UNIVERSITY OF WEST LONDON

The Claude Littner Business School

Factors Influencing Finance Business Partnering Capabilities for

Improved Organisational Performance
- An Empirical Study among Finance Professionals in Sri Lanka -

Archchana Vekneswaran
UWL ID: 21332755

Supervised By: Mr Rizwan Anise

Submitted in April, 2017

Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Business Administration (MBA)

DECLARATION
This work is being submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Master of
Business Administration and has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree
and is not being concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree.

Candidate: Archchana Vekneswaran

Date : 25th April, 2017

1
 ABSTRACT
Role of management accountants has been taking an enhancement of becoming business
partners and being integral part of decision making. However there is very limited research in
the context of enabling factors which could cater to such capabilities to make finance more
relevant for the future. This phenomenon of partnering could contribute towards the
organisational performance. This context was analysed from the sample from finance
professionals in Sri Lanka, based on primary data from surveys in an electronically
administered platform.

The study has concluded that attitudes, knowledge, vocational skills, organisational structure
and systems and processes could influence the finance business partnering capability and
which in turn would influence the organisational performance.

Keywords: Finance business partner, business partnering, attitudes, structure, skills,

management accountants

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author is heart fully thankful to her dissertation supervisor Mr Riswan Anise for his
guidance and support in the completion of this dissertation. She is also thankful to Dr Neavis
Morais, Dr Nalaka Wickramasinghe and Mr Alexander Marceline whose encouragement,
guidance, and support from the initial to the final level enabled the author to develop an
understanding about the subject, statistics and structure entailed in the report.

The author also wishes to thank the staff at the institute for assisting in terms of access to
library resources, blackboard and submissions etc.

Lastly, the author offer her regards to all those who supported her during the completion of
this thesis.

The author is responsible for any errors that remain in this assignment.

3
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ 2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...................................................................................................... 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................... 4
LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. 7
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................ 8
LIST OF EQUATIONS ......................................................................................................... 9
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................. 9
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................11
1.1 Background to the study .........................................................................................11
1.1.1 Evolution in the role of management accountants .....................................................11
1.1.2 Finance Business Partnering Capabilities ..................................................................11
1.1.3 Organisational Performance ...................................................................................12
1.2 Problem statement & justification ............................................................................13
1.3 Research Questions and Objectives ...............................................................................13
1.4 Significance of the study ..............................................................................................13
1.5 Scope of the study.......................................................................................................14
1.6 Limitations of the study................................................................................................14
1.7 Structure of the report.................................................................................................15
1.8 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................................15
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW..................................................................................16
2.1 Management accountants as finance business partners....................................................16
2.1.1 Origins of Business Partnering Concept David Ulrich Model ......................................16
2.1.2 Finance Business Partners and Capabilities ...............................................................17
2.1.3Types of finance business partners ...........................................................................19
2.3 Theoretical Frameworks...............................................................................................21
2.3.1 Dynamic Resource Based Theory and Capability Lifecycle Teece et al (1997) & Helfat and
Peteraf (2003) ..............................................................................................................21
2.3.2 Micro foundations of routines and capabilities- Felin et al, 2012 ..................................22
2.4 Empirical Evidence and Hypothesis Development ............................................................23
2.4.1 Individual Capabilities ............................................................................................23
2.4.2Organisational Structure .........................................................................................28

4
 2.4.3 Systems and Processes ..........................................................................................30
2.4.4Organisational Performance ....................................................................................31
2.5 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................................31
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY........................................................................33
3.1 Definition on Variables.................................................................................................33
3.2 Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................34
3.3 Research Hypothesis....................................................................................................34
3.4 Research Paradigm & Approach ....................................................................................35
3.5 Research Design..........................................................................................................36
3.6 Research Strategy and Instrumentation..........................................................................36
3.7 Population .................................................................................................................37
3.8 Sample ......................................................................................................................38
3.9 Sampling Technique ....................................................................................................38
3.10 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................39
3.11 Ethics in the study .....................................................................................................39
3.12 Operationlisation ......................................................................................................40
3.13 Measurement of Testing ............................................................................................40
3.14 Pilot Study ................................................................................................................41
3.15 Validity ....................................................................................................................41
3.15.1 Convergent Validity .............................................................................................41
3.16 Reliability .................................................................................................................46
3.16.1 Internal Consistency Measure Cronbach Alpha ......................................................47
3.16.2 Composite Reliability (CR).....................................................................................47
3.17 Chapter summary......................................................................................................48
CHAPTER 4: DATA PRESENTATION & ANALYSIS............................................................49
4.1 Sample Profile ............................................................................................................49
4.2 Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA) ....................................................................................50
4.2.1 Missing Values......................................................................................................50
4.2.2 Outliers ...............................................................................................................51
4.2.3 Normality ............................................................................................................51
4.2.4 Linearity ..............................................................................................................52
4.3 Objective based Data Analysis .......................................................................................53
4.3.1 Descriptive Analysis Research Objective 1 ..............................................................53
4.3.2 Hypothesis Testing (Research Objective 2 and 3) .......................................................60

5
 4.4 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................................66
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................68
5.1 Factors influencing FBPC ..............................................................................................68
5.2 Relationship between influencing factors and FBPC..........................................................68
5.2.1 Relationship between attitudes and FBPC.................................................................68
5.2.2 Relationship between knowledge and FBPC ..............................................................69
5.2.3 Relationship between vocational skills and FBPC .......................................................70
5.2.4 Relationship between organisational structure and FBPC ............................................71
5.2.5 Relationship between systems & processes and FBPC ................................................72
5.3 Relationship between FBPC and Organisational Performance ............................................72
5.4Future Research...........................................................................................................73
5.5 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................................73
REFERENCES....................................................................................................................74
APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................86

6
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: David Ulrich Model on HR Roles ................................................................................16

Figure 2: Traditional to Emerging Role of Finance .....................................................................17
Figure 3: Role of creating an impact........................................................................................18
Figure 4: Types of Finance Business Partners............................................................................20
Figure 5: Building Blocks of Routines and Capabilities................................................................22
Figure 6: Levels of Knowledge Management ............................................................................26
Figure 7: Skills of Finance Business Partners.............................................................................27
Figure 8: Conceptual Framework of the study ..........................................................................34
Figure 9: Research Population - Members of Accounting Bodies .................................................37
Figure 10: Determination of sample size..................................................................................38
Figure 11: Scatter Plot ..........................................................................................................52
Figure 12: Histogram with Normal Distribution Curve for FBPC ...................................................53
Figure 13: Histogram with Normal Distribution Curve for Attitudes .............................................54
Figure 14: Histogram with Normal Distribution Curve for Knowledge...........................................55
Figure 15: Histogram with Normal Distribution Curve for Vocational Skills....................................56
Figure 16: Histogram with normal distribution curve for organisational structure..........................57
Figure 17: Histogram with normal distribution curve for systems and processes ...........................58
Figure 18: Normal Distribution curve with Histogram for organisational performance....................59
Figure 19: Random Numbers .................................................................................................86
Figure 20: Sample Profile Marital Status ................................................................................ 103
Figure 21: Sample Profile - Gender ....................................................................................... 103
Figure 22: Sample Profile - Qualifications .............................................................................. 104
Figure 23: Sample Profile - Role............................................................................................ 104
Figure 24: Sample Profile - Department................................................................................. 104
Figure 25: Histogram for FBPC ............................................................................................. 106
Figure 26: Normal Q-Q Plot for FBPC..................................................................................... 106
Figure 27: Detrended Normal Q-Q plot for FBPC ..................................................................... 107
Figure 28: Box Plot for FBPC ................................................................................................ 107
Figure 29: Histogram for Attitude ......................................................................................... 108
Figure 30: Normal Q-Q Plot for Attitude ................................................................................ 108
Figure 31: Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot for Attitudes ............................................................... 109
Figure 32: Box Plot for Attitudes .......................................................................................... 109
Figure 33: Histogram for Knowledge ..................................................................................... 110
Figure 34: Normal Q-Q Plot for Knowledge ............................................................................ 110
Figure 35: Detrended Q-Q Plot for Knowledge........................................................................ 111
Figure 36: Box Plot for Knowledge ........................................................................................ 111
Figure 37: Histogram for Vocational Skills .............................................................................. 112
Figure 38: Normal Q-Q Plot for Vocational Skills ..................................................................... 112
Figure 39: Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot for Vocational Skills ..................................................... 113
Figure 40: Box Plot for Vocational Skills ................................................................................. 113
Figure 41: Histogram for Organisational Structure .................................................................. 114
Figure 42: Normal Q-Q Plot for Organisational Structure.......................................................... 114

7
Figure 43 - Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot for Organisational Structure ......................................... 114
Figure 44: Box plot for Organisational Structure ..................................................................... 114
Figure 45: Histogram for Systems and Processes .................................................................... 114
Figure 46: Normal Q-Q Plot for Systems and Processes............................................................ 114
Figure 47: Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot for Systems and Processes ............................................ 114
Figure 48: Box Plot for Systems and Processes ....................................................................... 114
Figure 49: Histogram for Organisational Performance ............................................................. 114
Figure 50: Normal Q-Q Plot for Organisational Performance .................................................... 114
Figure 51: Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot for Organisational Performance..................................... 114
Figure 52: Box Plot for Organisational Performance ................................................................ 114

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Variable Definitions ..................................................................................................34
Table 2: Stratified Sample .....................................................................................................39
Table 3: Operationalisation Table...........................................................................................40
Table 4: Results of Reliability testing .......................................................................................42
Table 5: Total Variance Explained FBPC.................................................................................43
Table 6: Total Variance explained for Attitudes ........................................................................44
Table 7: Total Variance explained for Knowledge ......................................................................44
Table 8: Table 8: Total Variance explained for Vocational Skills ...................................................44
Table 9: Total Variance explained for Organisational Structure ...................................................45
Table 10: Total Variance explained for Systems and Processes....................................................45
Table 11:Table 11: Total Variance explained for Organisational performance................................46
Table 12: AVE......................................................................................................................46
Table 13: Cronbach Alpha Reliability statistics of the pilot study .................................................47
Table 14: Composite Reliability ..............................................................................................48
Table 15: Sample Profile - Nominal Variables ...........................................................................49
Table 16: Sample Profile - Scale Variables ................................................................................49
Table 17: Missing Values Case Processing Summary ..................................................................51
Table 18: Skewness and Kurtosis Statistics ...............................................................................52
Table 19: Descriptive Statistics for FBPC ..................................................................................53
Table 20: Descriptive Statistics of Attitudes .............................................................................54
Table 21: Descriptive Statistics for Knowledge..........................................................................55
Table 22: Descriptive Statistics for Vocational Skills...................................................................56
Table 23: Descriptive Statistics for Organisational Structure .......................................................57
Table 24: Descriptive Statistics for Systems and Processes .........................................................58
Table 25: Descriptive Statistics for Organisational Performance ..................................................59
Table 26: Correlation between IA & FBPC ................................................................................60
Table 27: Correlation between IK and FBPC .............................................................................61
Table 28: Correlation between VS and FBPC ............................................................................61
Table 29: Correlation between OS and FBPC ............................................................................62
Table 30: Correlation between SNP and FBPC ..........................................................................63
Table 31: Correlation between FBPC and OP ............................................................................63

8
Table 32: Model Summary 1- Factors Influencing FBPC ..............................................................64
Table 33: ANOVA 1 - Factors Influencing FBPC..........................................................................64
Table 34 : Coefficient Table I - Factors influencing FBPC.............................................................65
Table 35: Model Summary II - FBPC and OP .............................................................................65
Table 36: ANOVA II - FBPC and OP ..........................................................................................66
Table 37: Coefficient Table II - FBPC and OP .............................................................................66
Table 38: Hypothesis Test Summary .......................................................................................67
Table 39: Validity Results FBPC ..............................................................................................93
Table 40: Validity Results for Attitudes....................................................................................93
Table 41: Validity Results for Knowledge .................................................................................93
Table 42: Validity results for Vocational Skills ...........................................................................94
Table 43: Validity Results for Organisational Structure...............................................................94
Table 44: Validity Results for Systems and Processes.................................................................94
Table 45: Validity Results for Organisational Performance .........................................................95
Table 46 : Reliability Statistics for FBPC Variable .......................................................................96
Table 47: AVE and Composite Reliability................................................................................ 101
Table 48: Statistics for Sample Profile Nominal Variables ......................................................... 102
Table 49: Gender Statistics .................................................................................................. 102
Table 50: Marital Status Statistics......................................................................................... 102
Table 51: Qualification Statistics........................................................................................... 102
Table 52: Current Department Statistics................................................................................ 103
Table 53: Current Position Statistics...................................................................................... 103
Table 54: Likhert Scale Responses ........................................................................................ 105

LIST OF EQUATIONS
Equation 1: AVE Formula ......................................................................................................46
Equation 2: Composite Reliability ...........................................................................................48

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AAT - Association of Accounting Technicians

ACCA - Association of Certified Chartered Accountants

AVE - Average Variance Extracted

CAGR - Cumulative Annual Growth Rate

CFO Chief Financial Officer

CGMA - Chartered Global Management Accountant

CIMA - Chartered Institute of Management Accountants

9
CIPD - Chartered Institute of People Development

EDA - Exploratory Data Analysis

FBP - Finance Business Partner/ Partnering

FBPC - Finance Business Partnering Capabilities

FBPs - Finance Business Partners

HR - Human Resources

IA - Attitudes

ICAEW Institute of Charted Accountants of England and Wales

ICASL Institute of Chartered Accountants of Sri Lanka

IK - Knowledge

KMO - Kaiser Meyer Olkin Stats

KMS - Knowledge Management Systems

MCQ - Multiple choice questions

OP - Organisational Performance

OS - Organisational Structure

SNP - Systems and Processes

SOP - Standards Operating Procedures

VS - Vocational Skills

VUCA - Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous

10
 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
The title of the study is factors influencing finance business partnering capabilities for
improved organisational performance. The first chapter of the report will sketch out the
background and scope of the research along with the objectives which would set the tone to
the theory being developed through this research study.

1.1 Background to the study

1.1.1 Evolution in the role of management accountants

If we take the past prior to 1990s, finance has been considered as professional bean counters
or corporate historians (Wolf et el, 2016), whose main accountability is limited in nature
towards feedback control through evaluation of historical performances, managing cash flow
and establishing the internal control frameworks.

However, such competencies are only a basic requirement to enter into finance profession in
todays era of disruptive technologies and increasing competition with innovations around the
business arena. This is often referred to as VUCA world; an acronym represented the cold
war with reference to volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous environments (CGMA,
2015). With increasing debate amidst professional accounting bodies and emerging
requirements from businesses explain the importance of change over from the comfort zone
of number crunching towards value addition to the business by enhancing their analytical,
technical and business acumen (CGMA, 2015).

