-

Performance Organization (SETA4) at the statistically significant level of 0.05.


PO gives precedence to Change Management (SETA1) consisting of the disciplined

cascade (Y1) and being evolutionary organizations (Y2) in high level which will also

increase the indicators of People (SETA2) in an organization.

d) People (SETA2) has a direct effect on Design

(SETA3) and High-Performance Organization (SETA4) at the statistically

significant level of 0. 01. People (SETA2) has the highest direct effect on Design

(SETA3) with the approximate impact of 0 . 9 5 . People (SETA2) has the second

highest direct effect on High-Performance Organization (SETA4) which has the

approximate impact of 0.69.


PO gives precedence to People (FETA2) consisting of the employer branding (Y3),

critical roles and key talents (Y4), and strategic human resources (Y5) in high level

which will also increase indicators of Design (SETA3) and High-Performance

Organization (SETA4) in an organization.

e) Design (SETA3) has a direct effect on High-

Performance Organization (SETA4) at the statistically significant level of 0. 05

which has the approximate impact of 0.33. This finding could explain that the second

group of PO gives precedence to Design (SETA3) consisting of efficient structure and

resource allocation (Y6 ) , few layers and wide spans of control (Y7 ) , clear

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8 ) , and employees matched to

role requirements (Y9 ) in high level which will also increase indicators of High-

Performance Organization (SETA4) in an organization.


The details of the analysis results of the direct effect, indirect

effect, and total effect of latent variables in the model of the second group are as

follows:

1. Culture and Engagement (SKSI1)

a) Culture and Engagement (SKSI1)

has a total effect on Change Management (SETA1). The approximate impact is 0.37,


b) Culture and Engagement (SKSI1)

has a total effect on People (SETA2). The approximate direct impact is 0.51 which is a

direct effect of 0.28, and an indirect effect of 0.23 via Change Management (SETA1).

c) Culture and Engagement (SKSI1)

has a total effect on Design (SETA3). The approximate impact is 0.48 which is not a

direct effect, but it is an indirect effect of 0.48 via Change Management (SETA1)

and People (SETA2).

d) Culture and Engagement (SKSI1)

has a total effect on High-Performance Organization (SETA4). The approximate


via Change Management (SETA1), People (SETA2), and Design (SETA3).

2. Leadership (SKSI2)

a) Leadership (SKSI2) has a total

effect on Change Management (SETA1). The approximate impact is 0.59 which is a


b) Leadership (SKSI2) has a total

effect on People (SETA2). The approximate impact is 0 .4 4 which is a direct effect

0.08 and an indirect effect 0.36 via Change Management (SETA1).

c) Leadership (SKSI2) has a total

effect on Design (SETA3). The approximate direct impact is 0.41 which is not a direct

effect, but it is an indirect effect of 0.41 via Change Management (SETA1) and

People (SETA2).

d) Leadership (SKSI2) has a total

effect on High-Performance Organization (SETA4). The approximate impact is 0.49


which is a direct effect of 0.36 and an indirect effect of 0.14 via Change Management

(SETA1), People (SETA2), and Design (SETA3).

3. Change Management (SETA1)

a) Change Management (SETA1) has

a total effect on People (SETA2). The approximate impact is 0 .6 1 which is a direct


b) Change Management (SETA1) has

a total effect on Design (SETA3). The approximate direct impact is 0.57 which is not a

direct effect, but it is an indirect effect 0.57 via People (SETA2).

c) Change Management (SETA1) has

a total effect on High-Performance Organization (SETA4). The approximate impact

is 0.10 which is a direct effect -0.51 and an indirect effect 0.61 via People (SETA2),

and Design (SETA3).

4. People (SETA2)

a) People (SETA2) has a total effect on

Design (SETA3). The approximate impact is 0.95 which is a direct effect 0.95 without

an indirect effect.

b) People (SETA2) has a total effect on

High-Performance Organization (SETA4). The approximate impact is 1.00 which is

a direct effect 0.69, and it is also an indirect effect 0.31 via Design (FETA3).

5 Design (SETA3) has a total effect on High-

Performance Organization (SETA4). The approximate impact is 0 .3 3 which is a



the PO model of the third mission group.

a) Culture and Engagement (TKSI1) has a direct

effect on Change Management (TETA1) at the statistically significant level of 0. 05

which has the approximate impact of 0 .23. Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) has a

direct effect on People (SETA2) at the statistically significant level of 0.05 which has

the approximate impact of 0 .22. Culture and Engagement (TKSI1) does not affect on

High-Performance Organization (TETA4) at the statistically significant level of 0.05.


This finding could explain that the third group of

PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (TKSI1), consisting of giving


increase indicators of change management and people in an organization.

b) Leadership (TKSI2) has a direct effect on

Change Management (TETA1) at the statistically significant level of 0.01 which has

the approximate impact of 0 .69. Leadership (TKSI2) has a direct effect on People

(TETA2) at the statistically significant level of 0.05 which has the approximate impact

of 0 .2 9 . Leadership (TKSI2) does not affect on High-Performance Organization

(TETA4) at the statistically significant level of 0.05.


PO gives precedence to Leadership (TKSI2) consisting of having high-performance

teams of individual leaders (X3), future leaders (X4), and having middle managers

who embrace and translate strategy (X5) in high level which will also increase

indicators of change management and people in an organization.

c) Change Management (TETA1) has a direct

effect on People (TETA2) at the statistically significant level of 0.01 which has the

approximate impact of 0.47. Change Management (TETA1) does not affect on High-

Performance Organization (TETA4) at the statistically significant level of 0.05.


PO gives precedence to Change Management (TETA1) consisting of the disciplined

cascade (Y1), and being evolutionary organizations (Y2) in high level which will also

increase indicators of People (TETA2) in an organization.

d) People (TETA2) has a direct effect on Design

(TETA3) and High-Performance Organization (TETA4) at the statistically

significant level of 0. 01. People (TETA2) has the highest direct effect on Design

(TETA3) which has the approximate impact of 0 .90 . The second is People (TETA2)

has the second highest direct effect on High-Performance Organization (TETA4)

which has the approximate impact of 0.55.


PO gives precedence to People (TETA2) consisting of the clear employer branding

(Y3), a focus on critical roles and key talents (Y4), and using strategic human


resources (Y5) in high level which will also increase indicators of Design (TETA3)

and High-Performance Organization (TETA4) in an organization.

e) Design (TETA3) has a direct effect on High-

Performance Organization (TETA4) at the statistically significant level of 0. 01

which has the approximate impact of 0 .3 4 . This finding could explain that the third

group of PO gives precedence to Design (TETA3) consisting of the efficient structure

and resource allocation (Y6 ) , few layers and wide spans of control (Y7 ) , clear

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8 ) , and employees matched to

role requirements (Y9 ) in high level which will also increase indicators of High-

Performance Organization (TETA4) in an organization.

The details of the analysis results of the direct

effect, indirect effect, and total effect of latent variables in the model of the third group

are as follows:

1. Culture and Engagement (TKSI1)

a) Culture and Engagement (TKSI1)

has a total effect on Change Management (TETA1). The approximate impact is 0.23


b) Culture and Engagement (TKSI1)

has a total effect on People (TETA2). The approximate impact is 0.33 which is a direct

impact of 0.22, and an indirect effect of 0.11 via Change Management (TETA1).

c) Culture and Engagement (TKSI1)

has a total effect on Design (TETA3). The approximate direct impact is 0.29 which is

not a direct effect, but it is an indirect effect of 0.29 via Change Management

(FETA1) and People (FETA2).

d) Culture and Engagement (TKSI1)

has a total effect on High-Performance Organization (TETA4). The approximate


via Change Management (TETA1), People (TETA2), and Design (TETA3).


2. Leadership (TKSI2)

a) Leadership (TKSI2) has a total

effect on Change Management (TETA1). The approximate impact is 0.69 which is a


b) Leadership (TKSI2) has a total

effect on People (TETA2). The approximate impact is 0 .6 2 which is a direct effect

0.29 and an indirect effect 0.33 via Change Management (TETA1).

c) Leadership (TKSI2) has a total effect

on Design (TETA3). The approximate direct impact is 0 .5 5 which is not a direct effect,

but it is an indirect effect 0.55 via Change Management (TETA1) and People (TETA2).

d) Leadership (TKSI2) has a total

effect on High-Performance Organization (TETA4). The approximate direct impact

is 0 .5 3 which is a direct effect of 0 .0 6 , and it is also an indirect effect of 0.47 via

Change Management (TETA1), People (TETA2), and Design (TETA3).

3. Change Management (TETA1)

a) Change Management (TETA1)

has a total effect on People (FETA2). The approximate impact is 0.47 which is a direct


b) Change Management (TETA1)

has a total effect on Design (TETA3). The approximate direct impact is 0.43 which is

not a direct effect, but it is an indirect effect of 0.43 via People (TETA2).

c) Change Management (TETA1)

has a total effect on High-Performance Organization (TETA4). The approximate

direct impact is 0.32 which is a direct effect of -0.09, and it is also an indirect effect of

0.41 via People (TETA2), and Design (TETA3).

4. People (TETA2)

a) People (TETA2) has a total effect on

Design (TETA3) . The approximate impact is 0 .9 0 which is a direct effect of 0 .9 0

without an indirect effect.

b) People (TETA2) has a total effect on

High-Performance Organization (TETA4). The approximate impact is 0.85 which is a

direct effect of 0.55, and it is also an indirect effect of 0.30 via Design (TETA3).


5) Design (TETA3) has a total effect on High-

Performance Organization ( TETA4) . The approximate impact is 0 .3 4 which is a


4) The analysis results of the first mission group of PO Model.

The SEM model has construct validity and the hypothesis model fits the

empirical data. This could be described as follows:

The ability to predict the dependent variables of first mission

group finds that the indicators in every variable in the measurement model are close in

importance. The most important indicator is middle managers embrace and

translate strategy (X5), and the second most important are strategic human

resources (Y5 ) , and few layers and wide spans of control (Y7 ) . Change

Management (FETA1) is influenced by Culture and Engagement ( FKSI1) and

Leadership (FKSI2). This finding could explain that the first group of PO gives

precedence to Culture and Engagement ( FKSI1) and Leadership (FKSI2) in high

level which will also increase change management in an organization.

People (FETA2) is influenced by Culture and Engagement

(FKSI1) and Leadership (FKSI2). This finding could explain that the first group of

PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (FKSI1) and Leadership (FKSI2)

in high level which will also increase indicators of employee management in an

organization. Design (FETA3) is influenced by People (FETA2). This finding could

explain that the first group of PO gives precedence to People (FETA2) in high level

which will also increase the level of organizational design. High-Performance

Organization (FETA4) is influenced by People (FETA2) and Design (FETA3). This

finding could explain that the first group of PO gives precedence to People (FETA2)

and Design (FETA3) in high level which will also increase HPO. However, High-

Performance Organization (FETA4) is not directly influenced by Culture and

Engagement (FKSI1), Leadership (FKSI2), and Change Management (FETA1).

Moreover, the results could explain the significant points as follows:

1 ) Design (FETA3) is influenced by Culture and

Engagement ( FKSI1) , Leadership (FKSI2) via Change Management (FETA1) and

People (FETA2). The approximate impact is 0 .52 and 0.33, respectively. This finding

could explain that the first group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement


( FKSI1) and Leadership (FKSI2) in high level which will also increase organizational

design indirectly, but it does not directly affect organizational design for the first group.

2 ) High-Performance Organization (FETA4) is influenced

by Culture and Engagement (FKSI1), Leadership (FKSI2) via People (FETA2) and

Design (FETA3). The approximate indirect impacts are 0 .48 and 0.32, respectively.

This finding could explain that the first group of PO gives precedence to Culture and

Engagement (FKSI1) and Leadership (FKSI2) in high level which will also increase

HPO indirectly, but it does not directly affect HPO for the first group.

3 ) High-Performance Organization (FETA4) is influenced

by People (FETA2), via Design (FETA3). The approximate indirect impact is 0 .24.

This finding could explain that the first group of PO gives precedence to People

(FETA2) in high level which will also increase HPO indirectly, and directly affect

high HPO for the first group.

All the variables in the research model of the first group of SEM model of

PO as HPO could explain the variance of Change Management (FETA1) 83%, the

variance of People (FETA2) 81%, the variance of Design (FETA3) 80%, and the

variance of High-Performance Organization (FETA4) 89%.

5) The analysis results of the PO Model of the second group.



The ability to predict the dependent variables of second group

finds that the indicators in every variable in the measurement model are close in

importance. The most important indicator is energizing system and structure (Y14),

and the second and third are shared information and open communication (Y10),

and culture (X1), respectively. Change Management (SETA1) is influenced by

Culture and Engagement ( SKSI1) and Leadership (SKSI2). This finding could

explain that the second group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement

(SKSI1) and Leadership (SKSI2) in high level which will also increase indicators of

change management in an organization.

People (SETA2) is influenced by Culture and Engagement

( SKSI1) and Change Management (SETA1). This finding could explain that the

second group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement ( SKSI1) and


Change Management (SETA1) in high level which will also increase indicators of

employee management in an organization. However, People (SETA2) is not directly

influenced by Leadership (SKSI2).

Design (SETA3) is influenced by People (SETA2). This

finding could explain that the second group of PO gives precedence to People

(SETA2) in high level which will also increase indicators of organizational design.

High-Performance Organization (SETA4) is influenced by

Leadership (SKSI2), People (SETA2), and Design (SETA3). This finding could

explain that the second group of PO gives precedence to Leadership (SKSI2), People

(SETA2), and Design (SETA3) in high level which will also increase indicators of

HPO. However, High-Performance Organization (SETA4) is not directly influenced

by Culture and Engagement (SKSI1), and Change Management (SETA1).


1) People (SETA2) is influenced by Culture and Engagement

( SKSI1) , and Leadership (SKSI2) via Change Management (SETA1). The

approximate indirect impacts are 0.23 and 0.36, respectively. This finding could explain

that the second group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) and

Leadership (SKSI2) in high level which will also increase indicators of People (SETA2)

indirectly, but it does not directly affect People (SETA2) for the second group.

2 ) Design (SETA3) is influenced by Culture and

Engagement (SKSI1) via People (SETA2) which has the approximate indirect impact

of 0.48. Design (SETA3) is influenced by Leadership (SKSI2) via Change

Management (SETA1) and People (SETA2) which has the approximate indirect

impact of 0.41. Design (SETA3) is influenced by Change Management (SETA1) via

People (SETA2) which has the approximate indirect impact of 0.57. This finding

could explain that the second group of PO gives precedence to Culture and

Engagement (SKSI1), Leadership (SKSI2), and Change Management (SETA1) in high

level which will also increase indicators of organizational design indirectly, but it does

not directly affect organizational design for the second group.

3 ) High-Performance Organization (SETA4) is influenced

by Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) via Change Management (SETA1), People

(SETA2), and Design (SETA3). The approximate indirect impact is 0.32. This finding


could explain that the second group of PO gives precedence to Culture and

Engagement ( SKSI1) in high level which will also increase indicators of HPO

indirectly, but it does not directly affect HPO for the second group.


indirectly by Change Management (SETA1), and People (SETA2) via Design

(SETA3). The approximate indirect impacts are 0 . 61 and 0.31, respectively. This

finding could explain that the second group of PO gives precedence to Change

Management (SETA1) and People (SETA2) in high level which will also increase

indicators of HPO indirectly, and cause high HPO directly for the second group.

All the variables in the research model of the second group of SEM model

of PO as HPO could explain the variance of Change Management (SETA1) 86%, the

variance of People (FETA2) 87%, the variance of Design (SETA3) 90%, and the

variance of High-Performance Organization (SETA4) 93%.

6) The analysis results of the third group of PO Model.



1 ) The ability to predict the dependent variable of the third

mission group finds that the indicators of every variable in the measurement model are

close in importance. The most important indicator is the energizing system and

structure (Y14), and the second and third are accountabilities, decision rights, and

collaboration (Y8 ) , and middle managers embrace and translate strategy (X5),

respectively. Change Management (TETA1) is influenced by Culture and

Engagement ( TKSI1) and Leadership (TKSI2). This finding could explain that the

third group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement ( TKSI1) and

Leadership (TKSI2) in high level which will also increase indicators of change

management in an organization.

People (TETA2) is influenced by Culture and Engagement

( TKSI1), Leadership (TKSI2), and Change Management (TETA1). This finding

could explain that the third group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement

(TKSI1), Leadership (TKSI2), and Change Management (TETA1) in high level which

will also increase indicators of employee management in an organization.


Design (TETA3) is influenced by People (TETA2). This

finding could explain that the third group of PO gives precedence to People (TETA2)

in high level which will also increase indicators of organizational design.

High-Performance Organization (TETA4) is influenced by

People (TETA2) and Design (TETA3). This finding could explain that the third group

of PO gives precedence to People (TETA2) and Design (TETA3) in high level which

will also increase indicators of HPO. However, High-Performance Organization

(TETA4) is not directly influenced by Culture and Engagement (TKSI1) , Leadership

(TKSI2), and Change Management (TETA1).


1 ) People (TETA2) is influenced by Culture and

Engagement (TKSI1), and Leadership (FKSI2) via Change Management (FETA1).

The approximate impacts are 0 .11 and 0.33, respectively. This finding could explain

that the third group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (TKSI1) and

Leadership (TKSI2) in high level which will also increase indicators of People

(TETA2) indirectly, but it does not directly affect People (TETA2) for the third group.

2 ) Design (TETA3) is influenced by Culture and

Engagement (TKSI1) via People (SETA2), the approximate indirect impact is 0.29.

Design (TETA3) is influenced by Leadership (SKSI2) via Change Management

(SETA1) and People (SETA2), the approximate indirect impact is 0.55. Design

(SETA3) is influenced by Change Management (SETA1) via People (TETA2) which

has the approximate indirect impact of 0.43. This finding could explain that the third

group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (TKSI1), Leadership

(TKSI2), and Change Management (TETA1) in high level which will also increase

indicators of organizational design indirectly, but it does not directly affect

organizational design for the third group.

3 ) High-Performance Organization (TETA4) is influenced by

Culture and Engagement ( TKSI1) and Leadership (TKSI2) via Change Management

(TETA1), People (TETA2) and Design (TETA3). The approximate indirect impacts are 0.26

and 0.47, respectively. This finding could explain that the third group of PO gives precedence

to Culture and Engagement (TKSI1) and Leadership (TKSI2) in high level which will also

increase indicators of HPO indirectly, but it does not directly affect HPO for the third group.


4 ) High-Performance Organization (TETA4) is influenced

by Change Management (TETA1), and People (TETA2), via Design (TETA3). The

approximate indirect impacts are 0 . 41 and 0.30, respectively. This finding could

explain that the third group of PO gives precedence to Change Management (TETA1)

and People (TETA2) in high level which will also increase indicators of HPO

indirectly, and cause high HPO directly for the third group.

All the variables in the research model of the third group of SEM model of

PO as HPO could explain the variance of Change Management (TETA1) 81%, the

variance of People (TETA2) 83%, the variance of Design (TETA3) 67%, and the

variance of High-Performance Organization (TETA4) 74%.


2 = 97.28, df = 81, p = 0.105, 2/df = 1.201, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 0.96, AGFI= 0.91, RMSEA = 0.030, SRMR = 0.030


Remark Group1

FKSI1 = Culture and Engagement Y3 = Employer branding

FKSI2 = Leadership Y4 = The critical roles and key talents

FETA1 = Change Management Y5 = Strategic human resource

FETA2 = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation

FETA3 = Design Y7 = Few layers and wide spans of control

FETA4 = High-Performance

Organization

Y8 = Accountabilities, decision rights, and

collaboration



communication

X3 = High-Performance Teams of

Individual Leaders

Y11 = Compelling vision, purpose and values

X4 = Future Leaders Y12 = Ongoing learning

X5 = Middle Managers embrace and

translate strategy.

Y13 = The focus on customer results

Y1 = Disciplined cascade Y14 = Energizing system and structure

Y2 = Evolutionary organizations Y15 = Shared power and high involvement

Figure 4.19 A structural equation modeling (SEM) of the first mission group of public

organization as high-performance organization




Remark Group2

SKSI1 = Culture and Engagement Y3 = Employer branding

SKSI2 = Leadership Y4 = The critical roles and key talents

SETA1 = Change Management Y5 = Strategic human resource

SETA2 = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation

SETA3 = Design Y7 = Few layers and wide spans of control

SETA4 = High-Performance Organization Y8 = Accountabilities, decision rights, and

collaboration


X1 = Engagement Y10 = Shared information and open communication


Individual Leaders




translate strategy.




Figure 4.20 A structural equation modeling (SEM) of the second mission group of





Remark Group3

TKSI1 = Culture and Engagement Y3 = Employer branding

TKSI2 = Leadership Y4 = The critical roles and key talents

TETA1 = Change Management Y5 = Strategic human resource

TETA2 = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation

TETA3 = Design Y7 = Few layers and wide spans of control

TETA4 = High-Performance Organization Y8 = Accountabilities, decision rights, and

collaboration


X1 = Engagement Y10 = Shared information and open communication


Individual Leaders




translate strategy.




Figure 4.21 A structural equation modeling (SEM) of the third mission group of



4.4 The summary of the practical approach of the models of the

management of public organization (PO) to high-performance

organization (HPO) The researcher concludes with the practical approach of the models of the

management of public organization (PO) as high-performance organization (HPO) in the

three mission groups. Three SEM models are considered supported by information from

in-depth interviews with experts in POs who are top manager, middle manager, and first-

line manager or first-line supervisor and employees. The results are described as follows:

1 ) The component of Culture and Engagement ( KSI1) in

general, for POs of the three mission groups who have been categorized as HPO

reveals that the constructed measurement model has construct validity and the

hypothesis model fits the empirical data. The observable variables are important

indicators in measuring Culture and Engagement (KSI1) for all organizations with

positive weights. This leads to the practical approach that the three mission groups of

POs that give precedence to culture (X1) and engagement (X2) in high level will also

exhibit increased culture and engagement in the organization. On the other hand, the

three mission groups of POs that give precedence to these indicators in low level will

also exhibit decreased culture and engagement in the organization. Therefore, the

practical approach is to maintain the level of these indicators. All observed variables

having a high positive correlation show that culture (X1) and engagement (X2) have a

supportive relationship with each other. That is, promoting organizational culture will

increase employee engagement. Meanwhile, encouraging employee engagement in the

organization with appropriate methods will reinforce organizational culture that

accelerates strategic goals to lead to organizational success. The practical approach of

POs of the three mission groups is to promote culture and engagement in alignment.

The researcher has summarized the practical approach of the

component of culture and engagement which is a part of the HPO model of the three

mission groups as shown in the table.


Table 4.41 The practical approach of the component of Culture and Engagement

Culture and engagement

Organization Culture

- The focus on organizational culture as a

catalyst for strategic goals.

- The focus on the executives to convey

the direction of organization to change

the culture of work in accordance with

the organizational strategy.

- The focus on the determination of organizational management and monitoring

systems to promote organizational success.

Employee Engagement

- The determination of an employee

engagement system and developing a

commitment to work success.

- The focus on employee engagement at a

level where employees have a high level

of work spirit.

- The focus on employee engagement with

a collaborative atmosphere.

- The focus on the engagement tools

including symbols, stories, languages,

and policies to build commitment

between employees.

2 ) The component of Leadership (KSI2 ) in general, in POs

of the three mission groups who have been categorized as HPO reveals that the

constructed measurement model has construct validity and the hypothesis model fits

the empirical data. The observable variables are indicators which measure Leadership

(KSI2) for all organizations with positive weights. This leads to the practical approach

that the three mission groups of POs that give precedence to high-performance teams

of individual leaders (X3), future leaders (X4), and middle managers embrace and

translate strategy (X5) in high level will also exhibit increased leadership in the

organization. On the other hand, if the three mission groups of POs give precedence to

these indicators in low level this will also decrease leadership in the organization.

Therefore, the practical approach is to maintain the level of these indicators. All

observed variables having a high positive correlation show that having high-

performance teams of individual leaders (X3), giving attention to future leaders (X4),

and having middle managers who embrace and translate strategy (X5) have a


supportive relationship with each other. The practical approach of POs of the three

mission groups should be to promote the three indicators of leadership in alignment.

The researcher summarizes the practical approach of the component of leadership

which is a part of the HPO model of the three mission groups as shown in the table.

Table 4.42 The practical approach of the component of Leadership

Leadership

High-performance teams of individual leaders

- The focus on leadership can be driven

by organizational collaboration for

strength performance.

- The focus on the skillful leader to work

smoothly with colleagues outside the

organization.

- The focus on the leaders to work collaboratively with their colleagues.

Future leaders

- The focus on determining the required

attributes of skilled leaders in accordance

with current and future organizational

mission since the start of the recruitment

process.

- The focus on the leader develops the

skills and competencies needed for the

future mission of the organization by

accountability

- The focus on leaders can rotate in many

different positions, and have multiple

roles.

- The focus on the senior executives

perform the role for determining

expectations for leadership behaviors,

review, and modify the performance

management system.

for organizational success.

Middle managers embrace and translate strategy

- The focus on determining the head of

division performs a role of strategic

interpretation to the operators.

- The focus on determining the head of

division performs a role of creating a

skilled staff and strength in work.

- The focus on determining the head of division performs an important role in linking

work between top executives and employees by using two-way communication from

top-down and from the bottom-up.


3) The component of Change management (ETA1 ) in

general, in POs of the three mission groups who have been categorized as HPO reveals

that the constructed measurement model has construct validity and the hypothesis

model fits the empirical data. The observable variables are indicators which measure

Change Management (ETA1) for all organizations with positive weights. This leads to

the practical approach that organizations in the three mission groups of POs that give

precedence to the disciplined cascade (Y1) and are evolutionary organizations (Y2) in

high level will also exhibit increased change management in the organization. On the

other hand, in organizations in the three mission groups of POs that give precedence to

these indicators in low level will also have decreased change management. Therefore,

the practical approach is to maintain the level of these indicators. All observed

variables having a high positive correlation show that the disciplined cascade (Y1) and

being evolutionary organizations (Y2) have a supportive relationship with each other.

The practical approach of POs of the three mission groups is to promote the two

indicators of change management in alignment.

The researcher summarizes the practical approach of the component of

Change Management which is a part of the HPO model of the three mission groups as

shown in the table.

Table 4.43 The practical approach of the component of Change Management

Change Management

Disciplined cascade

- The focus on prioritizing organization

mission

- The focus on the determination of the

progress organization to compare the

operations and prevent risks that will not

be in line with the plan.

- The focus on the determination of

accountability and success indicators for

each employee.

- The focus on the communicating to the

stakeholders of the organization,

especially during fluctuating times.

- The focus on providing tools and power to employees to accomplish their tasks.


Table 4 . 4 3 The practical approach of the component of Change Management

(cont.)

Change Management


- The focus on organizational adaptation

to changing circumstances

- The focus on the continuous change

observation in the operational context

which is similar to the organization

performance including the situations

affecting organizational management

- The focus on the strategy adjustment to be more effective and consistent with the

changing environment

4 ) The component of People (ETA2 ) in general, for POs of

the three mission groups who have been categorized as HPO reveals that the

constructed measurement model has construct validity and the hypothesis model fits

the empirical data. The observable variables are indicators which measure People

(ETA2) for all organizations with positive weights. This leads to the practical

approach that organizations in the three mission groups of Pos that give precedence to

employer branding (Y3), identify critical roles and key talents (Y4), and use strategic

human resources (Y5) in high level will also exhibit increased people or employee

management in the organization. On the other hand, if the organizations in the three

mission groups of POs give precedence to these indicators in low level they will also

exhibit decreased level of people or employee management. Therefore, the practical

approach is to maintain the level of these indicators. All observed variables having a

high positive correlation show that employer branding (Y3), critical roles and key

talents (Y4), and strategic human resources (Y5) have a supportive relationship with

each other. The practical approach of POs of the three mission groups should be to

promote the three indicators of Employee Management in alignment.

The researcher summarizes the practical approach of the

component of People or Employee Management which is a part of the HPO model of

the three mission groups as shown in the table.


Table 4.44 The practical approach of the component of People

People (Employee management)

Employer branding

- The focus on the investment for human

development, especially effective training

- The focus on the proper career

advancement for employee

- The focus on the job rotation to

contribute the proper roles and

responsibility creating organization

achievement

- The focus on developing the

substandard workers

- The focus on the motivational tools that could maintain people in the form of

compensation and other incentives, such as Non-monetary benefits such as welfare,

the various privilege and so on


- The focus on determining the roles

needed for each mission

- The focus on the employee management

by the changeable workers according to

organizational strategic priorities

- The focus on determining capable

employee who performs the task

successfully

- The focus on determining a continuous

plan for the management of talented

workers

- The focus on the management of talented workers both in terms of fast progress and

strategies to retain personnel


- The focus on the human resources

strategy

- The focus on the human resource

management which contributes to

employees' creativity at work for

organizational success

- The focus on the human resource

management which aims to develop

people in consistent with organizational

strategies

- The focus on the he human resource

management which could provide advice

and analysis to the line manager or

administrators


5) The component of Design (ETA3) in general, for POs of the

three mission groups who have been categorized as HPO reveals that the constructed

measurement model has construct validity and the hypothesis model fits the empirical

data. The observable variables are indicators which measure Design (ETA3) for all

organizations with positive weights. This leads to the practical approach that

organizations in the three mission groups of POs that give precedence to structure and

resource allocation (Y6), have few layers and wide spans of control (Y7), have clear

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8), and employees matched to role

requirements (Y9) in high level will also exhibit increased levels of organizational

design. On the other hand, when the three mission groups of POs give precedence to

these indicators in low level it will also decrease organizational design. Therefore, the

practical approach is to maintain the level of these indicators. All observed variables

having a high positive correlation show that structure and resource allocation (Y6), few

layers and wide spans of control (Y7), accountabilities, decision rights, and

collaboration (Y8), and matched role requirements (Y9) all have a supportive

relationship with each other. The practical approach of POs of the three mission groups

should be to promote the four indicators of organization design in alignment.


component of Organizational Design which is a part of the HPO model of the three

mission groups as shown in the table.

Table 4.45 The practical approach of the component of Design

Organization Design


- The focus on the systematization of

organizational structure consistent with

the establishing law and resources

allocation consistent with operations

- The focus on the executives monitor the

corresponding operational processes of

each division

- The focus on the systematization of

primary and secondary missions

- The focus on determining the person

who is responsible for each task or project

to achieve effective performance


Table 4.45 The practical approach of the component of Design (cont.)

Organization Design


- The focus on defining organizational

philosophy statement in line with

organizational strategy

- The focus on creating a collective work

from the integration of various parts of

the organization

- The focus on designing operational processes and strategies which align with the

current situations and the future circumstances


- The utilization of a small number of

organizational layers and wide spans of

control with fast communication and

decision making to complete the mission

on time and with goals

- The focus on the line managers use

leadership skills to oversee the operation

of a wide range of control

- The focus on reducing or eliminating unnecessary processes to focus on the work

that is important to the organization



accountability and clear roles in the

operation in line with the authoritative

rules

- The focus on the collaborative works

and with accountability

- The focus on the employees having the

right and opportunity to make decisions

- The focus on the employees involving in

drafting their work plans to determine the

accountability and decision making


- The focus on the assignment of the roles

and skilled workers which is essential for

organizational success and changing

circumstances

- The focus on the assignment of

important tasks to the appropriate

employee by potential and responsibility

- The focus on the works with experts to perform important missions or hiring skilled

people to streamline operations


6 ) The component of High-Performance Organization

(ETA4) in general, for POs of the three mission groups who have been categorized as

HPO reveals that the constructed measurement model has construct validity and the

hypothesis model fits the empirical data. The observable variables are indicators which

measure High-Performance Organization (ETA4) for all organizations with positive

weights. This leads to the practical approach that organizations in the three mission

groups of POs that give precedence to shared information and open communication

(Y10), having a compelling vision, purpose and values (Y11), encouraging ongoing

learning (Y12), having a focus on customer results (Y13), having an energizing system

and structure (Y14), and having shared power and high involvement (Y15) in high

level will also exhibit an increase in the level of the High-Performance Organization

measure in the organization. On the other hand, when organizations in the three

mission groups of POs give precedence to these indicators in low level there will also

be a decrease in High-Performance Organization. Therefore, the practical approach is

to maintain the level of these indicators. All observed variables having a high positive

correlation show that shared information and open communication (Y10), having a

compelling vision, purpose and values (Y11), ongoing learning (Y12), a focus on

customer results (Y13), having an energizing system and structure (Y14), and shared

power and high involvement (Y15) have a supportive relationship with each other. The

practical approach of POs of the three mission groups should promote the six

indicators of High-Performance Organization in alignment.


component of High-Performance Organization which is a part of the HPO model of

the three mission groups as shown in the table.


