Descriptive statistics for the major variables
| Variables | HQS in the non-crisis time | HQS in the crisis time | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valid N | Mean | Min | Max | Std.Dev | Valid N | Mean | Min | Max | Std.Dev | |
| Results in finance | 200 | 4.03 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.32 | 200 | 3.92 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.36 |
| Results in HRM | 200 | 3.98 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.38 | 200 | 3.92 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.37 |
| Results in quality | 200 | 3.85 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.60 | 200 | 3.77 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.58 |
| Results in innovativeness | 200 | 3.77 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.57 | 200 | 3.82 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.54 |
| Employee performance in KPIs | 200 | 3.00 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 0.49 | 200 | 3.24 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 0.53 |
| Advancement level of EB | 200 | 3.53 | 2.00 | 4.00 | 0.51 | 200 | 3.57 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 0.53 |
| Significance level of EB | 200 | 3.52 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 0.58 | 200 | 3.69 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 0.48 |
| Variables | HQS in the non-crisis time | HQS in the crisis time | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valid | Mean | Min | Max | Std.Dev | Valid | Mean | Min | Max | Std.Dev | |
| Results in finance | 200 | 4.03 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.32 | 200 | 3.92 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.36 |
| Results in HRM | 200 | 3.98 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.38 | 200 | 3.92 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.37 |
| Results in quality | 200 | 3.85 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.60 | 200 | 3.77 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.58 |
| Results in innovativeness | 200 | 3.77 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.57 | 200 | 3.82 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.54 |
| Employee performance in KPIs | 200 | 3.00 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 0.49 | 200 | 3.24 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 0.53 |
| Advancement level of EB | 200 | 3.53 | 2.00 | 4.00 | 0.51 | 200 | 3.57 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 0.53 |
| Significance level of EB | 200 | 3.52 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 0.58 | 200 | 3.69 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 0.48 |
| Variables | Foreign subsidiaries in the non-crisis time | Foreign subsidiaries in the crisis time | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valid N | Mean | Min | Max | Std.Dev | Valid N | Mean | Min | Max | Std.Dev | |
| Results in finance | 200 | 3.99 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.24 | 200 | 3.93 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.37 |
| Results in HRM | 200 | 3.98 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.31 | 200 | 3.92 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.34 |
| Results in quality | 200 | 3.81 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.57 | 200 | 3.77 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.54 |
| Results in innovativeness | 200 | 3.81 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.56 | 200 | 3.90 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.50 |
| Employee performance in KPIs | 200 | 3.05 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 0.39 | 200 | 3.19 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 0.51 |
| Advancement level of EB | 200 | 3.33 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 0.50 | 200 | 3.44 | 2.00 | 4.00 | 0.55 |
| Significance level of EB | 200 | 3.41 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 0.62 | 200 | 3.66 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 0.54 |
| Variables | Foreign subsidiaries in the non-crisis time | Foreign subsidiaries in the crisis time | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valid | Mean | Min | Max | Std.Dev | Valid | Mean | Min | Max | Std.Dev | |
| Results in finance | 200 | 3.99 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.24 | 200 | 3.93 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.37 |
| Results in HRM | 200 | 3.98 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.31 | 200 | 3.92 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.34 |
| Results in quality | 200 | 3.81 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.57 | 200 | 3.77 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.54 |
| Results in innovativeness | 200 | 3.81 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 0.56 | 200 | 3.90 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.50 |
| Employee performance in KPIs | 200 | 3.05 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 0.39 | 200 | 3.19 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 0.51 |
| Advancement level of EB | 200 | 3.33 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 0.50 | 200 | 3.44 | 2.00 | 4.00 | 0.55 |
| Significance level of EB | 200 | 3.41 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 0.62 | 200 | 3.66 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 0.54 |
Note(s): Scales, Company performance results in HRM, finance, innovativeness, quality → benchmarked to the companies of similar business profile: 1 – poor, 2 – below average, 3 – similar to others, 4 – above average, 5 – very good, Employee performance in KPIs: 1 – significantly below standards, 2 – rather below standards, 3 – exactly with the standards, 4 – rather higher than standards, 5 – significantly higher than standards, Advancement level of EB → benchmarked to the best market practices: 1 – significantly lower, 2 – lower, 3 – similar to others, 4 – higher, 5 – significantly higher, Significance level of EB to the company’s performance results: 1 – not important, 2 – slightly important, 3 – important, 4 – very important, 5 – of critical significance
Source(s): Own empirical research
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.