Management accounting is defined by CGMA (2015) as The sourcing and analysis of

accounting and management information and its communication and use, both to preserve
and create value. The definition enlightens the fact that the management accountants should
have the ability to tackle business requirements with available information to transform the
finance functions into more of a corporate sounding board and support in value addition
through enhancing itself as integral part of business than just another support function.

1.1.2 Finance Business Partnering Capabilities

David Ulrichs recommendation on how human resource generalists should transform
themselves into more of strategists of the company to absorb right talent pool into
organisations (Brown and Christies, 2005) can be replicated into finance professionals too in
order to support value generation activities of the company. It is assumed that IT would easily
replace finance through automation. However, this isnt true where IT become integral part of

11
finance but with fewer staff who are specialised in networking with cross functional
departments, managing risks, providing business insights and real time planning. The role of
CFO would be more of company strategist rather than controller (EY, 2015). Hence these
changes support the partnering role of finance, similar to David Ulrichs view point on HR
generalists.

Finance business partnering involves the role played in supporting the deployment of
strategies devised by the management within risk appetite of the company in order to
generate shareholder wealth with effective questioning and challenging and continuous
support throughout (Flanagan and Mohan, 2013). The individuals who take up these added
responsibilities along with their traditional accounting role are known as Finance Business
Partners. This is the resultant role of the evolution of management accountants described in
the previous section of this chapter.

However, not many businesses will be convinced that finance business partnering is a
requirement for the success of the business unless the individuals themselves drive the
demand from within (ICAEW, 2014). For which the capabilities should be build in many
avenues. Capabilities are resources of an organisation put into action by tapping their
capacity to develop or extend its services or products to the market (Winter, 2003). But high
demand from business for such capabilities might tend to overburden the limited resources in
finance to become superhuman in order to deliver increasing and conflicting priorities. So
there is an individual perspective and organisational perspective in building the capabilities.
Authors view is supported by Felin et al (2012), in their view on how micro foundations of
capabilities stem from individuals, process and structure.

1.1.3 Organisational Performance

The ultimate motive of developing such capabilities in finance business partner is to deliver
optimal results through strategy deployment in their respective businesses. In general
organisational performance could be measures in multiple ways from financial perspective to
non financial aspects. If the finance business partnering capabilities were developed ideally it
should lead to sound financially feasible projects.

In summary, evolving nature of management accountants has paved the way to an enhanced
role as finance business partner, whose capabilities could be improved through multiple
avenues from which resultant benefit could improve organisational performances, in this case
both financial and non financial perspective.

12
1.2 Problem statement & justification
Constituents of finance business partnering capabilities to effectively contribute towards
improvements in organisational performance are what the author intents to research through
this study. EY (2015) predicts that by the 2020 every corporate which are leader in their
respective sectors would be working along with a finance business partner. This hints the fact
that how important it is for the finance professional to take up these challenges, how ready
are they and also how organisations could harness these capabilities. It also should be noted
that traditional finance could be easily replaced by the systems but how you make analytics
and arrive and conclusions is something which cannot be automated. It could be said that the
changes in the business world has becomes more pronounced for finance (EY, 2015).
Therefore, the problem statement can be stated as below:

What are the factors enabling finance business partnering capabilities for improved
organisational performance?

1.3 Research Questions and Objectives

Based on above mentioned problem statement the author intends to find answers to the below
research questions though this study.

RQ 1: What factors enables FBP capabilities?

RQ 2: What is the relationship between the identified factors and FBP capabilities?

RQ 2: Would FBP contribute towards improvement in organisational performance?

Based on above research questions the below objectives were developed.

Objective 1: To recognise the factors influencing of FBPC

Objective 2: To establish the relationship between influencing factors and FBPC

Objective 3: To establish the relationship between FBP and organisational performance

1.4 Significance of the study

Empirical studies to analyse which factors contribute towards finance business partnering
capabilities and how it contributes towards improvement in the organisational performance is
very limited in nature. Despite that this has been widely debated and published by finance
professional bodies and leading audit firms who ensure that the change is happening and how

13
ready the individuals are and how well the organisations are contributing towards such
capability development to occupy business partners to act as internal advisory for the
business. Hence this study intent to bridge the knowledge gap in this area and contribute to
the academic literature.

Most available literatures were based on surveys conducted and case studies developed in
Western part of the world, especially in Europe. Wolf et el (2016), Tynkkynen (2016), Voipio
(2014), Siriwardane, Low and Bliez (2015) are few authors who have worked on this concept
in the recent past. It should also be noted that the study takes place in an emerging economy
like Sri Lanka where the concept of FBP is very new and very little research has taken place
to justify the evolving role of finance. Author believes this would shed light on the emerging
market context in terms of finance business partnering capabilities.

The identified enablers of finance business partnering capabilities could support finance
professionals and the organisations to develop high performing companies based on internal
talent pool enhancement. Also author believes that the findings could be used by the
professional bodies to modify their course content to prepare the finance students for the
future and for the betterment of finance community at large through continuous professional
development mediums and trainings.

1.5 Scope of the study

The scope is to identify and develop the relationship between factors acting as enablers for
finance partnering capability development and together with that how it improves
organisation performance. The scope is very wide in such case. However, the study will be
conducted from the sample of 84 finance professionals who are members of professional
accountancy bodies in Sri Lanka to establish the theory chosen randomly from membership
databases.

1.6 Limitations of the study

Internet mediated questionnaires (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2016) will be used for data
collection. Since the respondents are internet savvy with access to email and the researcher is
a full time employee, hence time limitation lead to this decision to go ahead with self
administered questionnaires. This data gathering instrument is subject to some limitations in
terms of data distortion and social desirability in the responses given (Saunders, Lewis and
Thirnhill, 2016).

14
This research was conducted in a very limited time span. Time has been a major limiting
factor since the researcher was a full time employee and tried her maximum to present her
findings within stipulated timeframe.

1.7 Structure of the report

This study comprises of 5 main chapters. The first chapter gives a view o n the general
introduction to the study along with specifics on the objectives, research significance,
population being chosen, scope and limitations, and also a brief summary on the research
hypothesis.

Chapter two will focus on the review of the literature relevant to the study of finance business
partnering and related capabilities. The chapter will review research articles on the
independent variables of individual capabilities such as attitudes, knowledge and vocational
skills along with organisationa l structure, and systems & processes.

The third chapter will be on the research methodology of the study where the research design,
strategy, sampling technique, tools to be used to gather data etc. This chapter will also
include conceptual framework of the study based on the hypothesis developed and reliability
& validity testing.

The fourth chapter will have the presentation of the data based on the analytics done post
completion of the survey. This will also be accompanied by the data interpretation based on
the patterns, critical discussion on the hypothesis developed, and the impact it has on studies
done in other parts of the world against Sri Lanka.

The fifth and final chapter will include the summary on the main findings accompanied by
directions for further research in the future and also feasible recommendations that could be
adopted.

1.8 Chapter Summary

In summary the above chapter covers the background, research objectives, significance,
scope and limitations of the study and also the structure of the report in detail.

15
 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
The following chapter will highlight the theoretical framework and empirical evidence
prevalent to the research. The focus of the chapter would be around the finance business
partnering concept, capabilities, variables contributes towards such capabilities on which the
conceptual framework and data analysis will be based upon.

2.1 Management accountants as finance business partners

2.1.1 Origins of Business Partnering Concept David Ulrich Model

Business partner is popular term originally initiated from HR discipline where David Ulrich
in 1997 states the importance of HR becoming a strategic partner along with handling shared
services and being a part of centres of excellence (Reez and French, 2010). The role of HR
as strategic partner requires them to be a part of strategies developed by the leadership and
implement them such as in the case of resource planning, capability building, gathering
intelligent etc to name a few (Reez and French, 2010).

Figure 1: David Ulrich Model on HR Roles

Source: Reez and French (2010)

However the model started to gain more criticisms from practicality angles where HR
practitioners are more of generalists and the strategic partner was considered as only a name
change. Deloitte (2009) and CIPD (2010) argued that it should be adopted with precautions
since it required significant changes in mentality and business partners lacked the business
acumen to convince the management on such merging requirement on such transitions.

16
2.1.2 Finance Business Partners and Capabilities

2.1.2.1 Who are finance business partners?

Following the Ulrich model, similar development was seen visible in finance departments
where their skills and knowledge has been shared with cross functional teams in current
context. In search of literature to describe who business partners are, various academics have
defined business partnering from a controllers (Management accountants) stand point at
various occasions.

Javenpaa (2007) states that its the readiness of a controller to participate actively in decision
making, however, this is subject to managements demand for such inputs. Another definition
states that its the role played in supporting the deployment of strategies devised by the
management within risk appetite of the company in order to generate shareholder wealth with
effective questioning and challenging and continuous support throughout (Flanagan and
Mohan, 2013).

Figure 2: Traditional to Emerging Role of Finance

Source: Flanagan and Mohan (2013)

The above image depicts how the finance role has been transforming and more oriented
towards business support and strategic advisory (Flanagan and Mohan, 2013). The
management accountants in their new enhanced role should be able to generate value through
creating value by giving business input that creates an impact (CGMA, 2015).

17
Figure 3: Role of creating an impact
So urce: (CGMA, 2015)

2.1.2.2 Finance Business Partnering Capabilities

Capabilities are resources of an organisation put into action by tapping their capacity to
develop or extend its services or products to the market (Winter, 2003). Finance business
partnering involves the role played in supporting the deployment of strategies devised by the
management within risk appetite of the company in order to generate shareholder wealth with
effective questioning and challenging and continuous support throughout (Flanagan and
Mohan, 2013). The individuals who take up these added responsibilities along with their
traditional accounting role are known as Finance Business Partners.

2.1.2.3 Background on global studies

In the study conducted by IBM on global CFOs in 2010, the concept of finance as business
partners has started to gain momentum in the academic and professional literature sources.
The global survey concluded the fact that finance would no longer survive based on only its
technical stand point but through integration of itself as part of t he wider business
(Tynkkynen, 2016). It further included an emphasis over the combination of business insight
and finance efficiency making the role of CFO more vital for the future of the companies
(IBM, 2010). In the world of changes due to automation the study has actually revealed the
importance of making finance more relevant for the future by taking more strategic
standpoint. Following this EY (2010) conducted another study amidst 669 senior finance
professionals of multiple geographical regions representing Europe, Africa and Middle East
and Indian sub continent in order to understand the unique qualities expected of a CFO,
which were referred to as DNA. The study concluded the fact that CFOs have been turning
the role of finance around by repositioning themselves as enabling business partners than

18
corporate gate keepers (EY, 2010). With above studies the finance business partnering
concept started to gain its momentum in the corporate world.

Consultancy firms such as Deloitte and KPMG started to pick on this and conducted their
own studies as to how these could be implemented and which skills are expected by the
modern day corporate from finance professional. These consultancy firms even took its
stance to the next level by developing a separate service offering where in the absence of
internal talent pool they would offer partnering services (Deloitte, 2012). The studies also
proposed what measures to be used for performance appraisal, how the business should
support such changes etc (Deloitte, 2012). However, outsourcing such partnering
requirements to and external party even with disclosure agreements seems bit farfetched
given the sensitivity of the data which is under discussion and evaluation when making
strategic opinions. Hence, facilitating the internal talent pool to become finance partners
makes it more relevant and strategic for a business.

Following such corporate studies, lately, global finance accountancy bodies has been doing
their studies and publishing articles in their discussion forums on guidelines, emphasizing the
importance etc. CGMA, CIMA and ICAEW are few bodies to conduct such studies. CGMA
(2015) claimed the fact that in the VUCA world we live in finance business partners could
become a key enabler for the companies to attain their competitive advantage though tapping
their finance and business knowledge by becoming a part of matrix cross functional
structures of a company. In many businesses in practical standpoint, new roles have been
established. One such example is GSK, global pharmaceutical and consumer healthcare
company has clearly defined business partners working along with sales and marketing teams
on projects to deliver results.

Academic literature is still under developed on this concept, but very few studies have been
conducted on Western part of the world which will be discussed later in the next chapter.

2.1.3Types of finance business partners

Similar to David Ulrich model, CIMA has proposed the types of finance business partners
that could exist in a company.

19
 Figure 4: Types of Finance Business Partners

Source: Adapted from CIMA (2009)

Based on whether its operational or how embedded the services are there could be 4
categories as analysed below.

2.1.3.1 Finance Shared Services

Shared services partners are more of technical specialists where their capabilities are high due
to investments technologies and people for routine services such as budgeting, generating
reports and analysis etc (CIMA, 2009). Their services are more routine and automated. These
services could be either in-house or outsourced based on cost efficiencies.

2.1.3.2 Financial Support

These finance partners sit as a part of matrix structure with solid line reporting to business
and dotted line to the finance director. These roles take more of number crunching and
controls based stand point than contributing to the business (CIMA, 2009). These are tricky
roles since solid line to business makes it biased towards business calls than fiduciary duty to
uphold objectivity as finance professional (CIMA, 2009).

2.1.3.3 Expert Services

These finance partners are based in head offices than in front line of projects (CIMA, 2009).
It would be really hard for them to give opinion solidly based on operational stance due to
their strategic standpoint, but they would be very objective and subject matter experts who
could support the business related decisions.

2.1.3.4 Finance Leadership

This calibre would be the ideal finance business partners where they are specialists in
analysis, supports businesses through questioning and challenging and act as finance coach

20
for the shareholders on wealth maximisation (CIMA, 2009). This fourth type of the finance
business partner is the main focus of this research study.

2.3 Theoretical Frameworks

While exploring the literature on the finance business partnering capabilities, author was able
to find below existing theoretical framework as the basis for the development of hypothesis
variables.

2.3.1 Dynamic Resource Based Theory and Capability Lifecycle Teece et al (1997) &
Helfat and Peteraf (2003)
Resource based view theory suggests that firms competitive advantage over time evolves
with the capabilities of the resources within them. Teece et al (1997) suggested that dynamic
capabilities form the basis for competencies of organisations. Dynamic capabilities are firms
abilities to build, reconfigure and integrate external and internal competencies based on the
changing external environment (Teece et al, 1997). This would involve p hysical and human
resources of a company. In the case of finance business partnering, external dynamics should
be able to be adopted through analysis and communication of option to the management to
take steps to address the threat or accommodate and create value on an opportunity. However,
having only the dynamic capabilities would not be sufficient but it should also evolve through
the changes of the company and its offering as in the case of product life cycles.

Helfat and Peteraf (2003) introduced a basis for dynamic capabilities through a form of life
cycle to highlight how the capabilities go through a process and create the evolution of the
organisational capabilities. In the foundation stage, with a set target objective a founding
group will be set with a leadership (Helfat and Peteraf, 2003). Adner and Helfat (2003)
suggest that the team should have human capital, social capital and as well as cognition to
achieve the targets set. The team will move into a development stage where the team works
on capabilities development based on individual desires in terms of risk appetite and
technical competencies (Helfat and Peteraf, 2003). Then comes the capability maintenance
stage where the teams continuously exercises their capabilities for the betterment of the
organisation in an uninterrupted manner then, leading to tacit capabilities (Helfat and Peteraf,
2003) which is practically explained by the learning curves on productivity (Thompson,
2002). Then the capabilities might enter into retirement if it no longer required in the field or
could be renewed and retrenched to influence a trajectory to the evolvement in the
organisation (Helfat and Peteraf, 2003).