Table 4 . 4 6 The practical approach of the component of High-Performance

Organization


Shared information and open communication

- The focus on the operators access

information, news, and information

conveniently for the effective work

- The focus on the high-performing teams

of the authority to jointly accomplish the

organization mission

- The focus on the employees having a

wide range of communication and

decisions to make better understanding

- The focus on the conversation with

employees and value for employee

feedback and opinion

- The focus on the open communication in

the organization

- The focus on involving employees in all

important activities

- The focus on preparing information

which is ready to support decision-

making to create employee a sense of

ownership of the organization

- The focus on the line managers perform

a role in encouraging employees to

develop themselves to improve and drive

organization performances

- The focus on the permission to trial and error for learning


- The focus on the determination and

management of organization leaders to

have the characteristics and operations in

line with the vision and values of the

organization

- The focus on the employees support the

organization, including goals, values,

shared values and the future image of the

organization

- The encouragement of employees to

enjoy the job to perform the shared

common goals and values

- The focus on the employees having the

same values in the direction in accordance

with the organization values

- The focus on the employees having commitment to create contributions to the

organization success



Organization (cont.)


Ongoing learning

- The encouragement of employees to be

motivated to increase their skills and

performance in work to create a standard

of continuous learning in the operation of

organization

- The support for learning resources

which are beneficial to organization

missions

- The support for learning from best

practices and transfering of knowledge in

organization

- The focus on the organization learning

along with the learning of each employee


- The focus on all employee in

organization maintains a high standard in

quality and service

- The focus on develop strategies and

vision for success which meet the

expectations of customers or service

recipients.

- The focus on every step of the process is

designed to facilitate the customers or

service recipients

- The focus on Executives or line

managers perform the active role in

encouraging employees to become leaders

and to develop the skills which lead to

promotion within the organization


- The focus on the empowerment of

decision-making throughout the

organizational processes

- The focus on encouraging employees to

have access to information needed to

make decisions in work

- The focus on the participation,

collaboration and teamwork

- The focus on encouraging employees

motivated to create a value that respond

to the goals and vision of the organization



Organization (cont.)



- The focus on the empowerment of

decision-making throughout the

organizational processes

- The focus on encouraging employees to

have access to information needed to

make decisions in work

- The focus on the participation,

collaboration and teamwork


motivated to create a value that respond

to the goals and vision of the organization

By analyzing the content and summarizing the issues mentioned above, the

researcher presents the detailed results by each type of public organization:

4.4.1 The practical approach of the model of public organization as

high-performance organization of the first mission group: public organizations

with the mission of the development and specific policy implementation of

government affairs

The researcher concludes the practical approach of the model of the first

mission group of POs as HPO which is tested for consistency with empirical data and

confirmed by the experts of POs as shown in the figure and description.


Figure 4.22 The high-performance organization models of the first group of public

organization

2 = 97.28, df = 81, p = 0.105, 2/df = 1.201, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 0.96, AGFI= 0.91, RMSEA = 0.030, SRMR = 0.030 (Lisrel 8.72 Standardized Estimates)

Remark *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and t > 1.96 indicate p < 0.05, and t > 2.58 indicates p < 0.05 FKSI1 (K1) = Culture and engagement Y3 = Employer branding FKSI2 (K2) = Leadership Y4 = The critical roles and key talents FETA1 (E1) = Change management Y5 = Strategic HR FETA2 (E2) = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation FETA3 (E3) = Design Y7 = Few layers and wide spans of control FETA4 (E4) = High-Performance Y8 =Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration

Organization X1 = Culture Y9 = Matched role requirements X1 = Engagement Y10 = Shared information and open communication X3 = Teams of leaders Y11 = Compelling vision, purpose and values X4 = Future leaders Y12 = Ongoing learning X5 = Middle managers Y13 = The focus on customer results Y1 = Change is a disciplined cascade. Y14 = Energizing system and structure Y2 = The organization is evolutionary. Y15 =Shared power and high involvement Group 1 = Public organizations of the mission of the development and the specific policy implementation of the government affairs Group 2 = Public organizations of technical services or the interdisciplinary mission Group 3 = Public organizations of the general public services


The practical approach of the model of first group mission of PO to HPO

derives from the model tested by the samples from two high-performing POs, namely,

the Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of Thailand (Public Organization),

and the Highland Research and Development Institute (Public Organization), in

addition to the results of in-depth interviews. All experts confirm the models tested

with empirical data. The descriptions are presented as follows:

1 . The first group of public organizations with the mission of

the development and specific policy implementation of government affairs could

develop the indicators of organizational success from the tested model by the

application of the characteristic features in organization management prioritized by the

first three in sequence.

( 1 ) The first in priority is the indicator of middle

managers embrace and translate strategy (X5). The practical approach of the model

of first group could develop the indicator weight of the POs success based on the

performance of the heads of departments or divisions which links the work in two ways,

from the high level to the practical staff and from staff to the senior management.

Moreover, other POs in the same group mission

could apply the model to implement improvements in their operation and to apply the

strengths that middle and senior executives are strategic drivers. The importance of

strategic communication can be emphasized by the head of the department.

( 2 ) The second in priority is the indicator of

strategic human resources (Y5). The practical approach of the model of first group

could be to develop the PO success based on the development of human resources

strategy in relation to organizational strategy. Indicators of organizational success

should be measured by the success of proper human resources management.

Moreover, other POs in the same mission group

could apply the model to implement improvements in their operations and to apply

human resources management to be an indicator which supports organizations of the

first mission group in improving operations and getting benefits from the strengths of

human resources management to convey the operational strategy. Human resource

managers must provide good employee management advice that aligns with

organizational strategies from senior management.


( 3 ) The third in priority is the indicator of few

layers and wide spans of control (Y7). The practical approach of the model of first

group could be to develop the POs success based on the benefits of a horizontal

organizational structure that makes the hierarchy of lines short so that the workflow is

streamlined to suit the size of the public organization which is consistent with its

mission. This causes cross-functional operation leading to effective performance.

Moreover, other POs in the same mission group

could apply the model to implement improvements in their operation by this indicator.

The researcher concludes the practical approach of the HPO

model of the first mission group applied to organizational achievement prioritized by

weight value from maximum to minimum is as shown in the table.

Table 4 .47 The practical approach by the indicator weight of the organizational

success of the first mission group of public organization prioritized by weight

value from maximum to minimum Order of

value

The strengths of the model prioritized by

weight value from maximum to minimum

The practical approach by the indicator weight of the


1. Middle managers embrace and translate strategy - The focus on determining the head of division performs a

role of strategic interpretation to the operators.

- The focus on determining the head of division performs an

important role in linking work between top executives and

employees by using two-way communication from top-down

and from the bottom-up.

- The focus on determining the head of division performs a

role of creating a skilled staff and strength in work.

2. Strategic human resource - The focus on the human resources strategy

- The focus on the human resource management which aims to

develop people in consistent with organizational strategies

- The focus on the human resource management which

contributes to employees' creativity at work for organizational

success

- The focus on the he human resource management which

could provide advice and analysis to the line manager or

administrators




value from maximum to minimum (cont.) Order of

value





3. Few layers and wide spans of control - The utilization of a small number of organizational layers

and wide spans of control with fast communication and

decision making to complete the mission on time and with

goals

- The focus on reducing or eliminating unnecessary processes

to focus on the work that is important to the organization

- The focus on the line managers use leadership skills to

oversee the operation of a wide range of control

4. Energizing system and structure - The systematic monitoring of operations to provide mission

and practice in accordance with the established law and

operating system. to support the organization success

- The monitoring of operations which are problems and an

obstacles to develop the proper solutions

- The accountability determination in performance

management systems to achieve organizational success

- The focus on the reward system depending on the success of

organization, work department, and staff

5. Future leaders - The focus on determining the required attributes of skilled

leaders in accordance with current and future organizational

mission since the start of the recruitment process

- The focus on leaders can rotate in many different positions,

and have multiple roles

- The focus on the leader develops the skills and competencies

needed for the future mission of the organization by

accountability

- The focus on the senior executives perform the role for

determining expectations for leadership behaviors, review, and

modify the performance management system for


Ongoing learning - The encouragement of employees to be motivated to increase

their skills and performance in work to create a standard of

continuous learning in the operation of organization

- The support for learning from best practices and transferring

of knowledge in organization

- The support for learning resources which are beneficial to

organization missions

- The focus on the organization learning along with the

learning of each employee





value





The focus on customer results - The focus on all employee in organization maintains a high

standard in quality and service

- The focus on every step of the process is designed to

facilitate the customers or service recipients

- The focus on develop strategies and vision for success which

meet the expectations of customers or service recipients

- The focus on Executives or line managers perform the active

role in encouraging employees to become leaders and to

develop the skills which lead to promotion within the

organization

6. High-performance teams of individual leaders - The focus on leadership can be driven by organizational

collaboration for strength performance

- The focus on the leaders to work collaboratively with their

colleagues

- The focus on the skillful leader to work smoothly with

colleagues outside the organization

7. Disciplined cascade - The focus on prioritizing organization mission

- The focus on the determination of accountability and success

indicators for each employee

- The focus on providing tools and power to employees to

accomplish their tasks

- The focus on the determination of the progress organization

to compare the operations and prevent risks that will not be in

line with the plan

- The focus on the communicating to the stakeholders of the

organization, especially during fluctuating times

Shared power and high involvement - The focus on the empowerment of decision-making

throughout the organizational processes

- The focus on the empowerment of decision-making


- The focus on encouraging employees to have access to

information needed to make decisions in work

- The focus on encouraging employees motivated to create a

value that respond to the goals and vision of the organization





value





8. Engagement - The determination of an employee engagement system and

developing a commitment to work success

- The focus on employee engagement with a collaborative

atmosphere

- The focus on employee engagement at a level where

employees have a high level of work spirit

- The focus on the engagement tools including symbols,

stories, languages, and policies to build commitment between

employees

Employer branding - The focus on the investment for human development,

especially effective training

- The focus on the job rotation to contribute the proper roles

and responsibility creating organization achievement

- The focus on the motivational tools that could maintain

people in the form of compensation and other incentives, such

as non-monetary benefits such as welfare, the various

privilege, and so on

- The focus on the proper career advancement for employee

- The focus on developing the substandard workers

Accountabilities, decision rights, and

collaboration

- The focus on the determination of accountability and clear

roles in the operation in line with the authoritative rules

- The focus on the employees having the right and opportunity

to make decisions

- The focus on the collaborative works and with accountability

- The focus on the employees involving in drafting their work

plans to determine the accountability and decision making

9. Matched role requirements - The focus on the assignment of the roles and skilled workers

which is essential for organizational success and changing

circumstances

- The focus on the works with experts to perform important

missions or hiring skilled people to streamline operations

- The focus on the assignment of important tasks to the

appropriate employee by potential and responsibility





value





Shared information and open communication - The focus on the operators access information, news, and

information conveniently for the effective work

- The focus on the employees having a wide range of

communication and decisions to make better understanding

- The focus on the open communication in the organization

- The focus on preparing information which is ready to

support decision-making to create employee a sense of


- The focus on the permission to trial and error for learning

- The focus on the high-performing teams of the authority to

jointly accomplish the organization mission

- The focus on the conversation with employees and value for

employee feedback and opinion

- The focus on involving employees in all important activities

- The focus on the line managers perform a role in

encouraging employees to develop themselves to improve and

drive organization performances

10. Structure and resource allocation - The focus on the systematization of organizational structure

consistent with the establishing law and resources allocation

consistent with operations

- The focus on the systematization of primary and secondary

missions

- The focus on defining organizational philosophy statement in

line with organizational strategy

- The focus on the executives monitor the corresponding

operational processes of each division

- The focus on determining the person who is responsible for

each task or project to achieve effective performance

- The focus on creating a collective work from the integration

of various parts of the organization

- The focus on designing operational processes and strategies

which align with the current situations and the future

circumstances

11. The critical roles and key talents - The focus on determining the roles needed for each mission

- The focus on determining the roles needed for each mission

- The focus on the management of talented workers both in

terms of fast progress and strategies to retain personnel

- The focus on the employee management by the changeable

workers according to organizational strategic priorities

- The focus on determining a continuous plan for the

management of talented workers





value





Compelling vision, purpose and values - The focus on the determination and management of

organization leaders to have the characteristics and operations

in line with the vision and values of the organization

- The encouragement of employees to enjoy the job to perform

the shared common goals and values

- The focus on the employees support the organization,

including goals, values, shared values and the future image of

the organization

- The focus on the employees having the same values in the

direction in accordance with the organization values

- The focus on the employees having commitment to create

contributions to the organization success

12. Evolutionary organizations - The focus on organizational adaptation to changing

circumstances

- The focus on the strategy adjustment to be more effective

and consistent with the changing environment

- The focus on the continuous change observation in the

operational context which is similar to the organization

performance including the situations affecting organizational

management

13. Culture - The focus on organizational culture as a catalyst for strategic

goals

- The focus on the determination of organizational

management and monitoring systems to promote


- The focus on the executives to convey the direction of

organization to change the culture of work in accordance with

the organizational strategy

Therefore, the implementation of the first mission group

should give authority and role to the department head / division head in the

organization to make linkages for efficient operation. The first mission group should

apply the practical approach by using a wide span of control for a faster process. This

is also the practical approach for other POs to give precedence to human resource

management for the organization’s success.

Moreover, the practical approach could also create other

development plans according to the indicator weight values next in priority order in


addition to the first three in sequence. This may depend on the policy of the executives

and the public organization committees to focus on the matter. It also depends on the

situation of the organization and budget limitations. The organization can choose to

invest in development prioritized by the order of the weight of the element from high

value to low value as shown in the table. However, POs who are in the sample of the

first group, namely, the Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of Thailand

(Public Organization), and the Highland Research and Development Institute (Public

Organization) can be applied as an example of the how the work process can be

improved to be more efficient by attention even to lower weight indicators as shown in

the table, such as the improvement of organizational culture, which has the lowest

element weight for the first group prioritized by indicators. So, the HPOs of the first

mission group have attained high-performance by: (1) the focus on organizational

culture as a catalyst for strategic goals; (2) the focus on the determination of

organizational management and monitoring systems to promote organizational

success; and (3) the focus on the executives to convey the direction of the organization

in order to change the culture of work in accordance with the organizational strategy.

The same indicators in the value order chart can be used as a development guide

simultaneously, or a PO could choose to develop appropriately consistent with the

situational management policy.

The model of the first mission group of POs as HPO has

shown the significant points for the practical approach as follows:

1. The component of Culture and Engagement (KSI1)

For the first mission group of POs, the element of

Culture and Engagement (FKSI1) has direct effects on Change Management (FETA1)

and People (FETA2 ) and has an indirect effect on High-Performance Organization

(FETA4) via People (FETA2). The practical approach is presented as follows:

1 ) The focus on culture and engagement in an

organization in high level will lead to better organizational change management. That

is, the first mission group could give precedence to the elements of organizational

culture, by: (1) the focus on organizational culture as a catalyst for strategic goals; (2)

the focus on the determination of organizational management and monitoring systems

to promote organizational success; and (3 ) the focus on the executives to convey the


direction of the organization to change the culture of work in accordance with the

organizational strategy. Further, the first mission group could give precedence to the

elements of employee engagement; by: ( 1 ) the determination of an employee

engagement system and developing a commitment to work success; (2 ) the focus on

employee engagement with a collaborative atmosphere; (3 ) the focus on employee

engagement at a level where employees have a high level of work spirit; and (4 ) the

focus on the engagement tools including symbols, stories, languages, and policies to

build commitment between employees. The organizations in the first mission group

can create better change management by the disciplined cascade, by: (1) the focus on

prioritizing the organizational mission; (2 ) the focus on the determination of

accountability and success indicators for each employee; (3 ) the focus on providing

tools and empowering employees to accomplish their tasks; (4 ) the focus on the

determination of the progress of the organization to compare the operations and

prevent risks that will not be in line with the plan; and (5) the focus on communicating

to the stakeholders of the organization, especially during fluctuating times. The first

mission group is able to create change management by being an evolutionary

organization, by: (1) the focus on organizational adaptation to changing circumstances;

(2 ) the focus on the strategy adjustment to be more effective and consistent with the

changing environment; and ( 3 ) the focus on continuous change observation in the

operational context, which is similar to organizational performance including the

situations affecting organizational management.

2) The focus on culture and engagement in an

organization in high level will lead to better employee management. That is, the first

mission group could give precedence to organizational culture, by: (1) the focus on

organizational culture as a catalyst for strategic goals; (2 ) the focus on the

determination of organizational management and monitoring systems to promote

organizational success; and (3 ) the focus on the executives to convey the direction of

the organization to change the culture of work in accordance with the organizational

strategy. In addition, the organizations in the first mission group could give

precedence to employee engagement, by: ( 1 ) the determination of an employee

engagement system and developing a commitment to work success; (2 ) the focus on

employee engagement with a collaborative atmosphere; (3 ) the focus on employee


engagement at a level where employees have a high level of work spirit; and (4 ) the

focus on the engagement tools including symbols, stories, languages, and policies to

build commitment between employees. Organizations in the first mission group can

create better employee management by employer branding, by: (1 ) the focus on the

investment for human development, especially effective training; (2) the focus on job

rotation to contribute to the proper roles and responsibility creating organizational

achievement; (3) the focus on motivational tools that could retain people in the form of

compensation and other incentives, such as non-monetary benefits such as welfare,

various privileges, and so on; (4 ) the focus on the proper career advancement for

employees; and (5 ) focus on improving substandard workers. An organization in the

first mission group is able to create better employee management by focusing on

critical roles and key talents, by: ( 1 ) the focus on determining the roles needed for

each mission; (2) the focus on determining capable employees who perform the tasks

successfully; (3) the focus on the management of talented workers both in terms of fast

progress and strategies to retain personnel; (4) the focus on employee management by

having flexible workers according to organizational strategic priorities; and (5 ) the

focus on determining a continuous plan for the management of talented workers.

Another way for the first mission group to create better employee management is by

using strategic human resources, by: (1) the focus on the human resources strategy; (2)

the focus on the human resource management which aims to develop people consistent

with organizational strategies; (3 ) the focus on human resources management which

contributes to employees' creativity at work for organizational success; and (4 ) the

focus on human resources management which could provide advice and analysis to the

line managers or administrators.


organization in high level will lead to better HPO. That is, the first mission group could

give precedence to organizational culture and employee engagement as shown in

previous items in order to create HPO by using shared information and open

communication, namely, (1) the focus on the operators having convenient access to

news and information for effective work; (2) the focus on the employees having a wide

range of communication and understanding to make better decisions; (3) the focus on

open communication in the organization; (4) the focus on preparing information which


is ready to support decision-making to create in employees a sense of ownership of the

organization; (5) the focus on the permission for trial and error for learning; (6) the focus

on high-performing teams with the authority to jointly accomplish the organizational

mission; (7) the focus on conversations with employees and valuing employee feedback

and opinion; (8) the focus on involving employees in all important activities; (9) the

focus on the line managers performing a role in encouraging employees to develop

themselves to improve and drive organization performances. An organization in the first

mission group could create HPO by focusing on the elements of compelling vision,

purpose and values, by: (1) the focus on the determination and management of the

organization’s leaders to have the characteristics and operations in line with the vision

and values of the organization; (2) the encouragement of employees to enjoy the job to

perform with shared values and common goals; (3) the focus on the employees support

for the organization, including goals, shared values and the future image of the

organization; (4) the focus on the employees having similar values in accordance with

the organization’s values; and (5) the focus on the employees having commitment to

create contributions to the organization’s success. The organizations in the first mission

group are able to create HPO by encouraging ongoing learning, by: (1) the

encouragement of employees to be motivated to increase their skills and performance in

work to create a standard of continuous learning in the operation of the organization; (2)

the support for learning from best practices and transferring of knowledge in the

organization; (3) the support for learning resources which are beneficial to

organizational missions; and (4) the focus on the organizational learning along with the

learning of each employee. Organizations in the first mission group could increase HPO

by having a focus on customer results, by: (1) the focus that all employees in an

organization maintain a high standard in quality and service; (2) the focus on every step

of the process being designed to facilitate the customers or service recipients; (3) the

focus on developing strategies and vision for success which meet the expectations of

customers or service recipients; and (4) the focus on executives or line managers

performing an active role in encouraging employees to become leaders and to develop

the skills which lead to promotion within the organization. An organization can also

create an HPO by having an energizing system and structure, namely, (1) the systematic

monitoring of operations to provide mission and practice in accordance with the


establishment law and operating system to support the organization’s success; (2) the

monitoring of operations which are problems and obstacles to develop the proper

solutions; (3) accountability in determination of performance management systems to

achieve organizational success; and (4) the focus on the reward system depending on the

success of organization, work department and staff. Finally, the model shows that an

organization in the first mission group could create HPO by shared power and high

involvement, by: (1) the focus on the empowerment of decision-making throughout the

organizational processes; (2) the focus on participation, collaboration and teamwork; (3)

the focus on encouraging employees to have access to information needed to make

decisions in work; and (4) the focus on encouraging employees to be motivated to create

values that respond to the goals and vision of the organization.

2. The component of Leadership (FKSI2)


Leadership (FKSI2) has a direct effect on Change Management (FETA1), and it has

an indirect effect to High-Performance Organization (FETA4) via People (FETA2).

The practical approach is presented as follows:

1) The focus on leadership in an organization in

high level will lead to better organizational change management. That is, the first

mission group could give precedence to leadership by focusing on the elements of

high-performance teams of individual leaders, by: (1) the focus on leadership that can

drive organizational collaboration for strong performance; (2 ) the focus on leaders to

work collaboratively with their colleagues; and (3 ) the focus on skillful leaders to

work smoothly with colleagues outside the organization. Also, an organization in the

first mission group can create leadership by a focus on future leaders, by: (1) the focus

on determining the required attributes of skilled leaders in accordance with current and

future organizational mission starting with the recruitment process; (2 ) the focus on

leaders who can rotate in many different positions and have multiple roles; (3 ) the

focus on leaders developing the skills, competencies and accountability needed for the

future mission of the organization; and (4 ) the focus on the senior executives

performing the role for determining expectations for leadership behaviors, and review

and modify the performance management system for organizational success. Further,

an organization in the first mission group could create leadership by middle managers


who embrace and translate strategy, by: (1) the focus on determining how the head of

each division performs a role of strategic interpretation to the operators; (2) the focus

on determining how the head of each division performs an important role in linking


top-down and from the bottom-up; and (3 ) the focus on determining how the head of

each division performs a role of creating a skilled staff and strengths in work.

Leadership in the first mission group creates better organizational change

management by the disciplined cascade, namely, ( 1 ) the focus on prioritizing the

organizational mission; (2 ) the focus on the determination of accountability and

success indicators for each employee; (3 ) the focus on providing tools and

empowerment to employees to accomplish their tasks; (4 ) the focus on the



to the stakeholders of the organization, especially during fluctuating times. The model

shows that an organization in the first mission group could create better organizational

change management by the element of being an evolutionary organization, by: (1) the

focus on organizational adaptation to changing circumstances; (2 ) the focus on the

strategy adjustment to be more effective and consistent with the changing

environment; and (3 ) the focus on the continuous change observation in the

operational context, which is similar to organizational performance including the



high level will lead to better employee management. That is, organizations in the first

mission group could give precedence to leadership by the high-performance teams of

individual leaders, by: ( 1 ) the focus on leadership that can drive organizational

collaboration for strong performance; (2 ) the focus on the leaders to work

collaboratively with their colleagues; and (3) the focus on the skillful leaders to work

smoothly with colleagues outside the organization. Developing leadership for the first

mission group is created by a focus on future leaders, by: (1) the focus on determining

the required attributes of skilled leaders in accordance with the current and future

organizational mission starting with the recruitment process; (2 ) the focus on leaders

who can rotate in many different positions, and have multiple roles; (3 ) the focus on


the leaders developing the skills, competencies and accountability needed for the

future mission of the organization; and (4 ) the focus on the senior executives

performing a role for determining expectations for leadership behaviors, to review and

modify the performance management system for organizational success. An

organization in the first mission group could create leadership by middle managers

who embrace and translate strategy, by: (1) the focus on determining how the head of

a division performs a role of strategic interpretation to the operators; (2) the focus on

determining how the head of a division performs an important role in linking work

between top executives and employees by using two-way communication from top-

down and from the bottom-up; and (3 ) the focus on determining how the head of a

division performs a role of creating a skilled staff and strength in work. The first

mission group could create better employee management by clear employer branding,

by: ( 1 ) the focus on the investment for human development, especially effective

training; (2 ) the focus on the job rotation to contribute to the proper roles and

responsibility creating organizational achievement; (3 ) the focus on the motivational

tools that could retain people in the form of compensation and other incentives, such

as non-monetary benefits such as welfare, various privileges, and so on; (4) the focus

on the proper career advancement for employees; and (5 ) the focus on improving

substandard workers. The organizations in the first mission group could create better

employee management by a focus on the elements of critical roles and key talents, by:

( 1 ) the focus on determining the roles needed for each mission; (2 ) the focus on

determining capable employees who perform the tasks successfully; (3 ) the focus on

the management of talented workers both in terms of fast progress and strategies to

retain personnel; (4 ) the focus on employee management by having flexible workers

according to organizational strategic priorities; and (5 ) the focus on determining a

continuous plan for the management of talented workers. Finally, the model shows for

the first mission group that a way to create better employee management is by

attention to strategic human resources, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the human resources

strategy; (2) the focus on human resource management which aims to develop people

consistent with organizational strategies; (3 ) the focus on the human resource

management which contributes to employees' creativity at work for organizational


success; and (4 ) the focus on the human resource management which could provide

advice and analysis to the line managers or administrators.

3) The focus on the leadership and employee

management in an organization in high level will lead to better HPO. That is, the first

mission group could give precedence to elements of leadership, namely, the high-

performance teams of individual leaders, the future leaders, and the middle managers

who embrace and translate strategy. The first mission group could also give

precedence to the elements of employee management; namely, employer branding, the

critical roles and key talents, and the strategic human resources as shown in previous

item in order to create HPO. Leadership and employee management are increased by

having shared information and open communication, namely, ( 1 ) the focus on the

operators having convenient access to news and information for effective work; (2) the

focus on the employees having a wide range of communication and understanding to

make better decisions; (3 ) the focus on open communication in the organization; (4 )

the focus on preparing information which is ready to support decision-making to

create in employees a sense of ownership of the organization; (5 ) the focus on the

permission for trial and error for learning; (6) the focus on high-performing teams with

the authority to jointly accomplish the organizational mission; (7 ) the focus on

conversations with employees and valuing employee feedback and opinion; (8 ) the

focus on involving employees in all important activities; and (9) the focus on the line

managers performing a role in encouraging employees to develop themselves to

improve and drive organizational performances. The model shows that for the first

mission group another element to create HPO is by having compelling vision, purpose

and values, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the determination and management of organization

leaders to have the characteristics and operations in line with the vision and values of

the organization; (2) the encouragement of employees to enjoy the job to perform with

shared values and common goals; (3 ) the focus on the employees supporting the

organization, including goals, shared values and the future image of the organization;

(4 ) the focus on the employees having similar values in accordance with the

organizational values; and (5 ) the focus on the employees having commitment to

create contributions to the organization’s success. Another way for the first mission

group to create HPO is by encouraging ongoing learning, by: (1) the encouragement of


employees to be motivated to increase their skills and performance in work to create a

standard of continuous learning in the operation of the organization; (2) the support for

learning from best practices and transferring of knowledge in the organization; (3) the

support for learning resources which are beneficial to organizational missions; and (4)

the focus on organizational learning along with the learning of each employee. An

organization in the first mission group is able to create HPO by the focus on customer

results, by: ( 1 ) the focus on all employees in the organization maintaining a high

standard in quality and service; (2 ) the focus on every step of the process being

designed to facilitate the customers or service recipients; (3 ) the focus on developing

strategies and vision for success which meet the expectations of customers or service

recipients; and (4 ) the focus on executives or line managers who perform an active

role in encouraging employees to become leaders and to develop the skills which lead

to promotion within the organization. An organization in the first mission group could

create HPO by having an energizing system and structure, by: ( 1 ) the systematic


establishment law and operating system to support the organization’s success; (2 ) the

monitoring of operations which are problems and obstacles to develop the proper

solutions; (3) the determination of accountability in performance management systems

to achieve organizational success; and (4 ) the focus on the reward system depending

on the success of organization, work department and staff. Finally, the model shows an

organization in the first mission group could create HPO by shared power and high

involvement, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the empowerment of decision-making throughout

the organizational processes; (2 ) the focus on participation, collaboration and

teamwork; (3 ) the focus on encouraging employees to have access to information

needed to make decisions in work; and (4 ) the focus on encouraging employees who

are motivated to create values that respond to the goals and vision of the organization.

3. The component of Change Management (FETA1)


the Change Management (FETA1) is influenced by Culture and Engagement

(FKSI1) and Leadership (FKSI2). The practical approach shows that POs in the first

mission group that focus on change management in its organization in high level can

drive operations to respond to a rapidly changing environment and they also give


precedence to culture and engagement and leadership in high level in order to increase

the achievement of change management. However, the element of the Change

Management (FETA1) does not have affect in other directions because the first group

does not emphasize on the change management plan very clearly. There is only one

caution in such work, such as in SWOT analysis to determine strengths, weaknesses,

opportunities, and threats to operations, to regularly give consideration that the

operation does not overlap with the mission of the ministerial agencies performing

similar tasks when a strategy is needed for a change in circumstances.

4. The component of People (FETA2)

For the first mission group of POs, the element of People

(FETA2) has a direct effect on Design (FETA3), and it has a direct effect on High-Performance

Organization (FETA4) . People (FETA2 ) is also influenced by Culture and Engagement

(FKSI1) and Leadership (FKSI2). The practical approach is presented as follows:

1) The focus on people and employee management

in an organization in high level will lead to better organizational design. Specifically,

the first mission group could give precedence to people and employee management by

employer branding, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the investment for human development,

especially effective training; (2 ) the focus on job rotation to contribute to the proper

roles and responsibility creating organizational achievement; (3 ) the focus on the

motivational tools that could maintain people in the form of compensation and other

incentives, such as non-monetary benefits such as welfare, the various privileges, and

so on; (4) the focus on the proper career advancement for employees; and (5) the focus

on improving the substandard workers. As tested by the model, better employee

management is created by the focus on critical roles and key talents, by: (1) the focus

on determining the roles needed for each mission; (2 ) the focus on determining

capable employees who perform the tasks successfully; (3 ) the focus on the

management of talented workers both in terms of fast progress and strategies to retain

personnel; (4 ) the focus on employee management by flexible workers according to

organizational strategic priorities; and (5) the focus on determining a continuous plan

for the management of talented workers. In addition, an organization in the first

mission group could create better employee management by using strategic human

resources, namely, ( 1 ) the focus on human resources strategy; (2 ) the focus on the


human resource management which aims to develop people consistent with

organizational strategies; (3 ) the focus on the human resource management which


focus on the human resource management which could provide advice and analysis to

the line managers or administrators. In order to create a better organizational design,

an organization could focus on the structure and resource allocation, namely, (1 ) the

focus on the systematization of organizational structure consistent with the

establishment law and resources allocation consistent with operations; (2) the focus on

the systematization of primary and secondary missions; (3) the focus on defining

organizational philosophy statement in line with organizational strategy; (4) the focus

on designing operational processes and strategies which align with the current

situations and the future circumstances; (5) the focus on how the executives monitor

the corresponding operational processes of each division; (6) the focus on determining

the person who is responsible for each task or project to achieve effective

performance; and (7) the focus on creating a collective work from the integration of

various parts of the organization. Moreover, the first mission group could give

precedence to organizational design by having few layers and wide spans of control;

namely, (1) the utilization of a small number of organizational layers and wide spans

of control with fast communication and decision making to complete the mission on

time and within goals; (2) the focus on reducing or eliminating unnecessary processes

to focus on the work that is important to the organization; and (3) the focus on the line

managers who use leadership skills to oversee the operation of a wide range of control.

The first mission group could give precedence to organizational design by attention to

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration, by: (1) the focus on the

determination of accountability and clear roles in the operation in line with the

authoritative rules; (2) the focus on the employees having the permission and

opportunity to make decisions; (3) the focus on collaborative work and with

accountability; and (4) the focus on the employees being involved in drafting their

work plans to determine the accountability and decision making. The first mission

group could give precedence to organizational design by focusing on employees being

matched to role requirements, by: (1) the focus on the assignment of roles and skilled

workers which are essential for organizational success and changing circumstances;


(2) the focus on working with experts to perform important missions or hiring skilled

people to streamline operations; and (3) the focus on the assignment of important tasks

to the appropriate employee by potential and responsibility.