21
In the transformation to develop finance business partner, both individual and organisation
input is of vital to make firm more dynamic and also to proceed through the capability
lifecycle. However, not all organisations occupy dynamic capabilities, as in the case of new
to the world companies, for which such capabilities are non - existent. Those capabilities are
known as operational capabilities which could similarly go through the life cycles and
influence the evolving organisation.

2.3.2 Micro foundations of routines and capabilities- Felin et al, 2012

In recent literature there has been increasing attention given to the origins of capabilities and
routines which contributes towards the differences in organisational behaviours and
performances (Felin et al, 2012, Miller et al, 2012, Hoopes and Madsen, 2008 etc). Felin et al
(2012) framework on micro foundations of capabilities and routines has explained how micro
factors could contribute towards organisational heterogeneity in terms of performance. These
micro level factors such as individuals, processes and structures have developed the core
foundation of the management theory (Felin and Foss, 2009).

In this theory, routines could be defined as the repeating patterns of actions done by multiple
individuals (Feldman and Pentland, 2003). Organisations capabilities is a compilation of
high level routines given as input which ultimately generates significant out puts as set of
decisions for the management to choose from (Winter, 2000). This provides the basis that the
capabilities could evolve based on routines, learning and experience by putting resources into
action (Felin et al, 2012). Some capabilities are zero level which emerges as a result of
repetitive routines where as high level or dynamic capabilities are generated through multiple
other sources. The focus of this paper would be mainly on dynamic partnering capabilities
since that is what required in enabling finance to perform as strategic advisory for the
business. The building blocks identified by the authors could be depicted as below from the
above theory.

Figure 5: Building Blocks of Routines and Capabilities

Source: Compiled by Author based on Felin et al (2012)

22
This theory documents how individual, organisations structure and well as the processes open
up the way for development of capabilities. Individual plays a vital role since their capacity
mould the behaviour, performances and evolutions of the company thro ugh individual
characteristics such as in abilities, cognition and choices etc (Felin et al, 2012). Why
individuals became part of the formula is that firstly they are rational beings in decision as
per behavioural theory and secondly they bring more variety to the human capital through
their knowledge and skills (Felin et al, 2012). Hence this character becomes prominent as a
building block.

Processes and interaction bring in capabilities in two mediums. Firstly that could be due to
established process with multiple individual interactions and secondly through how
technology has influenced such coordination (Felin et al, 2012). Final constituent of the
micro foundation would be organisations structure where it modifies how individuals
interact, knowledge being transferred and collective actions are made (Felin et al, 2012).

In contrary, it should be noted that multiple external factors dominate the capability
development in any organisation. How historically the processes are being modified, how to
assess the capability of a department would it be thorough individual or group behaviours
and suffers in terms of temporal dynamics. Winter (2012) and Hidgson (2012) have been
raising these alternative viewpoints on above theory. This theory will influence the
conceptual model of this study to assess the factors influencing finance business partnering
capabilities.

2.4 Empirical Evidence and Hypothesis Development

2.4.1 Individual Capabilities

The first variable identified which could contribute towards finance business partnering
capability building was individuals. An organisation could be defined as aggregation of
individuals. The attributes and heterogeneity brought in by the individuals are well studied in
the organisational behaviour and psychological st udies and few studies are conducted in how
individual cognition would contribute in terms of firms performances (Laureiro Martinez et
al, 2010, Felin and Zenger, 2009).

The heterogeneity is brought in by the individuals in terms of human capital aspects such as
in the case of knowledge, skills and risk appetitive etc (Felin and Hesterly, 2007). Another
variation brought in by individuals are explained by Felin et al (2012) in terms how the
relational capability through individual interactions and integrat ion capability through how

23
they integrate knowledge and related artefacts to attain specific outcomes which forms the
routines and capabilities. Certain studies have also highlighted individuals as the critical
factor for the capabilities and their mobility affects the organisational performance (Madsen
et al, 2003).

Due to importance given in the academic literature on individual capabilities, author has
decided to research three human capital variables to analyse this factors relationship with
finance business partnering capability.

2.4.1.1 Attitudes
Wolf et al (2015) in their study on controllers as business partners in decision making
established that attitude plays a vital role in modifying the behaviour of the controllers to take
on business partnering role. Their study was based on the established theory by Ajzen (1998)
on reasoned action. An individual attitude depends majorly based on the outcomes of
behaviour of actions as a business partner (Wolf et al, 2015). Attitude will be the antecedent
for management accountants business partnering behaviour to modify their routine work to
take on added responsibilities which is subject to individuals assessment on consequences.

Studies in the area of behavioural theory on individual factors which contribute towards
organisations actions are very limited in nature (Felin et al, 2012). One theory that has been
established by Argote and Greeve (2007) says that when individuals take actions based on
their beliefs they gain feedback gain experience and adapt to the environment. This
experiential learning is subject to individuals cognitive limitations and their experience. This
become a part of their daily routines and plays a vital role in capability development (Argote
and Greeve, 2007).

There is an emerging trend in empirical work on management literature on how internal state
(specifically psychological processes) of individuals influence the choices and in turn impact
the capability development of an organisation. Huy (2011) stated that emotions of managers
on actions of an organisation would directly influence the implementation success. There are
studies being developed about the psychological process imaging on individuals on making
choices which concludes the influence they have on development and mod ification on
capabilities of an organisation (Laureiro Martinez et al, 2010). Furthermore, attitude will
also be modifying the behavioural intention by assessment of what fellow individuals would
think about the changes (subjective norm) and how much control does he or she would have
on performing or not performing partnering role (volitional control) at the expected level

24
from them which is subject to availability of opportunities and resources (Ajzen, 1998).
Simons (2014) adds that individuals capacity to take on added tasks will also modify the
attitude to become a finance partner could be mainly due to limitation in staff with required
skill set.

ICAEW (2014) guidelines suggest that FBP should have a business orientation and utilise
available resources and manage stakeholders. FBP might often face a conflict whether to
support the business or maintain the independence of finance function and expected to act
with objectivity (ICAEW, 2014). This might be one of the reasons for negativity around
taking up the partnering role. It further adds that commercial acumen is expected to accept
and pursue commercially viable projects only and have the attitude towards shareholder
wealth management coupled constructive criticisms (ICAEW, 2014). Based on above review
below hypothesis is developed.

H1: There is a relationship between attitudes and FBPC

2.4.1.2 Knowledge
Knowledge and management accounting has been widely analysed in various disciples. Initial
study on knowledge was conducted by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). They argued on the
ontological angle, emphasising the knowledge created by individuals and alternatively on the
epistemological standpoint, knowledge created through transfer of explicit and tacit
knowledge through social interactions (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). Holsapple and Jones
(2004) have portrayed 5 levels in knowledge namely, acquisition, selection, generation,
assimilation and emission. Given the complications in acquiring knowledge, knowledge
management perspective started to emerge in the literature.

Knowledge could be defined as sum of data that an individual attains through conscious
learning (Gornjak, 2014). It could be group or individual learning. Most organisations operate
as knowledge based relational network as per the knowledge based view (Verwaal, 2016). He
further adds that epistemic communities would be able to assess such knowledge through
common norms and procedures under the constraints of bounded rationality risks and
opportunities (Verwaal, 2016).

Grant (1996) proposed that superior profitability is possible through capability based
advantages than market strategies for which specialised knowledge is of critical importance.
He further adds that efficiency of tapping into individual knowledge, scope of knowledge and
flexibility in renewing existing knowledge contributes to the success of knowledge
25
integration (Grant,1996). Shiller (2010) adds that knowledge management has gained
prominence in the area of management accountants with strategic focus to improving the
organisational capabilities in terms of performance. Alavi & Leinder (2001) proposes that
information technology has been playing wider role in creating knowledge and learning
through knowledge management systems (KMS). Levels of KMS are as follows:

This is where the Since knowledge Transmission of Instructions,

Application
Transmission
Store
Create

knowledge is evolve with knowledge processes,

created through organisatios it happens through problem solving
emails, intranet, needs to be formal meetings, and routine
skills preserved in KMS informal meetings activities
development and seminars
inside an
organisation

Figure 6: Levels of Knowledge Management

Source: Compiled by Author based on Alavi & Leinder (2001)

Schiller (2010) proved that holistic learning should be encouraged for management
accountants to gain knowledge in new concepts and prosper in the dynamic business
environment whereas traditional learning would limit the success only to basic management
accounting principles. Finance business partners should be able to understand changing
environment and adapt accordingly through accumulating knowledge on business acumen in
order to devise business strategies and provide credible inputs to business (ICAEW, 2014).
Hence learning organisations would be able to have knowledge based capabilities.

Finance business partners are also encouraged to have wider cross functional knowledge
since that would support in terms of effective questioning and challenging in terms of IT,
marketing and risk management disciples (ICAEW, 2014). 93% of the CEOs believe
sustainability as next big ticket item of corporate agenda hence having sound knowledge on
society and environment are also expected from them (ICAEW, 2014). The second
hypothesis will be devised as below:

H2: There is a relationship between knowledge and FBPC

2.4.1.3 Vocational Skills

Having discussed the academic standpoint on the criticality of attitude and knowledge of
professional accountants, it is required to see how capable and equipped they are to execute
their viewpoints and ideas. This is mainly through having adequate vocational skills. There
have been few researches done on the importance of such soft skills for a professional

26
accountant. Roger (1996) supports these views in saying that technical skills can be carried
out better if an employee possesses generic skills. There are often big debates on academic
literature on which kind of skills are required for finance professionals generic non
accounting skills or technica l accounting skills. On one end generic skills are encouraged for
individuals to perform better (Palmer, Dougles and P insker, 2004) whereas as Smigla (2003)
suggests that technical skills are mandatory for a person to move up the carrier ladder in
finance. However finance professional bodies such as IFA (2003) supports generic skills
improvement through lifelong learning. The study will focus on generic skills as an
antecedent for the existence of finance business partnering capability.

Quality of the accountants could be measured as fit for purpose (Hassall et al, 2005). Yorke
(1992) says that students buy a qualification from educational institutes with a mot ive to
transform themselves to be fit into a career. They themselves become products for employers
by being transformed through strenuous learning process to become a professional. One such
skill set is non accounting capabilities mainly referred to soft skills/generic skills that enable
them to execute their knowledge (Hassal et al, 2005). In this study they have identified,
communications, analytical, technical skills and interpersonal skills as critical from a
European employer standpoint (Hassal et al, 2005). CGMA (2015) suggests that even after
qualifying, through continuous professional development avenues, finance business partners
would be able to gain such skills which are depicted as below:

Figure 7: Skills of Finance Business P artners

Source: Adopted from CGMA (2015)

27
Siriwardane, Law & Bletz (2015) mention that there are gaps in communication skills among
professional accountants. These are skills which strike a balance between effectiveness and
appropriateness of message delivery to the respective stakeholders (Spitzberg and Cupach,
1984). Through such communication skills FBPs are expected to put forward a convincing
argument (ICAEW, 2014). Burnett (2003) in their study amidst finance professionals found
that top ranking given for communications among other generic skill set.

Problem solving skills has emerged in recent passed as a result of technology taking over
most of routine accounting tasks (Hunton, 2002). It is the ability to solve issues arising from
familiar and unfamiliar context with analytical capabilities due to changing business
environment (Jones and Davidson, 2007). FBPs are expected to present business insights
through such skill set by reducing the analysis paralysis based on magnitudes of the results
presented by numbers (ICAEW, 2014).

In todays context, management accountants have become a part of cross functional teams in
which they have to represent interpersonal team working skills (Kennedy and Sorenson,
2006). Avery (2001) mentions that its the skill to take responsibility of team work and its
outcome. Crombie and Lord (2009), Hancock et al (2010) and Mallak (2012) have found that
management places high bets on management accountants with team skills.

ICAEW (2014) mentions that time management as next critical skill set for individual
capability to manage daily routine task and performing as business partner of the firm. These
capabilities are subject to organisational culture and layouts of the office which often impacts
the individual capacity to manage and deliver value at stipulated time periods (ICAEW,
2014). Hence the third variable could be posited as below:

H3: There is a relationship between vocational skills and FBPC

2.4.2Organisational Structure
The freedom and the ability to deliver tasks for the FBPs are widely subject to the type of
organisational structure they are placed in. ACCA and IMA survey suggests the global CFOs
find it as the 4th priority of their corporate agendas to build a suitable organisational structure
for finance business partner indicating the importance of this variable on partnering capability
building (ACCA, 2014).

Felin et al (2012) defines the organisational structure as the condition which constraints or
enables individual or collective action through interactions within organisations. They

28
influence sharing of information and knowledge, coordination and collective decision making
(Felin et al, 2012). Structures would influence the capabilities in 3 dimensions as discussed in
literature. Firstly organisations would establish rules to enhance decision making through
organisational structures (Bingham and Eisenhardt, 2011) which often influenced by the
organisational and institutional constraints. Some structure may become flexible and some
may become more stringent for governing purposes. This efficacy decides how it influences
capability developments of individuals (Felin et al, 2012). Secondly, the type of structure
influences the information sharing and coordination (flat or tall, matrix or virtual structures)
which would influence coordination and integration within a firm and might impac t
capability development of individuals (Foss, 2003). Finally, founders logic behind
administration will influence the capabilities such as in the case of administrative
bureaucracies (Baron et al, 1999). These policies would modify the firms capability
development policies.

Hopper (1980) is of the view point that traditional accounting role was presenting a
centralised structure where accountants directly reporting to higher level management as
similar to subsidiary reporting to parent. Benston (1969) on the other hand suggests that this
is not the case where finance performs a service role to the business providing information to
operational units and middle management and operates as decentralised organisation with the
risk of data manipulation. Felin and Powell (2016) refers to this as differentiation by
Polyarchy structure where organisation distributes autonomy to individuals and subunits
through which they expect to facilitate local creativity, experiments to influence capability
building through organisational design. ICAEW (2014) suggests that ideal structure to be
decentralised where divisional CFOs report to group CFO as well as a dotted line to the
business. This is subject to few challenges where finance integrity is at risk when they take a
business stance, and also divisional finance should not be viewed as corporate spies for the
partnering to work well.

Incentives play a vital role in the motivational standpoint for fianc business partner to take
on a challenging role. If the group CFO makes bonus decisions it would be subject to
business challenges hence might hinder the financial benefits and reduce motivation to FBP
(ICAEW, 2014). P lacement of FBPs with internal customers is also being very challenging
due to proximity, geography and space limitations (ICAEW, 2014) which constraints the
insights which would be given by the business partners.