2) In the model, the focus on People or Employee

Management in an organization in high level will lead to better HPO. That is, the first

mission group could give precedence to people or employee management by attention

to employer branding, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the investment for human development,

especially effective training; (2) the focus on job rotation to contribute the proper roles

and responsibility creating organizational achievement; (3 ) the focus on the

motivational tools that could retain people in the form of compensation and other

incentives, such as non-monetary benefits such as welfare, various privileges, and so

on; (4) the focus on the proper career advancement for employees; and (5) the focus on

improving the substandard workers. The first mission group could create better

employee management by focusing on critical roles and key talents, by: (1 ) the focus




personnel; (4 ) the focus on the employee management by flexible workers according

to organizational strategic priorities; and (5 ) the focus on determining a continuous

plan for the management of talented workers. The first mission group could create

better employee management by focusing on strategic human resources, by: ( 1 ) the

focus on the human resources strategy; (2 ) the focus on the human resource

management which aims to develop people consistent with organizational strategies;

(3 ) the focus on the human resource management which contributes to employees'

creativity at work for organizational success; and (4) the focus on the human resource

management which could provide advice and analysis to the line managers or

administrators. In order to create HPO, the causal model finds that organizations in the

first mission group can effectively use shared information and open communication,

by: (1 ) the focus on the operators having convenient access to news and information

for effective work; (2 ) the focus on the employees having a wide range of

communication and understanding to make better decisions; (3 ) the focus on open

communication in the organization; (4 ) the focus on preparing information which is


ready to support decision-making to create in employees a sense of ownership of the

organization; (5 ) the focus on the permission for trial and error for learning; (6 ) the

focus on the high-performing teams with the authority to jointly accomplish the

organizational mission; (7 ) the focus on conversations with employees and valuing

employee feedback and opinion; (8) the focus on involving employees in all important

activities; (9) the focus on line managers performing a role in encouraging employees

to develop themselves to improve and drive the organization’s performance. An

organization in the first mission group could create HPO by focusing on having

compelling vision, purpose and values, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the determination and

management of organizational leaders to have the characteristics and operations in line

with the vision and values of the organization; (2) the encouragement of employees to

enjoy the job to perform the shared common goals and values; (3 ) the focus on the

employees supporting the organization, including goals, values, shared values and the

future image of the organization; (4) the focus on the employees having similar values

in accordance with the organization values; and (5) the focus on the employees having

commitment to create contributions to the organization success. An organization in the

first mission group could become an HPO by focusing on ongoing learning, by: (1) the

encouragement of employees to be motivated to increase their skills and performance

in work to create a standard of continuous learning in the operation of the

organization; (2 ) the support for learning from best practices and transferring of

knowledge in the organization; (3 ) the support for learning resources which are

beneficial to an organization’s mission; and (4 ) the focus on the organizational

learning along with the learning of each employee. An organization in the first mission

group could become an HPO by focusing on customer results, by: (1) the focus of all

employees in an organization maintaining a high standard in quality and service; (2 )

the focus on every step of the process being designed to facilitate the customers or

service recipients; (3) the focus on developing strategies and vision for success which

meet the expectations of customers or service recipients; and (4 ) the focus on

executives or line managers performing an active role in encouraging employees to

become leaders and to develop the skills which lead to promotion within the

organization. Organizations in the first mission group could focus on the energizing

system and structure to create HPO, by: (1) the systematic monitoring of operations to



system to support the organization success; (2) the monitoring of operations which are

problems and have obstacles to develop the proper solutions; (3) the determination of

accountability in performance management systems to achieve organizational success;

and (4 ) the focus on the reward system depending on the success of the organization,

work department and staff. Another way for the first mission group to create HPO is

by shared power and high involvement, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the empowerment of

decision-making throughout the organizational processes; (2 ) the focus on

participation, collaboration and teamwork; (3) the focus on encouraging employees to

have access to information needed to make decisions in work; and (4 ) the focus on

encouraging employees to be motivated to create values that respond to the goals and

vision of the organization.

3) People (FETA2) is influenced by Culture and

Engagement (FKSI1) as mentioned in the previous item. The practical approach could

be presented that an organization of the first group that desires to develop the people

or employee management to be an excellent agency must give precedence initially to

culture and engagement. This will lead to a high quality of employee management.

4) People (FETA2) is influenced by Leadership (FKSI2) as

mentioned in the previous item. The practical approach could be presented that

organizations of the first group that desire to develop the people or employee management

to be an excellent agency must give precedence initially to leadership by way of developing

high-performance teams of individual leaders, future leaders, and middle managers who

embrace and translate strategy. This will lead to a high quality of employee management.

However, the element of the change management does not

affect employee management. In practice, it should not be used as a causal factor for the

improvement of the worker. Therefore, improvement in employee management requires

the development of culture and engagement and leadership in the organization.

5. The component of Design (FETA3)

For the first mission group of POs, the element of Design (FETA3)

has a direct effect on High-Performance Organization (FETA4). Design (FETA3) is also

influenced by People (FETA2). The practical approach is presented as follows:


1) The focus on organizational design in high level will lead

to better HPO. That is, the first mission group could give precedence to organizational

design by structure and resource allocation, namely, ( 1 ) the focus on the

systematization of organizational structure consistent with the establishing law and

resources allocation consistent with operations; (2) the focus on the systematization of

primary and secondary missions; (3) the focus on a defining an organizational

philosophy statement in line with organizational strategy; (4) the focus on designing

operational processes and strategies which align with the current situations and the

future circumstances; (5) the focus on the executives monitoring the corresponding

operational processes of each division; (6) the focus on determining the person who is

responsible for each task or project to achieve effective performance; and (7) the focus

on creating a collective work from the integration of various parts of the organization.

Moreover, the first mission group could give precedence to organizational design by

having few layers and wide spans of control, by: (1) the utilization of a small number

of organizational layers and wide spans of control with fast communication and

decision making to complete the mission on time and within goals; (2) focus on

reducing or eliminating unnecessary processes to focus on the work that is important

to the organization; and (3) focus on the line managers who use leadership skills to

oversee the operation with a wide range of control. The first mission group could give

precedence to organizational design by focusing on accountabilities, decision rights,

and collaboration, by: (1) the focus on the determination of accountability and clear

roles in the operation in line with the authoritative rules; (2) the focus on the

employees having the permission and opportunity to make decisions; (3) the focus on

collaborative work and with accountability; and (4) focus on the employees being

involved in drafting their work plans to determine accountability and decision making.

The first mission group could give precedence to organizational design by attention to

matched role requirements, by: (1) focus on the assignment of the roles and skilled

workers which is essential for organizational success and changing circumstances; (2)

focus on working with experts to perform important missions or hiring skilled people

to streamline operations; and (3) focus on the assignment of important tasks to the

appropriate employee by potential and responsibility. In order to create HPO, first

mission group could focus on shared information and open communication, by: (1) the


focus on the operators’ convenient access to news and information for effective work;

( 2 ) t h e focus on the employees having a wide range of communication and

understanding to make better decisions; (3 ) the focus on open communication in the

organization; ( 4 ) t h e focus on preparing information which is ready to support

decision-making to create in employees a sense of ownership of the organization; (5 )

t h e focus on permission for trial and error for learning; ( 6 ) t h e focus on high-

performing teams with the authority to jointly accomplish the organizational mission;

(7 ) th e focus on conversations with employees and valuing employee feedback and

opinion; (8) the focus on involving employees in all important activities; and (9) the

focus on the line managers performing a role in encouraging employees to develop

themselves to improve and drive the organization’s performance. Another way for the

first mission group to create HPO is by having compelling vision, purpose and values,

namely, by: ( 1 ) t h e focus on the determination and management of organization

leaders to have the characteristics and operations in line with the vision and values of

the organization; (2) the encouragement of employees to enjoy the job to perform the

common goals and shared values; ( 3 ) the focus on employees supporting the

organization, including goals, shared values and the future image of the organization;

(4 ) the focus on the employees having similar values in accordance with the

organizational values; and ( 5 ) the focus on the employees having commitment to

create contributions to the organization’s success. Organizations in the first mission

group could create HPO by encouraging ongoing learning, by: (1) encouragement of


standard of continuous learning in the operation of the organization; ( 2 ) supporting

learning from best practices and transferring of knowledge in organization; (3) giving

support for learning resources which are beneficial to organizational missions; and (4)

focusing on the organizational learning along with the learning of each employee.

Organizations in the first mission group could create HPO by focusing on customer

results, by: ( 1 ) t h e focus on all employees in the organization maintaining a high

standard in quality and service; ( 2 ) t h e focus on every step of the process being

designed to facilitate the customers or service recipients; (3) the focus on developing

strategies and vision for success which meet the expectations of customers or service

recipients; and (4) the focus on executives or line managers performing an active role


in encouraging employees to become leaders and to develop the skills which lead to

promotion within the organization. The organizations in the first mission group could

create HPO by having an energizing system and structure, by: ( 1 ) the systematic


establishing law and operating system to support the organization’s success; ( 2 ) the

monitoring of operations which are problems and have obstacles to develop the proper



on the success of organization, work department and staff. Another way for the first

mission group to create HPO is by having shared power and high involvement, by: (1)

the focus on the empowerment of decision-making throughout the organizational

processes; (2) the focus on participation, collaboration and teamwork; (3) the focus on

encouraging employees to have access to information needed to make decisions in

work; and (4 ) the focus on encouraging employees to b e motivated to create values

that respond to the goals and vision of the organization.

2 ) Design (FETA3) is also influenced by People

(FETA2) as mentioned in the previous item. The practical approach could be presented that

organizations in the first mission group that desire to develop the organizational design to be

an excellent agency must give precedence initially to people or employee management by

attention to employer branding, critical roles and key talents, and strategic human resources.

This will lead to a high quality of organizational design, which is part of the HPO model.

6 . The component of High-Performance

Organization (FETA4)

For the first mission group of POs, as mentioned in

the previous item, the element of High-Performance Organization (FETA4) is

influenced by People (FETA2) and Design (FETA3). The practical approach is

presented as follows:

1) The practical approach could be presented that

the first group that desires to develop the HPO or become an excellent agency must

give precedence initially to people and employee management by employer branding,

by focusing on critical roles and key talents, and by focusing on strategic human


resources in high level. This will lead to HPO by having: (1) shared information and

open communication; (2) compelling vision, purpose and values; (3) ongoing learning;

(4) a focus on customer results; (5) an energizing system and structure; and (6) shared

power and high involvement.

2) In addition, the practical approach could be

presented that organizations in the first mission group that desire to develop as HPO or

become an excellent agency must give precedence initially to organizational design by

efficient structure and resource allocation, having few layers and wide spans of control,

having accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration, and having employees matched

to role requirements in high level, which will lead to HPO or becoming an excellent agency.

4.4.2 The practical approach of the model of public organization as

high-performance organization of the second group: public organizations of

technical services or the interdisciplinary mission

The researcher presents conclusions for the practical approach of the

model of the second mission group of POs as HPO which has been tested for

consistency with empirical data and confirmed by the experts of POs of the second

mission group as shown in the figure and description.


Figure 4.23 The high-performance organization model of the second mission group of

public organizations



Remark *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and t > 1.96 indicate p < 0.05, and t > 2.58 indicates p < 0.05 SKSI1 (K1) = Culture and engagement Y3 = Employer branding SKSI2 (K2) = Leadership Y4 = The critical roles and key talents SETA1 (E1) = Change management Y5 = Strategic HR SETA2 (E2) = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation SETA3 (E3) = Design Y7 = Few layers and wide spans of control SETA4 (E4) = High-Performance Y8 =Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration



The practical approach of PO as HPO for the second mission group derives

from the model tested by the samples from six high-performing POs, namely, the

Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public Organization), the Princess Maha Chakri

Sirindhorn Anthropology Center (Public Organization), the Thailand Greenhouse Gas

Management Organization (Public Organization), the Synchrotron Light Research

Institute (Public Organization), the Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute (Public

Organization), and National Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand (Public

Organization), in addition to the results of in-depth interviews. All experts confirm the

models tested with empirical data. The descriptions are presented as follows:

1 . The second group of public organizations of technical

services or the interdisciplinary mission could develop the indicators of organizational

success from the tested model by giving attention to the characteristic features in

organizational management with priority to the first three indicators in sequence.

( 1 ) The first in priority is the energizing system

and structure (Y14) in the component of HPO. The practical approach of the model

of second group suggests the POs could develop success based on: the systematic


establishment law and operating system to support the organization’s success, the

monitoring of operations which are problems or have obstacles to develop the proper

solutions, the determination of accountability in performance management systems to

achieve organizational success, and having focus on the reward system depending on

the success of organization, work department and staff.

(2 ) The second in priority are the two equal-value

indicators; shared information and open communication (Y10) in the component of

HPO, and culture in the component of culture and engagement. The practical

approach from the model of POs in the second mission group suggests success is

based on: the focus on the convenient access for operators to news and information for

effective work, the employees having a wide range of communication and

understanding to make better decisions, having open communication, having

permission for trial and error for learning, having high-performing teams that have the

authority to jointly accomplish the organizational mission, and having line managers

who perform a role in encouraging employees to develop themselves to improve and


drive the organization’s performance. Moreover, the practical approach of the model

suggests POs in the second mission group could develop success based on

organizational culture, by: determining the organizational culture as a catalyst for

strategic goals, having organizational management and monitoring systems to promote

organizational success, and executives who convey the direction of the organization to

change the culture of work in accordance with the organizational strategy.

( 3 ) The third in priority are the five equal-value

indicators as follows:

a. The practical approach of the model of the

second group could be to develop the PO’s success based on the high-performance

teams of individual leaders by the focus on leadership that can drive organizational

collaboration for strong performance, and leadership to work smoothly with colleagues

outside the organization.

b. The practical approach of the model of the

second group could be to develop the PO’s success based on using strategic human

resources by the focus on the human resources strategy which aims to develop people

consistent with organizational strategies and to provide advice and analysis to the line

managers or administrators.

c. The practical approach of the model of second

group could be to develop the PO’s success based on clear accountabilities, decision

rights, and collaboration by: the focus on the determination of accountability and

clear roles in the operation in line with the authoritative rules, employees having the

permission and opportunity to make decisions and are involved in drafting their work

plans to determine their accountability and decision making, and performing

collaborative work and with accountability.

d. The practical approach of the model of the

second group could be to develop the PO’s success based on ongoing learning by

encouraging employees to be motivated to increase their skills and performance in

work to create a standard of continuous learning in the operation of organization from

best practices and transferring of knowledge in the organization and giving support for

learning resources.


e. The practical approach of the model of second

group could be to develop the PO’s success based on a focus on customer results

coming from a focus on all employees in the organization maintaining a high standard

in quality and service to facilitate the customers or service recipients and to meet their

expectations, and executives or line managers performing an active role in

encouraging employees to become leaders and to develop the skills which lead to

promotion within the organization.

Moreover, the practical approach from indicators

a-e could be implemented together or designed as a development indicator appropriate

for each context. Other POs in the second group mission could apply the model by

using these indicators to implement improvements for their operation.


Table 4.48 The practical approach by the indicators of organizational success of

public organizations in the second mission group prioritized by weight value

from maximum to minimum Order of

value

The strengths of the model prioritized by weight

value from maximum to minimum



1. Energizing system and structure - The systematic monitoring of operations to provide

mission and practice in accordance with the established

law and operating system. to support the organization

success

- The monitoring of operations which are problems and

an obstacles to develop the proper solutions

- The accountability determination in performance

management systems to achieve organizational success

- The focus on the reward system depending on the

success of organization, work department, and staff

2. Shared information and open communication - The focus on the operators access information, news,

and information conveniently for the effective work

- The focus on the employees having a wide range of

communication and decisions to make better

understanding

- The focus on the open communication in the

organization

- The focus on preparing information which is ready to

support decision-making to create employee a sense of


- The focus on the permission to trial and error for

learning

- The focus on the high-performing teams of the authority

to jointly accomplish the organization mission

- The focus on the conversation with employees and

value for employee feedback and opinion

- The focus on involving employees in all important

activities

- The focus on the line managers perform a role in

encouraging employees to develop themselves to improve

and drive organization performances

3. High-performance teams of individual leaders - The focus on leadership can be driven by organizational

collaboration for strength performance

- The focus on the leaders to work collaboratively with

their colleagues

- The focus on the skillful leader to work smoothly with

colleagues outside the organization




from maximum to minimum (cont.) Order of

value





Strategic human resource - The focus on the human resources strategy


aims to develop people in consistent with organizational

strategies


contributes to employees' creativity at work for


- The focus on the he human resource management which

could provide advice and analysis to the line manager or

administrators

Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration - The focus on the determination of accountability and

clear roles in the operation in line with the authoritative

rules

- The focus on the employees having the right and

opportunity to make decisions

- The focus on the collaborative works and with

accountability

- The focus on the employees involving in drafting their

work plans to determine the accountability and decision

making

Ongoing learning - The encouragement of employees to be motivated to

increase their skills and performance in work to create a

standard of continuous learning in the operation of

organization

- The support for learning from best practices and

transferring of knowledge in organization

- The support for learning resources which are beneficial

to organization missions

- The focus on the organization learning along with the

learning of each employee

The focus on customer results - The focus on all employee in organization maintains a

high standard in quality and service

- The focus on every step of the process is designed to

facilitate the customers or service recipients

- The focus on develop strategies and vision for success

which meet the expectations of customers or service

recipients

- The focus on Executives or line managers perform the

active role in encouraging employees to become leaders

and to develop the skills which lead to promotion within

the organization





value





4. Engagement - The determination of an employee engagement system

and developing a commitment to work success

- The focus on employee engagement with a collaborative

atmosphere

- The focus on employee engagement at a level where

employees have a high level of work spirit

- The focus on the engagement tools including symbols,

stories, languages, and policies to build commitment

between employees

Compelling vision, purpose and values - The focus on the determination and management of

organization leaders to have the characteristics and

operations in line with the vision and values of the

organization

- The encouragement of employees to enjoy the job to

perform the shared common goals and values

- The focus on the employees support the organization,

including goals, values, shared values and the future

image of the organization

- The focus on the employees having the same values in

the direction in accordance with the organization values

- The focus on the employees having commitment to

create contributions to the organization success

5. Middle managers embrace and translate strategy - The focus on determining the head of division performs

a role of strategic interpretation to the operators.

- The focus on determining the head of division performs

an important role in linking work between top executives

and employees by using two-way communication from

top-down and from the bottom-up.

- The focus on determining the head of division performs

a role of creating a skilled staff and strength in work.

Matched role requirements - The focus on the assignment of the roles and skilled

workers which is essential for organizational success and

changing circumstances

- The focus on the works with experts to perform

important missions or hiring skilled people to streamline

operations

- The focus on the assignment of important tasks to the

appropriate employee by potential and responsibility





value





6. Future leaders - The focus on determining the required attributes of

skilled leaders in accordance with current and future

organizational mission since the start of the recruitment

process

- The focus on leaders can rotate in many different

positions, and have multiple roles

- The focus on the leader develops the skills and

competencies needed for the future mission of the

organization by accountability

- The focus on the senior executives perform the role for

determining expectations for leadership behaviors,

review, and modify the performance management system

for organizational success

The critical roles and key talents - The focus on determining the roles needed for each

mission

- The focus on determining the roles needed for each

mission

- The focus on the management of talented workers both

in terms of fast progress and strategies to retain personnel

- The focus on the employee management by the

changeable workers according to organizational strategic

priorities

- The focus on determining a continuous plan for the

management of talented workers

Few layers and wide spans of control - The utilization of a small number of organizational

layers and wide spans of control with fast communication

and decision making to complete the mission on time and

with goals

- The focus on reducing or eliminating unnecessary

processes to focus on the work that is important to the

organization

- The focus on the line managers use leadership skills to

oversee the operation of a wide range of control





value





Shared power and high involvement - The focus on the empowerment of decision-making


- The focus on the empowerment of decision-making


- The focus on encouraging employees to have access to

information needed to make decisions in work

- The focus on encouraging employees motivated to

create a value that respond to the goals and vision of the

organization

7. Employer branding - The focus on the investment for human development,

especially effective training

- The focus on the job rotation to contribute the proper

roles and responsibility creating organization

achievement

- The focus on the motivational tools that could maintain

people in the form of compensation and other incentives,

such as non-monetary benefits such as welfare, the

various privilege, and so on

- The focus on the proper career advancement for

employee



- The focus on the determination of accountability and

success indicators for each employee

- The focus on providing tools and power to employees to

accomplish their tasks

- The focus on the determination of the progress

organization to compare the operations and prevent risks

that will not be in line with the plan

- The focus on the communicating to the stakeholders of

the organization, especially during fluctuating times





value





9. Structure and resource allocation - The focus on the systematization of organizational

structure consistent with the establishing law and

resources allocation consistent with operations

- The focus on the systematization of primary and

secondary missions

- The focus on defining organizational philosophy

statement in line with organizational strategy

- The focus on the executives monitor the corresponding

operational processes of each division

- The focus on determining the person who is responsible

for each task or project to achieve effective performance

- The focus on creating a collective work from the

integration of various parts of the organization

- The focus on designing operational processes and

strategies which align with the current situations and the

future circumstances

10. Evolutionary organizations - The focus on organizational adaptation to changing

circumstances

- The focus on the strategy adjustment to be more

effective and consistent with the changing environment

- The focus on the continuous change observation in the

operational context which is similar to the organization

performance including the situations affecting

organizational management

11. Culture - The focus on organizational culture as a catalyst for

strategic goals

- The focus on the determination of organizational

management and monitoring systems to promote


- The focus on the executives to convey the direction of

organization to change the culture of work in accordance

with the organizational strategy


The second group can implement other development plans

prioritized according to the next weight-value indicators in addition to the first three in the

priority sequence. This may depend on the policy of the executives and the public

organization committees to focus on the matter. It also depends on the situation of the

organization and the budget limitations. However, POs who are in the sample of the

second mission group, namely, the Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public

Organization), the Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology Center (Public

Organization), the Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (Public

Organization), the Synchrotron Light Research Institute (Public Organization), the Hydro

and Agro Informatics Institute (Public Organization), and National Astronomical

Research Institute of Thailand (Public Organization) have applied the indicators as a

guideline for improving the work process to be more efficient. Even the indicators with

least element weight for the second group as shown in the table, for example the indicators

of improvement of organizational culture, namely, (1) the focus on organizational culture

as a catalyst for strategic goals; (2) the focus on the determination of organizational

management and monitoring systems to promote organizational success; and (3) the focus

on the executives to convey the direction of organization in order to change the culture of

work in accordance with the organizational strategy have been the basis for achieving a

level of high-performance. The indicators in the same value priority order can be used

simultaneously as a development guide, or a PO could choose to develop whichever is

appropriate consistent with the situation management policy.

The practical approach of the causal model of the second

mission group of POs as HPO has shown the significant points as follows:

1. The component of Culture and Engagement (SKSI1)

For the second mission group of POs, the element of Culture

and Engagement (SKSI1) has direct effects on Change Management (SETA1) and

People (SETA2), which is the same as the first group. Culture and Engagement

(SKSI1) has an indirect effect to High-Performance Organization (SETA4) via

People (SETA2). The practical approach is presented as follows:



is, the second mission group could give precedence to organizational culture, by: (1)


th e focus on organizational culture as a catalyst for strategic goals; (2 ) focus on the


organizational success; and (3) focus on the executives to convey the direction of the

organization to change the culture of work in accordance with the organizational

strategy. The second mission group could give precedence to employee engagement,

by: ( 1 ) the determination of an employee engagement system and developing a

commitment to work success; ( 2 ) the focus on employee engagement with a

collaborative atmosphere; ( 3 ) the focus on employee engagement at a level where

employees have a high level of work spirit; and (4) the focus on the engagement tools

including symbols, stories, language, and policies to build commitment between

employees. The second mission group could create better change management by the

disciplined cascade, by: (1) the focus on prioritizing the organizational mission; (2) the

focus on the determination of accountability and success indicators for each employee;

(3 ) the focus on providing tools and empowerment to employees to accomplish their

tasks; (4) the focus on the determination of the organization’s progress in comparison

to the operations and prevent risks that it will not be in line with the plan, and (5) the

focus on communicating to the stakeholders of the organization, especially during

fluctuating times. The second mission group could create better change management

by being an evolutionary organization, by: (1 ) the focus on organizational adaptation

to changing circumstances; (2 ) the focus on strategy adjustment to be more effective

and consistent with the changing environment; and (3) the focus on continuous change

observation in the operational context to compare the organization’s performance

relative to the situations affecting organizational management.


organization in high level will lead to better employee management. That is the

second mission group could give precedence to organizational culture, by: ( 1 ) the

focus on organizational culture as a catalyst for strategic goals; ( 2 ) the focus on the


organizational success; and (3) the focus on the executives to convey the direction of


strategy. In addition, the second mission group could give precedence to employee

engagement, by: ( 1 ) the determination of an employee engagement system and


developing a commitment to work success; ( 2 ) the focus on employee engagement

with a collaborative atmosphere; ( 3 ) the focus on employee engagement at a level

where employees have a high level of work spirit; and (4) the focus on the engagement

tools including symbols, stories, languages, and policies to build commitment between

employees. The second mission group could create a higher level of employee

management by attention to employer branding, by: (1 ) the focus on the investment

for human development, especially effective training; (2 ) the focus on job rotation to

contribute to the proper roles and responsibility creating organizational achievement;

( 3 ) the focus on the motivational tools that could retain people in the form of


various privileges, and so on; ( 4 ) the focus on the proper career advancement for

employees, and ( 5 ) the focus on improving the substandard workers. The second

mission group could create better employee management by the attention to critical

roles and key talents, by: ( 1 ) the focus on determining the roles needed for each

mission; ( 2 ) the focus on determining capable employees who perform the tasks


progress and strategies to retain personnel; (4) the focus on employee management by

having workers be flexible according to organizational strategic priorities; and (5) the

focus on determining a continuous plan for the management of talented workers. The

second mission group could create better employee management by focusing on

strategic human resources, by: (1) the focus on the human resources strategy, (2) the

focus on the human resource management which aims to develop people consistent

with organizational strategies, (3 ) the focus on human resources management which

contributes to employees' creativity at work for organizational success; and ( 4 ) the


the line managers or administrators.

3) The focus on culture and engagement and

employee management (people) in an organization in high level will lead to better

HPO. That is, the second mission group could give precedence to organizational

culture and employee engagement as shown in previous items and employee

management by focusing on: (1) employer branding, (2) critical roles and key talents,

and (3) strategic human resources. In order to create HPO, the second mission group


could focus on shared information and open communication, by: (1 ) the focus on the

operators having convenient to access to news and information for effective work; (2)

the focus on the employees having a wide range of communication and understanding

to make better decisions; (3) the focus on open communication in the organization; (4)

the focus on preparing information which is ready to support decision-making to

create in employees a sense of ownership of the organization; ( 5 ) the focus on the

permission for trial and error for learning; (6) the focus on high-performing teams with

the authority to jointly accomplish the organizational mission; ( 7 ) the focus on

conversations with employees and valuing employee feedback and opinion; ( 8 ) the



improve and drive the organization’s performance. The second mission group could

create an HPO by having a compelling vision, purpose and values, by: (1) the focus on

the determination and management of organization leaders to have the characteristics

and operations in line with the vision and values of the organization; ( 2 ) the

encouragement of employees to enjoy the job to perform the shared values and

common goals; (3) the focus on the employees supporting the organization, including

goals, shared values and the future image of the organization; ( 4 ) the focus on the

employees having similar values in accordance with the organizational values; and (5)

the focus on the employees having commitment to create contributions to the

organization’s success. The second mission group could create HPO by encouraging

ongoing learning, by: (1) the encouragement of employees to be motivated to increase

their skills and performance in work to create a standard of continuous learning in the

operation of the organization; ( 2 ) the support for learning from best practices and

transferring of knowledge in the organization; (3 ) the support for learning resources

which are beneficial to organizational missions; and ( 4 ) the focus on organizational

learning along with the learning of each employee. The second mission group could

create HPO by their focus on customer results, by: (1 ) the focus on all employees in

the organization maintaining a high standard in quality and service; (2 ) the focus on

every step of the process being designed to facilitate the customers or service

recipients; (3) the focus on developing strategies and vision for success which meet the

expectations of customers or service recipients; and (4) the focus on executives or line


managers performing an active role in encouraging employees to become leaders and

to develop the skills which lead to promotion within the organization. The second

mission group could create HPO by their energizing system and structure, by: (1) the

systematic monitoring of operations to provide mission and practice in accordance

with the establishment law and operating system. to support the organization’s

success; ( 2 ) the monitoring of operations which are problems and have obstacles to

develop the proper solutions; (3 ) the determination of accountability in performance

management systems to achieve organizational success; and ( 4 ) the focus on the

reward system depending on the success of organization, work department and staff.

The second mission group could create HPO by shared power and high involvement,

by: ( 1 ) the focus on the empowerment of decision-making throughout the

organizational processes; (2 ) the focus on participation, collaboration and teamwork;

(3) the focus on encouraging employees to have access to information needed to make

decisions in work; and (4 ) the focus on encouraging employees to b e motivated to

create values that respond to the goals and vision of the organization.

Therefore, the second group should emphasize culture and

engagement that requires the development of the practitioner to achieve the level of HPO.

2. The component of Leadership (SKSI2)

For the second mission group of POs, the element of

Leadership (SKSI2) has a direct effect on Change Management (SETA1) and High-

Performance Organization (SETA4), and it has an indirect effect to People (SETA2)

via Change Management (SETA1). The practical approach is presented as follows:

1 ) The focus on leadership in an organization in

high level will lead to better organizational change management. That is, the second

mission group could give precedence to leadership by having high-performance teams

of individual leaders, by: ( 1 ) the focus on leadership that can be driven by

organizational collaboration for strong performance; (2 ) the focus on leaders to work

collaboratively with their colleagues; and (3) the focus on the skillful leaders to work

smoothly with colleagues outside the organization. The second mission group could

create leadership by giving attention to future leaders, by: (1) the focus on determining

the required attributes of skilled leaders in accordance with current and future

organizational mission starting with the recruitment process; (2 ) the focus on leaders


who can rotate in many different positions, and have multiple roles; (3 ) the focus on

the leaders developing the skills and competencies needed for the future mission of the

organization by accountability; and (4) the focus on the senior executives performing

the role for determining expectations for leadership behaviors, and review and modify

the performance management system for organizational success. The second mission

group could create leadership by focusing on the middle managers who embrace and

translate strategy, by: ( 1 ) the focus on determining how the head of a division

performs a role of strategic interpretation to the operators, (2) the focus on determining

the how the head of a division performs an important role in linking work between top

executives and employees by using two-way communication from top-down and from

the bottom-up; and (3) the focus on determining how the head of a division performs a

role of creating a skilled staff and strength in work. The second mission group could

create change management by the disciplined cascade, specifically: (1 ) the focus on

prioritizing the organizational mission; ( 2 ) the focus on the determination of

accountability and success indicators for each employee; ( 3 ) the focus on providing

tools and empowerment to employees to accomplish their tasks; (4 ) the focus on the

determination of the progress of the organization in comparison to the operations and

prevent risks that will not be in line with the plan; and ( 5 ) the focus on the

communicating to the stakeholders of the organization, especially during fluctuating

times. The second mission group could create change management by being an

evolutionary organization, by: (1 ) the focus on organizational adaptation to changing

circumstances, (2) the focus on strategy adjustment to be more effective and consistent

with the changing environment; and (3) the focus on continuous change observation in

the operational context, which is similar to the organizational performance including

the situations affecting organizational management.


high level will lead to a better HPO. That is, the second mission group could give

precedence to leadership in order to create HPO by focusing on shared information

and open communication, by: (1) the focus on the operators having convenient access

to news and information for effective work; (2 ) the focus on the employees having a

wide range of communication and understanding to make better decisions; ( 3 ) the

focus on open communication in the organization; ( 4 ) the focus on preparing


information which is ready to support decision-making to create in employees a sense

of ownership of the organization; (5) the focus on the permission for trial and error for

learning; (6 ) the focus on the high-performing teams with the authority to jointly

accomplish the organization mission; (7 ) the focus on conversations with employees

and valuing employee feedback and opinion; (8) the focus on involving employees in

all important activities; (9 ) the focus on the line managers performing a role in

encouraging employees to develop themselves to improve and drive the organization’s

performance. The second mission group could create HPO by having compelling

vision, purpose and values, by: (1) the focus on the determination and management of

organization leaders to have the characteristics and operations in line with the vision


perform with the shared common goals and values; (3 ) the focus on the employees

supporting the organization, including goals, shared values and the future image of the


the organizational values; and ( 5 ) the focus on employees having commitment to

create contributions to the organization’s success. The second mission group could

create HPO by focusing on ongoing learning, by: (1) the encouragement of employees

to be motivated to increase their skills and performance in work to create a standard of

continuous learning in the operation of the organization; (2 ) the support for learning

from best practices and transferring of knowledge in organization; (3) the support for

learning resources which are beneficial to organization missions; and (4) the focus on

the organizational learning along with the learning of each employee. The second

mission group could create HPO by having a focus on customer results, by: (1 ) the

focus on all employees in the organization maintaining a high standard in quality and

service; (2 ) the focus on every step of the process being designed to facilitate the

customers or service recipients; (3 ) the focus on developing strategies and vision for

success which meet the expectations of customers or service recipients; and ( 4 ) the

focus on executives or line managers performing an active role in encouraging

employees to become leaders and to develop the skills which lead to promotion within

the organization. The second mission group could create HPO by having an energizing

system and structure, by: ( 1 ) the systematic monitoring of operations to provide

mission and practice in accordance with the establishment law and operating system to


support the organization’s success; (2 ) the monitoring of operations which are

problems and have obstacles to develop the proper solutions; (3) the determination of


and (4) the focus on the reward system depending on the success of the organization,

work department and staff. The second mission group could create HPO by shared

power and high involvement, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the empowerment of decision-

making throughout the organizational processes; (2 ) the focus on participation,

collaboration and teamwork; (3) the focus on encouraging employees to have access to

information needed to make decisions in work; and ( 4 ) the focus on encouraging

employees to be motivated to create values that respond to the goals and vision of the

organization.

3 ) Leadership has an indirect effect on employee

management via change manangement. The second mission group could give

precedence to leadership and change manangement, as detailed in the previous item,

which will lead to a high-quality of employee management by employer branding, by:

(1) the focus on the investment for human development, especially effective training;

( 2 ) the focus on job rotation to contribute to the proper roles and responsibility

creating organization achievement; (3 ) the focus on the motivational tools that could

retain people in the form of compensation and other incentives, such as non-monetary

benefits such as welfare, various privileges, and so on; (4) the focus on proper career

advancement for employees; and (5) the focus on improving the substandard workers.

In addition, organizations in the second mission group could create better employee

management by focusing on critical roles and key talents, by: ( 1 ) the focus on

determining the roles needed for each mission; (2 ) the focus on determining capable

employees who perform the tasks successfully; ( 3 ) the focus on the management of

talented workers both in terms of fast progress and strategies to retain personnel; (4 )

the focus on employee management by workers being flexible according to

organizational strategic priorities; and (5) the focus on determining a continuous plan

for the management of talented workers. The second mission group could create better

employee management by giving attention to strategic human resources, by: ( 1 ) the

focus on the human resources strategy; (2) the focus on human resource management

which aims to develop people consistent with organizational strategies; (3 ) the focus


on human resource management which contributes to employees' creativity at work for

organizational success; and (4 ) the focus on the human resource management which

could provide advice and analysis to the line managers or administrators.

3. The component of Change Management (SETA1)

In the model Change Management has a direct effect on

Employee Management, and it has indirect effects on Organizational Design and HPO via

People or Employee Management (SETA2). The practical approach is presented as follows:

1) The focus on change management in an

organization in high level will lead to better employee management. That is,

organizations in the second mission group could give precedence to change

management by the disciplined cascade, namely, ( 1 ) the focus on prioritizing the

organizational mission; ( 2 ) the focus on the determination of accountability and

success indicators for each employee; ( 3 ) the focus on providing tools and

empowerment to employees to accomplish their tasks; ( 4 ) the focus on the

determination of the progress of the organization in comparison to the operations and


to the stakeholders of the organization, especially during fluctuating times.

Organizations in the second mission group could create better change management by

being evolutionary organizations, by: ( 1 ) the focus on organizational adaptation to

changing circumstances; (2) the focus on strategy adjustment to be more effective and

consistent with the changing environment; and (3 ) the focus on continuous change

observation in the operational context, which is similar to the organizational

performance including the situations affecting organizational management. In order to

create better employee management, organizations in the second mission group could

have clear employer branding, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the investment for human

development, especially effective training; (2) the focus on job rotation to contribute to

the proper roles and responsibility creating organizational achievement; (3 ) the focus

on the motivational tools that could retain people in the form of compensation and

other incentives, such as non-monetary benefits such as welfare, various privileges,

and so on; (4) the focus on the proper career advancement for employees; and (5) the

focus on improving the substandard workers. Organizations in the second mission

group could create better employee management by focusing on critical roles and key


talents, by: (1 ) the focus on determining the roles needed for each mission, (2 ) the

focus on determining capable employees who perform the tasks successfully, (3 ) the

focus on the management of talented workers both in terms of fast progress and

strategies to retain personnel, (4 ) the focus on the employee management by workers

being flexible according to organizational strategic priorities; and (5 ) the focus on

determining a continuous plan for the management of talented workers. Organizations

in the second mission group could create better employee management by focusing on

strategic human resources, by: (1) the focus on the human resources strategy; (2) the

focus on human resource management which aims to develop people consistent with

organizational strategies; ( 3 ) the focus on the human resource management which




2) Change Management has indirect effects on

Organization Design via People or Employee Management (SETA2). So, the focus on

change management by using a disciplined cascade and being an evolutionary

organization, along with having a focus on employee management by employer branding,

identifying critical roles and key talents, and using strategic human resources in high level,

as mentioned in the previous item, will lead to better organizational design. A good

organizational design also comes from focus on having efficient structure and resource

allocation with few layers and wide spans of control, having clear accountabilities,

decision rights, and collaboration, and having workers matched with role requirements.


HPO via People or Employee Management (SETA2). So, the focus on the change

management, namely, using a disciplined cascade and being an evolutionary

organization, along with having a focus on employee management, namely, by

employer branding, identifying critical roles and key talents, and using strategic

human resources in high level, as mentioned in the previous item, will lead to better

HPO. Better HPO also comes from shared power and high involvement, by: (1)

focusing on the empowerment of decision-making throughout the organizational

processes; (2) focusing on participation, collaboration and teamwork; (3) encouraging

employees to have access to information needed to make decisions in work; and (4)


encouraging employees to be motivated to create values that respond to the goals and

vision of the organization.

4. The component of People (SETA2)

In the model for the second mission group of POs, the element

of People (SETA2) has a direct effect on Design (SETA3), and it has a direct effect on

High-Performance Organization (SETA4) . People (SETA2) has an indirect effect

on HPO via Design. The practical approach is presented as follows:

1) The focus on people or employee management

in the organization in high level will lead to better organizational design. That is, the

second mission group could give precedence to people or employee management by

employer branding, namely, (1 ) the focus on the investment for human development,


roles and responsibilities creating organizational achievement; ( 3 ) the focus on the




improving the substandard workers. The second mission group could create better

employee management by focusing on the critical roles and key talents, by: (1 ) the

focus on determining the roles needed for each mission; (2) the focus on determining

capable employees who perform the tasks successfully; ( 3 ) the focus on the


personnel; ( 4 ) the focus on employee management by workers being flexible

according to organizational strategic priorities; and ( 5 ) the focus on determining a

continuous plan for the management of talented workers. The second mission group

could create better employee management by focusing on strategic human resources,

by: (1) the focus on the human resources strategy; (2) the focus on the human resource


(3 ) the focus on human resource management which contributes to employees'



administrators. In order to create better organizational design, the second mission

group could focus on structure and resource allocation, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the


systematization of organizational structure consistent with the establishment law and

resources allocation consistent with operations; (2) the focus on the systematization of

primary and secondary missions; (3) the focus on defining the organizational

philosophy statement in line with organizational strategy; (4) the focus on designing

operational processes and strategies which align with the current situations and the

future circumstances; (5) the focus on the executives monitoring the corresponding

operational processes of each division; (6) the focus on determining the person who is

responsible for each task or project to achieve effective performance; and (7) the focus

on creating a collective work from the integration of various parts of the organization.

Moreover, the second mission group could give precedence to organizational design

by having few layers and wide spans of control, by: ( 1 ) the utilization of a small

number of organizational layers and wide spans of control with fast communication

and decision making to complete the mission on time and with goals; (2) the focus on

reducing or eliminating unnecessary processes to focus on the work that is important

to the organization; and (3) the focus on the line managers using leadership skills to

oversee the operation of a wide range of control. The second mission group could give

precedence to organizational design by having clear accountabilities, decision rights,

and collaboration, by: ( 1) the focus on the determination of accountability and clear

roles in the operation in line with the authoritative rules; (2) the focus on the

employees having the permission and opportunity to make decisions; (3) the focus on

the collaborative works and with accountability; and ( 4) the focus on the employees

being involved in drafting their work plans to determine the accountability and

decision making. The second mission group could give precedence to organizational

design by giving attention to matched role requirements, by: ( 1) the focus on the

assignment of the roles and skilled workers which is essential for organizational

success and changing circumstances; (2) the focus on working with experts to perform

important missions or hiring skilled people to streamline operations; and (3) the focus

on the assignment of important tasks to the appropriate employee by potential and

responsibility.

2) The focus on people or employee management in an

organization in high level will lead to better HPO. That is, the second mission group could give

precedence to people or employee management by having clear employer branding, namely, (1)


the focus on the investment for human development, especially effective training; (2) the focus on

job rotation to contribute to the proper roles and responsibility creating organizational achievement;

(3) the focus on the motivational tools that could retain people in the form of compensation and

other incentives, such as non-monetary benefits such as welfare, various privileges, and so on; (4)

the focus on the proper career advancement for employees; and (5 ) the focus on improving the

substandard workers. The second mission group could create better employee management by

focusing on the critical roles and key talents, by: (1) the focus on determining the roles needed for

each mission; (2) the focus on determining capable employees who perform the tasks successfully;

(3) the focus on the management of talented workers both in terms of fast progress and strategies to

retain personnel; (4) the focus on the employee management by workers being flexible according

to organizational strategic priorities; and (5 ) the focus on determining a continuous plan for the

management of talented workers. The second mission group could create better employee

management by using strategic human resources, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the human resources

strategy; (2 ) the focus on the human resource management which aims to develop people

consistent with organizational strategies; (3 ) the focus on human resource management which

contributes to employees' creativity at work for organizational success; and (4) the focus on human

resource management which could provide advice and analysis to the line managers or

administrators. In order to create HPO the second mission group could focus on shared

information and open communication, by: (1) the focus on operators having convenient access to

news and information for effective work; (2) the focus on the employees having a wide range of

communication and understanding to make better decisions; (3) the focus on open communication

in the organization; (4 ) the focus on preparing information which is ready to support decision-

making to create in employees a sense of ownership of the organization; (5 ) the focus on the

permission for trial and error for learning; (6 ) the focus on high-performing teams with the

authority to jointly accomplish the organizational mission; (7 ) the focus on conversations with

employees and valuing employee feedback and opinion; (8) the focus on involving employees in

all important activities; (9 ) the focus on the line managers performing a role in encouraging

employees to develop themselves to improve and drive the organization’s performance. The

second mission group could create HPO by focusing on having a compelling vision, purpose and

values, by: (1) the focus on the determination and management of organization leaders to have the

characteristics and operations in line with the vision and values of the organization; (2 ) the

encouragement of employees to enjoy the job to perform with shared values and common goals;


(3) the focus on the employees supporting the organization, including goals, shared values and the

future image of the organization; (4 ) the focus on the employees having similar values in

accordance with the organization’s values; and (5) the focus on the employees having commitment

to create contributions to the organization’s success. The second mission group could create HPO

by encouraging ongoing learning, by: ( 1) the encouragement of employees to be motivated to

increase their skills and performance in work to create a standard of continuous learning in the

operation of the organization; (2 ) the support for learning from best practices and transferring of

knowledge in organization; (3 ) the support for learning resources which are beneficial to

organization missions; and (4) the focus on the organizational learning along with the learning of

each employee. The second mission group could create HPO by their focus on customer results,

by: (1) the focus on all employees in the organization maintaining a high standard in quality and

service; (2 ) the focus on every step of the process being designed to facilitate the customers or

service recipients; (3 ) the focus on developing strategies and vision for success which meet the

expectations of customers or service recipients; and (4) the focus on executives or line managers

performing an active role in encouraging employees to become leaders and to develop the skills

which lead to promotion within the organization. The second mission group could create HPO by

having an energizing system and structure, by: ( 1 ) the systematic monitoring of operations to

provide mission and practice in accordance with the establishment law and the operating system to

support the organization’s success; (2) the monitoring of operations which are problems and have

obstacles to develop the proper solutions; (3 ) the determination of accountability in performance

management systems to achieve organizational success; and (4 ) the focus on the reward system

depending on the success of the organization, work department and staff. The second mission

group could create HPO by focusing on shared power and high involvement, by: (1) the focus on

the empowerment of decision-making throughout the organizational processes; (2 ) the focus on

participation, collaboration and teamwork; (3) the focus on encouraging employees to have access

to information needed to make decisions in work; and (4) the focus on encouraging employees to

be motivated to create values that respond to the goals and vision of the organization.

3) People (SETA2) has an indirect effect on HPO

via Design. The focus on the employee management and organizational design in high

level will lead to better HPO. That is, the second mission group could give precedence

to employee management, namely, employer branding, identifying critical roles and

key talents, and using strategic human resources, and give precedence to


organizational design, namely, by giving attention to efficient structure and resource

allocation, having few layers and wide spans of control, having clear accountabilities,

decision rights, and collaboration, and having employees matched to role requirements

as detailed in the previous points, in order to create HPO.

5. The component of Design (SETA3)

For the second mission group of POs, the element of Design

(SETA3) has a direct effect on High-Performance Organization (SETA4). Design (SETA3)

is also influenced by People (SETA2). The practical approach is presented as follows:

1) The focus on organizational design in high

level will lead to better HPO. That is, the second mission group could give precedence

to organizational design by giving focus to structure and resource allocation, namely,

( 1 ) the focus on the systematization of organizational structure consistent with the

establishing law and resources allocation consistent with operations; (2) the focus on

the systematization of primary and secondary missions; ( 3) the focus on defining an



situations and the future circumstances; (5) the focus on the executives monitoring the

corresponding operational processes of each division; (6) the focus on determining the

person who is responsible for each task or project to achieve effective performance;

and (7) the focus on creating collective work from the integration of various parts of

the organization. Moreover, the second mission group could give precedence to

organizational design by having few layers and wide spans of control, by: ( 1 ) the

utilization of a small number of organizational layers and wide spans of control with

fast communication and decision making to complete the mission on time and within

goals; (2) the focus on reducing or eliminating unnecessary processes to focus on the

work that is important to the organization; and (3) the focus on the line managers using

leadership skills to oversee the operation of a wide range of control. The second

mission group could give precedence to organizational design by focusing on

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration, by: ( 1) the focus on the


authoritative rules; ( 2) the focus on the employees having the permission and

opportunity to make decisions; ( 3) the focus on collaborative work and with


accountability; and ( 4) the focus on the employees being involved in drafting their

work plans to determine accountability and decision making. The second mission

group could give precedence to organizational design by having matched role

requirements, by: ( 1) the focus on the assignment of the roles and skilled workers

which is essential for organizational success and changing circumstances; (2) the focus

on working with experts to perform important missions or hiring skilled people to

streamline operations; and ( 3) the focus on the assignment of important tasks to the

appropriate employees by potential and responsibility. In order to create HPO, the

second mission group could focus on shared information and open communication, by:

(1 ) the focus on the operators having convenient access to news and information for

effective work; (2) the focus on the employees having a wide range of communication

and understanding to make better decisions; (3 ) the focus on open communication in

the organization; ( 4 ) the focus on preparing information which is ready to support

decision-making to create in employees a sense of ownership of the organization; (5 )

the focus on the permission for trial and error for learning; ( 6 ) the focus on high-

performing teams with the authority to jointly accomplish the organizational mission;

( 7 ) the focus on conversations with employees and valuing employee feedback and

opinion; (8) the focus on involving employees in all important activities; (9) the focus

on the line managers performing a role in encouraging employees to develop

themselves to improve and drive organizational performance. The second mission

group could create HPO by having a compelling vision, purpose and values, by: (1 )

the focus on the determination and management of organization leaders to have the

characteristics and operations in line with the vision and values of the organization; (2)

the encouragement of employees to enjoy the job to perform with shared common

goals and values; ( 3 ) the focus on the employees supporting the organization,

including goals, shared values and the future image of the organization; (4 ) the focus

on the employees having similar values in accordance with the organizational values;

and (5) the focus on the employees having commitment to create contributions to the

organization’s success. The second mission group could create HPO by ongoing

learning, by: ( 1) the encouragement of employees to be motivated to increase their

skills and performance in work to create a standard of continuous learning in the

operation of the organization; (2 ) the support for learning from best practices and



which are beneficial to organizational missions; and (4) the focus on the organization

learning along with the learning of each employee. The second mission group could

create HPO by the focus on customer results, by: (1) the focus on all employees in the

organization maintaining a high standard in quality and service; (2) the focus on every

step of the process being designed to facilitate the customers or service recipients; (3)

the focus on developing strategies and vision for success which meet the expectations

of customers or service recipients; and (4 ) the focus on executives or line managers


the skills which lead to promotion within the organization. The second mission group

could create HPO by their energizing system and structure, by: ( 1 ) the systematic


establishment law and its operating system to support the organization’s success; (2 )

the monitoring of operations which are problems and have obstacles to develop the

proper solutions; (3 ) the determination of accountability in performance management

systems to achieve organizational success; and ( 4 ) the focus on the reward system

depending on the success of the organization, work department and staff. The second

mission group could create HPO by shared power and high involvement, by: (1 ) the

focus on the empowerment of decision-making throughout the organizational



work; and ( 4 ) the focus on encouraging employees to be motivated to create values


2) Design ( SETA3) is also influenced by People

(SETA2) as mentioned in the previous item. The practical approach could be presented

that the first group desires to develop the organization design to the excellent agency

have to give precedence initially to people or employee management by the employer

branding, the critical roles and key talents, and the strategic human resource. This will

cause high quality of organization design which is part of the HPO model.

6. The component of High-Performance Organization (SETA4)

For the second mission group of POs, as mentioned in the

previous item, the element of High-Performance Organization ( SETA4) is


influenced by People ( SETA2) and Design ( SETA3) . The practical approach is

presented as follows:

1 ) The practical approach could be presented that

organizations in the second mission group that desire to develop as HPO or achieve

excellent agency status must give precedence initially to People or Employee Management

by attention to employer branding, critical roles and key talents, and strategic human

resources in high level. This will lead to being an HPO through (1) having shared

information and open communication, (2) having a compelling vision, purpose and values,

(3) encouraging ongoing learning, (4) focusing on customer results, (5) having an energizing

system and structure; and (6) having employees with shared power and high involvement.


organizations in the second mission group that desire to develop as HPO or achieve a

level of excellent agency must give precedence initially to organizational design; by

attention to structure and resource allocation, by having few layers and wide spans of

control, by having clear accountabilities, decision rights and collaboration, and by

employees matched to role requirements in high level.

4.4.3 The practical approach of the model of the third mission group

of public organization as high-performance organization: general public services

The researcher concludes the practical approach of the model of the third

mission group PO as HPO which is tested for consistency with empirical data and

confirmed by the experts of POs of the third group as shown in the figure and

description.


Figure 4.24 The high-performance organization model of the third mission group of

public organization


Remark *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and t > 1.96 indicate p < 0.05, and t > 2.58 indicates p < 0.05 TKSI1 (K1) = Culture and engagement Y3 = Employer branding TKSI2 (K2) = Leadership Y4 = The critical roles and key talents TETA1 (E1) = Change management Y5 = Strategic HR TETA2 (E2) = People Y6 = Structure and resource allocation TETA3 (E3) = Design Y7 = Few layers and wide spans of control TETA4 (E4) = High-Performance Y8 =Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration



The practical approach of the model of third group mission of PO as HPO

derives from the tested model based on the samples from two high-performing POs,

namely, the Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization), and the Film Archive (Public

Organization), in addition to the results of in-depth interviews. All experts confirm the

models tested with empirical data. The description is presented as follows:

The third group of public organizations with the mission of general public

services could develop greater organizational success from the application of the

characteristic features of the tested model in organizational management, especially

the first three in priority sequence.

(1 ) The first priority is the energizing system and structure

(Y14) in the component of HPO. In the practical approach of the model, the third

mission group could develop the PO success based on the systematic monitoring of

operations to provide mission and practice in accordance with the establishment law

and an operating system to support the organization’s success, by the monitoring of

operations which are problems and have obstacles to develop the proper solutions, by

the determination of clear accountability in performance management systems to

achieve organizational success, and by a focus on the reward system depending on the

success of the organization, work department and staff.

Moreover, other POs in the third mission group could

implement their energizing system and structure for improving effective operations.

(2) The second in priority is accountabilities, decision rights,

and collaboration (Y8) in the component of organizational design. In the practical

approach of the model, the third mission group could develop the PO success based on

their clear accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration by focusing on the

determination of accountability and clear roles in their operation in line with the

authoritative rules, by the employees having the permission and opportunity to make

decisions and being involved in drafting their work plans to determine accountability

and decision making and having collaborative work with accountability.

Moreover, other POs in the same group mission could apply

the model to implement improvements in their operations and to apply these ideas for

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration for improving their effective

operation.


( 3 ) The third component in priority is having middle

managers who embrace and translate strategy (X5) in the component of leadership.

The practical approach of the model of the third mission group could be to develop the

PO success based on middle managers or the heads of divisions who perform a role of

strategic interpretation to the operators, and who have a role in linking work between

top executives and employees by using two-way communication from top-down and

from the bottom-up, along with a role of creating a skilled staff and strength in work.

Moreover, other POs in the same mission group could apply the

model to implement improvements in their operation and to apply these ideas of the leadership

of middle managers who embrace and translate strategy for improving their effective operations.

The researcher concludes the practical approach of the HPO model of the

third mission group to apply to organizational achievement prioritized by weight value

from maximum to minimum as shown in the table.


Table 4.49 The practical approach of the organizational success of the third

mission group of public organization prioritized by indicator weight value from

maximum to minimum

Order of

value

The strengths of the model prioritized by weight value from

maximum to minimum

The practical approach by the indicator

weight of the organization success

1. Energizing system and structure - The systematic monitoring of operations to

provide mission and practice in accordance with

the established law and operating system. to

support the organization success

- The monitoring of operations which are

problems and an obstacles to develop the proper

solutions

- The accountability determination in

performance management systems to achieve


- The focus on the reward system depending on

the success of organization, work department,

and staff

2. Accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration - The focus on the determination of

accountability and clear roles in the operation in

line with the authoritative rules

- The focus on the employees having the right

and opportunity to make decisions

- The focus on the collaborative works and with

accountability

- The focus on the employees involving in

drafting their work plans to determine the

accountability and decision making

3. Middle managers embrace and translate strategy - The focus on determining the head of division

performs a role of strategic interpretation to the

operators.

- The focus on determining the head of division

performs an important role in linking work

between top executives and employees by using

two-way communication from top-down and

from the bottom-up.

- The focus on determining the head of division

performs a role of creating a skilled staff and

strength in work.




maximum to minimum (cont.) Order of

value


maximum to minimum



4. Ongoing learning - The encouragement of employees to be

motivated to increase their skills and

performance in work to create a standard of

continuous learning in the operation of

organization

- The support for learning from best practices

and transferring of knowledge in organization

- The support for learning resources which are

beneficial to organization missions

- The focus on the organization learning along

with the learning of each employee



accountability and success indicators for each

employee

- The focus on providing tools and power to

employees to accomplish their tasks

- The focus on the determination of the progress

organization to compare the operations and

prevent risks that will not be in line with the

plan

- The focus on the communicating to the

stakeholders of the organization, especially

during fluctuating times

Evolutionary organizations - The focus on organizational adaptation to

changing circumstances

- The focus on the strategy adjustment to be

more effective and consistent with the changing

environment

- The focus on the continuous change

observation in the operational context which is

similar to the organization performance

including the situations affecting organizational

management





value


maximum to minimum



Few layers and wide spans of control - The utilization of a small number of

organizational layers and wide spans of control

with fast communication and decision making

to complete the mission on time and with goals

- The focus on reducing or eliminating

unnecessary processes to focus on the work that

is important to the organization

- The focus on the line managers use leadership

skills to oversee the operation of a wide range

of control

Matched role requirements - The focus on the assignment of the roles and

skilled workers which is essential for

organizational success and changing

circumstances

- The focus on the works with experts to

perform important missions or hiring skilled

people to streamline operations

- The focus on the assignment of important

tasks to the appropriate employee by potential

and responsibility

The focus on customer results - The focus on all employee in organization

maintains a high standard in quality and service

- The focus on every step of the process is

designed to facilitate the customers or service

recipients

- The focus on develop strategies and vision for

success which meet the expectations of

customers or service recipients

- The focus on Executives or line managers

perform the active role in encouraging

employees to become leaders and to develop the

skills which lead to promotion within the

organization





value


maximum to minimum



6. Shared information and open communication - The focus on the operators access information,

news, and information conveniently for the

effective work

- The focus on the employees having a wide

range of communication and decisions to make

better understanding

- The focus on the open communication in the

organization

- The focus on preparing information which is

ready to support decision-making to create

employee a sense of ownership of the

organization

- The focus on the permission to trial and error

for learning

- The focus on the high-performing teams of the

authority to jointly accomplish the organization

mission

- The focus on the conversation with employees

and value for employee feedback and opinion

- The focus on involving employees in all

important activities

- The focus on the line managers perform a role

in encouraging employees to develop

themselves to improve and drive organization

performances

Compelling vision, purpose and values - The focus on the determination and

management of organization leaders to have the

characteristics and operations in line with the

vision and values of the organization

- The encouragement of employees to enjoy the

job to perform the shared common goals and

values

- The focus on the employees support the

organization, including goals, values, shared

values and the future image of the organization

- The focus on the employees having the same

values in the direction in accordance with the

organization values

- The focus on the employees having

commitment to create contributions to the






value


maximum to minimum



7. The critical roles and key talents - The focus on determining the roles needed for

each mission

- The focus on determining the roles needed for

each mission

- The focus on the management of talented

workers both in terms of fast progress and

strategies to retain personnel

- The focus on the employee management by

the changeable workers according to

organizational strategic priorities

- The focus on determining a continuous plan

for the management of talented workers

Shared power and high involvement - The focus on the empowerment of decision-

making throughout the organizational processes

- The focus on the empowerment of decision-

making throughout the organizational processes

- The focus on encouraging employees to have

access to information needed to make decisions

in work


motivated to create a value that respond to the

goals and vision of the organization

8. Strategic human resource - The focus on the human resources strategy

- The focus on the human resource management

which aims to develop people in consistent with

organizational strategies

- The focus on the human resource management

which contributes to employees' creativity at

work for organizational success

- The focus on the he human resource

management which could provide advice and

analysis to the line manager or administrators





value


maximum to minimum



9. Future leaders - The focus on determining the required

attributes of skilled leaders in accordance with

current and future organizational mission since

the start of the recruitment process

- The focus on leaders can rotate in many

different positions, and have multiple roles

- The focus on the leader develops the skills and

competencies needed for the future mission of

the organization by accountability

- The focus on the senior executives perform the

role for determining expectations for leadership

behaviors, review, and modify the performance

management system for organizational success

Structure and resource allocation - The focus on the systematization of

organizational structure consistent with the

establishing law and resources allocation

consistent with operations

- The focus on the systematization of primary

and secondary missions

- The focus on defining organizational

philosophy statement in line with organizational

strategy

- The focus on the executives monitor the

corresponding operational processes of each

division

- The focus on determining the person who is

responsible for each task or project to achieve

effective performance

- The focus on creating a collective work from

the integration of various parts of the

organization

- The focus on designing operational processes

and strategies which align with the current

situations and the future circumstances





value


maximum to minimum



10. Culture - The focus on organizational culture as a

catalyst for strategic goals


organizational management and monitoring

systems to promote organizational success

- The focus on the executives to convey the

direction of organization to change the culture

of work in accordance with the organizational

strategy

11. Engagement - The determination of an employee engagement

system and developing a commitment to work

success

- The focus on employee engagement with a

collaborative atmosphere

- The focus on employee engagement at a level

where employees have a high level of work

spirit

- The focus on the engagement tools including

symbols, stories, languages, and policies to

build commitment between employees

High-performance teams of individual leaders - The focus on leadership can be driven by

organizational collaboration for strength

performance

- The focus on the leaders to work

collaboratively with their colleagues

- The focus on the skillful leader to work

smoothly with colleagues outside the

organization

12. Employer branding - The focus on the investment for human

development, especially effective training

- The focus on the job rotation to contribute the

proper roles and responsibility creating organization

achievement

- The focus on the motivational tools that could

maintain people in the form of compensation and

other incentives, such as non-monetary benefits such

as welfare, the various privilege, and so on

- The focus on the proper career advancement for

employee



Moreover, the practical approach could also be to create other

development plans according to the next indicators in priority order by weight value,

in addition to the first three in sequence. This may depend on the policy of the

executives and the public organization committees to focus on the matter. It also

depends on the situation of the organization and the budget limitations. The

organization can choose to develop prioritized by the weight of the element in order

from high to low value as shown in the table. However, HPOs who are in the sample

of the third group, namely, the Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization), and Film

Archive (Public Organization) have applied these results as a guideline for improving

the work process to be more efficient even by attention to indicators with less weight

as shown in the table, such as the improvement of employer branding, which has the

lowest priority element weight for the third group, namely, 1) the focus on investment

for human development, especially effective training; 2) the focus on job rotation to

contribute the proper roles and responsibility creating organization achievement; 3) the

focus on the motivational tools that could retain people in the form of compensation

and other incentives, such as non-monetary benefits such as welfare, various

privileges, and so on; 4) the focus on the proper career advancement for employees;

and 5) the focus on improving the substandard workers. The other indicators in similar

value order can be used as a development guide simultaneously, or a PO could choose

to develop appropriately to policy which is consistent with situational management.

The practical approach of the causal model of the third mission group of

POs as HPO has shown the significant point as follows:

1. The component of Culture and Engagement (TKSI1)

For the third mission group of POs, the element of Culture

and Engagement (TKSI1) has the direct effects on Change Management (TETA1)

and People (TETA2 ) and has an indirect effect to High-Performance Organization

(TETA4) via People (TETA2). The practical approach is presented as follows:



is, the third mission group could give precedence to organizational culture, namely,

(1) the focus on organizational culture as a catalyst for strategic goals; (2) the focus on

the determination of organizational management and monitoring systems to promote




strategy. The third mission group could give precedence to employee engagement,

namely, ( 1 ) the determination of an employee engagement system and developing a



employees have a high level of work spirit; and (4) the focus on the engagement tools

including symbols, stories, languages, and policies to build commitment between

employees. In addition, organizations in the third mission group could create change

management by focusing on the disciplined cascade, by: (1) the focus on prioritizing

the organizational mission; ( 2 ) the focus on the determination of accountability and

success indicators for each employee; ( 3 ) the focus on providing tools and

empowerment to employees to accomplish their tasks; ( 4 ) the focus on the



to the stakeholders of the organization, especially during fluctuating times. The third

mission group could create change management by being an evolutionary

organization, by: (1) the focus on organizational adaptation to changing circumstances;

(2 ) the focus on the strategy adjustment to be more effective and consistent with the

changing environment; and (3) the focus on the continuous change observation in the

operational context which is similar to the organizational performance including the



organization in high level will lead to better employee management. That is, the third

mission group could give precedence to organizational culture, by: (1) the focus on

organizational culture as a catalyst for strategic goals; ( 2 ) the focus on the




strategy. The third mission group could give precedence to employee engagement;

namely, ( 1 ) the determination of an employee engagement system and developing a




employees have a high level of work spirit; and ( 4 ) the focus on engagement tools

including symbols, stories, languages, and policies to build commitment between

employees. Organizations in the third mission group could create better employee

management by clear employer branding, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the investment for

human development, especially effective training, ( 2 ) the focus on job rotation to

contribute to the proper roles and responsibility creating organizational achievement,

( 3 ) the focus on the motivational tools that could retain people in the form of


various privileges, and so on; ( 4 ) the focus on the proper career advancement for

employees; and (5) the focus on improving the substandard workers. The third mission

group could create better employee management by focusing on the critical roles and

key talents, by: (1) the focus on determining the roles needed for each mission; (2) the

focus on determining capable employees who perform the tasks successfully; (3 ) the

focus on the management of talented workers both in terms of fast progress and

strategies to retain personnel; ( 4 ) the focus on the employee management by the

changeable workers according to organizational strategic priorities; and (5 ) the focus

on determining a continuous plan for the management of talented workers. The third

mission group could create better employee management by using strategic human

resources, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the human resources strategy; (2 ) the focus on the



contributes to employees' creativity at work for organizational success; and (4 ) t he



3) The focus on culture and engagement and

employee management (people) in an organization in high level will lead to creating

an HPO. That is, the third mission group could give precedence to organizational

culture and employee engagement as shown in previous item and employee

management, by: (1) clear employer branding; (2) attention to critical roles and key

talents; and (3) using strategic human resources. Further, in order to create an HPO the

third mission group could focus on the elements of shared information and open


communication, namely, ( 1 ) the focus on the operators having convenient access to

news and information for effective work; (2 ) the focus on the employees having a

wide range of communication and understanding to make better decisions; (3 ) t he

focus on open communication in the organization; (4 ) the focus on preparing

information which is ready to support decision-making to create in employees a sense

of ownership of the organization; (5) the focus on the permission for trial and error for

learning; (6 ) the focus on the high-performing teams with the authority to jointly

accomplish the organizational mission; (7) the focus on conversations with employees

and valuing employee feedback and opinion; (8) the focus on involving employees in

all important activities; (9 ) the focus on the line managers performing a role in

encouraging employees to develop themselves to improve and drive organization

performances. The third mission group could create HPO by having a compelling

vision, purpose and values, by: (1) the focus on the determination and management of

organization leaders to have the characteristics and operations in line with the vision


perform with common goals and shared values; (3 ) the focus on the employees

supporting the organization, including goals, shared values and the future image of the


the organizational values; (5) the focus on the employees having commitment to create

contributions to the organization’s success. The third mission group could create HPO

by encouraging ongoing learning, by: ( 1) the encouragement of employees to be

motivated to increase their skills and performance in work to create a standard of

continuous learning in the operation of organization; (2) the support for learning from

best practices and transferring of knowledge in organization; (3 ) the support for

learning resources which are beneficial to organization missions; (4 ) the focus on the

organizational learning along with the learning of each employee. The third mission

group could create HPO by focusing on customer results, by: ( 1 ) the focus on all

employees in the organization maintaining a high standard in quality and service; (2 )



meet the expectations of customers or service recipients; (4) the focus on executives or

line managers performing an active role in encouraging employees to become leaders


and to develop the skills which lead to promotion within the organization. The third

mission group could create HPO by having an energizing system and structure, by: (1)

the systematic monitoring of operations to provide mission and practice in accordance

with the establishment law and an operating system to support the organization’s

success; (2) the monitoring of operations which are problems and obstacles to develop

the proper solutions; (3 ) the determination of accountability in performance

management systems to achieve organizational success; (4 ) the focus on the reward

system depending on the success of the organization, work department and staff. The

third mission group could create HPO by focusing on shared power and high

involvement, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the empowerment of decision-making throughout

the organizational processes; (2 ) the focus on participation, collaboration and

teamwork; (3 ) the focus on encouraging employees to have access to information

needed to make decisions in work; (4 ) the focus on encouraging employees t o b e

motivated to create values that respond to the goals and vision of the organization.