29
Information systems has reduced the number of individuals and influenced the flat
organisations lately (Davis, 2000). The fourth variable is as below :

H4: There is a relationship between organisational structure and FBPC

2.4.3 Systems and Processes

Processes could be defined as series of interrelated activities (Felin et al, 2012). Establishing
processes requires routines developed through individual interactions (Felin et al, 2012). 4
different varieties of routines could emerge and would accommodate capability building.
Some routines are very rigid in nature, as in the case of processes limited by SOP guidelines
(Felin et al, 2012), where as alternatively some processes could be executed at the
management discretion as explained by Hoops and Madsen (2008) which leads to
heterogeneous firms. The third type emerges through trial and error learning and finally it
could even emerge from ad hoc problem solving (Miner, 1994 and Winter, 2003). The
process adopted by the company would reflect how the capabilities are driven through such
interactions.

Technological disruptions have emerged in todays business world hence emphasise the
importance of system integration into finance which has facilitated in many ways for
capability enhancements. Cassiatori (2012)s research on the impact of technological
artefacts on capability development of companies. Few other studies like how Barley (1986)
proved the importance of technological interaction among medical specialists and
improvement in learning rates through technology interventions by (Ashworth et al, 2006)
among finance firms explain the role of technology played by systems on capability
enhancements. Systems become a platform for problem solving, social learning etc
(Edmondson et al, 2007).

Establishing a user friendly systems and processes are putting tremendous challenges for the
businesses. Finance is encouraged to maintain and agile relationship with IT department to
ensure that proper systems are in place because that would be the source from which the data
for analytics will emerge from (ICAEW, 2014). The outputs from the systems should be
trustworthy for the finance business partners to make an analysis hence finance also should
play a vital role in system selection, implementing controls etc (ICAEW, 2014). There are
vast avenues of opportunities such as cloud computing and outsources IT departments for
specialised services for enhancement of the capability by being mindful on risks pertaining to
such initiatives.

30
Hence the fifth variable could be depicted as below:

H5: There is a relationship between systems & processes and FBPC

2.4.4Organisational Performance
Measuring the business performance is an ongoing challenge for many companies (Mouzas,
2006). Many academics have explained various phenomena that explained how firms
success has been influenced. The organisational performance could be explained through
financial and financial performance measures (Lahiri et al, 2009).

As depicted by Santerelli and Vivarelli (2007), business performance is complicated with

focus on success often influenced by capabilities which corresponds with changes in external
environment. Usage advanced management accounting techniques will lead to firms high
performance (Chenhall & Langfield, 1998). Internal systems, structures and situational
factors will influence the organisational performance (Mat and Smith, 2014).

Organisational performance was chosen as a variable to see how finance business partnering
capabilities will enable it which is the ulterior motive for the common expectation of
partnering for performance theme. PWC (2009) states that finance business partnering
would bring in financial results through partnering culture, synergies stemming from
partnering and accountability on the information sources. IBM (2010) in their study on
relationship on finance business partners and their impact on business outcome and
operational cost saving have identified that ROI and revenue CAGR has been phenomenally
high, 30% and 49% more respectively than companies with finance business partners.

Hence the below hypothesis could be posited:

H6: There is a relationship between FBPC and organisational performance

2.5 Chapter Summary

The above chapter detailed out the global studies in the finance business partnering concepts,
terminology descriptions and branches of partnering in finance department. 5 independent
variables were identified namely, attitudes, knowledge, vocational skills (as part of individual
capabilities), organisational structure, systems and processes as factors influencing finance
business partnering (dependent) and organisational performance was chosen as the next
dependent variable to establish the second link between FBP capability and performance.

31
Very detailed theoretical framework was given on dynamic capabilities, capability cycle and
the micro foundations of capabilities and routines. Then empirical evidence on the hypothesis
variables was discussed in detail in relation to capability building for an organisation.

32
 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The following chapter will highlight the definitions of the variables used in the study,
research methodology adapted, population, sample, sample selection technique adopted and
operationalization of the constructs, pilot study analysis, validity and reliability verifications
on the data collection tool.

3.1 Definition on Variables

Variable Definition Source

Attitudes An individuals beliefs on outcomes and attributes Wolf et al (2015),
of an action in a social environment. Ajzen (1980)
Knowledge Knowledge could be defined as sum of data that an Gornjak (2014)
individual attains through conscious learning.
Vocational Skills Generic non accounting skills those are required for Mallak (2012)
all professions.
Organisational Its a condition which constraints or enables Felin et al (2012)
Structure individual or collective action through interactions
within organisations.
Systems & Processes Processes could be defined as series of interrelated Felin et al (2012)
activities.

Systems are technological artefacts which Cassiatori (2012)

influences problem solving and social learning. and Edmondson
et al (2007)
Finance Business Finance business partnering involves the role Flanagan and
Partnering Capabilities played in supporting the deployment of strategies Mohan (2013)
devised by the management within risk appetite of
the company in order to generate shareholder
wealth with effective questioning and challenging
and continuous support throughout.

Capabilities are resources of an organisation put Winter (2003)

into action by tapping their capacity to develop or
extend its services or products to the market.

33
Organisational How firm has performed in terms of financials, Wolf et al (2015),
Performance internal efficiency, process improvements and Lahiri et al (2009)
market share perspective.
Table 1: V ariable Definitions

So urce: Compiled by Author (2017)

3.2 Conceptual Framework

Figure 8: Conceptual Framework of the study

Source: Compiled by Author (2017)

3.3 Research Hypothesis

Felin et al (2012) in their micro foundations theory has established that individuals play a
vital role in the organisational capability development. When Ajzen (1998) and Argote and
Greeve (2007) proved that attitudes influences individuals behaviour and Wolf et al (2015)
has given an alternative viewpoint saying that subjective norm has more power than
controllers attitude towards a partnering behaviour. However both studies are conducted in
Western part of the world and contradicting with their finding. Knowledge has been a critical
factor in establishing capabilities (Verwaal, 2016 and Grant 1996) and most studies
unanimously agrees on this conclusion. The third variable on individual capability, vocational
skills, has a positive impact on capabilities as per Palmer, Dougals and Pinsker (2004), where
as Smigla (2003) says it should be the technical skills that are critical for succession of
individuals in finance career.

34
Hopper (1980) suggests finance should be a centralised structure and Benston (1969) and
ICAEW (2014) says it should be decentralised to provide services to the business in order to
contribute towards capability. Felin et al (2012) states that processes improves interactions
and build in capabilities but whether its rigid or at the management discretion (Hoops and
Madsen, 2008) makes the difference to what extent it builds the capabilities.

Wolf et al (2015) in their study has established that partnering behaviour would lead to
process improvements and internal efficiencies for the firms. The financial performance has
been studied in other disciplines such as in the case of marketing capabilities and risk
management capabilities (Fainshimdt et al, 2016) but not specifically to finance business
partnering per se. However, in terms of dynamic capabilities, Zott (2003) argues systematic
changes inside the resources would enlighten the firms with knowledge to effectively manage
cost and be congruent with business climate. Alternatively, Ambrosini and Bowman (2009)
argue that dynamic capabilities might not necessarily bring in configuration of right resources
and entail cost. From a Sri Lankan stance, since this phenomenon is not yet explored, hence it
could be hypothesized that finance business partnering capabilities would contribute towards
organisational performance improvements both financially and non-financially.

Based on the above summary from empirical evidence detailed in chapter 2 the below list of
hypothesis were developed and will be studied.

H1 There is a relationship between Attitudes and FBPC

H2 There is a relationship between Knowledge and FBPC
H3 There is a relationship between Vocational Skills and FBPC
H4 There is a relationship between Organisational Structure and FBPC
H5 There is a relationship between Systems & Processes and FBPC
H6 There is a relationship between FBPC and organisational performance

3.4 Research Paradigm & Approach

Positivism is one of the paradigms under epistemology which focuses on how the world can
be studied in a scientific manner to find the objective truth prevailing in the area of study
(Sekaran and Bougie, 2013). It assumes that there is cause and effectual, reliability and
generalizability of the research finding through scientific approach (Sekaran and Bougie,
2013). The author would be taking the positivist stance to conduct the objective research
using the established theories to replicate the causal relationship between independent and
dependant variables. Alternatively the researcher could have taken an interpretive approach

35
which is more subjective in nature and believes in alternative methods to study behaviours
(Brymen and Bell, 2011). Given the time constraints and to conduct an objective study the
alternative approach was not taken.

Researcher will use deductive reasoning to establish the causal relationship between
independent and dependent variables. This approach believes that research could only explain
the phenomena by using the objective data and any external factors beyond that influencing
such relationships will be impossible such as in the case of emotions (Sekaran and Bougie,
2013). This study will examine the theories on factors influencing capabilities in the context
of finance business partnering and how it influences the organisational performance at large
in a relatively less researched emerging economy (Sri Lanka).

3.5 Research Design

The research problem is to identify factors enabling FBP and how it impacts organisa tions
performance. Hence this problem forms an influential in nature which leads to explanatory
research design. The causal relationships could be studied through explanatory study
(Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2016). The causal studies describes how one variable
(independent) affects or responsible for another variables (dependent) change (Cooper and
Schindler, 2003). The possible relationships could be studies at multiple ways namely
symmetrical, reciprocal and asymmetrical (Cooper and Schindler, 2003). This study would
analyse the asymmetrical relationships which seeks to look at the impact of variables changes
the other variable, which is the case in most business research. Attitudes, knowledge,
vocational skills, organisational structure and systems & processes become the independent
variable that impacts finance business partnering capabilities which in turn influences
organisational performance.

3.6 Research Strategy and Instrumentation

Survey method is very popular strategy among deductive studies. This is a quantitative study
and questionnaires will be chosen as the instrument conduct the survey among finance
professional in Sri Lanka. Internet mediated pre structured questionnaires (Saunders, Lewis
and Thornhill, 2016) will be used for data collection since the respondents are internet savvy
with access to email. This primary data gathering survey will be administered via
https://docs.google.com/forms electronically. This data gathering instrument is subject to
some limitations in terms of data distortion and social desirability in the responses given
(Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2016). However, given the time limitations this would give

36
access to wider audience and gather data in a convenient manner. The hypothesis testing will
be done through questions asked based on 5 point Likhert scale which then will be analysed
quantitatively based on inference and descriptive statistics to establish the relationships
between variables.

3.7 Population
Population denotes the entire group of individuals, or events that the individual wishes to
study through the research (Sekaran and Bougie, 2013). The changes in the business
environment and emerging technological disruptions have been influencing and modifying
how finance operates in the world and as well as in Sri Lanka. Hence author decided to
choose the members from professional accountancy bodies in Sri Lanka representing CIMA,
ICASL, AAT and CMA as the respondents for this study. Only the members and fellows will
be chosen since they have been working with a certified 3+ years experience in the finance
field. They also possess the clarity and understanding as to what the research is all about and
they could provide valid input to the analytics.

Researcher based the population from membership directories readily available (subject to
information protection ruling) and prepared the below diagram. Since internet administered
surveys will be used, there wont be any restriction on population based on geography or type
of industry they are based in. The population size of the study would be 12,815 (Fig below).

Figure 9: Rese arch Population - Members of Accounting Bodies

Source: Compiled by Author based on CIMA (2015)*, CMA (2015), ICASL (2015), and AAT (2015)

*CIMA directory only discloses member agreed to the information disclosure. Actual membership not reflected above.

37
3.8 Sample
Sekaran and Bougie (2013) describes sample as the subset of a population. These subjects
would denote the overall opinion from the finance professionals of Sri Lanka. Determining
the sample size is a critical factor to generalise the results in such manner. In order to
determine the sample size of the study, the author has chosen the G Power 3.0 software. The
objectives of the study will be done through correlation and regression analysis hence this
belongs to exact test category (Prajapati, Dune and Armstorng, 2016). This would be done
based on two tail test since the author doesnt know the type of relationship that the
independent variables has on dependent variable (Stephanie, 2009). The effectiveness is
considered to be medium since this is based on an email survey, at a margin of error at 5% , at
statistical power of 0.80 giving a total sample size of 84 respondents.

Figure 10: Determination of sample size

Source: Author based on G Power outputs (2017)

3.9 Sampling Technique

The researcher will choose stratified random sampling technique for the choice of the
participants for the selection as sample. Stratified random sampling gained the appreciation
over other sampling techniques since the proportional allocation would create efficient

38
estimation (Christofides, 2005). The sample from the 4 professional institutions will be as
below:

Institute Population Sample

CIMA 1071 7
CMA 2412 16
ICASL 4876 32
AAT 4456 29
12815 84
Table 2: Stratified Sample

Source: Compiled by Author (2017)

The sample of 84 will be chosen as above from the listing in membership directories of the
institutes. To maintain the objectivity 84 random numbers has to be chosen to select for the
study. For this purpose author has chosen the 84 random sample numbers from
https://www.random.org (Appendix 1). This would be the scientific way to apply for this
research with less biasness.

However, since the response rate for email surveys is relatively low, much higher number
than 84 questionnaires has to be emailed out. Hence first 84 responses received during the
stipulated time frame will be chosen for the study.

3.10 Data Analysis

The data analysis will be done based on SPSS (version 24) to test the reliability and validity
and as well as data analysis and representation. Based on the results hypothesis develo ped
will be proven or rejected and research objectives will be fulfilled.

3.11 Ethics in the study

The ethical stance was upheld throughout the study. The survey will be totally voluntary and
the privacy will be maintained for the respondents through anonymity of the individual
responses. There would not be any corporate names mentioned and the selection of
individuals from the directory will be random in nature and there would not be any
discrimination in that case.

Statistical power was used to determine the sample size for the study sinc e that is an
emerging requirement to justify the ethical clearance by research ethics committees on
journal acceptance (Prajapati, Dune and Armstorng, 2016). Also the study would be ethically
acceptable since required sample of 84 will be used than hundreds of participants by

39
effectively using the time and resources of the participants of the study (Prajapati, Dune and
Armstorng, 2016).

3.12 Operationlisation
In order to measure the variables physically it is required to reduce the abstract notions of
nebulous variables (Sekaran and Bougie, 2013). It bridges the gap between psychological
world and physical world. This process is known as operationalisation. It is done by depicting
facets and properties of the variables to make it more observable (Sekaran and Bougie, 2013).