2. The component of Leadership (TKSI2)

For the third mission group of POs, the element of Leadership

(TKSI2) has a direct effect on Change Management (TETA1), and it has an indirect

effect on High-Performance Organization ( TETA4) via People ( TETA2 ) . The

practical approach is presented as follows:


high level will lead to better organizational change management. That is, the third


of individual leaders, specifically: ( 1 ) the focus on leadership that is driven by

organizational collaboration for strong performance; (2 ) the focus on the leaders to

work collaboratively with their colleagues; (3 ) the focus on skillful leaders to work

smoothly with colleagues outside the organization. In addition, the third mission group

could create better leadership by focusing on the future leaders, by: (1 ) the focus on

determining the required attributes of skilled leaders in accordance with current and

future organizational mission starting with the recruitment process; (2 ) the focus on

leaders who can rotate in many different positions, and have multiple roles; (3 ) the

focus on the leaders developing the skills, competencies and accountability needed for

the future mission of the organization; (4 ) the focus on the senior executives


performing a role for determining expectations for leadership behaviors, reviewing and

modifying the performance management system for organizational success. To create

better leadership the third mission group could focus on the middle managers who

embrace and translate strategy, specifically: (1) the focus on determining how the head

of a division performs a role of strategic interpretation to the operators; (2 ) the focus

on determining h o w the head of each division performs an important role in linking


top-down and from the bottom-up; (3 ) the focus on determining the how a head of

division performs a role of creating a skilled staff and strength in work. The third

mission group could create better change management by the disciplined cascade,

namely, (1 ) the focus on prioritizing the organizational mission; (2 ) the focus on the

determination of accountability and success indicators for each employee; (3 ) the

focus on providing tools and empowerment to employees to accomplish their tasks; (4)

the focus on the determination of the organizational progress to compare the

operations and prevent risks that will not be in line with the plan; (5 ) the focus on

communicating to the stakeholders of the organization, especially during fluctuating

times. The third mission group could create better change management by being an

evolutionary organization, by: (1 ) the focus on organizational adaptation to changing

circumstances; (2) the focus on strategy adjustment to be more effective and consistent

with the changing environment; (3) the focus on the continuous change observation in

the operational context which is similar to the organization’s performance including

the situations affecting organizational management.


high level will lead to better employee management. That is, the third mission group

could give precedence to leadership by a focus on high-performance teams of

individual leaders, by: (1) the focus on leadership that can be driven by organizational

collaboration for strong performance; (2 ) the focus on the leaders to work

collaboratively with their colleagues; and (3 ) the focus on the skillful leader to work

smoothly with colleagues outside the organization. The third mission group could

create leadership by focusing on its future leaders; namely, ( 1 ) the focus on

determining the required attributes of skilled leaders in accordance with the current

and future organizational mission starting with the recruitment process; (2 ) the focus


on leaders who can rotate in many different positions, and have multiple roles; (3) the

focus on leaders developing the skills and competencies and accountability needed for

the future mission of the organization; (4 ) the focus on the senior executives

performing a role for determining expectations for leadership behaviors, and review

and modify the performance management system for organizational success. The third

mission group could create leadership by middle managers who embrace and translate

strategy, by: (1 ) the focus on determining how the head of each division performs a

role of strategic interpretation to the operators; (2) the focus on determining how the

head of each division performs an important role in linking work between top

executives and employees by using two-way communication from top-down and from

the bottom-up; and (3 ) the focus on determining how the head of each division

performs a role in creating a skilled staff and strength in work. The third mission

group could create better employee management by clear employer branding, by: (1)

the focus on the investment for human development, especially effective training; (2 )

the focus on job rotation to contribute to the proper roles and responsibility in creating

organizational achievement; (3 ) the focus on the motivational tools that could retain

people in the form of compensation and other incentives, such as non-monetary

benefits such as welfare, various privileges, and so on; (4 ) the focus on the proper

career advancement for employees; (5 ) the focus on improving the substandard

workers. The third mission group could create better employee management by

focusing on critical roles and key talents, by: (1 ) the focus on determining the roles

needed for each mission; (2 ) the focus on determining capable employees who

perform the tasks successfully; (3 ) the focus on the management of talented workers

both in terms of fast progress and strategies to retain personnel; (4 ) the focus on the

employee management by flexible workers according to organizational strategic

priorities; (5 ) the focus on determining a continuous plan for the management of

talented workers. The third mission group could create better employee management

by focusing on strategic human resources, by: (1 ) the focus on the human resources

strategy; (2) the focus on human resources management which aims to develop people

consistent with organizational strategies; (3 ) the focus on human resources

management which contributes to employees' creativity at work for organizational


success; (4 ) the focus on the human resources management which could provide

advice and analysis to the line managers or administrators.

3) The focus on leadership and employee

management in an organization in high level will lead to better HPO. That is, the

third mission group could give precedence to leadership, specifically: the high-

performance teams of individual leaders, the future leaders, and the middle managers

who embrace and translate strategy. The third mission group could give precedence to

employee management, including attention given to employer branding, identifying

critical roles and key talents, and using strategic human resources as shown in the

previous item. In order to create an HPO, the third mission group could focus on

shared information and open communication, by: (1) the focus on the operators having

convenient access to news and information for effective work; (2 ) the focus on the

employees having a wide range of communication and understanding to make better

decisions; (3) the focus on open communication in the organization; (4 ) the focus on

preparing information which is ready to support decision-making to create in

employees a sense of ownership of the organization; (5 ) the focus on the permission

for trial and error for learning; (6 ) the focus on the high-performing teams with the

authority to jointly accomplish the organization mission; (7 ) the focus on


focus on involving employees in all important activities; (9 ) the focus on the line


improve and drive organizational performances. The third mission group could create

HPO by having a compelling vision, purpose and values, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the

determination and management of organization leaders who have the characteristics

and operations in line with the vision and values of the organization; (2 ) the

encouragement of employees to enjoy the job to perform with common goals and

shared values; (3 ) the focus on the employees supporting the organization, including

goals, shared values and the future image of the organization; (4 ) the focus on the

employees having similar values in accordance with the organization’s values; and (5)

the focus on the employees having commitment to create contributions to the

organization’s success. The third mission group could create HPO by ongoing

learning, by: ( 1) the encouragement of employees to be motivated to increase their


skills and performance in work to create a standard of continuous learning in the

operation of the organization; (2 ) the support for learning from best practices and


which are beneficial to organizational missions; (4 ) the focus on organizational

learning along with the learning of each employee. The third mission group could

create HPO by their focus on customer results, specifically: ( 1 ) the focus on all

employees in the organization maintaining a high standard in quality and service; (2 )



meet the expectations of customers or service recipients; (4) the focus on executives or

line managers performing an active role in encouraging employees to become leaders

and to develop their skills which lead to promotion within the organization. The third

mission group could create HPO by having an energizing system and structure, by: (1)

the systematic monitoring of operations to provide mission and practice in accordance

with the establishment law and operating system to support the organization’s success;

(2) the monitoring of operations which are problems and have obstacles to develop the

proper solutions; (3 ) the determination of accountability in performance management

systems to achieve organizational success; (4 ) the focus on the reward system

depending on the success of organization, work department and staff. The third

mission group could create HPO by focusing on shared power and high involvement,

specifically: ( 1 ) the focus on the empowerment of decision-making throughout the

organizational processes; (2 ) the focus on participation, collaboration and teamwork;

(3) the focus on encouraging employees to have access to information needed to make

decisions in work; (4) the focus on encouraging employees to be motivated to create

values that respond to the goals and vision of the organization.

3. The component of Change Management (TETA1)

In the HPO model, Change Management has a direct effect on

Employee Management, and it has indirect effects on Organization Design and HPO via

People or Employee Management (TETA2). The practical approach is presented as follows:

1) The focus on change management in an

organization in high level will lead to better employee management. That is the third

mission group could give precedence to change management by the a focus on the


disciplined cascade, specifically: (1) the focus on prioritizing the organizational mission;

(2) the focus on the determination of accountability and success indicators for each

employee; (3) the focus on providing tools and empowerment to employees to accomplish

their tasks; (4) the focus on the determination of the progress of the organization compared

to the operations and prevention of risks that will not be in line with the plan; and (5) the

focus on communicating to the stakeholders of the organization, especially during

fluctuating times. In addition, the third mission group could create change management by

being an evolutionary organization, by: (1) the focus on organizational adaptation to

changing circumstances; (2) the focus on strategy adjustment to be more effective and

consistent with the changing environment; and (3) the focus on continuous change

observation in the operational context which is similar to the organizational adaptation to

the situations affecting organizational management. In order to create better employee

management, the third mission group could focus on the employer branding, by: (1) the

focus on the investment for human development, especially effective training; (2) the

focus on job rotation to contribute to the proper roles and responsibility in creating

organization achievement; (3) the focus on the motivational tools that could retain people

in the form of compensation and other incentives, such as non-monetary benefits such as

welfare, various privileges, and so on; (4) the focus on the proper career advancement for

employees; and (5) the focus on improving the substandard workers. The third mission

group could create better employee management by focusing on critical roles and key

talents, by: (1) the focus on determining the roles needed for each mission; (2) the focus

on determining capable employees who perform the tasks successfully; (3) the focus on

the management of talented workers both in terms of fast progress and strategies to retain

personnel; (4) the focus on employee management by workers being flexible according to

organizational strategic priorities; and (5) the focus on determining a continuous plan for

the management of talented workers. The third mission group could create better

employee management by focusing on strategic human resources, specifically: (1) the

focus on the human resources strategy; (2) the focus on the human resources management

which aims to develop people consistent with organizational strategies; (3) the focus on

the human resource management which contributes to employees' creativity at work for

organizational success; and (4) the focus on the human resource management which could

provide advice and analysis to the line managers or administrators.



Organizational Design via People or Employee Management (TETA2 ) . So, the

organization could focus on improving change management via the disciplined cascade

and being an evolutionary organization, and improve employee management via

employer branding, giving attention to critical roles and key talents, and using strategic

human resources in high level, as mentioned in the previous item. These will lead to

better organizational design because of efficient structure and resource allocation, by

efficiency from few layers and wide spans of control, by clear accountabilities, decision

rights, and collaboration, and by employees matched to role requirements.

3) Change Management has indirect effects on HPO

via People or Employee Management (TETA2 ) . So, a focus on change management,

namely, the disciplined cascade and being an evolutionary organization, and a focus on

employee management, namely, employer branding, attention to critical roles and key

talents, and using strategic human resources in high level, as mentioned in the previous item,

will lead to becoming a better HPO. In addition the third mission group could achieve a

higher level of employee management by employees with shared power and high

involvement, specifically: (1) the focus on the empowerment of decision-making throughout

the organizational processes; (2) the focus on participation, collaboration and teamwork; (3)

the focus on encouraging employees to have access to information needed to make decisions

in work; and (4) the focus on encouraging employees to be motivated to create values that

respond to the goals and vision of the organization.

4. The component of People (TETA2)

In the model for the third mission group of POs, the element of People

(TETA2) has a direct effect on Design (TETA3), and it has a direct effect on High-Performance

Organization ( TETA4) . People ( TETA2 ) is also influenced by Culture and Engagement

(TKSI1) and Leadership (TKSI2). The practical approach is presented as follows:

1) The focus on people or employee management

in an organization in high level will lead to better organizational design. That is,

organizations in the third mission group could give precedence to people or employee

management by focusing on employer branding, specifically by: (1 ) the focus on the

investment for human development, especially effective training; (2) the focus on job

rotation to contribute to the proper roles and responsibility creating organizational


achievement; (3 ) the focus on the motivational tools that could retain people in the

form of compensation and other incentives, such as non-monetary benefits such as

welfare, various privileges, and so on; (4) the focus on the proper career advancement

for employees; and (5 ) the focus on improving the substandard workers. Further, the

third mission group could create better employee management by focusing on critical

roles and key talents, by: ( 1 ) the focus on determining the roles needed for each

mission; (2 ) the focus on determining capable employees who perform the tasks


progress and strategies to retain personnel; (4) the focus on the employee management

by workers being flexible according to organizational strategic priorities; and (5 ) the

focus on determining a continuous plan for the management of talented workers. The

third mission group could create better employee management by focusing on strategic

human resources, by: (1) the focus on the human resources strategy; (2) the focus on



contributes to employees' creativity at work for organizational success; (4 ) the focus

on human resource management which could provide advice and analysis to the line

managers or administrators. The third mission group could create better

organizational design by focusing on structure and resource allocation, by: ( 1 ) the

focus on the systematization of organizational structure consistent with the

establishment law and resources allocation consistent with operations; (2) the focus on

the systematization of primary and secondary missions; (3) the focus on defining the



situations and the future circumstances; (5) the focus on the executives who monitor

the corresponding operational processes of each division; (6) the focus on determining

the person who is responsible for each task or project to achieve effective

performance; and (7) the focus on creating collective work from the integration of

various parts of the organization. Moreover, the third mission group could give

precedence to organizational design by having few layers and wide spans of control,

by: ( 1 ) the utilization of a small number of organizational layers and wide spans of

control with fast communication and decision making to complete the mission on time


and within goals; (2) the focus on reducing or eliminating unnecessary processes to

focus on the work that is important to the organization; and (3) the focus on the line

managers using leadership skills to oversee the operation of a wide range of control.

The third mission group could give precedence to organizational design by focusing

on accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration, specifically, (1) the focus on the



opportunity to make decisions; (3) the focus on collaborative works and with

accountability; and (4) the focus on the employees being involved in drafting their

work plans to determine their accountability and decision making. The third mission

group could give precedence to organizational design by the matched role

requirements, specifically: (1) the focus on the assignment of roles to skilled workers

which is essential for organizational success and changing circumstances; (2) the focus

on working with experts to perform important missions or hiring skilled people to

streamline operations; (3) the focus on the assignment of important tasks to the

appropriate employees by potential and responsibility.

2) The focus on People or Employee

Management in an organization in high level will lead to better HPO. That is, the

third mission group could give precedence to people or employee management by

employer branding, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the investment in human development,


roles and responsibility creating organizational achievement; (3 ) the focus on the




developing the substandard workers. The third mission group could create better

employee management by focusing on critical roles and key talents, by: (1 ) the focus




personnel; (4 ) the focus on employee management by workers being flexible

according to organizational strategic priorities; and (5 ) the focus on determining a


continuous plan for the management of talented workers. The third mission group

could create better employee management by focusing on strategic human resources,

by: (1 ) the focus on the human resources strategy; (2 ) the focus on human resource


(3 ) the focus on the human resources management which contributes to employees'



administrators. In order to create HPO the third mission group could focus on shared

information and open communication, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the operators having

convenient access to news and information for effective work; (2 ) the focus on the

employees having a wide range of communication and understanding to make better

decisions; (3) the focus on open communication in the organization; (4 ) the focus on

preparing information which is ready to support decision-making to create in

employees a sense of ownership of the organization; (5 ) the focus on the permission

for trial and error for learning; (6 ) the focus on the high-performing teams with the

authority to jointly accomplish the organizational mission; (7 ) the focus on





HPO by having a compelling vision, purpose and values, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the

determination and management of organization leaders to have the characteristics and

operations in line with the vision and values of the organization; (2 ) the

encouragement of employees to enjoy the job to perform the common goals and shared

values; (3 ) the focus on the employees supporting the organization, including goals,

shared values and the future image of the organization; (4) the focus on the employees

having similar values in accordance with the organization’s values; and (5 ) the focus

on employees having commitment to create contributions to the organization’s

success. The third mission group could create HPO by encouraging ongoing learning,

by: ( 1) the encouragement of employees to be motivated to increase their skills and

performance in work to create a standard of continuous learning in the operation of the

organization; (2 ) the support for learning from best practices and transferring of


knowledge in the organization; (3 ) the support for learning resources which are

beneficial to organizational missions; and (4 ) the focus on organizational learning

along with the learning of each employee. The third mission group could create HPO

by their focus on customer results, specifically: (1 ) the focus on all employees in the

organization maintaining a high standard in quality and service; (2) the focus on every

step of the process being designed to facilitate the customers or service recipients; (3)

the focus on developing strategies and vision for success which meet the expectations

of customers or service recipients; (4 ) the focus on executives or line managers


their skills which leads to promotion within the organization. The third mission group

could create HPO by having an energizing system and structure, by: (1) the systematic


establishment law and operating system to support the organization’s success; (2 ) the




on the success of the organization, work department and staff. The third mission group

could create HPO by employees with shared power and high involvement, by: (1) the

focus on the empowerment of decision-making throughout the organizational



work; and (4 ) the focus on encouraging employees to b e motivated to create values


3 ) The focus on the Employee Management and

Organization Design in high level will lead to better HPO. That is, in order to create an

HPO the organizations in the third mission group could give precedence to employee

management, namely, by clear employer branding, by attention to critical roles and key

talents, and using strategic human resources; and give precedence to organization

design, namely, by efficient structure and resource allocation, having few layers and

wide spans of control, by clear accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration, and

by employees matched to role requirements as shown in the previous item.


5. The component of Design (TETA3)

In the model for the third mission group of POs, the element of

Design (TETA3) has a direct effect on High-Performance Organization (TETA4). Design

(TETA3) is also influenced by People (TETA2). The practical approach is presented as follows:

1 ) In the model, the focus on Organizational

Design in a PO in high level will lead to better HPO. That is, the third mission group

could give precedence to organizational design by focusing on efficient structure and

resource allocation, specifically, (1 ) the focus on the systematization of organizational

structure consistent with the establishment law and resources allocation consistent with

operations; (2) the focus on the systematization of primary and secondary missions; (3)

the focus on defining an organizational philosophy statement in line with organizational

strategy; (4) the focus on designing operational processes and strategies which align

with the current situations and the future circumstances; (5) the focus on the executives

monitoring the corresponding operational processes of each division; (6) the focus on

determining the person who is responsible for each task or project to achieve effective

performance; and (7) the focus on creating collective work from the integration of

various parts of the organization. Moreover, the third mission group could give

precedence to organizational design by having few layers and wide spans of control, by:

(1) the utilization of a small number of organizational layers and wide spans of control

with fast communication and decision making to complete the mission on time and

within goals; (2) the focus on reducing or eliminating unnecessary processes to focus on

the work that is important to the organization; and (3) the focus on the line managers

using leadership skills to oversee the operation of a wide range of control. The third

mission group could give precedence to organizational design by focusing on clear

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration, by: (1) the focus on the



opportunity to make decisions; (3) the focus on collaborative works and with

accountability; and (4) the focus on the employees being involved in drafting their work

plans to determine their accountability and decision making. The third mission group

could give precedence to organizational design by having matched role requirements,

namely, ( 1) the focus on the assignment of the roles and skilled workers which is


essential for organizational success and changing circumstances; (2) the focus on

working with experts to perform important missions or hiring skilled people to

streamline operations; and (3) the focus on the assignment of important tasks to the

appropriate employee by potential and responsibility. In order to create HPO the third

mission group could use shared information and open communication, by: (1) the focus

on the operators having convenient access to news and information for effective work;

(2 ) the focus on the employees having a wide range of communication and

understanding to make better decisions; (3 ) the focus on open communication in the

organization; (4) the focus on preparing information which is ready to support decision-

making to create in employees a sense of ownership of the organization; (5) the focus on

the permission for trial and error for learning; (6 ) the focus on the high-performing

teams with the authority to jointly accomplish the organizational mission; (7 ) the focus

on conversations with employees and valuing employee feedback and opinion; (8 ) the

focus on involving employees in all important activities; and (9 ) the focus on the line



HPO by having compelling vision, purpose and values, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the

determination and management of organization leaders to have the characteristics and

operations in line with the vision and values of the organization; (2) the encouragement

of employees to enjoy the job to perform with common goals and shared values; (3) the

focus on the employees supporting the organization, including goals, shared values and

the future image of the organization; (4 ) the focus on the employees having similar

values in accordance with the organizational values; and (5) the focus on the employees

having commitment to create contributions to the organization’s success. The third

mission group could create HPO by encouraging ongoing learning, by: ( 1) the

encouragement of employees to be motivated to increase their skills and performance in

work to create a standard of continuous learning in the operation of organization; (2) the

support for learning from best practices and transferring of knowledge in organization;

(3) the support for learning resources which are beneficial to the organizational mission;

and (4 ) the focus on the organizational learning along with the learning of each

employee. The third mission group could create HPO by their focus on customer results,

specifically: ( 1 ) the focus on all employees in the organization maintaining a high


standard in quality and service; (2) the focus on every step of the process being designed

to facilitate the customers or service recipients; (3 ) the focus on developing strategies

and vision for success which meet the expectations of customers or service recipients;

and (4 ) the focus on executives or line managers performing an active role in

encouraging employees to become leaders and to develop the skills which lead to

promotion within the organization. The third mission group could create HPO by having

an energizing system and structure, by: (1 ) the systematic monitoring of operations to


system to support the organization’s success; (2) the monitoring of operations which are

problems and have obstacles to develop the proper solutions; (3 ) the determination of


and (4 ) the focus on the reward system depending on the success of the organization,

work department and staff. The third mission group could create HPO by employees

with shared power and high involvement, by: ( 1 ) the focus on the empowerment of

decision-making throughout the organizational processes; (2) the focus on participation,

collaboration and teamwork; (3 ) the focus on encouraging employees to have access to

information needed to make decisions in work; (4) the focus on encouraging employees

to be motivated to create values that respond to the goals and vision of the organization.

2 ) Design ( TETA3) is also influenced by People

(TETA2) as mentioned in the previous item. The practical approach could be presented that

the third group that desires to develop their organization design to be an excellent agency

must give precedence initially to people or employee management by having clear employer

branding, by attention to critical roles and key talents, and by using strategic human resources.

This will cause high quality of organization design which is part of the HPO model.

6. The component of High-Performance Organization (TETA4)

In the model for the third mission group of POs, as mentioned in

the previous item, the element of High-Performance Organization (TETA4) is influenced by

People (TETA2) and Design (TETA3). The practical approach is presented as follows:


an organization in the third mission group that desires to develop to be an HPO or

become an excellent agency must give precedence initially to people or employee

management by clear employer branding, by attention to critical roles and key talents,


and by using strategic human resources in high level. This will cause HPO by: (1) use

o f shared information and open communication; (2) h a v in g a compelling vision,

purpose and values; (3) encouraging ongoing learning; (4) having a focus on customer

results; (5) having an energizing system and structure; and (6) employees with shared

power and high involvement.


an organization in the third mission group that desires to develop the HPO or become

an excellent agency must give precedence initially to good organizational design, by

attention to efficient structure and resource allocation, by having few layers and wide

spans of control, by clear accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration, and by

employees matched to role requirements in high level; this will lead to becoming an

HPO or an excellent agency.

Fac. of Grad. Studies, Mahidol Univ. D.P.A.(Public Policy and Public Management) / 343

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION

In this chapter the researcher discusses the model of Public Organizations

as High-Performance Organizations considering the six primary components, namely,

(1) Culture and Engagement (KSI1), (2) Leadership (KSI2), (3) Change Management

(ETA1), (4) People (ETA2), (5) Design (ETA3), and (6) High-Performance

Organization (ETA4). The Public Organizations are categorized according to three

mission groups, namely, the first group: public organizations with a mission of

development and specific policy implementation of government affairs, the second

group: public organizations of technical services or an interdisciplinary mission, and

the third group: public organizations of general public services.

5.1 The Discussion of the six components of the model of Public

Organizations as High-Performance Organizations

5.1.1 Culture and Engagement (KSI1)

The component of Culture and Engagement (KSI1) of the model of PO as

HPO is composed of the two indicators of organizational culture (X1) and employee

engagement (X2). A positive and supportive culture accelerates strategic objectives

and engagement is measured and cultivated to generate discretionary effort from

employees. All experts provide opinions that the model can be applied to the concept

of culture and engagement from the synthesis of related research (American

Management Association, 2007; Banerjee & Kamener, 2009; Bhalla et al., 2011;

Hewitt Association, 2009; Lussier and Achua, 2007) to suitably construct a

measurement model. This authoritative confirmation of the measurement model is the

qualitative method. Convergent validity can be considered by quantitative methods

Waranya Jirangkul Discussion / 344

based on the three criterions described in Chapter 4: (1) Standardized Factor Loading,

(2) Average Variance Extracted (AVE), and (3) Construct Reliability (CR). From the

measurement model check, Culture and Engagement (KSI1) has passed these

criterions. It is concluded that these two indicators are the proper composition to

explain Culture and Engagement (KSI1), which leads to the model test.

5.1.2 Leadership (KSI2)

The component of Leadership (KSI2) in the model of PO as HPO is

composed of the indicators of (1) high-performance teams of individual leaders (X3), (2)

future leaders (X4), and (3) middle managers embrace and translate strategy (X5). All

experts provide opinions that the model can be applied to the concept of organizational

leadership from the synthesis of related research (American Management Association,

2007; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Bhalla et al., 2011; Lussier & Achua, 2007; Pickering &

Brokaw, 2012; Waal, 2012) to suitably construct the measurement model. Convergent

validity can be considered by quantitative methods based on the three criterions described

in Chapter 4: (1) Standardized Factor Loading, (2) Average Variance Extracted (AVE),

and (3) Construct Reliability (CR). From the measurement model check, Leadership

(KSI2) has passed these criterions. It is concluded that these three indicators are the proper

composition to explain Leadership (KSI2), which leads to the model test.

5.1.3 Change Management (ETA1)

The component of Change Management (ETA1) of the model of PO as HPO

is composed of the indicators of (1) change is a disciplined cascade (Y1), and (2) the

organization is evolutionary (Y2). All experts provide opinions that the model can be

applied to the concept of change management from the synthesis of related research

(Bhalla et al., 2010; Kickert, 2015; Lawler III & Worley, 2006; Pickering & Brokaw,

2012) to suitably construct the measurement model. Convergent validity can be

considered by quantitative methods based on the three criterions described in Chapter 4:

(1) Standardized Factor Loading, (2) Average Variance Extracted (AVE), and (3)

Construct Reliability (CR). From the measurement model check, Change Management

(ETA1) has passed these criterions. It is concluded that these two indicators are the proper

composition to explain Change Management (ETA1), which leads to the model test.


5.1.4 People (ETA2)

The component of People (ETA2) of the model of PO as HPO is composed of

the indicators of (1) employer branding (Y3), (2) the critical roles and key talents (Y4),

and (3) strategic human resources (Y5). All experts provide opinions that the model can

be applied to the concept of People or Employee Management from the synthesis of

related research (Armitage & Allen, 2007; Bhalla et al., 2011; Mir et al., 2002; Ulrich &

Allen, 2014; Waal, 2015) to suitably construct the measurement model. Convergent

validity can be considered by quantitative methods based on the three criterions described

in Chapter 4: (1) Standardized Factor Loading, (2) Average Variance Extracted (AVE),

and (3) Construct Reliability (CR). From the measurement model check, People (ETA2)

has passed these criterions. It is concluded that these three indicators are the proper

composition to explain People (ETA2), which leads to the model test.

5.1.5 Design (ETA3)

The component of Design (ETA3) of the model of PO as HPO is composed

of the indicators of (1) structure and resource allocation (Y6), (2) few layers and wide

spans of control (Y7), (3) accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8), and

(4) matched role requirements (Y9). All experts provide opinions that the model can be

applied to the concept of organizational design from the synthesis of related researches

(American Management Association, 2007; Alavi, 2003; Bamber & Dale, 2000; Barker,

1994; Bhalla et al., 2011; Davison, 2003; Jordan & Michel, 1999; Pickering & Brokaw,

2012) to construct the measurement model suitably. Convergent validity can be

considered by quantitative methods based on the three criteria described in Chapter 4:


Construct Reliability (CR). From the measurement model check, Design (ETA3) has

passed these criterions. It is concluded that these four indicators are the proper

composition to explain Design (ETA3), which leads to the model test.

5.1.6 High-Performance Organization (ETA4)

The component of High-Performance Organization (ETA4) of the model

of PO as HPO is composed of the indicators of (1) shared information and open

communication (Y10), (2) compelling vision, purpose and values (Y11), (3) ongoing


learning (Y12), (4) the focus on customer results (Y13), (5) energizing system and

structure (Y14), and (6) shared power and high involvement (Y15). All experts

provide opinions that the model can be applied to the concept of HPO from the

synthesis of related research (Blanchard, 2010; Pickering & Brokaw, 2012; Waal,

2010) to suitably construct the measurement model. Convergent validity can be

considered by quantitative methods based on the three criteria described in Chapter 4:


Construct Reliability (CR). From the measurement model check, High-Performance

Organization (ETA4) has passed these criterions. It is concluded that these six

indicators are the proper composition to explain High-Performance Organization

(ETA4), which leads to the model test.

5.2 The Discussion of the model of the three mission groups of Public

Organizations as High-Performance Organizations

From the model test of the three mission groups, the importance of the

predictor variables along with their weighted variable coefficients is different for each

mission group, which leads to different variations in influence of elements for

conclusions about putting the model into practice. The discussion is as follows:

5.2.1 The first mission group: public organizations with the mission of

the development and specific policy implementation of government affairs

The first group model of PO as HPO is based on the sample of two POs,

namely, the Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of Thailand (Public

Organization), and the Highland Research and Development Institute (Public

Organization).

1. All coefficients of standardized factor loading in the first

group are close in values. The maximum correlation coefficient weight is the indicator

of middle managers embrace and translate strategy (X5) in the component of

Leadership, the second is using strategic human resources (Y5) in the component of

People, and the third is having an organization with few layers and wide spans of

control (Y7) in the component of Design. The findings are as follows.


1 ) The first group of POs with the mission of the

development and specific policy implementation of government affairs has the

maximum correlation coefficient weight in the measure of middle managers or head of

division embrace and translate strategy. This distinctive point makes the group's

performance in line with Bhalla et al. (2011) who pointed out that one part of

organizational success must be a leadership component from the beginning to the

middle level and strategies must be used and interpreted. Intermediate managers will

need to work with senior managers by inspecting work actively. Therefore, the first

group of POs could take this as an advantage to develop as an indicator of success.

2 ) The first group of POs also has a strength in

human resources management being a strategic partner with the organization

according to the second correlation coefficient weight. Therefore, this group should

empower their strategic human resources. This distinctive point makes the group's

performance in line with Bhalla et al. (2011) and Ali Mir et al. (2002) who pointed out

that the role of human resources management in the organization is important to link

the activities in the organization with efficiency, influence strategic issues of the

organization, and promote employee engagement, which is an important part of

success relating to the human resources management by recruiting, training and

retaining the staff. The first group of POs should maintain the quality of human

resources management to support the organization's management excellence, and to

provide advice and analysis to the line managers or administrators.

3) The finding of the model of the first group that

few layers and wide spans of control in the organizational design element is the third

in the order of importance can be developed as a measure of success of the first group

of POs as well. This conforms to the concept of Bhalla et al. (2011) who presented the

idea that lean structures necessitate the organization to emphasize the importance of

work and coordination through communication. This leads to the practice of the first

group of POs to work closely through a flat organizational structure which is a point of

effective benefit to the organization.

2. The elements of the causal model of the first mission group

of POs as HPO show the significant points as follows.


1) The element of the Change Management

(FETA1) is influenced by Culture and Engagement (FKSI1) showing that, for the first

mission group of POs, the development of culture and engagement and change

management is a causal relationship. That is, the proper development of culture and

engagement will directly affect change management in a clear and consistent direction.

This finding is consistent with Halm's (2011) concept that organizational change is

related to making organizations successful by pointing to the five guiding principles

for creating culture and employee engagement that can be applied to the management

of public organizations, namely, (1) identifying employee roles to fulfill organizational

goals, (2) selecting the talented employees who come with the potential, performance

and passion, (3) supporting and giving values to employees, (4) creating a sustainable

reward system, and (5) developing feedback and reinforcement mechanisms.

2 ) The element of the Change Management

(FETA1) is influenced by Leadership (FKSI2) showing that, for the first mission

group of POs, the development of leadership and change management is a causal

relationship. That is, the proper development of leadership will directly increase

indicators of change management in a clear and consistent direction. This finding is

consistent with Groves’ (2016) concept that linking leadership with the mediator role

of organizational change is a major alteration of an organization, and Ghatge et al.

(2015) who pointed out that visionary leaders must come up with strategic decisions

that address the diverse challenges surrounding the organization's evolution to lead the

organization to success. A progressive management policy is needed in the

organization and in practice it is identified in the plan. This finding also conforms to

Ford & Ford (2012) who pointed out that leadership has a direct influence on

organizational change, and organizational change also has a direct influence on


3) People (FETA2) is influenced by Culture and

Engagement (FKSI1) showing that, for the first mission group of POs, the

development of people and culture and engagement is a causal relationship. That is,

the proper development of culture and engagement will directly affect people or

employee engagement in a clear and consistent direction. This finding leads to the

practice of the tested model that the first mission group of POs giving precedence to


organization culture and employee engagement in high level will directly affect a high

quality of employee management by employer branding, proper placement of critical

roles and key talents, and use of strategic human resources. Therefore, the first mission

group of POs could develop their organizational management by considering the

culture and engagement of employees in the context of the organization to support the

progress of employees, such as, by creating employee engagement support over time.

This finding is consistent with concepts of Kotter and Heskett (1992) who pointed out

that an organization with quality employees is derived from the organizational culture

giving attention to the appropriate and inappropriate employee engagement behavior

that may promote or hinder strategic change affecting the difficulty of organizational

change. This also conforms to Wickramaratne (2014) who found a positive

relationship in the excellent agency of employee engagement affecting organizational

excellence by three forms of engagement, namely, affective, normative, and

continuance. This also conforms to Llandis Barratt‐Pugh et al. (2013) who pointed out

that organizational culture affected employees by offering a model of middle

management that can play a role in cultivating cultural change. This also conforms to

American Management Association (2007) who pointed out that HPO was generally a

good-faith based organization that drove behavior and values to be more

understandable for employees. The practical approach of the first mission group of

POs is related to Kotter and Heskett (1992) who offered further suggestions, that the

way that organizational culture relates to strong performance is: (1) organization and

staff goals must be done in the same way, (2) organizational culture must motivate

employees’ behavior and the joint values that employees are satisfied with their work

with the organization, and (3) organizations without formal structures and formal

bureaucracy can motivate employees and produce innovations.

4) People (FETA2) is influenced by Leadership

(FKSI2) showing that, for the first mission group of POs, the development of

leadership and employee management is a causal relationship. That is, the proper

development of leadership will directly affect people or employee engagement in a

clear and consistent direction. This finding is consistent with the concept of Adams

(2000) who pointed out that the leadership factor has a significant influence on

subordinate employees, and the manager's perception improves organization


performance. This also conforms to Peterson (2016) who pointed out that the

organization must grow steadily with expansion, adjustment, and change to drive

future global environmental needs efficiently and effectively through the foundation of

learning. Transformational leaders display important characteristics within the

learning organization by creating a vision, motivation, influence, and direction for

other leaders in the organization. Strategies and work plans must be aligned with the

vision, mission, and goals of the organization. People and processes will be guided

toward organizational goals through the direction of leadership. This leads to the

practical approach that the first mission group of POs giving precedence to leadership

in high level will increase the high quality of employee management.

5) Design (FETA3) is influenced by People

(FETA2) showing that, for the first mission group of POs, the development of

organizational design and employee management is a causal relationship. That is, the

proper development of employee management will directly affect organizational

design in a clear and consistent direction. This finding is consistent with the concept of

Mohrman and Lawler III (2014) who pointed out that modern organizations faced

increasing stakeholder expectations. Environmental issues which were a big challenge

for the organization brought a need to design a sustainable organization to support the

future. This is related to the human resources management strategy of an organization.

This also conforms to Worle and Doolen (2015) who found that the composition of

employees influenced the adoption of an organizational lean structure, that is, without

cooperation from the staff the design of the organization will impede the lean

structure. The lean implementations influence the organizational performance. This

also conforms to Stanica and Peydro (2016) who found that the cross-section of

employees has a positive influence on the knowledge transfer process in the

department by increasing their performance. It can be concluded that the first mission

group of POs giving precedence to employee management in high level will increase

their high quality of organizational design.

6) High-Performance Organization (FETA4) is

influenced by People (FETA2) showing the finding that, for the first mission group of

POs, the development of employee management and HPO is a causal relationship.

That is, the proper development of employee management will directly affect HPO in


a clear and consistent direction. So, the first mission group could apply the concepts of

organizational management by considering employee management in the context of

the organization and the factors supporting the development of the excellent

organization. This finding is consistent with the concept of Bhalla et al. (2011) who

pointed out that an organization can effectively translate the organization's strategy

into effective people strategies. It can attract and retain the most talented employees.

This also conforms to Ulrich and Allen (2014) who found that an organization

achieves good performance from putting learning into practice with the talented

employees. The strategy and growth of an organization also influences the people

management. This also conforms to Armitage and Keeble-Allen (2007) who found

that human resources management forms the basis of a high-performance work

system. This also conforms to Waal (2015) who studied the ideal employees in the

form of high-performing employees or HPE and found that performances depended on

engagement of high-performance employees. Employees must have knowledge, skills,

experience, and creativity; these are important elements needed to make the

organization successful. It can be concluded that the first mission group of POs giving

precedence to employee management in high level will increase HPO. 7) High-Performance Organization (FETA4) is

influenced by Design (FETA3) showing the finding that, for the first mission group of

POs, the development of organizational design and HPO is a causal relationship. That

is, the proper organizational design will directly affect HPO in a clear and consistent

direction. This finding is consistent with the concept of Pickering and Brokaw (2012)

who studied the HPO creation and pointed out that HPO required the mechanism of

applied change levers consisting of strategy, structure and systems, which performed

in the component of organizational design in this study. This also conforms to Ray and

John (2011) who studied the concept and technique of lean structure applied to

increase the fitted procedures of the organization. It can be concluded that the first

mission group of POs giving precedence to organizational design in high level will

increase HPO.


5.2.2 The second mission group: public organizations of technical

services or an interdisciplinary mission

The second group model of PO as HPO is based on the sample of six POs,

namely, the Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public Organization), the Princess

Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology Center (Public Organization), the Thailand

Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (Public Organization), the Synchrotron

Light Research Institute (Public Organization), the Hydro and Agro Informatics

Institute (Public Organization), and National Astronomical Research Institute of


1. All coefficient standardized factor loading in the second

group shows close values. The maximum correlation coefficient weight is the indicator

of energizing system and structure (Y14) in the component of HPO. The second

highest in factor weight are the two equal-value indicators; shared information and

open communication (Y10) in the component of HPO, and culture in the component of

Culture and Engagement. The findings are as follows.

1) The second group of public organizations of

technical services or the interdisciplinary mission has the maximum correlation

coefficient weight in the energizing system and structure (Y14). This can be developed

as the best measure of organizational success. This distinctive point makes the group's

performance in line with Bhalla et al. (2011) who pointed out the importance of

system, structure, process and practice to be consistent in supporting the organization

in terms of goals, values and strategic direction. This could facilitate employees to

work successfully. This also conforms to Blanchard (2010) who emphasized the high

information relevance needed to make decisions for employees, including the shared

power in organizations. This also conforms to Bhalla et al. (2011) who pointed out that

culture occurred meaningfully by accelerating strategic objectives. An HPO defines,

manages and validates organizational culture to achieve strategic objectives.

Therefore, the implementation for this group should be to develop and maintain the

system, structure and process in alignment, including shared information and open

communication.

2) The second group of POs also has a strength in

the shared information and open communication (Y10) according to the second


correlation coefficient weight. Therefore, this group should implement this indicator of

success, highlighting the importance of facilitating the access to information and open

communication with their high-performing teams and in the role of line managers.

This finding conforms to Blanchard (2010) and Waal (2010) who discovered that an

HPO must value the employees’ opinions and involve employees in all key activities

and processes of the organization. The line managers performed an important role in

encouraging employees to develop in order to improve their performance and drive

business performance.

3) The findings of the model show that

organizational culture in the element of Culture and Engagement can be developed as

a measure of success considering the weight of this indicator for the second group of

POs as well. This conforms to the idea of Bhalla et al. (2011) who found that an HPO

must provide value to organizational culture as a catalyst for strategic goals, with a

system for managing and monitoring organizational culture to promote organizational

success.

2. The causal model of the second mission group of POs as

HPO has shown the significant points as follows.


(SETA1) is influenced by Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) showing that, for the

second mission group of POs, the development of culture and engagement and change

management is a causal relationship. That is, the proper development of culture and

engagement will directly affect change management in a clear and consistent direction.

This finding is consistent with Halm's (2011) concept that it is organizational change

that makes successful organizations, by pointing out the five guiding principles for

creating a culture and employee engagement that can be applied to the management of

public organizations, namely, (1) identifying employee roles to fulfill organizational

goals, (2) selecting the talented employees who come with potential, performance and

passion, (3) supporting and giving values to employees, (4) creating a sustainable

reward system, and (5) developing feedback and reinforcement mechanisms.


(FETA1) is influenced by Leadership (SKSI2) showing that, for the second mission



relationship. That is, the proper development of leadership will directly promote

change management in a clear and consistent direction. This finding is consistent with

Groves’ (2016) concept that linking leadership with the mediator role of

organizational change is a major alteration of an organization. Also related is Ghatge

et al. (2015) who pointed out that visionary leaders must come up with strategic

decisions that address the diverse challenges surrounding the organization's evolution

to lead the organization to success. A progressive management policy is needed in the

organization and in practice it is identified in the plan. This finding also conforms to

Ford & Ford (2012) who pointed out that leadership has a direct influence on

organizational change, and organizational change also has a direct influence on


3) People (SETA2) is influenced by Culture and

Engagement (SKSI1) showing that, for the second mission group of POs, the


the proper development of culture and engagement will directly affect the indicators of

people or employee engagement in a clear and consistent direction. This finding leads

in practice to the second mission group of POs giving precedence to organization

culture and employee engagement in high level which will directly lead to a high

quality of employee management by clear employer branding, attention to critical

roles and key talents, and using strategic human resources. Therefore, the second

mission group of POs could develop their organizational management by considering

the culture and engagement of employees in the context of the organization to support

the progress of employees, such as, creating programs to support employee

engagement over time. This finding is consistent with the concept of Kotter and

Heskett (1992) who pointed out that organizations with quality employees are derived

from the organizational culture directing the appropriate and inappropriate employee

engagement behavior that may promote or hinder strategic change affecting the

difficulty of organizational change. This also conforms to Wickramaratne (2014) who

found a positive relationship between the excellent agency and employee engagement

affecting organizational excellence by three forms of engagement, namely, affective,

normative, and continuance. This also conforms to Llandis Barratt Pugh et al. (2013)

who pointed out that organizational culture affected employees by offering a model of


middle management that can play a role in cultivating cultural change. This also

conforms to American Management Association (2007) who pointed out that HPO

was generally a good-faith based organization that drove behavior and values to be

more understandable for employees. The practical approach of the second mission

group of POs is related to Kotter and Heskett’s (1992) further suggestions about the

way that organizational culture relates to strong performance by (1) organization and

staff goals that must be done in the same way, (2) organizational culture must motivate

employees’ behavior and the joint values that employees are satisfied with their work

with the organization, and (3) organizations without formal structures and formal

bureaucracy can motivate employees and produce innovations. Thus, it could be

concluded that the second mission group of POs giving precedence to culture and

engagement in high level will increase a high quality of employee management.

4) People (SETA2) is influenced by Change

Management (SETA1) showing that, for the second mission group of POs, the

development of people and change management is a causal relationship. That is, the

proper development of change management in an organization will directly affect

people or employee engagement in a clear and consistent direction. This finding

conforms to Cree (2000) who presented the model referring to Fishbein and Ajzen's

(1975) ‘Theory of Reasoned Action’ and found that employee intentions towards

participation were influenced by beliefs and attitudes of employees towards

participation in organizational change initiatives. The beliefs and attitudes of

employees were influenced by a number of organizational variables. The model shows

the more an employee's attitude was likely to be involved in organizational change, the

perception of individual participation in organizational change initiatives was even

greater. Employees see that they should more willingly get involved. This also

conforms to Simmelink (2012) who pointed out that critical communication strategies

were the means by which senior leaders identified employee engagement with change

processes. Situational thinking helped to create learning opportunities and

partnerships, continuing vision, including flexibility in work. Moreover, the accurate

and supported culture was essential to apply the change effectively, including the

expansion of employee engagement in the change process. Thus, it could be concluded


that the second mission group of POs giving precedence to change management in

high level will increase their high quality of employee management.

However, People (SETA2) is not influenced by

Leadership (SKSI2) for the second mission group of PO. This reveals that the model

of this group does not require leadership to drive better employee engagement. So, this

finding is inconsistent with Adams (2000) who found that leadership factors have a

significant influence on subordinate employees. This finding is also inconsistent with

Peterson (2016) who found that transformational leaders are shown in an important

role to practitioners.

5) Design (SETA3) is influenced by People

(SETA2) showing that, for the second mission group of POs, the development of

people and organizational design is a causal relationship. That is, the proper

development of people or employee engagement in an organization will directly affect

organizational design in a clear and consistent direction. This finding conforms to the

concept of Mohrman and Lawler III (2014) who pointed out that modern organizations

faced increasing stakeholder expectations. Environmental issues which were a big

challenge for the organization needed a sustainable organizational design to support

the future. It is related to the human resources management strategy of an

organization. This also conforms to Worle and Doolen (2015) who found that the

composition of employees influenced the adoption of an organizational lean structure,

that is, without cooperation from the staff the design of the organization will impede

the lean structure. The lean implementations influence the organization’s performance.

This also conforms to Stanica and Peydro (2016) who found that the cross-section of

employees has a positive influence on the knowledge transfer process in the

department by increasing their performance. Thus, it could be concluded that the

second mission group of POs giving precedence to employee management in high

level will increase the high quality of organizational design.

6) High-Performance Organization (SETA4) is

influenced directly by Leadership (SKSI2) showing the finding that for the second

mission group of POs, the development of leadership and HPO is a causal relationship.

That is, the proper development of leadership will directly affect HPO in a clear and

consistent direction. This is a special feature of the second mission group model that


leadership has a direct effect on HPO that is different from the other two groups with

only indirect influence. This finding conforms to Bhalla et al. (2011), Lussier and

Achua (2007), and American Management Association (2007) who presented a

concept of leadership deeply embedded in the organization. Leadership was a causal

factor of success in organizational models. Leadership was one of the key components

of an organization's system which research has shown to act on the effectiveness of

organizational performance by creating a more competitive organization. Thus, it

could be concluded that the second mission group of POs giving precedence to

leadership in high level will increase the high HPO.


influenced by People (SETA2) showing the finding that, for the second mission group

of POs, the development of employee management and HPO is a causal relationship.

That is, the proper development of employee management will directly affect HPO in

a clear and consistent direction. So, the second mission group could apply

organizational management by considering employee management in the context of

the organization, and the factors supporting the development of the excellent

organization. This finding is consistent with the concept of Bhalla et al. (2011) who

pointed out that an organization can effectively translate the organization's strategy

into effective people strategies. It can attract and retain the most talented employees.

This also conforms to Ulrich and Allen (2014) who found that an organization can

have good performance from putting learning into practice with talented employees.

The strategy and growth of an organization has also influenced the people

management. This also conforms to Armitage and Allen (2007) who found that human

resources management forms the basis of a high-performance work system. This also

conforms to Waal (2015) who studied the ideal employees in the form of high-

performing employee or HPE and found that performances from high-performance

employees depended on engagement. Employees must have the important elements of

knowledge, skills, experience, and creativity needed to make the organization

successful. Thus, it could be concluded that the second mission group of POs giving

precedence to employee management in high level will increase HPO.


influenced by Design (SETA3) showing the finding that, for the second mission group


of POs, the development of organizational design and HPO is a causal relationship.

That is, the proper organizational design will directly affect HPO in a clear and

consistent direction. This finding is consistent with the concept of Pickering and

Brokaw (2012) who studied the HPO creation and pointed out that HPO required the

mechanism of applied change levers consisting of strategy, structure and systems,

which performed in the component of organizational design in this study. This also

conforms to Ray and John (2011) who studied the concept and technique of lean

structure to apply to increase the fitted procedures of the organization. Thus, it could

be concluded that the second mission group of POs giving precedence to

organizational design in high level will increase HPO.

5.2.3 The third mission group: Public Organizations of general public services

The third group model of PO as HPO is based on the sample of two POs, namely,

Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization), and Film Archive (Public Organization).

1. All coefficient standardized factor loading in the third group

shows close values. The maximum correlation coefficient weight is the energizing

system and structure (Y14) in the component of HPO, the second in weight is

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8) in the component of design,

and third are the set of five equal weight variables, namely, high-performance teams of

individual leaders (X3), the strategic human resource (Y5), the accountabilities,

decision rights, and collaboration (Y8), ongoing learning (Y12), and the focus on

customer results (Y13). The findings are as follows.

1) The third mission group of public organizations

of the general public services has the maximum correlation coefficient weight in the

energizing system and structure (Y14) in the component of HPO. This distinctive

point makes the group's performance in line with Blanchard (2010) who pointed out

that HPO required systems, structures, processes and practices to support the

organization in terms of goals, values, strategic direction and objectives to facilitate

employees to work successfully. Therefore, the third group of POs could take this

advantage to develop as an indicator of success.

2) The third group of POs also has a strength in the

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8) in the component of design


according to the second correlation coefficient weight. Therefore, this group should

give precedence to determine accountability and clear roles in work consistent with the

regulations. Employees had the permission and opportunity to work and cooperate

with accountability including the involvement in drafting their work plan. This point

conforms to Bhalla et al. (2011) and American Management Association (2007) who

pointed out that employees in an HPO had clearly defined roles, which was in a

combination in an effective organizational formation. Employees understood what was

expected and what they can do.

3) The third in priority order for the third mission

group of POs that can be developed are the five equal weight variables. This leads in

practice to giving precedence to the high-performance teams of individual leaders

which can drive organizational collaboration. This point conforms to Bhalla et al.

(2011) who pointed out that HPO coordinated work in close collaboration with their

colleagues and realized a collective strength through cooperation. Leaders must be

streamlined with outside collaborators. The third group of POs can develop the

indicator of strategic human resources and having accountabilities, decision rights, and

collaboration by emphasizing the importance of human resource management to

develop people in line with organizational strategies. This point conforms to Bhalla et

al. (2011) who pointed out that human resources management is a strategic partner and

opened the way for organizations to succeed in HPO by clearly defining roles

consistent with the power structure. The third group of POs can develop the indicator

of ongoing learning to encourage employees to be motivated to increase their skills

and performance in the workplace, and to create a standard of continuous learning in

the operation. This point conforms to Bhalla et al. (2011) who pointed out that

employees in an HPO had clearly defined roles, which was in combination in an

effective organizational formation. Employees understand what is expected and

understand what they can do. The ongoing learning encourages employees to be

motivated to increase their skills and performance in the workplace to build a learning

standard in the operation. The third group of POs, those who perform public services,

can develop the indicator of the focus on customer results to maintain high standards

of quality and services. This point conforms to Blanchard (2010) who pointed out that

an HPO must emphasize to all personnel in the organization the importance of high


standards of quality and services, including the development of strategies and vision of

success that meets the expectations of customers or service recipients.

2. The causal model of the third mission group of POs as HPO

shows the significant points as follows.


(TETA1) is influenced by Culture and Engagement (TKSI1) showing that, for the third

mission group of POs, the development of culture, engagement and change management

is a causal relationship. That is, the proper development of culture and engagement will

directly promote change management in a clear and consistent direction. This finding is

consistent with Halm's (2011) concept that organizational change is correlated with

successful organizations by pointing out the five guiding principles for creating culture

and employee engagement that can be applied to the management of public

organizations, namely, (1) identifying employee roles to fulfill organizational goals, (2)

selecting talented employees who come with potential, performance and passion, (3)

supporting and giving values to employees, (4) creating a sustainable reward system,

and (5) developing feedback and reinforcement mechanisms. 2) The element of the Change Management

(TETA1) is influenced by Leadership (TKSI2) showing that, for the third mission


relationship. That is the proper development of leadership will directly promote

change management in a clear and consistent direction. This finding is consistent with

Groves’ (2016) concept that links leadership with the mediator role in organizational

change which is a major alteration of the organization. Ghatge et al. (2015) pointed out

that visionary leaders must come up with strategic decisions that addresses the diverse

challenges surrounding the organization's evolution to lead the organization to success.

A progressive management policy is needed in the organization and in practice it is

identified in the plan. This finding also conforms to Ford & Ford (2012) who pointed

out that leadership has a direct influence on organizational change, and organizational

change also has a direct influence on organizational performance. 3) People (TETA2) is influenced by Culture and

Engagement (FKSI1) showing that, for the third mission group of POs, the



the proper development of culture and engagement will directly affect people or

employee engagement in a clear and consistent direction. This finding leads to the

practice of the tested model that the third mission group of POs giving precedence to

organization culture and employee engagement in high level will directly promote a

high quality of employee management by employer branding, attention to critical roles

and key talents, and using strategic human resources. Therefore, the third mission

group of POs could develop high-performance organizational management by

considering the culture and engagement of employees in the context of the

organization to support the progress of employees, such as, creating methods to

promote employee engagement over time. This finding is consistent with the concept

of Kotter and Heskett (1992) who pointed out that organizations with quality

employees are derived from the organizational culture that gives attention to the

appropriate and inappropriate employee engagement behavior that may promote or

hinder strategic change affecting the difficulty of organizational change. This also

conforms to Wickramaratne (2014) who found a positive relationship affecting the

excellent agency between employee engagement and organizational excellence, by

three forms of engagement, namely, affective, normative and continuance. This also

conforms to Llandis Barratt‐Pugh et al. (2013) who pointed out that organizational

culture affected employees by offering a model of middle management that can play a

role in cultivating cultural change. This also conforms to American Management

Association (2007) who pointed out that HPO was generally a good-faith based

organization that drove behavior and values to be more understandable for employees.

The practical approach of the third mission group of POs is related to Kotter and

Heskett (1992) further suggestions, that is, the way that organizational culture relates

to strong performance by (1) organization and staff goals must be done in the same

way, (2) organizational culture must motivate employees’ behavior and joint values

and that employees are satisfied with their work in the organization, and (3)

organizations without formal structures and formal bureaucracy can motivate

employees and produce innovations.

4) People (TETA2) is influenced by Leadership

(TKSI2) showing that, for the third mission group of POs, the development of

leadership and employee management is a causal relationship. That is, the proper


development of leadership will directly affect indicators of people or employee

engagement in a clear and consistent direction. This finding is consistent with Adams’

(2000) concept who pointed out that the leadership factor has a significant influence

on subordinate employees, and the manager's perception improves organization

performance. This also conforms to Peterson (2016) who pointed out that an

organization must grow steadily with expansion, adjustment, and change to drive

future global environmental needs efficiently and effectively through a foundation of

learning. Transformational leaders display important impacts within the learning

organization by creating a vision, motivation, influence and direction for other leaders

in the organization. Strategies and work plans must be aligned with the vision, mission

and goals of the organization. People and processes will be guided toward

organizational goals through the direction of leadership. This leads to the practical

approach that the third mission group of POs giving precedence to leadership in high

level will increase the high quality of employee management.

5) People (TETA2) is influenced by Change

Management (TETA1) showing that, for the third mission group of POs, the

development of people and change management is a causal relationship. That is, the

proper development of change management in an organization will directly affect

indicators of people or employee engagement in a clear and consistent direction. This

finding conforms to Cree (2000) who presented the model referring to Fishbein and

Ajzen's (1975) work in ‘Theory of Reasoned Action’ and found that employee

intentions towards participation were influenced by beliefs and attitudes of employees

towards participation in organizational change initiatives. The beliefs and attitudes of

employees were influenced by a number of organizational variables. The model shows

that the more the employee's attitude was likely to be involved in organizational

change, the perception of individual participation in organizational change initiatives

was even greater. Employees see that they should more willing get involved. This also

conforms to Simmelink (2012) who pointed out that critical communication strategies

were the means by which senior leaders identified employee engagement with change

processes. Situational thinking helped to create learning opportunities and

partnerships, continuing vision, including flexibility in work. Moreover, the accurate

and supported culture was essential to apply the change effectively, including the


expansion of employee engagement in the change process. Thus, it could be concluded

that the third mission group of POs giving precedence to change management in high

level will increase high-quality employee management.

However, People (TETA2) is not influenced by

Leadership (TKSI2) in the model for the third mission group of PO. This reveals that

the model of this group does not require leadership to drive better employee

engagement. So, this finding is inconsistent with Adams (2000) who found that

leadership factors have a significant influence on subordinate employees. This finding

is also inconsistent with Peterson (2016) who found that transformational leaders held

an important role to practitioners.

6) Design (TETA3) is influenced by People

(TETA2) showing that, for the third mission group of POs, the development of

organizational design and employee management is a causal relationship. That is, the

proper development of employee management will directly affect high-level

organizational design in a clear and consistent direction. This finding is consistent

with Mohrman and Lawler III’s (2014) concept who pointed out that modern

organizations faced increasing stakeholder expectations. Environmental issues which

were a big challenge for the organization needed a sustainable design to support the

organization for the future. This is related to the human resources management

strategy of the organization. This also conforms to Worle and Doolen (2015) who

found that the composition of employees influenced the adoption of an organizational

lean structure, that is, without cooperation from the staff the design of the organization

will impede the lean structure. The lean implementation influences the organization’s

performance. This also conforms to Stanica and Peydro (2016) who found that the

cross-section of employees has a positive influence on the knowledge transfer process

in the department by increasing its performance. Thus, it could be concluded that the

third mission group of POs giving precedence to employee management in high level

will increase the high quality of organizational design.

7) High-Performance Organization (TETA4) is

influenced directly by People (TETA2) showing the finding that, for the third mission

group of POs, the development of employee management and HPO is a causal

relationship. That is, the proper development of employee management will directly


promote an increase in the indicators of HPO in a clear and consistent direction. So,

the third mission group could apply ideas of organizational management by

considering employee management in the context of the organization, to the factors

supporting the development of the excellent organization. This finding is consistent

with the concept of Bhalla et al. (2011) who pointed out that an organization can

effectively translate the organization's strategy into effective people strategies. It can

attract and retain the most talented employees. This also conforms to Ulrich and Allen

(2014) who found that organizations have good performance from learning and putting

it into practice by talented employees. The strategy and growth of an organization is

also influenced by people management. This also conforms to Armitage and Keeble-

Allen (2007) who found that human resources management forms the basis of a high-

performance work system. This also conforms to Waal (2015) who studied the ideal

employees in the form of high-performing employee or HPE and found that

performances depended on engagement from high-performance employees.

Employees must have knowledge, skills, experience, and creativity as these are

important elements needed to make the organization successful. Thus, it could be

concluded that the third mission group of POs giving precedence to employee

management in high level will increase HPO.

8) High-Performance Organization (TETA4) is

influenced by Design (TETA3) showing the finding that, for the third mission group of

POs, the development of organizational design and HPO is a causal relationship. That

is, the proper organizational design will directly lead to HPO in a clear and consistent

direction. This finding is consistent with Pickering and Brokaw’s (2012) concept who

studied HPO creation and pointed out that HPO required a mechanism of applied

change levers consisting of strategy, structure and systems, which performed as

components of organizational design in this study. This also conforms to Ray and John

(2011) who studied the concept and technique of lean structure to apply it to increase

the procedures fitted to the organization. Thus, it could be concluded that the third

mission group of POs giving precedence to organizational design in high level will

increase HPO.


CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

6.1 Conclusion

The results of the data analysis in Chapter 4 are summarized as follows:

6 . 1 . 1 The results of the model of public organizations as high-

performance organizations

The construction of the structural equation modeling of the management of a

Public Organization (PO) as a High-Performance Organization (HPO) derives from the in-depth

interviews with executives and subject experts representing 10 POs divided into three groups:

The first group are public organizations that have the mission of the

development and specific policy implementation of government affairs and consists of

two POs, namely, (1) The Support Arts and Crafts International Centre of Thailand

(Public Organization), and (2) the Highland Research and Development Institute

(Public Organization).

The second group are public organizations that have the mission of

technical services or an interdisciplinary mission and consists of six POs, namely, (1)

the Healthcare Accreditation Institute (Public Organization), (2) the Princess Maha

Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology Center (Public Organization), (3) the Thailand

Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (Public Organization), (4) the Synchrotron

Light Research Institute (Public Organization), (5) the Hydro and Agro Informatics

Institute (Public Organization), and (6) National Astronomical Research Institute of


The third group are public organizations that have a mission of general

public services and consists of two POs, namely, (1) The Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public

Organization), and (2) the Film Archive (Public Organization).

Waranya Jirangkul Conclusion and Recommendation / 366

The discussion of the findings can be summarized as follows.

1) The component of culture and engagement (KSI1)

All experts provided opinions that the model can be applied to the

concept of culture and engagement from the synthesis of related research for the model

test. This component is a latent causal factor for HPO. It consists of two indicators:

observable variables of organizational culture (X1) and employee engagement (X2).

2) The component of Leadership (KSI2)

All experts provided opinions that the model can be applied to

the concept of leadership from the synthesis of related research for the model test. This

component is a latent causal factor for HPO. It consists of three indicators: observable

variables of the high-performance teams of individual leaders (X3), future leaders

(X4), and middle managers embrace and translate strategy (X5).

3) The component of Change Management (ETA1)


the concept of change management from the synthesis of related research for the model

test. This component is a latent causal factor for HPO. It consists of two indicators:

observable variables of disciplined cascade (Y1) and evolutionary organizations (Y2).

4) The component of people (ETA2)


the concept of people or, more specifically, employee management from the synthesis

of related research for the model test. This component is a latent causal factor for

HPO. It consists of three indicators: observable variables of employer branding (Y3),

critical roles and key talents (Y4), and strategic human resources (Y5). 5) The component of design (ETA3)


the concept of organizational design from the synthesis of related research for the

model test. This component is a latent causal factor for HPO. It consists of four

indicators: observable variables of structure and resource allocation (Y6), few layers

and wide spans of control (Y7), accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration

(Y8), and matched role requirements (Y9).


6) The component of high-performance organization (ETA4)


the concept of high-performance organization from the synthesis of related research

for the model test. This component is latent in every high-potential PO. It consists of

six indicators: observable variables of shared information and open communication

(Y10), compelling vision, purpose and values (Y11), ongoing learning (Y12), focus on

customer results (Y13), energizing system and structure (Y14), and shared power and

high involvement (Y15).

6 . 1 . 2 The results of the examination of the constructed structural

equation modeling of the management of Public Organization (PO) as High-

Performance Organization (HPO) with the empirical data.

The analysis results of the SEM model finds that: The SEM model of PO

as HPO of the first group is fit to the construct validity or consistency with the

empirical data in high level by considering the statistical values used to check the

construct validity of model: 2 = 97.28, df = 81, p = 0.105, 2/df = 1.201, CFI = 1.00,

GFI = 0.96, AGFI= 0.91, RMSEA = 0.030, SRMR = 0.030. The SEM model of PO to

HPO of the second group is fit to the construct validity or consistency with the

empirical data in high level by considering the statistical value used to check the

construct validity of model: 2 = 82.06, df = 66, p = 0.088, 2/df = 1.243, CFI = 1.00,

GFI = 0.98, AGFI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.028, SRMR = 0.021. The SEM model of PO to

HPO of the third group is fit to the construct validity or consistency with the empirical

data in high level by considering the statistical value used to check the construct


0.98, AGFI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.023, SRMR = 0.013. This shows that the p-value of the

three mission groups is valid, and therefore to not reject the main assumption. This

reflects the test results as the value of 2 with non-statistical significance different from

zero which means to accept the measurement models of the three groups as matching the

construct validity. Thus, the three models are consistent with the results of the analysis


SRMR is lower than 0.08 (Hu and Bentler, 1999). 2/df value is less than 2.


Therefore, the SEM models of the three mission groups of POs as HPO

have construct validity and the hypothesis models fit the empirical data. The

conclusions of model analysis are as follows:

1. The SEM model of the first group of public organizations of the mission

of the development and specific policy implementation of government affairs.