Dimensions Items Sources

Finance Business Partnering FBPC1,
Capabilities
Attitudes
Knowledge
Vocational Skills
Organisational Structure
Systems and Processes
Organisational Performance
Table 3: Operationalisation Table
FBPC2, FBPC3, Developed by author based
FBPC4, FBPC5 on Flanagan and Mohan,
2013)
IA1, IA2, IA3, IA4, IA5 Developed by author based
on Wolf et al (2015), Argote
and Greeve (2007)
IK1, IK2, IK3, IK4 Developed by author based
on Grant (1996) and Verwaal
(2016)
VS1, VS2, VS3, VS4, VS5, Developed by author based
VS6 on ICAEW (2014)
OS1, OS2, OS3, OS4, OS5 Developed by author based
on Felin et al (2012) and
ICAEW (2014)
SNP1, SNP2, SNP3, SNP4, Developed by author based
SNP5 on Cassiatori (2012)
OP1, OP2, OP3, OP4, OP5 Developed by author based
on Wolf et al (2015)

So urce: Done by author (2017)

Refer Appendix 2 for the questionnaire used for the survey.

3.13 Measurement of Testing

There are 7 variables analysed in the study with relevant hypothesis testing which includes
finance business partnering capability, attitudes, knowledge, vocational skills, organisational

40
structure, systems and processes and organisational performance. All of these are made as
scale variables using 5 point Likhert scale question in which 5 stands for Strongly agree
and 1 denotes Strongly Disagree.

3.14 Pilot Study

Since the research instrument was newly developed by author based on the theoretical
understanding gained from literature review, it a requirement to test the validity and
reliability of the construct using a test run which is known as pilot study (Polit, Beck and
Hungler, 2001). Baker (1994) adds that 10% - 20% of the sample should be reasonable
participant for the test study. For this research author has chosen 20 respondents for the pilot
study out of the main sample of 84 (refer section 3.8 above) which is 24% which satisfies the
minimal requirement and considered sufficient to proceed with main study based on test
results.

The rationale behind this pilot study is to see the comprehensiveness of the instrument, scale
reliability and validity verifications, and also to establish analytical and statistical processes
to establish the efficacy (Simon, 2011).

3.15 Validity
Gaur and Gaur (2006) defines validity as a test to verify that the research instrument is
actually measuring the property it supposes to measure. They further add that this validity
assessment could be done through 4 tests namely face validity, predictive validity, content
validity and construct validity (Gaur and Gaur, 2006). Out of these, construct validity is
widely used in social science studies which assesses the agreement between theory and
measuring instrument (Gaur and Gaur, 2006).

Sekaran and Bougie (2013) proposes that the construct validity check could be done to verify
convergent validity and discriminant validity.

3.15.1 Convergent Validity

This assess the scores generated from two different instruments measuring the same concept
are correlated highly (Sekaran and Bougie, 2013). This can be assessed though factor loading
in SPSS.

When constructs are loaded into one factor in SPSS, Kaizer-Mayer-Olkin measure, Bartlett
Sphercity and component matrix results were generated for each dimension (Refer table
below).

41
 Variable No of KMO Chic Square Bartletts Component
Items Statistics Sphericity Sig Matrix

Finance Business Partnering 5 0.669 50.548 0.000

Capability
- FBPC 1 0.847
- FBPC 2 0.760
- FBPC 3 0.781
- FBPC 4 0.865
- FBPC 5 0.749
Attitudes 5 0.753 38.300 0.000
- IA1 0.852
- IA2 0.926
- IA3 0.767
- IA4 0.572
- IA5 0.698
Knowledge 4 0.544 37.845 0.000
- IK1 0.678
- IK2 0.744
- IK3 0.852
- IK4 0.894
Vocational Skills 6 0.794 60.216 0.000
- VS1 0.762
- VS2 0.797
- VS3 0.766
- VS4 0.902
- VS5 0.861
- VS6 0.604
Organisational Structure 5 0.669 23.763 0.008
- OS1 0.736
- OS2 0.792
- OS3 0.636
- OS4 0.533
- OS5 0.832
Systems and Processes 5 0.775 67.510 0.000
- SNP1 0.875
- SNP2 0.776
- SNP3 0.897
- SNP4 0.884
- SNP5 0.883
Organisational Performance 5 0.636 80.223 0.000
- OP1 0.913
- OP2 0.863
- OP3 0.862
- OP4 0.814
- OP5 0.877
Table 4: Results of Reliability testing

Source: Pilot study data (2017)

Refer Appendix 3 for detailed results from SPSS.

42
3.15.1.1 KMO, Bartlett Sphericity & Component Marix Results
KMO assesses depicts the ratio between squared correlation between variables and squared
partial correlation between variables (Kaiser, 1970 cited in Field, 2009). The results could
vary from 0 -1 and should be considered acceptable if its more than 0.5 (Field, 2009).
Considering the above table for KMO stats, all 7 variables are above this cut off criteria
hence valid in terms of sampling adequacy. In order to be more specific as per Hutcheson and
Sofronious (1999 cited in Field, 2009) classification on KMO scores, FBP, IK, OS and OP
have mediocre results since they range from 0.5 0.7 where as IA, VS and SNP are good
since they range from 0.7 0.8.

Bartletts Sphercity assess if the observed correlation matrix is significantly different from
identify matrix (NCSU, 2016). Rule of thumb is to accept the factor is the significance value
is less than 0.05 (NCSU, 2016). As per the table above all of the results satisfy the cut off
criteria hence could be considered valid.

3.15.1.2 Factor Loading Analysis

1. Finance Business Partnering Capability

All indicators of FBPC variable loaded on one factor. 64.315% of the variances are explained
by the single factor extracted.

Total Variance Explained

Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 3.216 64.315 64.315 3.216 64.315 64.315
2 .885 17.701 82.016
3 .522 10.434 92.450
4 .253 5.064 97.514
5 .124 2.486 100.000
Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.
Table 5: Tot al Variance Explained FBPC

Source: Pilot study data (2017)

2. Attitudes
All indicators of attitudes variable loaded on one factor. 59.719% of the variances are
explained by the single factor extracted.

43
 Total Variance Explained
Component Initial Eigen values Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 2.986 59.719 59.719 2.986 59.719 59.719
2 .796 15.915 75.633
3 .705 14.105 89.738
4 .342 6.833 96.571
5 .171 3.429 100.000
Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.
Table 6: Tot al Variance expl ained for Attitudes

Source: Pilot survey data (2017)

3. Knowledge
All indicators of attitudes variable loaded on one factor. 63.492% of the variances are
explained by the single factor extracted.

Total Variance Explained

Component Initial Eigen values Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 2.540 63.492 63.492 2.540 63.492 63.492
2 .894 22.352 85.844
3 .467 11.664 97.508
4 .100 2.492 100.000
Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.
Table 7: Tot al Variance expl ained for Knowledge

Source: Pilot survey data (2017)

4. Vocational Skills
All indicators of VS variable loaded on one factor. 62.050% of the variances are explained by
the single factor extracted.

Total Variance Explained

Component Initial Eigen values Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 3.723 62.050 62.050 3.723 62.050 62.050
2 .879 14.649 76.699
3 .729 12.147 88.846
4 .292 4.864 93.710
5 .220 3.661 97.370
6 .158 2.630 100.000
Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.
Table 8: Table 8: Total V ariance explained for Vocational Skills

Source: Pilot survey data (2017)

44
5. Organisational Structure
All indicators of OS variable loaded on one factor. 51.037% of the variances are explained by
the single factor extracted.

Total Variance Explained

Component Initial Eigen values Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 2.552 51.037 51.037 2.552 51.037 51.037
2 .987 19.739 70.777
3 .677 13.534 84.310
4 .514 10.283 94.593
5 .270 5.407 100.000
Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.
Table 9: Tot al Variance expl ained for Organisational Structure

Source: Pilot survey data (2017)

6. Systems and Processes

All indicators of SNP variable loaded on one factor. 74.691% of the variances are explained
by the single factor extracted.

Total Variance Explained

Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 3.735 74.691 74.691 3.735 74.691 74.691
2 .616 12.312 87.003
3 .304 6.072 93.075
4 .251 5.015 98.090
5 .096 1.910 100.000
Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.
Table 10: Total Variance explained for Systems and Processes

Source: Pilot survey data (2017)

7. Organisational Performance
All indicators of OP variable loaded on one factor. 75.056% of the variances are explained by
the single factor extracted.

45
 Total Variance Explained
Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 3.753 75.056 75.056 3.753 75.056 75.056
2 .558 11.156 86.212
3 .447 8.946 95.158
4 .201 4.020 99.178
5 .041 .822 100.000
Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.
Table 11:Table 11: Tot al Vari ance explained for Organisational performance

Source: Pilot survey data (2017)

As per above analysis single factor is identified which explains considerable amount can be
extracted hence it satisfies the factor loading requirement.

Since the scale has passed the KMO, Bartlett and factor loading tests by satisfying cut off
criteria, the scale is valid from convergent validity standpoint.

3.15.1.3 Average Variance Extracted (AVE)

Another measure that can be used to assess the convergent validity is through AVE which
measures variance which is captured by the construct versus its measurement error (Alarcon
and Sanchez, 2015). Referring to below table all the variables constructs has yielded AVE
scores more than 0.5 indicating that the scale is valid as per Alarcon and Sanchez (2015).

Variable AVE
FBPC 0.64
IA 0.60
IK 0.63
VS 0.62
OS 0.51
SNP 0.75
OP 0.75
Equation 1: AVE Formula Table 12: AVE

Source: Alarcon and Sanchez (2015) Source: Pilot survey (2017)

Refer Appendix 5 for the detailed calculations of AVE summarised in above table.

3.16 Reliability
Gaur and Gaur (2006) define reliability as the degree to which one can expect the similar
result if the measure was to be repeated. Commonly used reliability analysis tools are
Cohens Kappa Coefficient and Cronbachs Alpha (Gaur and Gaur, 2006).

46
3.16.1 Internal Consistency Measure Cronbach Alpha
Internal consistency is to measure to assess whether the items under each concept have the
capability to independently measure the same concept when repeated again. In other words
its an assessment of homogene ity of the items used in the measure (Sekaran and Bougie,
2013).

Pilot Study Main Study

Variable No of Cronbach Action No of Cronbach
Items Alpha Taken Items Alpha
Finance Business Partnering Capability 5 0.859 - 5 0.813
Attitudes 5 0.825 - 5 0.812
Knowledge 4 0.797 - 4 0.804
Vocational Skills 6 0.873 - 6 0.858
Organisational Structure 5 0.752 - 5 0.708
Systems and Processes 5 0.909 - 5 0.891
Organisational Performance 5 0.911 - 5 0.884
Table 13: Cronbach Alpha Reliability statistics of the pilot study

Source: Survey data (2017)

Please refer Appendix 4 for case processing summary, reliability statistics, item statistics,
scale statistics and item total statistics.

The above table indicates that Cronbach Alphas has been higher than 0.7 which has exceed
the cut off requirement as per Field (2009). Hence, as per Cronbach Alpha, the scale is
reliable as per pilot study data. Hence no amendments were done to the scale prior to main
study.

The main study reliability has also been satisfied 0.7 threshold limit for all the variables
hence scale is reliable as per Field (2009).

3.16.2 Composite Reliability (CR)

CR is claimed to be less biased estimate of reliability (Alarcon and Sanchez, 2015) calculated
based on factor loading data gathered in SPSS.

The acceptance criteria for CR are 0.7 (Alarcon and Sanchez, 2015). All the factors have
passed this threshold and could be stated that the scale is reliable. Refer Appendix 5 for the
detailed calculations of CR summarised in the table below.

47
 Variable Composite
Reliability
FBPC 0.90
IA 0.88
IK 0.87
VS 0.91
OS 0.84
SNP 0.94
OP 0.94
Equation 2: Composite Reliability Table 14: Composite Reliability

Source: Alarcon and Sanchez (2015) Source: Pilot survey data (2017)

3.17 Chapter summary

Chapter 3 has highlighted the research methodology adopted for the study. The variables
have been defined based on literature and conceptual framework was introduced with
hypothesis for the study. The study will be targeted towards finance professionals in Sri
Lanka, with a sample of 84. The study will be taking a survey approach to reach more
audience at a limited time frame. Author has developed her own questionnaire since this
study is relatively new to a Sri Lankan context. Pilot study was conducted with 20
respondents to establish validity and reliability of the scale. Detailed analysis on the scale
validity and reliability parameters has indicated that the scale is suitable to proceed with the
main study.

48
 CHAPTER 4: DATA PRESENTATION & ANALYSIS
The following chapter intends to analyse the data collected through the questionnaire.
Initially it will look into sample profile, and then have a comprehensive exploratory data
analysis to verify normality and linearity of the dataset, then move on to hypothesis testing.

4.1 Sample Profile

Factor Variable No of %
Respondents
Gender Male 44 52%
Female 40 48%
Marital Status Single 39 46%
Married 45 54%
Recent Qualification Professional Qualification in Finance 52 62%
Bachelors Degree 14 17%
Masters Degree 17 20%
Post Graduate Diploma 1 1%
Department at work Finance 66 79%
Other 18 21%
Role Profile Executive 24 29%
First Level Manager 17 20%
Middle Level Manager 8 10%
Top Level Manager 8 10%
Finance Business Partner 8 10%
Consultants 4 5%
Entrepreneur 0 0%
Other 15 18%
Table 15: Sample Profile - Nominal Variables

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Age Mean 31.30

Median 29.00
Mode 26.00
No of years in current role Mean 4.79
Median 3.00
Mode 1.00

Table 16: Sample Profile - Scale V ariables

Source: Survey Data (2017)

The above tables summarises the sample profile of the respondents. The sample had age
group from 22 to 64 with a mean of 31 years which is close to the median of Sri Lankan

49
population (Indexmundi, 2017). The professionals overall share 5 years of experience on
average and can be considered highly experienced to contribute to the research questions.

In terms of gender the sample is more dominant toward male with 52% where as Sri Lankas
sex ratio indicates only a 43% (Indexmundi, 2017). This biasness is due to the finance
professionals specifically targeted in this study. As per ACCA (2015), 40% of its members
are female whereas CA Sri Lanka claims only a 30% in membership level (LBO, 2016). Due
to this, sample is also reflecting a high male representation. In terms of marital status 46% of
the respondents are single and rest are married which is not consistent with Sri Lankan stats
of 20% and 80% above between 20 64 years of age (Department of census and statistics,
2012).

Out of these respondents 79% placed in different department than finance hinting the
possibility of partnering within other departments in a separate role profile. Out of these, 29%
are executives, 50% of them hold managerial positions and 10% of them are finance business
partners themselves. This indicates the inputs from multiple layers of a company which could
assist in generalising this study for overall finance professionals than to a single layer in
which they work in. The threshold requirement on this survey is to be a member of a
professional accountancy body (one or more - 62%). However, 37% has been following the
CPD requirements and been accomplished bachelor and post graduate studies on top of that
indicating the knowledge to contribute to the survey.

Refer Appendix 6 for detailed SPSS statistics and graphs used for sample profile analysis
above.

4.2 Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA)

EDA is used prior to objective oriented data analysis to detect the errors, validate the
assumptions and to arrive at preliminary relationship between explanatory and outcome
variables (Stat, 2017). The test to validate that the data sets appropriateness for analysis can
be done by checking the missing values, outliers, normality and linearity. The following
section summarises the EDA stats for this study.

4.2.1 Missing Values

Missing data in statistics would be harmful since it impacts the sample size, weaken the
statistical power, harms the confidence intervals and alarmingly could lead to biased
interpretations (Borie, 2013). Hence validating that there are no missing values in data set is
critical.

50
 Case Processing Summary
Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Finance Business Partnering Capability 84 100.0% 0 0.0% 84 100.0%
Attitude 84 100.0% 0 0.0% 84 100.0%
Know ledge 84 100.0% 0 0.0% 84 100.0%
Vocational Skills 84 100.0% 0 0.0% 84 100.0%
Organisational Structure 84 100.0% 0 0.0% 84 100.0%
Systems and Pr ocesses 84 100.0% 0 0.0% 84 100.0%
Organisational Perfor mance 84 100.0% 0 0.0% 84 100.0%
Table 17: Missing V alues C ase Processing Summary

Source: Survey Data (2017)

The above table shows that this study had no missing values under Lik hert scale questions
and could be concluded that the data is appropriate to proceed with analys is. This was mainly
due to using internet mediated questionnaire by making all questions mandated to be
answered prior to proceeding to the next question. By this researcher has ensured there are no
missing values.

4.2.2 Outliers
A data which stands out from the rest of the data could be classified as outliers (Cheng,
2000). Handling of such extreme values is of critical importance in data analysis to avoid the
impact of these anomalies in analytical results such as regression (Cheng, 2000).

The data set used for this study has been tested for outliers using histograms, stem and leaf
diagrams, Normal Q-Q plot, and box plot. Please refer appendix 9 for detailed results of the
test. Based on these, it was established that the data is free from anomalies/extreme values
and could be used for main study.

4.2.3 Normality
Most of the statistical methods such as parametric statistics assume that sample drawn from
the population will follow a normal distribution (Ghasemi and Zahedias, 2012). Its critical to
ensure that the sample has normality in to draw conclusion about reality in a fool proof
manner.

The below table illustrates the skewness and Kurtosis statistics for the variables in concern.
Based on results it could be said that FBP, VS, OS, OP are all symmetric since the values are
within -0.5 to 0.5 range whereas IA, IK and SNP are moderately skewed since their values

51
range from -1 to -0.5 (Adams, 2017). Kurtosis results are close to zero. Hence it is established
that the data set is not extremely skewed and follows a normal distribution pattern.

Variable Skewness Kurtosis

FBPC -0.208 -0.258
IA -0.855 0.469
IK -0.660 -0.278
VS -0.094 -0.474
OS 0.026 -0.370
SNP -0.688 0.012
OP -0.042 -0.450
Table 18: Skewness and Kurtosis Statistics

Source: Survey Data (2017)

4.2.4 Linearity
Linearity assessment is done to verify is the predictor variables ability to explain the
criterion variable (Statistics solutions, 2017). This is best assessed through scatter plot as
given below.

Figure 11: Scatter Plot

Source: Survey Data (2017)

52
All the independent variables (IA,IK,VS, OS, SNP) in X axis has a correlation with FBPC in
Y axis. Also FBPC has a correlation with OP. These are reflected by the line of best fit with a
slope in the trend which is to be further analysed in hypothesis testing in the following
section. Through the scatter plot it is established that the variables have a linear relationship.

4.3 Objective based Data Analysis

4.3.1 Descriptive Analysis Research Objective 1

4.3.1.1 Finance Business Partnering Capabilities

Table 19: De scriptive Statistics for FBPC

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 12: Histogram with Normal Distribution Curve for FBPC

Source: Survey Data (2017)

53
This variable was tested using 5 questions based on 5 point Likhert scale from 84
respondents. At 95% confidence level the mean value range from 18.6 19.9 which is higher
than 15 (Average of minimum score and maximum score) hence could be said sample is
more respondent towards agreeable side of the scale. The median of 19 is similar to mean
value of 19.29 hence it could stated that the data is symmetric (Minitab, 2017) with a very
minimal skewness towards the right side which is also indicated by the histogram above.
Standard deviation is 3.15 indicating that with normal data the standard deviation could be
1.575 from each side of the mean.

4.3.1.2 Attitudes

Table 20: Descriptive St atistics of Attitudes

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 13: Histogram with Normal Distribution Curve for Attitudes

Source: Survey Data (2017)

54
This variable was tested using 5 questions based on 5 point Likhert scale from 84
respondents. At 95% confidence level the mean value range from 18.8 20.3 which is higher
than 15 (Average of minimum score and maximum score) hence could be said sample is
more respondent towards agreeable side of the scale. The median of 20 is closer to mean
value of 19.57 hence it could stated that the data is moderately skewed (Minitab, 2017) with
skewness towards the left side which is also indicated by the histogram abo ve. Standard
deviation is 3.416 indicating that with normal data the standard deviation could be 1.708 from
each side of the mean.

4.3.1.3 Knowledge

Table 21: Descriptive St atistics for Knowledge

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 14: Histogram with Normal Distribution Curve for Knowledge

Source: Survey Data (2017)

55
This variable was tested using 4 questions based on 5 point Likhert scale from 84
respondents. At 95% confidence leve l the mean value range from 16.3 17.3 which is higher
than 12 (Average of minimum score and maximum score) hence could be said sample is
more respondent towards agreeable side of the scale. The median of 17 is closer to mean
value of 16.83 hence it could stated that the data is moderately skewed (Minitab, 2017) with
skewness towards the left side which is also indicated by the histogram above. Standard
deviation is 2.304 indicating that with normal data the standard deviation could be 1.152 from
each side of the mean.

4.3.1.4 Vocational Skills

Table 22: Descriptive St atistics for Vocational Skills

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 15: Histogram with Normal Distribution Curve for Vocational Skills
Source: Survey Data (2017)

56
This variable was tested using 6 questions based on 5 point Likhert scale from 84
respondents. At 95% confidence level the mean value range from 23.4 24.90 which is
higher than 21 (Average of minimum score and maximum score) hence could be said sample
is more respondent towards agreeable side of the scale. The median of 24 is closer to mean
value of 24.19 hence it could stated that the data is symmetrical (Minitab, 2017) with
minimal skewness towards the right side which is also indicated by the histogram above.
Standard deviation is 3.317 indicating that with normal data the standard deviation could be
1.659 from each side of the mean.

4.3.1.5 Organisation Structure

Table 23: Descriptive St atistics for Organisational Structure

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 16: Histogram with normal distribution curve for organisational structure

Source: Survey Data (2017)

57
This variable was tested using 5 questions based on 5 point Likhert scale from 84
respondents. At 95% confidence level the mean value range from 18.8 20.03 which is
higher than 15 (Average of minimum score and maximum score) hence could be said sample
is more responded towards agreeable side of the scale. The median of 20 is closer to mean
value of 19.417 hence it could stated that the data is symmetrical (Minitab, 2017) with
minimal skewness towards the right side which is also indicated by the histogram above.
Standard deviation is 2.842 indicating that with normal data the standard deviation could be
1.421 from each side of the mean.

4.3.1.6 Systems and Processes

Table 24: Descriptive St atistics for Systems and Processes

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 17: Histogram with normal distribution curve for systems and processes

Source: Survey Data (2017)

58
This variable was tested using 5 questions based on 5 point Likhert scale from 84
respondents. At 95% confidence level the mean value range from 20.02 21.49 which is
higher than 15 (Average of minimum score and maximum score) hence could be said sample
is more responded towards agreeable side of the scale. The median of 2 1 is higher than the
mean value of 20.714 hence it could stated that the data is moderately skewed (Minitab,
2017) with skewness towards the left side which is also indicated by the histogram above.
Standard deviation is 3.202 indicating that with normal data the standard deviation could be
1.60 from each side of the mean.

4.3.1.7 Organisational Performance

Table 25: Descriptive St atistics for Organisational Performance

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 18: Normal Distribution curve with Hi stogram for organi sational performance

Source: Survey Data (2017)

59
This variable was tested using 5 questions based on 5 point Likhert scale from 84
respondents. At 95% confidence level the mean value range from 19.935 21.04 which is
higher than 15 (Average of minimum score and maximum score) hence could be said sample
is more respondent towards agreeable side of the scale. The median of 20 is lower than the
mean value of 20.488 hence it could stated that the data is symmetrical (Minitab, 2017) with
minimal skewness towards the right side which is also indicated by the histogram above.
Standard deviation is 2.548 indicating that with normal data the standard deviation could be
1.27 from each side of the mean.

4.3.2 Hypothesis Testing (Research Objective 2 and 3)

4.3.2.1 Correlation Analysis

Since the data set is normally distributed, Pearsons Correlation will be used to assess the
correlation between the independent and dependent variables. The correlation coefficient is a
mathematical measure to value the linear relationship between two variables (Gaur and Gaur,
2006).

4.3.2.1.1 Relationship between Attitude and FBPC (Hypothesis 1)

Correlations
IA FBPC
IA Pearson Correlation 1 .609**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 84 84
FBPC Pearson Correlation .609** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 84 84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 26: Correlation between IA & FBPC

Source: Survey data (2017)

The above table suggests that attitude and FBPC are positively correlated (r = 0.609). As per
Guilford (1956) rule of thumb on correlation strength, this is a moderate relationship between
the variables since it ranges between 0.40 0.70. This correlation is significant at 99%
confidence level. Hypothesis 1 of the study is as below:

H1: There is a relationship between Attitude and FBPC

60
Based on this it could be established that there is a relationship between attitudes of the
individual towards building finance business partnering capability. Hence alternative
hypothesis is accepted and null hypothesis rejected based on correlation coefficient.

4.3.2.1.2 Relationship between Knowledge and FBPC (Hypothesis 2)

Correlations
IK FBPC
**
IK Pearson Correlation 1 .600
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 84 84
**
FBPC Pearson Correlation .600 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 84 84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 27: Correlation between IK and FBPC

Source: Survey Data (2017)

The above table suggests that knowledge and FBPC are positively correlated (r = 0.600). As
per Guilford (1956) rule of thumb on correlation strength, this is a moderate relationship
between the variables since it ranges between 0.40 0.70. This correlation is significant at
99% confidence level. Hypothesis 2 of the study is as below:

H2: There is a relationship between Knowledge and FBPC

Based on the above it could be established that there is a relationship between knowledge of
the individual towards building finance business partnering capability. Hence alternative
hypothesis is accepted and null hypothesis rejected based on correlation coefficient.

4.3.2.1.3 Relationship between Vocational Skills and FBPC (Hypothesis 3)

Correlations
VS FBPC
**
VS Pearson Correlation 1 .654
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 84 84
**
FBPC Pearson Correlation .654 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 84 84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 28: Correlation between VS and FBPC

Source: Survey Data (2017)

61
The above table suggests that VS and FBPC are positively correlated (r = 0.654). As per
Guilford (1956) rule of thumb on correlation strength, this is a moderate relationship between
the variables since it ranges between 0.40 0.70. This correlation is significant at 99%
confidence level. Hypothesis 3 of the study is as below:

H3: There is a relationship between Vocational Skills and FBPC

Based on the above it could be established that there is a relationship between VS of the
individual towards building finance business partnering capability. Hence alternative
hypothesis is accepted and null hypothesis rejected based on correlation coefficient.

4.3.2.1.4 Relationship between Organisational Structure and FBPC (Hypothesis 4)

Correlations
OS FBPC
**
OS Pearson Correlation 1 .577
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 84 84
**
FBPC Pearson Correlation .577 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 84 84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 29: Correlation between OS and FBPC

Source: Survey Data (2017)

The above table suggests that OS and FBPC are positively correlated (r = 0.577). As per
Guilford (1956) rule of thumb on correlation strength, this is a moderate relationship between
the variables since it ranges between 0.40 0.70. This correlation is significant at 99%
confidence level. Hypothesis 4 of the study is as below:

H4: There is a relationship between Organisational Structure and FBPC

Based on the above it could be established that there is a relationship between OS of the
finance department towards building finance business partnering capability. Hence alternative
hypothesis is accepted and null hypothesis rejected based on correlation coefficient.

62
4.3.2.1.5 Relationship between Systems & Processes and FBPC (Hypothesis 5)

Correlations
SNP FBPC
**
SNP Pearson Correlation 1 .434
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 84 84
**
FBPC Pearson Correlation .434 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 84 84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 30: Correlation between SNP and FBPC

Source: Survey Data (2017)

The above table suggests that SNP and FBPC are positively correlated (r = 0.434). As per
Guilford (1956) rule of thumb on correlation strength, this is a moderate relationship between
the variables since it ranges between 0.40 0.70. This correlation is significant at 99%
confidence level. Hypothesis 5 of the study is as below:

H5: There is a relationship between Systems & Processes and FBPC

Based on the above it could be established that there is a relationship between SNP
availability towards building finance business partnering capability. Hence alternative
hypothesis is accepted and null hypothesis rejected based on correlation coefficient.

4.3.2.1.6 Relationship between FBPC and Organisational Performance (Hypothesis 6)

Correlations
FBPC OP
**
FBPC Pearson Correlation 1 .351
Sig. (2-tailed) .001
N 84 84
**
OP Pearson Correlation .351 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .001
N 84 84
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 31: Correlation between FBPC and OP

Source: Survey Data (2017)

63
The above table suggests that FBPC and OP are positively correlated (r = 0.351). As per
Guilford (1956) rule of thumb on correlation strength, this is a weak relationship between the
variables since it ranges between 0.20 0.40. This correlation is significant at 99%
confidence level. Hypothesis 6 of the study is as below:

H6: There is a relationship between FBPC and Organisational Performance

Based on the above it could be established that there is a relationship between FBPC towards
improving organisational performance. Hence alternative hypothesis is accepted and null
hypothesis rejected based on correlation coefficient.

4.3.2.2 Regression Analysis

Regression coefficient measures how strongly each independent variable predicts the
dependent variable (Gaur and Gaur, 2006).

4.3.2.2.1 Regression Analysis for Factors Influencing FBPC

Model Summ ary - I

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
a
1 .722 .522 .491 2.24696
a. Predictors: (Constant), SNP, IK, OS, IA, VS
Table 32: Model Summary 1- Factors Influencing FBPC

Source: Survey Data (2017)

The below analysis is for H1 H5. The model summary table above illustrates that all the
independent variables (IA, IK, VS, OS and SNP) has a correlation with FBPC (dependent
variable) with an r value of 0.722 which signals a strong relationship as per Guilford (1956).
The coefficient of determination (R2 = 0.522) denotes that the combined independent
variables are deciding 52.2% of the variation in the dependent variable (FBPC) and rest is
determined by other factors outside the scope of conceptual model applied in this study.

a
ANOVA - I
Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
b
1 Regression 429.749 5 85.950 17.024 .000
Res idual 393.810 78 5.049
Total 823.560 83
a. Dependent Variable: Finance Business Partner ing Capability
b. Predictors: (Constant), SNP, IK, OS, IA, VS
Table 33: ANOVA 1 - Factors Influencing FBPC

Source: Survey Data (2017)

64
The ANOVA table above indicates that the statistical model is significant since the p value is
less than 0.05 (Field, 2009).