The test of the ability to predict the dependent variables of first mission

group finds that all indicator variables in the measurement model are close in

importance. The most important indicators are: middle managers embrace and

translate strategy (X5) in the component of Leadership, and the second is strategic

human resource (Y5) in the component of People, followed by few layers and wide

spans of control (Y7) in the component of Design.

Change Management (FETA1) is influenced by Culture and Engagement

(FKSI1) and Leadership (FKSI2). This finding is a result of the first group of PO

giving precedence to Culture and Engagement (FKSI1) and Leadership (FKSI2) in

high level which will also increase change management in an organization.

People (FETA2) is influenced by Culture and Engagement (FKSI1) and

Leadership (FKSI2). This finding explains that the first group of PO gives precedence

to Culture and Engagement (FKSI1) and Leadership (FKSI2) in high level which will

also increase the level of employee management in an organization. Design (FETA3)

is influenced by People (FETA2). This finding explains that the first group of PO

gives precedence to People (FETA2) in high level which will also increase the level of

organization design. High-Performance Organization (FETA4) is influenced by People

(FETA2) and Design (FETA3). This finding could explain that the first group of PO

gives precedence to People (FETA2) and Design (FETA3) in high level which will

also increase HPO. However, High-Performance Organization (FETA4) is not directly

influenced by Culture and Engagement (FKSI1), Leadership (FKSI2), and Change

Management (FETA1). Moreover, the results explain the significant points as follows:

1 ) Design (FETA3) is influenced by Culture and Engagement

(FKSI1), Leadership (FKSI2) via Change Management (FETA1) and People (FETA2);

the approximate impacts are 0.52 and 0.33, respectively. This finding could explain that

the first group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (FKSI1) and


Leadership (FKSI2) in high level which will also increase organizational design

indirectly, but it does not directly affect organizational design for the first group.

2 ) High-Performance Organization (FETA4) is influenced by

Culture and Engagement (FKSI1), and Leadership (FKSI2) via People (FETA2) and

Design (FETA3). The approximate indirect impacts are 0.48 and 0.32, respectively.

This finding could explain that the first group of PO gives precedence to Culture and

Engagement (FKSI1)and Leadership (FKSI2) in high level which will also increase

HPO indirectly, but it does not directly affect HPO for the first group.

3 ) High-Performance Organization (FETA4) is influenced by

People (FETA2), via Design (FETA3). The approximate indirect impact is 0.24. This

finding could explain that the first group of PO gives precedence to People (FETA2)

in high level will also increase HPO indirectly, and will result in high HPO directly for

the first group.

All the observed variables in the SEM research model of the first group of

POs as HPO can explain the variance of Change Management (FETA1) 83%, the

variance of People (FETA2) 81%, the variance of Design (FETA3) 80%, and the

variance of High-Performance Organization (FETA4) 89%.

2. The SEM model of the second group of public organizations of

technical services or an interdisciplinary mission.

The test of the ability to predict the dependent variables of the

second group finds that all the indicator variables in the measurement model are close

in importance. The most important indicator is the energizing system and structure

(Y14), and the second and third in weight are shared information and open

communication (Y10) and culture (X1), respectively. Change Management (SETA1)

is influenced by Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) and Leadership (SKSI2). This

finding could explain that the second group of PO gives precedence to Culture and

Engagement (SKSI1) and Leadership (SKSI2) in high level which will also increase

change management in an organization.

People (SETA2) is influenced by Culture and Engagement

(SKSI1) and Change Management (SETA1). This finding could explain that the

second group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) and

Change Management (SETA1) in high level which will also increase employee


management in an organization. However, People (SETA2) is not directly influenced

by Leadership (SKSI2).

Design (SETA3) is influenced by People (SETA2). This

finding could explain that the second group of PO giving precedence to People

(SETA2) in high level will also increase organizational design.

High-Performance Organization (SETA4) is influenced by

Leadership (SKSI2), People (SETA2) and Design (SETA3). This finding could

explain that the second group of PO gives precedence to Leadership (SKSI2), People

(SETA2) and Design (SETA3) in high level which will also increase HPO. However,

High-Performance Organization (SETA4) is not directly influenced by Culture and

Engagement (SKSI1) and Change Management (SETA1).

Moreover, the results could explain the significant points of the indirect

effects as follows:

1 ) People (SETA2) is influenced by Culture and Engagement

(SKSI1) and Leadership (SKSI2) via Change Management (SETA1). The approximate

indirect impacts are 0.23 and 0.36, respectively. This finding could explain that the

second group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) and

Leadership (SKSI2) in high level which will also indirectly increase indicators of

People (SETA2).

2 ) Design (SETA3) is influenced by Culture and Engagement

(SKSI1) via People (SETA2) with the approximate indirect impact of 0.48. Design

(SETA3) is influenced by Leadership (SKSI2) via Change Management (SETA1) and

People (SETA2) with the approximate indirect impact of 0.41. Design (SETA3) is

influenced by Change Management (SETA1) via People (SETA2) with the

approximate indirect impact of 0.57. This finding could explain that the second group

of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (SKSI1), Leadership (SKSI2) and

Change Management (SETA1) in high level which will also indirectly increase the

level of organizational design.

3 ) High-Performance Organization (SETA4) is influenced by

Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) via Change Management (SETA1), People (SETA2)

and Design (SETA3). The approximate indirect impact is 0.32. This finding could


explain that the second group of PO giving precedence to Culture and Engagement

(SKSI1) in high level will also indirectly increase the level of HPO.


indirectly by Change Management (SETA1) and People (SETA2) via Design

(SETA3). The approximate indirect impacts are 0.61 and 0.31, respectively. This

finding could explain that the second group of PO gives precedence to Change

Management (SETA1) and People (SETA2) in high level which will also indirectly

increase HPO.

All the observed variables in the SEM research model of the second group

of POs as HPO can explain the variance of Change Management (SETA1) 86%, the

variance of People (SETA2) 87%, the variance of Design (SETA3) 90%, and the

variance of High-Performance Organization (SETA4) 93%. 3. The SEM model of the third group of public organizations of the general

public services.

The test of the ability to predict the dependent variables of the third

mission group finds that all the indicator variables in the measurement model are close

in importance. The most important indicator is the energizing system and structure

(Y14), and the second and third are accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration

(Y8), and the middle managers embrace and translate strategy (X5), respectively.

Change Management (TETA1) is influenced by Culture and Engagement (TKSI1) and

Leadership (TKSI2). This finding could explain that the third group of PO gives

precedence to Culture and Engagement (TKSI1) and Leadership (TKSI2) in high level

which will also increase change management in the organization.

People (TETA2) is influenced by Culture and Engagement (TKSI1),

Leadership (TKSI2) and Change Management (TETA1). This finding could explain

that the third group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (TKSI1),

Leadership (TKSI2) and Change Management (TETA1) in high level which will also

increase employee management in the organization.

Design (TETA3) is influenced by People (TETA2). This finding could

explain that the third group of PO giving precedence to People (TETA2) in high level

will also increase organizational design.


High-Performance Organization (TETA4) is influenced by People

(TETA2) and Design (TETA3). This finding could explain that the third group of PO

gives precedence to People (TETA2) and Design (TETA3) in high level which will

also increase HPO. However, High-Performance Organization (TETA4) is not directly

influenced by Culture and Engagement (TKSI1), Leadership (TKSI2) and Change

Management (TETA1).

Moreover, the results could explain the significant points of the indirect

effects as follows:

1 ) People (TETA2) is indirectly influenced by Culture and

Engagement (TKSI1) and Leadership (TKSI2) via Change Management (TETA1).

The approximate impacts are 0.11 and 0.33, respectively. This finding could explain

that the third group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (TKSI1) and

Leadership (TKSI2) in high level which will also indirectly increase People (TETA2).

2 ) Design (TETA3) is indirectly influenced by Culture and

Engagement (TKSI1) via People (TETA2) with the approximate indirect impact of

0.29. Design (TETA3) is influenced by Leadership (TKSI2) via Change Management

(TETA1) and People (TETA2) with the approximate indirect impact of 0.55. Design

(TETA3) is influenced by Change Management (TETA1) via People (TETA2) with

the approximate indirect impact of 0.43. This finding could explain that the third

group of PO gives precedence to Culture and Engagement (TKSI1), Leadership

(TKSI2) and Change Management (TETA1) in high level which will also indirectly

increase organizational design.

3 ) High-Performance Organization (TETA4) is indirectly

influenced by Culture and Engagement (TKSI1)and Leadership (TKSI2) via Change

Management (TETA1), People (TETA2) and Design (TETA3). The approximate

indirect impacts are 0.26 and 0.47, respectively. This finding could explain that the

third mission group of PO giving precedence to Culture and Engagement (TKSI1) and

Leadership (TKSI2) in high level will also indirectly increase HPO.

4 ) High-Performance Organization (TETA4) is influenced by

Change Management (TETA1) and People (TETA2) via Design (TETA3). The

approximate indirect impacts are 0.41 and 0.30, respectively. This finding could


explain that the third group of PO gives precedence to Change Management (TETA1)

and People (TETA2) in high level which will also indirectly increase HPO.

All the observed variables in the SEM research model of the third group

of POs as HPO can explain the variance of Change Management (TETA1) 81%, the

variance of People (TETA2) 83%, the variance of Design (TETA3) 67%, and the

variance of High-Performance Organization (TETA4) 74%.

6 . 1 . 3 Conclusions of the practical approach of the models of the

management of Public Organization (PO) as High-Performance Organization

(HPO).

The practical approach of the three models of POs as HPO could be

described as follows:

1. The practical approach of the HPO model of the first

group of public organizations with the mission of the development and specific

policy implementation of government affairs.

The first group of POs could implement the indicators of

success prioritized by the first three factors in sequence:

(1) The first in factor weight priority is the indicator

of middle managers embrace and translate strategy (X5). The practical approach of the

model of the first mission group could be to develop the POs success based on the

performance of how the heads of departments or divisions link the work in two ways;

from the high level to the practical staff and from staff to the senior management.

(2) The second in priority weight is the indicator of

strategic human resources (Y5). The practical approach of the model of first group

could be to develop the POs success based on the development of human resources

strategy in relation to organizational strategy. Indicators of organizational success

should be measured by the success of proper human resources management.

(3) The third in priority weight is the indicator of

few layers and wide spans of control (Y7). The practical approach of the model of first

group could be to develop the POs success based on the benefits of a horizontal

organizational structure that makes the lines of hierarchy short, so that the workflow is

streamlined to suit the size of the public organization which is consistent with each


mission. This necessitates cross-functional operations leading to effective

performance.

Moreover, other POs in the same group mission could apply

the model to implement improvements in the operation and organizational plan

prioritized by the correlation coefficient weight of the indicators. It depends on the

policy of the executives who want to emphasize the importance and situation of the

organization, and the budget limitations. Organizations can choose to introduce

adjustments to their organization prioritized according to the table in Chapter 4.

The practical approach of the causal model of the first mission

group of POs as HPO has shown the significant points as follows:

1) The component of Culture and Engagement (FKSI1)


Culture and Engagement has direct effects to Change Management and People and has

an indirect effect to High-Performance Organization via People. The practical approach

presents the focus on culture and engagement in an organization in high level as a way

to lead to better organizational change management, and better employee management.

Therefore, the first mission group of POs should emphasize culture and engagement that

requires the development of the practitioner in order to achieve HPO.

2) The component of Leadership (FKSI2)


Leadership (FKSI2) has a direct effect on Change Management (FETA1), and it has an

indirect effect to High-Performance Organization (FETA4) via People (FETA2). The

practical approach presents the idea that giving precedence to leadership by high-

performance teams of individual leaders, developing future leaders, and having middle

managers who embrace and translate strategy will create suitable change management.

Therefore, the first mission group of POs can promote leadership in the organization to

drive organizational change to accommodate volatile environments.

Moreover, the focus on leadership in an

organization in high level will lead to better employee management. That is, the first


of individual leaders, developing future leaders, and having middle managers who

embrace and translate strategy to create a high quality of employee management. So,


the first mission group of POs can promote leadership in the organization to drive

employee management, resulting in high organizational performance by promoting the

importance of the worker to have the opportunity to progress in their career

advancement, by job rotation, and by proper attention to the management of talented

people to bring success of the organization based on its strategic priorities.

3) The component of Change Management (FETA1)


the Change Management (FETA1) is influenced by Culture and Engagement (FKSI1)

and Leadership (FKSI2). The practical approach shows that the first mission group of

POs can use change management in the organization to drive operations responding to

a rapidly changing environment in high level and give precedence to organizational

culture, employee engagement and leadership in high level in order to increase the

achievement of change management. However, the element of the Change

Management (FETA1) does not act in the opposite direction because the first group

does not emphasize change management in the plan very clearly. There is only one

caution in regular work to evaluate changes in circumstances, such as with SWOT

analysis to determine strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, to consider that

possible change in operations do not overlap with the mission of the ministerial

agencies performing similar tasks.

4) The component of People (FETA2)

For the first mission group of POs, People

(FETA2) is also influenced by Culture and Engagement (FKSI1) and Leadership

(FKSI2). The practical approach could be presented that organizations in the first

group that desire to develop their people or employee management to be an excellent

agency give precedence initially to the organizational culture and employee

engagement. This will result in a high quality of employee management.

Moreover, People (FETA2) is also influenced by

Leadership (FKSI2). The practical approach could be presented that organizations in

the first group that desire to develop their people or employee management in order to

be an excellent agency need to give precedence initially to leadership by their high-

performance teams of individual leaders, by preparing future leaders, and have middle


managers who embrace and translate strategy. This will result in a high quality of

employee management.

However, in the model, the element of

change management does not affect employee management. In practice, change

management should not be used as a causal factor for the improvement of the workers.

Therefore, high level employee management requires the development of

organizational culture, employee engagement and leadership in the organization.

5) The component of Design (FETA3)


Design (FETA3) has a direct effect on High-Performance Organization (FETA4).

Design (FETA3) is also influenced by People (FETA2). The practical approach

presents the idea that organizations in the first mission group give precedence to

organizational design by their efficient structure and resource allocation and their lean

structure which can help the organization to improve operations and to achieve

strategic goals. They give precedence initially to people or employee management by

their employer branding, giving attention to critical roles and key talents, and by using

strategic human resources. This will result in a high quality of organizational design,

which is part of the HPO model.

6) The component of High-Performance

Organization (FETA4)


High-Performance Organization (FETA4) is influenced by People (FETA2) and

Design (FETA3). The practical approach presents the idea that organizations in the

first group that desire to develop as HPO or to be an excellent agency give precedence

initially to people or employee management by their employer branding, attention to

critical roles and key talents, and the use of strategic human resources in high level.

This will create the right conditions for an HPO by having shared information and

open communication, by leadership with a compelling vision, purpose and values, by

supporting ongoing learning, by a focus on customer results, having an energizing

system and structure, and by operating with shared power and high involvement.

Similarly, the first mission group that desires to develop as HPO or to be an excellent

agency will give precedence initially to organizational design, by an efficient structure


and resource allocation, by having few layers and wide spans of control, by clear

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration, and by employees matched to role

requirements in high level, which will result in an HPO or to be an excellent agency.

2. The practical approach of the causal model of the second

group of public organizations with a mission of technical services or an

interdisciplinary mission.

The second group of POs could implement the indicators of

success prioritized by the first three factors in sequence.

(1) The first in factor weight priority is the

indicator of energizing system and structure (Y14) in the component of High-

Performance Organization. The practical approach of the model of second group could

be to develop of the POs success based on the systematic monitoring of operations to


system to support the organization’s success, by the monitoring of operations which

are problems and have obstacles in order to develop the proper solutions, by

determining accountability in performance management systems to achieve

organizational success, and by a focus on making the reward system depend on the

success of the organization, work department and staff.

(2) The second in factor weight priority are the two

equal-value indicators of shared information and open communication (Y10) in the

component of HPO, and culture in the component of Culture and Engagement. The

practical approach of the model of second group could be to develop the POs success

based on the focus on the operators having convenient access to news and information

for effective work, the employees having a wide range of communications and

understanding to make better decisions, having open communication, employees

having permission for trial and error for learning, having high-performing teams with

the authority to jointly accomplish the organization’s mission, and the line managers

performing a role in encouraging employees to develop themselves to improve and

drive good organization performances. Moreover, the practical approach of the model

of second group could be to develop the POs success based on organizational culture

by determining how the organizational culture can be a catalyst for strategic goals, by

having the organizational management and monitoring systems to promote


organizational success, and by the executives conveying the direction of the

organization to adjust the culture of work in accordance with the organizational

strategy.

(3) The third in factor weight are five equal-value

indicators leading to the practical approach of the model of second group as follows:

a) The practical approach of the model of second

group is to develop the POs success based on the indicator of high-performance teams

of individual leaders by focusing on leadership that can be driven by organizational

collaboration for strong performance and the ability to work smoothly with colleagues

outside the organization.

b) The practical approach of the model of second

group is to develop the POs success based on strategic human resources by having a

focus on the human resources strategy which aims to develop people consistent with

organizational strategies and provides advice and analysis to the line managers or

administrators.

c) The practical approach of the model of second

group is to develop the POs success based on having clear accountabilities, decision

rights, and collaboration by a focus on the determination of accountability and clear

roles in the operation in line with the authoritative rules, by the employees having the

permission and opportunity to make decisions and are involved in drafting their work

plans to determine their accountability and decision making, and focusing on

collaborative work and with accountability.

d) The practical approach of the model of second

group is to develop the POs success based on ongoing learning by encouraging


standard of continuous learning from best practices in the operation of the organization

and transferring of knowledge in the organization, and giving support for learning

resources.

e) The practical approach of the model of second

group is to develop the POs success based on a focus on customer results by ensuring

that all employees in the organization are focused on maintaining a high standard in

quality and service to facilitate the customers or service recipients and to meet their


expectations. In addition, executives or line managers perform an active role in

encouraging employees to become leaders and to develop their skills which can lead to

promotion within the organization.

Moreover, the practical approach from items a-e could be

implemented together or designed as a development indicator as appropriate for each

context. Other POs in the same mission group could apply the model to implement

improvements in the operation by these indicators.

The practical approach of the causal model of the second

mission group of POs as HPO has shown the significant points as follows:

1. The component of Culture and Engagement (SKSI1)

For the second mission group of POs, the element

of Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) has direct effects on Change Management

(SETA1) and People (SETA2), which is the same as the first group. The practical

approach is to focus on culture and engagement in the organization in high level which

will lead to better organizational change management and better employee

management, which in turn leads to being an HPO. Therefore, the second group

should emphasize the organizational culture and employee engagement that requires

the development of the practitioner to create one condition for an HPO or an excellent

agency.

2. The component of Leadership (SKSI2)


of Leadership (SKSI2) has a direct effect on Change Management (SETA1) and High-

Performance Organization (SETA4), and it has an indirect effect on People (SETA2)

via Change Management (SETA1). The practical approach presents the idea that a

focus on leadership; namely, having teams of leaders, developing future leaders, and

middle managers who embrace and translate strategy in the organization in high level

will lead directly to better organizational change management and HPO. Therefore,

the second mission group could give precedence to leadership in order to create HPO

directly, and to support change management in the organization to accommodate a

volatile environment.


3. The component of Change Management (SETA1)

Change management is influenced by

organizational culture, employee engagement and leadership. The practical approach

for the second mission group of POs, similar to the first group, is to focus on change

management in the organization which can drive operations supporting a rapidly

changing environment in high level, initially giving precedence to culture, engagement

and leadership in high level in order to increase the achievement of change

management.

4. The component of People (SETA2)

For the second mission group of POs, People

(SETA2) is also influenced by Culture and Engagement (SKSI1) and Leadership

(SKSI2). The practical approach could be presented that organizations in the second

group that desire to develop the people or employee management to be an excellent

agency need to give precedence initially to the organizational culture and employee

engagement. This will in turn lead to a high quality of employee management.

Moreover, People (SETA2) is also influenced by

Leadership (SKSI2). The practical approach could be presented that the second group

desires to develop the people or employee management to the excellent agency have to

give precedence initially to leadership by having high-performance teams of individual

leaders, developing future leaders, and having middle managers who embrace and

translate strategy. This will produce a high quality of employee management.

5. The component of Design (SETA3)


of Design (SETA3) has a direct effect on High-Performance Organization (SETA4).

Design (SETA3) is also influenced by People (SETA2). The practical approach

presents the idea that the second mission group could give precedence to

organizational design by efficient structure and resource allocation and designing a

lean structure which can help the organization to improve operations and to achieve

strategic goals. The organization needs to give precedence initially to people or

employee management by their employer branding, giving attention to critical roles

and key talents, and using strategic human resources. This will produce a high quality

of organizational design, which is part of the HPO model.


6. The component of High-Performance

Organization (SETA4)


of High-Performance Organization (SETA4) is influenced by People (SETA2) and

Design (SETA3). The practical approach presents the idea that organizations in the

second group that desire to develop the HPO or to become an excellent agency need to

give precedence initially to people or employee management by their employer

branding, by the alignment of critical roles and key talents, and the strategic use of

human resources in high level. This will cause HPO by having shared information and

open communication, by having a compelling vision, purpose and values, by the

support for ongoing learning, by a focus on customer results, by having an energizing

system and structure, and by operating with shared power and high involvement.

Similarly, the organizations in second group that desire to develop to be an HPO or an

excellent agency need to give precedence initially to organizational design, by

efficient structure and resource allocation, by operating with few layers and wide

spans of control, by having clear accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration,

and by employees matched to role requirements in high level, which will produce an

HPO or an excellent agency.

3. The practical approach of the HPO model of the third

group of public organizations with a mission of the general public services.

The third group of POs could implement the indicators of

success prioritized by the first three factors in sequence.

(1) The first indicator in priority is the energizing

system and structure (Y14) in the component of HPO. The practical approach of the

model of the third group is to develop the POs success based on the systematic


establishment law and operating system to support the organization’s success, and the


solutions. Organizational success will also be achieved from the determination of

accountability in performance management systems, and a focus on the reward system

depending on the success of the organization, work department and staff.


(2) The second in priority is the indicator of the

accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration (Y8) in the component of design.

The practical approach of the model of third group is to develop the POs success based

on clear accountabilities, decision rights, and collaboration by focusing on the


authoritative rules, by employees having the permission and opportunity to make

decisions and involving them in drafting their work plans to determine their

accountability and decision making, and by collaborative work with accountability. (3) The third in priority is the indicator of middle

managers embrace and translate strategy (X5) in the component of the leadership. The

practical approach of the model of third group is to develop the POs success based on

the performance of the heads of each department or division which links the work in

two ways; from the high level to the practical staff and from staff to the senior

management.

Moreover, other POs in the same mission group could apply

the model to implement improving the operation and organizational plan prioritized by

the maximum correlation coefficient weights of these indicators. It depends on the

policy of the executives who want to emphasize the importance and the situation of the

organization, and the budget limitations. Organizations can rationally introduce

adjustments to their operations prioritized according to the table in Chapter 4.

The practical approach of the causal model of the third mission

group of POs as HPO has shown the significant points as follows:

1. The component of Culture and Engagement (TKSI1)

For the third mission group of POs, the element of

Culture and Engagement has direct effects on Change Management and People and

has an indirect effect on High-Performance Organization via People. The practical

approach presents the idea that a focus on organizational culture and employee

engagement in an organization in high level will lead to better organizational change

management, and better employee management. Therefore, the third mission group of

POs should emphasize culture and engagement that requires the development of the

practitioner which will create conditions for achieving HPO, which is similar to the

first and second mission groups.


2. The component of Leadership (TKSI2)


Leadership (TKSI2) has a direct effect on Change Management (TETA1), and it has

an indirect effect on High-Performance Organization (TETA4) via People (TETA2).

The practical approach presents the idea that the third mission group could give

precedence to leadership by having high-performance teams of individual leaders,

developing future leaders, and by having middle managers who embrace and translate

strategy to create suitable change management. Therefore, the third mission group of

POs can promote leadership in the organization to drive organizational change in order

to accommodate volatile environments.

Moreover, the focus on leadership in an

organization in high level will lead to better employee management. That is, the third

mission group will have a high quality of employee management because of giving

precedence to their leadership by their high-performance teams of individual leaders,

their future leaders, and their middle managers who embrace and translate strategy.

So, the third mission group of POs can promote leadership in the organization to drive

employee management, resulting in high organizational performance by promoting the

importance of the worker to have the opportunity to progress in their career

advancement, job rotation, and promoting the management of talented people to the

success of the organization based on the strategic priorities of the organization.

3. The component of Change Management (TETA1)

Change Management is influenced by

organizational culture, employee engagement and leadership. The practical approach

for the third mission group of POs is to focus on change management in their

organization which can drive operations supporting a rapidly changing environment in

high level. HPOs will give precedence initially to culture, engagement and leadership

in high level in order to increase the achievement of change management, which is

similar for the first and second mission groups.

4. The component of People (TETA2)

For the third mission group of POs, People

(TETA2) is also influenced by Culture and Engagement (TKSI1) and Leadership

(TKSI2). The practical approach presents the idea that organizations in the third


mission group that desire to develop their people or employee management to be an

excellent agency need to give precedence initially to the organizational culture and

employee engagement. This will result in a high quality of employee management.

Moreover, People (TETA2) is also influenced by

Leadership (TKSI2). The practical approach presents the idea that organizations in the

third mission group desiring to develop their people or employee management to be an

excellent agency need to give precedence initially to leadership by their high-

performance teams of individual leaders, by developing future leaders, and by having

middle managers who embrace and translate strategy. This will achieve a high quality

of employee management.

5. The component of Design (TETA3)

For the third mission group of POs, similar to the

first and second groups, the element of Design (TETA3) has a direct effect on High-

Performance Organization (TETA4). Design (TETA3) is also influenced by People

(TETA2). The practical approach presents the idea that the third mission group could

give precedence to organizational design by operating with efficient structure and

resource allocation and organizing with a lean structure which can help the

organization to improve operations and to achieve strategic goals. Organizations also

need to give precedence initially to people or employee management by their

employer branding, by attention to critical roles and key talents, and by strategic use of

human resources. This will result in a high quality of organizational design, which is

part of the HPO model.

6. The component of High-Performance

Organization (TETA4)


High-Performance Organization (TETA4) is influenced by People (TETA2) and

Design (TETA3). The practical approach presents the idea that organizations in the

third mission group that desire to develop to be an HPO or an excellent agency need to

give precedence initially to people or employee management by their employer

branding, the proper attention to critical roles and key talents, and their strategic use of

human resources in high level. In addition, HPOs are characterized by their shared

information and open communication, by their compelling vision, purpose and values,


by support for ongoing learning, by their focus on customer results, by their energizing

system and structure, and by employees operating with shared power and high

involvement. Similarly, organizations in the third group that desire to develop as an

HPO or an excellent agency need to give precedence initially to organizational design,

by efficient structure and resource allocation, by operating with few layers and wide

spans of control, by employees having clear accountabilities, decision rights, and

collaboration, and with employees matched to role requirements in high level; all of

this will result in an organization that is an HPO or an excellent agency.

6.2 Recommendations

According to the results, the researcher has found interesting issues to

offer as implications of the study and recommendations as follows.

Implications of the study

The results show that the SEM model of the three mission groups can be

applied as follows.

1) The SEM model of the three mission groups of HPO can be applied by

the mechanism of the six key causal elements, namely, Culture and Engagement,

Leadership, Change Management, People, Design, and High-Performance

Organization. The way the six elements are appropriately applied is based on the direct

and indirect influences of the models in each mission group.

2) Other POs in each mission group, those who have been in operation for

a shorter or long time than organizations selected for this study, or POs having

problems in practice, could apply the practical approach of their mission groups to

rationally develop their appropriate and necessary performance improvement plans.

For example, the first mission group could focus on the development of their

employees and the organizational design because this is an element that directly

influences HPO for the first group, which can be achieved immediately or may require

the leadership component that drives it to be a successful organization. The second

group is the only group in which leadership is directly influencing organizational

performance. So, the application for the second group should be to implement


leadership as the key to driving organizational success by emphasizing the high-

performance teams of skillful leaders who work in organizational collaboration with

their colleagues and by emphasizing the role of the heads of each division. Likewise,

organizations in the third mission group of POs should prioritize leadership requiring a

high quality of employees. This group should implement a leadership development

plan alongside the development of people to achieve effective work.

3) The three mission groups of POs have common strengths of

organizational culture and employee engagement driving employees to be an HPO.

This leads to the development of the indicators of organizational success that come

from organizational culture that accompanies organizational commitment by the co-

existent elements, and the culture and commitment from both leaders and staff is a tool

to develop or improve the quality of workers.

4) The component of People of the three mission groups of POs is the

mediator to other components which cause an indirect effect of the model. Therefore,

the application of this research could create a work plan that takes into account worker

management as a key factor, by considering the proper career advancement for

employees, alignment of the critical roles and key talents, and the strategic use of

human resources.

5) The three mission groups of POs have causal effects between the

components of People, Design and HPO in high statistically significant values. This

can be applied to each aspect of the development of the components according to the

model tested and detailed in Chapter 4. The focus on the workers will directly affect

HPO. The emphasis in this area can also be developed with good organizational design

to achieve HPO as shown in the figure.


Figure 6.1 The causal effects between the components of People, Design and HPO

In an overview of the SEM model of three mission groups of POs as HPO,

administrators and strategic stakeholders of each public organization of the mission

groups can apply the model to their strategic plan and indicators for success in annual

public organization evaluations which are described in detail in Chapter 4. This plan

framework may be based on the mechanism of the six components the HPO model of

PO. For example, Ban Phaeo Hospital (Public Organization) can develop practitioners

by creating specialized medical professionals, and the science POs can develop a

research personnel management plan and research tools to support the operation of the

staff to develop their full potential research. Moreover, the three mission groups of

POs can create rational development plans by following the indicators in priority order

based on the indicator weight values. Implementation depends on the policy of the

executives who want to emphasize the importance and the situation of the organization

and the budget limitations. Organizations can choose to develop their respective areas.

In addition, POs who are in the research sample of the three groups have

been determined to be HPO and can be applied as exemplars for improving the work

process of other organizations in their respective mission group. Implementation of

best practice will be more efficient by applying the indicators as shown in the impact

weight table in Chapter 4.

People

High-Performance

Organization

Design


Recommendations for future research and Practical Applications

1) Research should be done by building an HPO model from other

conceptual frameworks. The latent variables can be narrowed to not more than 3-6

variables, selected by considering the necessity and appropriateness of the situation to

be developed, together with the appropriate number in the sample to be analyzed in

order to create a narrower and deeper frame; for example, the composition of people,

organizational design and HPO have an outstanding causal relationship based on the

weight of elements and may lead to an interesting study in an extension of the HPO

model. This should be done by researchers of public organizations who can use the

concept of modeling appropriately for specific operations.

2) Future studies should be carried out to determine the minimum

component weight of each task group from the measurement model check according to

Chapter 4, in order to discover an improvement approach affecting higher performance

organizations.

3) Future studies should extend this model to various dimensions of each

factor in the literature review; for example, the leadership factor could be studied in

terms of the traits of transformational leadership or strategic leadership leading to

HPOs, or change management could be studied using a specific approach. The

exploratory factor analysis (EFA) that was used determined the underlying structure of

the items for the first time using this tested instrument, allowing each indicator to be

selected and arranged to each component statistically. This approach should be applied

to specific organizational policy and other missions using appropriate methods.

4) In the current study, if the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in the

beginning stage of the model yielded solid statistical results regarding the goodness of

the properties of each dimension, this framework should test the hypothesized

structure of HPOs with the six causal factors by a second-order (or higher order)

modeling strategy within the framework of SEM. More benefits are associated with

second-order modeling than CFA in properly constructing first order factors that are

well established (Chen et al., 2005). This leads to an extended methodology for

studying the HPO model allowing researchers to build a statistically based structure

that reflects a conceptualized framework that is hierarchical in nature.


5) The causal effects of this study have similar points in the composition

of Culture and Engagement (KSI1) that have direct influence on the People (ETA2)

which leads to HPO. The variables associated with these three components should be

studied to deepen and to summarize the excellent management model of the three

mission groups of POs as a whole by the relationship of organizational culture,

employee management and HPO.

6) According to the significant effects in this study, the SEM model

reveals the components of people or employee management as concurrent viewpoints

and relevant mediator variables that connect to HPOs. Future studies should

investigate profound human resource management practices for effective

organizational affairs using a causal effect of multiple dimensions.

7) Future studies should investigate policy processes related to high-

potential agencies that implement policy at the national level. This study reveals an

HPO model for public organizations, the transformed government units that

accomplish effective national policy practices and recommends acquiring cooperation

from the implementing active agencies to achieve efficient practical policies.

Waranya Jirangkul Bibliography / 390

BIBLIOGRAPHY

THAI

Wanichbancha, K. (2002). Statistical Analysis: Statistics for Administration and

Research. Bangkok, Thailand: Faculty of Commerce and Accountancy,

Chulalongkorn University.

Wanichbancha, K. (2014). The Analysis of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)

by AMOS. Bangkok, Thailand: Samlada Limited Partnership.

Potisida, C. (2011). Science and Art of Qualitative Research. Bangkok, Thailand:

Ammarin Printing.

Lorsuwanrat, T. (2006). Factors Determining the Modern Government Organization

Model. NIDA Development Journal, Vol.46 No.1: 21-55.

Lorsuwanrat, T. (2008). High-Performance Organization with Social Responsibility.

Journal of Public and Private Management, Vol15 No.2 :11-36.

Siriprakob, P. (2015). 3 Paradigms of Public Administration: Concept, Theory and

Implementation. Bangkok, Thailand: Faculty of Education,

Chulalongkorn University.

Woratebputtipong, T. (1997). Formulating and Analyzing Public Policy. Bangkok,

Thailand: Sematam.

Wiratchai, N. (1999). Lisrel Model for Research. Bangkok, Thailand: Faculty of

Education, Chulalongkorn University.

Palakun, P. (1987). Legal Entity under French Law. Administrative Law Journal.

(August), 310-311.

Thammasat University Research and Consultancy Institute. (2004). Evaluation of

Public Organizations and Governmental Agencies. Bangkok,

Thailand.

Rangsiyokrit, S. (1997). Government Reform: Concepts and Strategies. Bangkok,

Thailand: Office of the Public-Sector Development Commission.


Boonyarattapan, S. (2013). Research Methodology for Public Administration.

Bangkok, Thailand: Sematam.

Aungkuchod, S., Vichitwanna, S., & Pinyopanuwat, R. (2011). Statistical analysis

for the social and behavioral sciences research technique using Lisrel

(3rd. ed.). Bangkok, Thailand: Jareonmankong Printing.

Nitikripot, S. (1992). Thai Universities in the Form of Public Organizations: The

Case Study of Suranaree University of Technology. Bangkok,

Thailand: Faculty of Law, Thammasat University.

Nitikripot, S. (1999). Public Organization: Concept, Form and Method of

Administration. Bangkok, Thailand: Office of the Public-Sector

Development Commission.

Nitikripot, S. (2000). Possibilities and Guidelines for Enacting a Public

Organization Law. Bangkok, Thailand: The Office of the Board of the

Reform of Government Bureaucracy.

Chadcham, S. (1995). The Model. n.p.

Secretariat of the House of Representative. (2015). The special agenda reform 7 to

reform the public organization. Retrieved from

https://www.parliament.go.th/ewtadmin/ewt/parliament_parcy/download/p

arcy/010.pdf

The Office of the Board of the Reform of Government Bureaucracy. (2001). The

Reform of Foreign Country Bureaucracy. Bangkok, Thailand: Office

of the Public-Sector Development Commission.

Jaikaew, A. (2008). Research Methodology in Public Administration, Songkhla,

Thailand: Max Media Hat Yai.

Ampawn, T. (2013). Organization Theories Structure and Design. Bangkok,

Thailand: Thammasat University.

Boonprasert, U. (2003). School Based Management. Bangkok, Thailand: Faculty of

Education, Chulalongkorn University.

Jamornman, U. (1998). “What is model?” Wichakan Journal, Vol. 1 No. 2, 22-26.

Sobchokchai, O. (2004). Independent State Administration (Crown Entities) in

New Zealand. Report of the Study on the Bureaucracy Reform of New


Zealand Under the bureaucratic Reform Scheme Sponsored by the

Government of New Zealand.

ENGLISH

American Management Association. (2007). How to build a high-performance

organization: A global study of current trends and future

possibilities 2007-2017. New York, NY: American Management

Association. Retrieved from

http://www.amajapan.co.jp/j/pdf/HRI_HIGH-PERFORMANCE_

Organization.pdf

Adams, K. A. (2000). The effects of subordinate and peer feedback on

subsequent self -ratings of leadership behaviors: A structural

equation modeling approach. University of Houston, ProQuest

Dissertations Publishing, 2000. 3032347.

Alavi, S. (2003). Leaning the right way, Manufacturing Engineer, Vol. 82 No. 3,

32-35.

Bamber, L. & Dale, B.G. (2000), Lean production: a study of application in a

traditional manufacturing environment, Production Planning &

Control, Vol. 11 No. 3, 291-298.

Banerjee, S. & Kamener, L. (2009). Public sector driving cultural change. Boston

Consulting Group. Retrieved from

https://www.bcgperspectives.com/content/articles/public_sector_engage

ment_culture_driving_cultural_change/Barratt‐Pugh, L., Bahn, S., &

Gakere, E. (2013). Managers as change agents: Implications for human

resource managers engaging with culture change, Journal of

Organizational Change Management, Vol. 26 Issue: 4, 748-764.

Retrieved from https://doi-org.ejournal.mahidol.ac.th/10.1108/JOCM-

Feb-2011-0014

Barker, R. C. (1994), The design of lean manufacturing systems using time-based

analysis, International Journal of Operations & Production

Management, Vol. 14 No. 11, 86-96.


Bhalla, V., Caye, J. M., Dyer, A., Dymond, L., Morieux, Y. & Orlander, P. 2011.

High performing organizations - The secrets of their success.

Massachusetts, MA: The Boston Consulting Group. Retrieved from

https://www.bcg.com/publications/2011/high-performance-

organizations-secrets-of-success.aspx

Blanchard, K. (2010). Leading at a higher level, revised and expanded edition:

Blanchard on leadership and creating high performing organizations

(2nd. ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Blanchard Management Corporation.

Blau, P. M., & Scott, W. R. (1962). Formal Organizations: A Comparative

Approach. San Francisco, CA: Chandler.

Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: John

Wiley & Son, Inc.

Bresnick, D. (1982). Public Organizations and Policy: An Experiential Approach

to Public Policy and its Execution. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

Brown, D., Bourke, J., Mallon, D., Smissen, S., Wakefield, N., Wharton, N., &

Wong J. (2015). Culture and engagement: The naked organization.

Global human capital trends 2015: Leading in the new world of work.

New York, NY: Deloitte University Press. Retrieved from

https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/focus/human-capital-

trends/2015/employee-engagement-culture-human-capital-trends-

2015.html?id=gx:2el:3dc:dup1132:eng:cons:hct15

Buytendijk, F. (2006). The Five Keys To Building A High-Performance

Organization. Business Performance Management, Feb 1.

Caver, J. (1997). Boards that Make a Difference, A New Design for Leadership

in Nonprofit and Public Organization. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass

Publisher.

Cree, T. (2000). Employee intentions to participate in change: The influence of

organizational variables, employee beliefs and attitudes. University of

Guelph (Canada), ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2000. NQ47388.

Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and

Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. New Jersey, NJ:

Merrill.


Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among

the five approaches. (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cronbach, L. J. (1990). Essentials of Psychology Testing. New York, NY: Harper

Collins Publishers Inc.

Davison, B. (2003). Management span of control: how wide is too wide? Journal of

Business Strategy, 24(4), 22-29.

David, B., Melian, V., Solow, M., Chheng, S. & Parker, K. (2015). Culture and

engagement: The naked organization. Global Human Capital Trends

2015: Leading in the New World of Work. Deloitte University Press.

Denhardt, R. B. & Grubbs, J. W. (2003). PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: AN

ACTION ORIENTATION. 6th ed. USA: Wadsworth, Thomson

Learning Publications.

Diamantopoulos, A. & Siguaw, J. A. (2000). Introducing LISREL. London, UK:

Sage Publications, Inc.

Ford, J. D., Ford, L. W. (2012). The Leadership of Organization Change: A View

from Recent Empirical Evidence, in Abraham B. (Rami) Shani, William

A. Pasmore, Richard W. Woodman (ed.) Research in Organizational

Change and Development (Research in Organizational Change and

Development, Volume 20) Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 1 - 36.

Georgalis, J., Samaratunge, R. & Kimberley, N. (2015). Change process

characteristics and resistance to organizational change: The role of

employee perceptions of justice. Australian Journal of Management,

Vol. 40(1) 89–113. DOI: 10.1177/0312896214526212.

Ghatge, B., Chakrabarti, D., & Shinde, S. (2015). Building a High-performance

Organization: Anna Bhau Ajara Shetkari Cooperative Spinning Mill.

South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases, Vol. 4, 1:

87-99.

Gibson, J. L., Ivancevich, J.M., & Donnelly, J. H. 1997. Organization Behavior

Structure Process. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Groves, K. S. (2016). Testing a Moderated Mediation Model of Transformational

Leadership, Values, and Organization Change. Journal of Leadership &

Organizational Studies, First Published 10 Aug 2016.


Hair, J. F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate

Data Analysis (5th ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Prentice-Hall International.

Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate

data analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Pearson Educational

International.

Halligan, J. (2007). Public Policy and Administration. Vol. 22 No.2: 217-238.

Halm, B. (2011), Employee Engagement: A Prescription for Organizational

Transformation, in Jason A. Wolf, Heather Hanson, Mark J.

Moir, Len Friedman, Grant T. Savage (ed.) Organization

Development in Healthcare: Conversations on Research and

Strategies (Advances in Health Care Management, Volume

10). Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 77 - 96

Hancott, D. E. (2005). The relationship between transformational leadership and

organizational performance in the largest public companies in

Canada. Capella University, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2005.

3159704.

Hewitt Association. (2009). Engagement and culture: Engaging talent in turbulent

times. London, UK: Hewitt Associates LLC. Retrieved from

http://www.aon.com/attachments/thought-

leadership/hewitt_pov_engagement_and_culture.pdf

Holbeche, L. (2004). HR and the High-Performance Organization: HR’s role in

creating a high-performance culture. Strategic HR Review, Vol. 3 No. 2.

Hodge, B. J. & Anthony, W. P. (1988). Organization Theory. Needham Heights,

Massachusetts, MA: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

Jacobi, E. (2015). Implementing a Holographic Organization Design: The Case of

GABO. South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases,

Vol. 4, 1: 2-13.

Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1998). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with

the SIMPLIS command language.

June M. Worley, J. M., & Doolen, T. L. (2015). Organizational structure, employee

problem solving, and lean implementation. International Journal of


Lean Six Sigma, Volume: 6 Issue: 1. Retrieved from DOI

10.1108/IJLSS-12-2013-0058.

Kaplan, D. (2000). Structural equation modeling: Foundations and extensions

(Advanced quantitative techniques in the social sciences). Retrieved from

http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452226576

Keeves, P. J. (1988). Educational Research Methodology and Measurement: An

International Handbook. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.

Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd

ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Lawler III, E. E. & Worley, C. G. (2006). Built to Change: How to Achieve

Sustained Organizational Effectiveness. Jossey-Bass.

Likert R. (1961). New Patterns of Management, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Likert R. (1967). The Human Organization: Its Management and Value, NY:

McGraw-Hill.

Lussier R. N. & Achua C. F. (2007). Effective leadership. New York, NY:

Thomson South-Western.

Mohrman, S. A. & Lawler III, E. E. (2014). Designing organizations for sustainable

effectiveness: A new paradigm for organizations and academic

researchers. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and

Performance, Vol 1 Issue: 1.

Muldmow, T. W. (2002). Creating High Performance Organizations in the public

sector, Human resource Management, Vol. 41.No. 2, 341-354.

Mumby, D. K. (2016). Organizing beyond organization: Branding, discourse, and

communicative capitalism. Organization, Vol. 23 No. 6: 884-907.

National Performance Review. (1993). From Red Tape to Results: Creating a

Government that Works Better and Cost Less. Retrieved from

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/library/nprrpt/annrpt/redtpe93/

National Performance Review (NPR). (1997). Serving the American Public: Best

Practices for Performance Measurement. Benchmarking Study

Report, U.S. Government, Washington, WA.

Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. (1997). Organizational Behavior: Foundations

Realities, and Challenges. New York, NY: West Publishing Company.


Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.

Osborne, D. & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing Government. New York, NY:

Addison-Wesley.

Osborne, D. (2007). REINVENTING GOVERNMENT: WHAT A

DIFFERENCE A STRATEGY MAKES. 7h Global Forum on

Reinventing Government, 26-29 June 2007, Vienna, Austria.

Parker, D. (2007). Organizational Theory, Design, and Change. New Jersey, NJ:

Pearson Education.

Peterson, T. M. (2016). Cardinal Stritch University, ProQuest Dissertations

Publishing.

Pickering, J. W., & Matson, R. E. (1992). Why Executive Development Programs

(Alone) Don’t Work. Training and Development, 92.

Pickering, J. W., & Brokaw, G. S. (2012). Chapter 6: Building high-performance

organizations. In T. Newell, G. Reeher & P. Ronayane (Eds.), The trusted

leader: Building the relationships that make government work.

Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Ray, S. & John, B. (2011). Lean Six-Sigma application in business process

outsourced organization, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol 2

Issue 4. Retrieved from DOI 10.1108/20401461111189443.

Roberts, A. S. (1997). Performance-based organizations: Assessing the Gore plan.

Public Administration Review, 57, 465-478. Retrieved

from https://ssrn.com/abstract=1309151

Sanchez, R. (2012). Architecting Organizations: A Dynamic Strategic

Contingency Perspective. Series: Research in Competence-Based

Management, Vol. 6.

Scamardo, M. (2011). KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGH PERFORMING

ORGANIZATIONS (& PEOPLE). Annual Conference National

Association of Development Organization.

Simmelink, M. N. (2012). Effective methods for implementing change and

enhancing employee engagement in a change process: A qualitative

study of leader perceptions. Argosy University/Sarasota, ProQuest

Dissertations Publishing.


Srivastava, P. & Bhatnagar, J. (2010). Employer Brand for Talent Acquisition: An

Exploration towards its Measurement. Vision, Vol. 14, 1-2: 25-34.

Stanica, S. & Peydro, J. (2016). How does the employee cross-training lean tool

affect the knowledge transfer in product development processes? VINE

Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, Vol

46 Issue: 3.

Thor, C., G. (1994). Doing and Rewarding: Inside a High-Performance Organization.

Management Master, Vol 6.

Ulrich & Allen. (2014). Talent Accelerator: Understanding How Talent Delivers

Performance for Asian Firms. South Asian Journal of Human

Resources Management. SAGE Publications.

DOI: 10.1177/2322093714526666.

Vijay, S. (1983). Some Action Implications of Corporate Culture: A Manager’s

Guide to Action, Organizational Dynamics 12, No.2 (Autumn), 4-23.

Waal, A. D. (2005). The Characteristics of a High-Performance Organization.

Maastricht School of Management, Netherlands.

Waal, A. D. (2012). What makes a high-performance organization: Five

validated factors of competitive advantage that apply worldwide.

Kent, UK: Global Professional Pub.

Wickramaratne, W. P. R. (2014). Organizational Commitment and Employee

Perceived TQM Excellence: Empirical Evidence from Manufacturing

Firms in Sri Lanka. Management and Labour Studies, Vol. 38, 4, 399-

409.

Worley, G., C., Williams, T. D., & Lawler III, E., E. (2014). The Agility Factor:

Building Adaptable Organizations for Superior Performance. Jossey-

Bass.

Worren, N., Eger, T., & Hærem, T. (2016). A key principle in the field of

organization design is to group activities or roles to minimize

coordination costs. Simulation & Gaming, Vol. 47, 6: 851-865.


APPENDICES

Waranya Jirangkul Appendices / 400

APPENDIX A

IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW FORM

Assessment to the hypostatical model of public organizations to high-

performance organizations”

SECTION 1 The concept of culture and engagement

1 ) How does the culture and engagement affect the excellent public

organization? Does it exist?

2) Do you think the components of culture and engagement is applicable

for this study?

SECTION 2 The concept of leadership

1 ) How does the leadership affect the excellent public organization?

Does it exist?

2) Do you think the components of leadership is applicable for this

study?

SECTION 3 The concept of change management

1 ) How does the change management affect the excellent public


2) Do you think the components of change management is applicable

for this study?

SECTION 4 The concept of people or employee management

1 ) How does the people or employee management affect the excellent

public organization? Does it exist?

2) Do you think the components of people is applicable for this study?

SECTION 5 The concept of design

1 ) How does the organization design affect the excellent public


Fac. of Grad. Studies, Mahidol Univ. D.P.A. (Public Policy and Public Management) / 401 2) Do you think the components of organization design is applicable for

this study?

SECTION 6 The concept of high-performance organization

1 ) How does high- performance organization affect the operation of

public organization? Does it exist?

2) Do you think the components of high- performance organization is

applicable for this study?


APPENDIX B

QUESTIONNAIRE

Questionnaire No.

Name of public organization

……………………………

Questionnaire for research

Title “The opinions of the operators of public organization for the model of

public organizations as high-performance organizations”

Explanation This questionnaire results from your organization being in the standard of an "Excellent

Public Organization" according to the concept of the high-quality characteristics of a high-performance

organization. This is a tool for the study of a model of public organizations as high-performance

organizations. The questions compose 8 sections and 88 items as follows;

Section 1 The personal information of the respondents of 7 items

Section 2 The component of culture and engagement of 8 items

Section 3 The component of leadership of 12 items

Section 4 The component of change management of 8 items

Section 5 The component of people of 12 items

Section 6 The component of design of 16 items

Section 7 The component of high-performance organization of 24 items

Fac. of Grad. Studies, Mahidol Univ. D.P.A. (Public Policy and Public Management) / 403 Section 8 The additional recommendations 1 item

This will take 5-9 minutes of your time. To be useful to the success of creating a model of

public organizations as high-performance organizations, the researcher requests the respondents to

answer the questionnaire completely. The researcher will keep your responses confidential and analyze

the results of research only in an overview.

The researcher is grateful for your cooperation.

Waranya Jirangkul

Doctoral student of public administration program in

Public Policy and Public Management

Section 1 The personal information of the respondent

Explanation Please mark in “( )” or fill-in each question as it describes you best.

1. Gender

( ) Male ( ) Female

2. Age

( ) 18 – 20 years ( ) 21 – 30 years

( ) 31 – 40 years ( ) 41 – 50 years

( ) 51 – 60 years ( ) Above 60 years

3. The highest level of education

( ) Secondary education or less

( ) High school education / vocational certificate

( ) Diploma / high vocational Certificate or equivalent

( ) Bachelor's degree

( ) Master's degree

( ) Doctorate


4. Status

( ) Single ( ) Married

( ) Other..........................................................................

5. Work time in public organization………………years

6. Position level.................................................................................................................

7. Type of work/Division.............................................................................................

Fac. of Grad. Studies, Mahidol Univ. D.P.A. (Public Policy and Public Management) / 405 Section 2 The questions of culture and engagement

Explanation Please mark in the box in each question that matches with your opinion. Only one answer per question.

How much do you

agree with the following statement?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

Culture

1. Your organization defines the culture,

values and organization to accelerate its

strategic goals.

2. Your organization applies the management

of cultural and organizational values to

accelerate its strategic goals.

3. Your organization has reviewed the cultural

values of your organization to accelerate the

strategic goals for its success.

4. Your organization delivers its direction to

employees to change the culture and values to

be aligned to the strategy of the organization.

Engagement

5. Your organization has a measurement

system or a review of employee engagement

that gives an assessment of the enthusiasm of

employees during stressful situations, etc.

6. Your organization creates an environment

that helps to improve the work.

7. The employee engagement in your

organization causes higher organizational

success.


How much do you

agree with the following statement?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

8. Your organization has values that create

commitment among all employees.

Section 3 The questions of leadership

Explanation Please fill in the blank in all questions that match with your opinion only one answer.

How much you agree with the following

message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

High-performance teams of individual

leaders

9. Your direct department head powers the unit

with cooperation in the organization.

10. Your direct department head works in

collaboration with you.

11. Your direct department head realizes that

collaboration creates a strong operation.

12. Your direct department head works by

flexibility with colleagues outside your

organization, such as individuals or entities

that have the power to control or are related to

your organization, or other organizations that

are not in the state sector.



message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

Future leaders

13. Your direct department head has skills

consistent with the goals for the future of your

organization.

14. Your direct department head has a role in

multiple missions or areas to support the work

that leads to success.

15. Your organization determines the high-

potential leaders from the start of the work

according to the necessary skills and

performance for the future of the organization.

16. Your organization determines the

leadership behaviors that lead to your

organization’s success.

Middle managers who embrace and

implement strategy

17. The first-line managers and the middle

managers have authority to make decisions to

implement the strategy and vision.

18. The first-line manager and the middle

manager work in association with your

organization’s senior management.


manager view your operation with enthusiasm.


manager are conducive to the strength of

engagement and skills for your work.

Waranya Jirangkul Appendices / 408 Section 4 The questions of change management



message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

Disciplined cascade

21. Your organization prioritizes and focuses

on what is most important for performance.

22. Your organization specifies your obligation

for accountability and empowers you to work

successfully.

23. Your organization records the progress of

your performance by time period for the

benefit of the improvement of quality.

24. Your organization communicates with

stakeholders, such as groups of people,

organizations, the related institutions that are

affected both positively and negatively from

the decisions of your organization, in order to

create confidence in time of change.


25. Your organization is usually able to adjust

its options to a changing situation.

26. Your organization follows the changes of

external circumstances that are related to your

organization.

27. Your organization can adjust its strategies

to support a changing situation.



message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

28. Your organization expands its strategic

scope to increase performance into

implementation.

Section 5 The questions of people



message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

Employer branding

29. Your organization invests in the

development of its people with training and

with rotation of people through roles and

responsibilities.

30. Your organization has the tools to create

motivation for its people by compensation and

incentives to retain employees.

31. Your organization supports promotions in

career positions.

32. Your organization applies a system

developed for employees who have lower

performance.



message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)


33. Your organization assigns the operators

with high potential in roles that are necessary

for the success of your organization.

34. Your organization focuses on the

importance of its strategy to maintain its

employees.

35. Your organization implements a

continuous plan in a strategy to retain

employees.

36. Your organization prioritizes the

importance of strategies that allow the plan

and the role of the organization to change.


37. Your organization has a distinctive strategy

for employees.

38. Human resources applies organizational

strategies to develop the goals of its people.

39. Human resources promotes your creativity

in order increase your importance to the

organization.

40. Human resources analyzes and makes

recommendations to the supervisors or the

heads of divisions for the successful

performance of your organization.

Fac. of Grad. Studies, Mahidol Univ. D.P.A. (Public Policy and Public Management) / 411 Section 6 The questions of design



message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)


41. Your organization usually emphasizes the

important tasks in the organization and

supports each unity properly.

42. Your organization has a structure to make

changes to the work to be better suited to the

work mission, such as the arrangement of the

structure according to the specific tasks, etc.

43. Your organization adjusts the work

structure when the strategy, performance or the

environment changes.

44. The organization performances come from

multiple sections that are responsible for the

project plan.


45. Your organization has few levels and wide

spans of control.

46. Your organization emphasizes the

significant work and eliminates the non-

essential procedures.

47. There are wide spans of control that

enables rapid communication and decisions for

work.



message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

48. There are wide spans of control that

enables the head of division to be high-

performing leadership.

Accountabilities, decision rights, and

collaboration

49. There is obvious determination of the roles

and accountability to support the potential for

improvement in performance and employee

engagement in the organization.

50. You can decide how to do your own job in

your duties and responsibilities.

51. You understand clearly when you need to

be working together with another person to

configure shared accountability.

52. You are participating in your assigned role

to work with a focus on accountability and

decision making.


53. You are in your proper role in the

operation.

54. Your organization has a person or group of

people who are responsible for development

and planning for people and the organization

to achieve success (change agents).

55. Your organization has management by an

expert.



message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

56. Your organization determines the roles of

workers and entrusts them with the appropriate

functions.

Section 7 The questions of high-performance organization (HPO)



message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

Shared information and open

communication

57. Your organization exchanges the

information that is necessary to the decisions

of the operators.

58. Your organization creates high-quality

teamwork with the shared authority, high

involvement and the process to develop the

skills deriving from multi-functional work.

59. You are allowed to work with trial and

error for learning.

60. The first-line supervisor and middle

manager perform their role to support you in



message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

the development of action to drive

organizational performances.


61. You can link a target in your performance

to the goals of organization.

62. Vision, purpose and values in your

organization are supported from all the

sections in the organization.

63. Your organization has a culture that drives

the results of the operation to achieve the

target.

64. Your organization has a process of

implementing a rearranged strategy to a new

option in the operation, including a process

that eliminates unnecessary procedures, work

and information overload.

Ongoing learning

65. Your organization supports you to

continuously learn by creating inspiration to

add new skills leading to higher productivity

and job satisfaction.

66. Your organization provides sources of

knowledge and a transfer of learning

throughout the organization with a variety of

methods.

67. Your organization has a coaching system

of one-on-one, group, or other ways to



message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

encourage the transfer of learning in the

workplace.

68. Your organization has an assessment

before and after to measure performance

according to the standards and the time of each

person and the team, and an assessment of



69. Your organization focuses on the view of

your customer to create a vision for success.

70. Your organization develops a strategy by

the study of the customer group for the

mission and delivers performances with higher

expectation.

71. Your organization operates with a focus on

the stakeholders throughout the organization.

72. The first-line supervisor and middle

manager perform a role to contribute to a

balance between the organizational purpose

and developing your work skills, such as

prioritizing the needs of the organization first

and supporting you to become a leader and to

promote you for better talent.

Energizing system and structure

73. Your organization has a system that aligns

all its processes to support the work to achieve

its goals and strategic direction.



message?

Level of opinion

Strongly

agree

(5)

Agree

(4)

Neither

agree

nor

disagree

(3)

Disagree

(2)

Strongly

disagree

(1)

74. Your organization has a system that aligns

all its processes to support the work to achieve

its goals and strategic direction.

75. Your organization has a system of

performance management to create

accountability for work.

76. Your organization has a system of reward

depending on the success of the organization,

department and personal goals.


77. You have an opportunity to make decisions

and to share your knowledge and skills

between colleagues in the organization.

78. Your organization has a system for

formation of partnerships between work

groups to develop goals and strategies.

79. Your supervisor transfers the power and

decision making to you to develop the work

successfully.

80. Your organization supports you to

contribute your skills and attitude that is

necessary to the goals of the work and for you

to become a partner who has the responsibility

to create the success of the organization.

Fac. of Grad. Studies, Mahidol Univ. D.P.A. (Public Policy and Public Management) / 417 Section 8 The additional recommendations

...................................................................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................................................

* The end of the questionnaire, thank you for your time to answer in this research.*


APPENDIX C


THE PRACTICAL APPROACH

The model of public organization to high-performance organization

models of the first group: public organizations of the mission of the

development and the specific policy implementation of the

government affairs

1. Based on the analysis of basic statistics of component variables, and

variables observed in the research model, it is found that the high- value manifest

variables are as follows:

1 . 1 The manifest variable of the high- performance teams of individual

leaders, and the future leaders in the component of leadership are the highest value of

the 3 group of POs

This means the 3 groups of POs should give precedence to leadership in

high level. Do you have any thoughts about this result?

1.2 The manifest variable of the organizational culture in the component of

culture and engagement is the second in value.

This means the 3 groups of POs should give precedence to organizational

culture in order to accelerate strategic objectives, as it is the second highest in

importance. Do you have any thoughts about this result?

2. The ability to predict the dependent variable of first group of POs has

found that the indicators in every variable in the measurement model are close in

importance. The most important indicator is the middle managers embrace and translate

strategy (X5) in the component of leadership, and the second most important is strategic

human resource ( Y5) in the component of people, and few layers and wide spans of

control (Y7) in the component of design, respectively. Do you have any thoughts about

the results regarding the most important indicators?


3 . Culture and engagement have a direct effect on change management.

Culture and engagement also have a direct effect on people or employee management.

This means the first group of POs should give precedence to organizational

culture and employee engagement in high level which will also increase change

management and people in an organization. Do you have any thoughts about this result?

4. Leadership has a direct effect on change management and people.

This means the first group of POs should give precedence to leadership,

which means having high-performance teams of individual leaders, developing future

leaders, and having middle managers who embrace and translate strategy in high level

which will in turn increase increase change management and people in an organization.

Do you have any thoughts about this result?

5. Change management is only influenced by culture and engagement and

leadership, but it does not affect the other side. Do you have any thoughts about this result?

6. People has a direct effect on design and high-performance organization.

This means the first group of POs should give precedence to people

consisting of employer branding, defining critical roles and key talents, and using

strategic human resources in high level, which will also increase organizational design

and HPO in an organization. Do you have any thoughts about this result?

7. Design has a direct effect on HPO.

This means the first group of POs should give precedence to design

consisting of structure and resource allocation, having few layers and wide spans of

control, clearly defined accountabilities, decision rights and collaboration, and the

matched role requirements in high level, which will also increase HPO in an

organization. Do you have any thoughts about this result?

8. HPO is influenced by people and design.

This means the organizations in the first group that desire to develop the

HPO or be an excellent agency have to give precedence initially to people or employee

management and organization design, which will cause HPO. Do you have any thoughts

about this result?

9. Other Suggestions

………………………………………………………………………………


APPENDIX D



The model of public organizations as high-performance organizations

of the second group: public organizations of technical services or the

interdisciplinary mission


variables observed in the research model, it is found that the high-value manifest


1 . 1 The manifest variables of the high-performance teams of individual

leaders, and the future leaders in the component of leadership are the highest value in

the 3 groups of POs.








2. The ability to predict the dependent variable of second group of POs has


importance. The most important indicator is the energizing system and structure in the

component of HPO. The second most important are the 2 equal value indicators; shared

information and open communication (Y10) in the component of HPO, and culture in

the component of culture and engagement. Do you have any thoughts about the results

regarding the most important indicators?




This means the second group of POs should give precedence to

organizational culture and employee engagement in high level which will also increase

change management and people in an organization. Do you have any thoughts about

this result?

4. Leadership has a direct effect on change management and HPO.

This means the second group of POs should give precedence to leadership,



which will in turn increase change management and HPO in an organization. Do you

have any thoughts about this result?

5. Change management has a direct effect on people.

This means the second group of PO giving precedence to change

management consisting of the disciplined cascade and being an evolutionary

organization in high level will in turn increase people or employee management in an



This means the second group of POs should give precedence to people





This means the second group of POs should give precedence to design






This means the organizations in the second group that desire to develop the


Waranya Jirangkul Appendices / 422 management and organization design, which will cause HPO. Do you have any thoughts

about this result?


…………………………….……….……….……….……….……….……

….……….……….……….……….……………………………………………………


APPENDIX E



The model of public organization to high-performance organization models of

the third group: public organizations of the general public services


variables observed in the research model, it is found that the high-value manifest


1 . 1 The manifest variables of the high-performance teams of individual

leaders, and the future leaders in the component of leadership are the highest value in

the 3 groups of POs.








2. The ability to predict the dependent variable of third group of POs has


importance. The most important indicator is the energizing system and structure (Y14) on

the component of HPO. The second most important is the accountabilities, decision rights,

and collaboration (Y8) in the component of design. The third most important is the middle

managers embrace and translate strategy in the component of the leadership, respectively.

Do you have any thoughts about the results regarding the most important indicators?




This means the third group of POs should give precedence to organizational

culture and employee engagement in high level which will also increase change

management and people in an organization. Do you have any thoughts about this result?

4. Leadership has a direct effect on change management and people.

This means the third group of POs should give precedence to leadership,



which will in turn increase change management and people in organization. Do you

have any idea about the results?

5. Change management has a direct effect on people.

This means the third group of PO giving precedence to change management

consisting of the disciplined cascade and being an evolutionary organization in high

level will in turn increase people or employee management in an organization. Do you

have any thoughts about this result?


This means the third group of POs should give precedence to people





This means the third group of POs should give precedence to design






This means the organizations in the third group that desire to develop the


management and organization design, which will cause HPO. Do you have any thoughts

about this result?



………………........................................……………………………………

…………………….……….……….....……….……….……….………......………

Waranya Jirangkul Biography / 426

BIOGRAPHY

NAME Waranya Jirangkul

DATE OF BIRTH 31 January 1984

PLACE OF BIRTH Bangkok, Thailand

INSTITUTIONS ATTENDED Faculty of Political Science, Thammasat

University, 2002-2006

Bachelor of Political Science (Politics and

Government)

Faculty of Political Science, Thammasat

University, 2006-2009

Master of Political Science (Public

Administration)

Faculty of Social Science and Humanities,

Mahidol University, 2014 - 2018

Doctor of Public Administration (Public Policy

and Public Management)

RESEARCH GRANTS Personal Scholarships

HOME ADDRESS 43/7 Puttamonton1 Road, Bangprom, Talingchan

District, Bangkok, 10170

Tel. 080-441-0054, 065-836-4770

E-mail: [email protected]

CURRENT POSITION Foreign Affairs Officer

EMPLOYMENT ADDRESS Bilateral Parliamentary Relations Division

Bureau of International Relations

Secretariat of the House of Representatives

Kingdom of Thailand

Date post:	17-Feb-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	3 times
Download:	0 times

THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC ORGANIZATION TO HIGH … · ABSTRACT (ENGLISH) ABSTRACT (THAI) iv v LIST...

Documents