Coefficients a - I
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 1.141 2.158 .529 0.000
Attitude .177 .117 .192 1.519 0.000
Know ledge .297 .171 .217 1.737 0.016
Vocational Skills .236 .131 .249 1.800 0.000
Organisational .255 .125 .230 2.048 0.032
Structure
Systems and Pr ocesses -.047 .103 -.048 -.457 0.000
a. Dependent Variable: Finance Business Partner ing Capability
Table 34 : Coefficient Table I - Factors influencing FBPC

Source: Survey Data (2017)

The Unstandardized coefficient can be used to in the formula as coefficient of different

independent variables along with constant term to predict the dependent variable (Gaur and
Gaur, 2006). The equation of FBPC can be stated below based on Beta value:

FBPC = 1.141+0.177 (IA) +0.297 (IK) +0.236 (VS) +0.255 (OS) -0.047 (SNP)

The model is significant since the p value for constant and all independent variables are
below 0.05. It could be concluded that all the independent variables stated above has a
significant influence on FBPC (dependent variable).

4.3.2.2.2 Regression Analysis for FBPC and Organisational Performance

Model Summary - II
Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the
Square Estimate
a
1 .351 .123 .112 2.40075
a. Predictors: (Constant), Finance Business Partnering Capability

Table 35: Model Summary II - FBPC and OP

Source: Survey Data (2017)

The below analysis is for H6. The model summary table above illustrates that FBPC has a
correlation with FBPC (dependent variable) with an r value of 0.351 which signals a weak
relationship as per Guilford (1956). The coefficient of determination (R2 = 0.123) denotes

65
FBPC is deciding only 12.3% of the variation in the organisational performance and rest is
determined by other factors outside the scope of conceptual model applied in this study. The
R2 value seems low compared to the R 2 in model summary 1. This could be accepted given
the nature of the social science research says Gaur and Gaur (2006). There isnt a rule of
thumb in this regard but each scenario to be treated case by case.

ANOVAa -II
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
b
1 Regression 66.372 1 66.372 11.516 .001
Res idual 472.616 82 5.764
Total 538.988 83
a. Dependent Variable: Organisational Performance
b. Predictors: (Constant), Finance Business Partnering Capability
Table 36: ANOVA II - FBPC and OP

Source: Survey Data (2017).

The ANOVA table above indicates that the statistical model is significant since the p value is
less than 0.05 (Field, 2009).

Coefficientsa -II
Model Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 15.010 1.635 9.178 .000
Finance Business Partnering .284 .084 .351 3.393 .001
Capability
a. Dependent Variable: Organisational Performance
Table 37: Coefficient Table II - FBPC and OP

Source: Survey Data (2017).

The equation of organisational performance can be stated below based on Beta value:

OP = 15.010+0.284 (FBPC)

The model is significant since the p value for constant and FBPC is below 0.05. It could be
concluded that FBPC stated above has a significant influence on organisational performance.

4.4 Chapter Summary

This chapter covered the statistical data ana lysis based on the survey results. Through the
sample profiling the characteristics of the respondents were displayed with justification for
random sampling. Next through exploratory data analysis it was established that there are no

66
missing values, no noisy data as outliers, data is normally distributed and has a linearity trend
depicted by scatter plots. Then a detailed descriptive analysis was given for the independent
and dependent variables.

In the objective oriented data analysis, the entire hypothesis developed in chapter 3 was
proven 0.01% significance level. Below would be summary on the results from hypothesis
testing.

Dependent Variable Independent Variable Correlation Test Summary

Coefficient
Finance Business Attitudes 0.609 H1 Accepted
Partnering Capabilities Knowledge 0.600 H2 Accepted
Vocational Skills 0.654 H3 Accepted
Organisational 0.577 H4 Accepted
Structure
Systems and Processes 0.434 H5 Accepted
Organisational Finance Business 0.351 H6 Accepted
performance Partnering Capabilities
Table 38: Hypothesis Test Summary

Source: Compiled by Author (2017)

The R squared analysis concluded that independent variables influence 52% changes in
FBPC which in turn influences 12% of variability in organisational performance. The
regression analysis concluded that all the independent variables are significantly influencing
FBPC and later also has a significant influence on organisational performance.

67
 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS

The below chapter will conclude the finding of the objective based analysis, its implications
on managerial and theoretical standpoint and recommendations. The chapter will also pave
the way to future research that could be under taken in this field of study.

5.1 Factors influencing FBPC

The first research objective is to recognise the factors influencing FBPC. Through literature
and theoretical framework, author found 5 factors influencing finance business partnering
capabilities namely attitudes, knowledge, vocational skills, organisational structure and
systems and processes. Through descriptive analysis in chapter 4 these variables and the
nature of the responses given by the sample was discussed.

5.2 Relationship between influencing factors and FBPC

The second objective of the study was to establish the relationship between predictor
variables and dependent variable. Through data analysis, Pearsons correlation was used to
establish the relationship and regression was to identify the strength of the influence one has
on the other. Below would be the discussion in line with the findings and recommendations.

5.2.1 Relationship between attitudes and FBPC

In chapter 4 it was established that attitude has a moderate positive correlation with FBPC
with a score of 0.609 and its significant which was demonstrated by p value which is less
than 0.05. Hence alternative hypothesis was established and accepted (H1).

5.2.1.1 Conclusion
On an empirical standpoint, the above results are in line with the prevailing research in
reference to attitude and the controller behaviours. It was evident that the ability to take on
the partnering role is subject to individuals cognitive limitations and experience they have as
proven by Argote and Greeve (2007) along with the emotions that the managers hold on such
initiatives (Huy, 2011). Also attitude has an infectious tendency on what others believe
commonly referred to as subjective norm (Wolf et al, 2015). Hence it could be concluded that
attitude has an effect on finance business partnering capabilities. Sri Lanka and Western
research share the same sentiments in this context.

5.2.1.2 Recommendations
Katz (1960 sited in simply psychology, 2017) suggests 4 ways in which individual attitude
can influence the behaviour, in this case partnering behaviour. They are knowledge, self/ego

68
expressive, adaptive and ego defensive (Katz, 1960 sited in simply psychology, 2017). These
four could be framework to influence positive attitude in the finance professionals to become
finance business partners.

The knowledge function is where the management gets to know the person better prior to
engaging them in a partnering role (Katz, 1960 sited in simply psychology, 2017). This helps
the management to pick and choose individuals specifically based on predicted behaviour.
Secondly attitude could be a way individuals express their interest through visible cues which
is known as ego expressive (Katz, 1960 sited in simply psychology, 2017). Thirdly the
individuals might seek social acceptance which forms an attitude (Katz, 1960 sited in simply
psychology, 2017) which is known as adaptive which is also highlighted in the research by
Wolf et al (2015) as subjective norm. Management should understand if there is business
demand for such enhanced FBPs which could be influencing the attitude towards developing
partnering capabilities which stakeholder approval. Finally, there are ego defensive attitudes,
commonly in older generations who resist any change in the way they operate and hence
might step back to take on a partnering role.

Its critical addresses the above segments of attitudes in individuals through one to one
discussions, by understanding their expectation, resolve any grievance coming from fear of
unknown etc to build up positive attitudes. Then it should also be decided, how to let go of
the individuals who no longer fit in to the business demand for their role and address them in
an ethical manner. Through these attitudes could be nurtured to convert finance professionals
into finance business partners and make them more relevant to the business which is
constantly facing changes.

5.2.2 Relationship between knowledge and FBPC

In chapter 4 it was established that knowledge has a moderate positive correlation with FBPC
with a score of 0.600 and its significant which was de monstrated by p value which is less
than 0.05. Hence alternative hypothesis was established and accepted (H2).

5.2.2.1 Conclusion
From an empirical standpoint, it could be established that knowledge has been identified as
an enabler for capability as well as performance for an organisation. Grant (1996) has proved
that specific knowledge especially in the case of business acumen is vital for a firms
performance. Also it essential to have knowledge management systems to have an
understanding on the business (Shiller, 2010). Alavi and Leinders (2001) proposal on cross

69
functional knowledge is vital in nature when business partners are placed inside different
departments or segments of a business. Hence this research revalidated the importance of
knowledge in capability development.

5.2.2.2 Recommendations
FBPs are knowledge workers who are not dependent on a company. They are recruited for
their knowledge to contribute for the betterment of a company. Also having said that they
would also expect avenues to network, interact and gain new knowledge. Hence it could be
said that this is a retrospective exchange expectation within a company and finance
professional.

Finance professionals are mostly mandated to follow CPD courses to remain relevant and not
obsolete. Hence companies could accommodate role specific courses which the individual
wishes to excel in and provide avenues to do so by supporting financially. Another method
that could be focused is through internal interactions through knowledge management
systems such as e-learning for them to spare some time on the job and learn. Some companies
opt to send individuals on secondments to other countries or another division to learn best
practices.

If these practices could be accommodated, individuals will be motivated and tap on their
knowledge gained throughout the job to provide business insights and gain recognition as
well and company receives credible performance through such inputs.

5.2.3 Relationship between vocational skills and FBPC

In chapter 4 it was established that vocational skills has a moderate positive correlation with
FBPC with a score of 0.654 and its significant which was demonstrated by p value which is
less than 0.05. Hence alternative hypothesis was established and accepted (H3).

5.2.3.1 Conclusion
This research has established that vocational skills are critical in order to build the finance
business partnering capabilities. This is in line with research by Roger (1996) when he has
proven that the generic skills have the ability to execute the knowledge which a finance
professional has. However this research contradicts with Smigla (2003) where he suggested
that technical skills are mandatory that the generic skills. From a Sr i Lankan perspective,
vocational skills influence the business partnering capability.

70
5.2.3.2 Recommendations
In order to enhance the vocational skills of finance professionals, there is variety of avenues
that could be taken. Initially the individual and their superiors should be able to assess their
current level of competencies in terms of team skills, questioning and challenging, time
management, leadership skills etc and identify the areas for improvement. This could be a
part of annual performance assessment from individuals and peer reviews. Based on the
comments and feedback each individual could be trained on skill gap. By this the individual
would be able to close the skill gap and execute his/her ideas by enhancing the capability.

5.2.4 Relationship between organisational structure and FBPC

In chapter 4 it was established that organisational structure has a moderate positive
correlation with FBPC with a score of 0.577 and its significant which was demonstrated by p
value which is less than 0.05. Hence alternative hypothesis was established and accepted
(H4).

5.2.4.1 Conclusion
This research has concluded that there is contribution on where the individual is placed and
development of finance business partnering capabilities. Hence in agreement with the
decentralised structure of finance as concluded by Benston (1969) and contradicts with the
centralised structure emphasis provided by Hopper (1980). Its critical that the finance
professional get the valuable input required performing the role as FBP by his placement into
the structure. But it should be noted the getting into business dominant role should not invade
integrity and accountability required by finance professional. Hence the individual should be
able to manage the dilemma in such case to proceed with the role.

5.2.4.2 Recommendations
As discussed above, its vital where the individual is placed with access to the stakeholder
they will be dealing with, mostly in a decentralised setup. However, the chain of command
has to be clearly established on whether the individual is directly reporting to the divisional
finance director or the company finance director. Also who determine the incentives of the
individuals is of vital in nature since this would determine the motive for the individual
perform or a tendency to manipulate to gain results. In order to the structure to enable the
partnering capability, clear role profiles and accountability has to be established.

71
5.2.5 Relationship between systems & processes and FBPC
In chapter 4 it was established that systems and processes has a moderate positive correlation
with FBPC with a score of 0.434 and its significant which was demonstrated by p value
which is less than 0.05. Hence alternative hypothesis was established and accepted (H5).

5.2.5.1 Conclusion
The research has concluded that the several human interaction at work from the processes
which contributes towards the capability building (Felin et al, 2012). The ways of working,
SOPs and instruction could have an influence over the capabilities developed. It was also
proven that the technology will also influence the capability in terms of making the work
more user friendly and less stressful for the individuals in the case it was carefully chosen to
support the business requirements.

5.2.5.2 Recommendations
It is recommended that the organisations support the smooth operation of finance
professionals by supporting them with avenues for human interactions. If there are stringent
complexities as in the case of organisational politics or inter department rivalry this could
harm such transition. In certain cases strict rules in SOPs might hinder and limit the
implementation of such creative ideas from individuals. Hence through detailed plans these
smooth role transitions could be catered to for capability development.

In the case of technological interventions, its critical that finance plays a domineering role in
developing agile relationship with IT and also put in controls for the use of information. The
systems should be user friendly and less complicated for the day to day operations, for which
data and analytics is of vital importance.

5.3 Relationship between FBPC and Organisational Performance

The final objective of the study was to establish the relationship between FBPC and
organisational performance.

In chapter 4 it was established that FBPC has positive correlation with OP with a score of
0.351 and its significant which was demonstrated by p value which is less than 0.05. Hence
alternative hypothesis was established and accepted (H6).

This research has proved that FBPC could influence the organisational performance. Its
obvious when finance professional drive financial performance but they are also contributing
towards process improvement, KPI tracking and analytics, and non financial initiatives by

72
actively contributing with their competencies. Hence this validates the statement of
partnering performance.

Based on the above findings and recommendations, in conclusion, if the organisations

address the attitude issues, provide avenues to gain knowledge, close the skills gaps and place
the individuals in a decentralised structure with sufficient autonomy along with processes and
suitable systems, it would contribute towards developing an internal talent pool of finance
business partners with critical partnering capabilities which when put into action could
contribute towards organisational performance.

5.4Future Research
This study was conducted in a general point of view gathering information from multiple
layers of companies since the sample was professional accountants. Future research could be
done on an industry specific method or one layer of the organisational structure to get more
specific insights. This study opted to see the relationship between 5 variables and FBPC, and
another testing to see if the FBPC is contributing towards the organisational performance.
Author didnt do an analysis on the mediator effect played by FBPC through sobel testing.
Hence future research could be done in that standpoint to see the mediator influence of
FBPC. A qualitative case study in this context on a specific company could lead to better
insights which could be used as bench mark against industry practices.

5.5 Chapter Summary

The above chapter covers the summary and recommendation of this research. It was found
that attitude, knowledge and vocational skills, organisational structure and systems and
processes influence the FBPC and which in turn influences the organisational performance.
Areas for future research have also been highlighted at the end.

73
REFERENCES

AAT (2015), Members directory 2015, AAT Sri Lanka.

ACCA (2014), Finance Insights: Challenges and Opportunities, [Online], Available from:
www.accaglobal.com/content/dam/acca/.../finance.../pol-afb-ficao-financial-insight.pd...
[Accessed 4th December, 2016]

ACCA (2015), A womans world. [Online], Available from:

http://www.accaglobal.com/lk/en/student/sa/features/a-womans-world.html [Accessed on
16th April, 2017]

Adams, R (2017), Normality Testing Skewness and Kurtosis, [Online], Available from:
https://help.gooddata.com/display/doc/Normality+Testing+-+Skewness+and+Kurtosis
[Accessed on 14th April, 2017]

Adner R, Helfat C. (2003). Corporate effects and dynamic managerial capabilities. Strategic
Management Journal, Special Issue 24(10): 10111025.

Ajzen, I. (1980). Understanding the attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Ajzen, I. (1998). Attitudes, Personality and Behavior. Chicago, Illinois: The Dorsey Press.

Alarcon, D and Sanchez, J (2015), Assessing convergent and discriminant validity in the
ADHD-R IV rating scale. [Online], Available from:
http://www.stata.com/meeting/spain15/abstracts/materials/spain15_alarcon.pdf [Accessed on
13th April, 2017]

Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Review: Knowledge management and knowledge
management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1),
107136.

Ambrosini, V. and Bowman, C. (2009). What are dynamic capabilities and are they a useful
construct in strategic management?. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11, 29
49

74
Argote, L. and Greve, H. R. (2007). A behavioral theory of the firm 40 years and counting:
introduction and impact. Organization Science, 18, 33749.

Ashworth, M. J., Argote, L. and Mukhopadhyay, T. (2006). The effect of information

technology on organizational learning and knowledge retention and transfer. Working Paper,
Carnegie Mellon University.

Avery, C. M. (2001). Teamwork is an individual skill. San Francisco: Barrett-Koehler

Publishers.

Baker, T.L. (1994), Doing Social Research (2 nd Ed). New York: McGraw Hill Inc.

Barley, S. R. (1986). Technology as an occasion for structuring: evidence from observations

of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 31, 78108.

Baron, J. N., Hannan, M. T. and Burton, M. D. (1999). Determinants of managerial intensity

in the early years of organizations. American Sociological Review, 64, 52747.

Benston, G. J., The Role of the Firms Accounting System for Motivation, Accounting Review
(1969), pp. 347-354.

Bingham, C. B. and Eisenhardt, K. M. (2011). Rational heuristics: the simple rules that
strategists learn from process experience. Strategic Management Journal, 32, 143764.

Bori , M S., (2013), Dealing with missing data: Key assumptions and methods for applied
analysis, [Online], Available from: http://www.bu.edu/sph/files/2014/05/Marina-tech-
report.pdf [Accessed on 18th April, 2017]

Brown, D and Christie, P (2005), From Octupus to Sharks, World at Work Journal, Vol 14, 6.

Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2011) Business Research Methods, 3rd edition. Oxford: University
Press

75
Burnett, S. (2003). The future of accounting education: A regional perspective. Journal of
Education for Business, 78(3), 129136.

Cassiatori, E. (2012). Resolving conflict in problem-solving: systems of artefacts in the

development of new routines. Journal of Management Studies , 49, 155985.

CGMA (2015), Finance business partnering. [Online], Available from:

www.cgma.org/Resources/Reports/Documents/CGMA-Business-partnering-report.pdf
[Accessed on 19th November, 2016]

Cheng, G J., (2000), Outlier management in intelligent data analysis, [Online], Available
from: https://www.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/site/assets/files/1025/gcheng.pdf [Accessed on 20th April,
2017]

Chenhall, R. H., and Langfield-Smith, K. (1998). The relationship between strategic

priorities, management techniques and management accounting: an empirical investigation
using a systems approach. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 23(3): 243-264.

Christofides, T (2005), Randomised response in stratified sampling, Journal of statistical

planning and inference, Vol 128, 303 310

CIMA (2009), Improving decision making in organisations. [Online], Available from:

http://www.cimaglobal.com/Documents/Thought_leadership_docs/cid_execrep_finance_busi
ness_partners_Jul09.pdf [Accessed 20th November, 2016]

CIMA (2015), Members directory 2015, CIMA Sri Lanka.

CIPD (2010), HR Buiness Partnering. Fact sheet. London CIPD

CMA (2015), CMA Annual Report 2015, Sri Lanka.

Crombie, N., Lord, B. (2009). Using the case study method to develop generic skills: An
analysis of student and tutor perceptions. 32nd Annual Congress of the European Accounting
Association (EAA). (Tampere, Finland) Retrieved from
http://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/10092/3566/1/12615339_EAA.pdf

76
Cooper, D and Schindler P (2003), Business Research Methods, New Delhi, McGrow Hill

Davis, S (2000), The changing organisational structure and individual responsibilities of

Managerial Accountants: A Case Study, Journal of managerial issues, Vol 12, 446 467

Deloitte (2009), Shaping up: Evolving the HR Function for the 21 st century. New
York/London: Deloitte MCS Limited

Department of census and statistics (2012), Population statistics. [Online], Available from:
http://www.statistics.gov.lk/PopHouSat/CPH2011/Pages/Activities/Reports/CPH_2012_5Per
_Rpt.pdf [Accessed on 20th April, 2017]

Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M. and P isano, G. P. (2001). Disrupted routines: team

learning and new technology implementation in hospitals. Administrative Science Quarterly,
46, 685716.

Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M. and P isano, G. P. (2001). Disrupted routines: team

learning and new technology implementation in hospitals. Administrative Science Quarterly,
46, 685716.

Ernst & Young (2010), The DNA of the CFO: A study of what makes a chief financial
officer. [Online] Available from: http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/The-DNA-of-
the-CFO-2010/$FILE/The-DNA-of-the-CFO-2010.pdf [Accessed: 26th December, 2016].

EY (2015), Finance redefined: the changing role of the finance function. [Online], Available
from: http://performance.ey.com/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2015/11/EY-Performance-
Finance-redefined.pdf [Accessed on 18th November, 2016]

Fainshmidt, S. Pezeshkan, A., Frazier, L, Nair, A, and Markowski, E. (2016), Dynamic

capabilities and organisational performance: A meta analytic evaluation and extension ,
Journal of management studies, 53 - 8

Feldman, M. S. and Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualising organizational routines as a

source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 94118.

77
Felin, T. and Foss, N. J. (2009). Organizational routines and capabilities: historical drift and
a coursecorrection toward microfoundations. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 25, 157
67.
Felin, T. and Hesterly, W. S. (2007). The knowledge-based view, nested heterogeneity, and
new value creation: philosophical considerations on the locus of knowledge. Academy of
Management Review, 32, 195218.

Felin, T. and Hesterly, W. S. (2007). The knowledge-based view, nested heterogeneity, and
new value creation: philosophical considerations on the locus of knowledge. Academy of
Management Review, 32,195218.

Felin, T., Foss, N., Heimericks, K., and Madsen, T (2012), Micro foundations of Routines
and capabilities: Individuals, Processes and Structure, Journal of management studies, Vol
49.

Felin, T., Powell, T. (2016), Designing Organisations for dynamic capabilities, University Of
California, Berkeley Vol. 58, No. 4 summer 2016

Flanagan, A and Mohan, S (2013), Finance Business Partnering : Making the right move
[Online] Available from:
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/ie/Documents/Finance%20Transformation/2
013_finance_business_partnering_survey_deloitte_ireland_finance_transformation_finance_s
urvey_partnering.pdf [Accessed: 5th November, 2015].

Field, A (2009), Discovering statistics using SPSS, Los Angeles, Sage.

Foss, N. J. (2003). Selective intervention and internal hybrids: interpreting and learning from
the rise and decline of oticon spaghtetti organization. Organization Science, 14, 331449.

Gaur, A, and Gaur S (2006), Statistical methods for practice and research, London, Response
Books.

78
Ghasemi, A and Zahendias, S (2012), Normality tests for statistical analysis: A guide for non
statisticians, [Online], Available from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3693611/ [Accessed on 13th April, 2017]

Goretzki, L., Strauss, E., and Weber, J (2013), An Institutional perspective on the changes in
management accountants professional role, Management Accounting Research, Vol 24, 41
63

Gornjak, M (2014), Knowledge Management and Management Accounting, Management

Knowledge and Learning International Conference, Portoroz - Slovenia, 25 17th June,
2014, ResearchGate.

Grant, R,.M. (1996), Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational

Capability as Knowledge Integration, Organization Science, Vol. 7, No. 4, (Jul. - Aug.,
1996), pp. 375-387

Guilford, J. P. (1956), Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education. New York:

McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Hancock, P., Segal, N., Howieson, B., Tempone, I., Kavanagh, M., & Kent, J. (2010).
Academic standards and challenges for accounting educators. Proceedings of the AFAANZ
Conference, 4-6 July, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Hassal, T., Joyce, J., Montano J L A., and Anes, J A D., (2005), Priorities for the
development of vocational skills in management accountants: A European perspective,
Journal of Accounting Forum, Vol 29, 379 394

Helfat C E, Peteraf (2003), The dynamic resource based view: Capability Lifecycles,
Strategic management journal, 24: 997 1010

Helfat, C., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M. A., Singh, H., Teece, D. J. and Winter, S.
G. (2007). Dynamic Capabilities. Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations.
Blackwell: Cambridge, MA.

Hodgson, G. (2012). The mirage of micro foundations. Journal of Management Studies, 49,
138994.

79
Holsapple, C. W., & Jones, K. (2004). Exploring primary activities of the knowledge chain.

Hoopes, D. G. and Madsen, T. L. (2008). A capability-based view of competitive

heterogeneity. Industrial and Corporate Change, 17, 393426.

Hopper, T M (1980), Role conflicts of management accountants and their position within
organisational structures, Accounting, Organisation and society, Vol 5, 401 411

Hunton, J. E. (2002). Blending information and communication technology with accounting

research. Accounting Horizons, 16, 5667.

Huy, Q. N. (2011). How middle managers group-focus emotions and social identities
influence strategy implementation. Strategic Management Journal, 32, 1387410.

IBM, (2010), the new value integrator; Insights from the Global Chief Financial Officer
Study Executive Summary. [Online] Available from: http://public.dhe.ibm.com/com-
mon/ssi/ecm/gb/en/gbe03282usen/GBE03282USEN.PDF [Accessed: 26th December 2016].

ICAEW (2014), Finance Business Partnering: a guide. [Online] Available from:

https://www.icaew.com/~/media/corporate/files/technical/business%20and%20finan-
cial%20management/finance%20direction/business-partnering-web-ready-pdf-fi-nal.ashx
[Accessed: 12th November, 2016].

ICASL (2015), ICASL Annual Report 2015, Sri Lanka

IFA (2003). Towards competent professional accountants. Retrieved from

http://www.ifac.org/sites/default/files/publications/files/iep-2-towardscompetent.pdf

Indexmundi (2017), Sri Lanka Demographics profile. [Online], Available from:

http://www.indexmundi.com/sri_lanka/demographics_profile.html [ Accessed on 15th April,
2017]

Jrvenp, M. (2007), Making business partners: a case study on how management

accountingvculture was changed, European Accounting Review, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 99-142.

80
Jones, S. H., & Davidson, R. A. (2007). Measuring the problem-solving abilities of
accounting and other business students: a comparison evaluation of three models.
Accounting Education: An International Journal, 16(1), 6579.

Kennedy, F and Sorensen, J (2006), Enabling the management accountant to become a

business partner: Organizational and verbal analysis toolkit, Journal of accounting
education, Vol 24, 149 171

KPMG, (2011), Mastering Finance Business Partnering; The missing link to building
Finances influence. [Online] Available from: http://www.cimaglobal.com/Docu-
ments/Thought_leadership_docs/KPMG%20CIMA%20business%20partnering%20white%2
0paper%20280111.pdf [Accessed on 26th December, 2016]

Lahiri, S., Kedia, B. L., Rahunath, S., & Agarwal, N.M. (2009). Anticipated rivalry as a
moderator of the relationship between firm resources and performance . International journal
of management, 26 (1), 146 158.

Laureiro-Martnez, D., Brusoni, S. and Zollo, M. (2010). The neuroscientific foundations of

the explorationexploitation dilemma. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics,
3, 95115.

LBO (2016), CA Sri Lanka underscores the need for greater women representation across all
sectors. [Online], Available from: http://www.lankabusinessonline.com/ca-sri-lanka-
underscores-the-need-for-greater-women-representation-across-all-sectors/ [Accessed on 16th
April, 2017]

Madsen, T. L., Mosakowski, E. and Zaheer, S. (2003). Knowledge retention and personnel
mobility: the nondisruptive effects of inflows of experience. Organization Science, 14, 173
91.

Mallak M A (2012) Accounting students need for important generic and technical
accounting skills in university education and as accountants in the workplace , Unpublished
MBA Thesis, The University of Waikato [Online], Available from:
http://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/ [Accessed : 4th April, 2017]

81
Mat, T., and Smith, M (2014), The impact of changes in environment and AMT on
management accounting practices and organisational strategy, structure and performance ,
JAMAR, Vol 12.

Miller, K. D., Pentland, B. T. and Choi, S. (2012). Dynamics of performing and remembering
organizational routines. Journal of Management Studies , 49, 153658.

Miner, A. S. (1994). Seeking adaptive advantage: evolutionary theory and managerial

action. Evolutionary Dynamics of Organizations, 76, 89.

Minitab (2017), Descriptive statistics, [Online], Available from:

http://support.minitab.com/en-us/minitab-express/1/help-and-how-to/basic-
statistics/summary-statistics/descriptive-statistics/interpret-the-results/key-results/ [Accessed
on 13th April, 2017]

Mouzas, S. (2006), Efficientcy versus effectiveness in business networks. Journal of Business

Research, 59, 1124 1132

NCSU (2016), Factor analysis. [Online], Available from:

http://www4.ncsu.edu/~slrace/LinearAlgebra2016/BookChapters/FactorAnalysis.pdf
[Accessed on 12th April, 2017]

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company. How Japanese
Companies Create the Dynamic of Innovation. New York Oxford University Press, 5673.

Palmer, K. N., Douglas, E. Z., & Pinsker, R. E. (2004). International knowledge, skills and
abilitites of auditors/accountants: Evidence from recent competency studies. Managerial
Auditing Journal, 19(7), 889896.

Polit, DF., Beck, C.T., & Hungler, B.P. (2001). Essentials of nursing research: Methods,
appraisal and utilisation (5th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott.

Prajapathi, B., Dunne, M. and Armstrong, R (2016), Sample power estimation and statistical
power analyses. [Online] Available from:
http://www.floppybunny.org/robin/web/virtualclassroom/stats/basics/articles/gpower/Gpower
_tutorial_Prajapati_2010-.pdf [Accessed on 13th April, 2017]

82
PwC (2009), Adding up or adding value. [Online], Available from:
https://www.pwc.co.uk/assets/pdf/adding-up-or-adding-value.pdf [Accessed on 3rd
December, 2016]

Random (2017), Random numbers. [Online]. Available from:

https://www.random.org/integers/?num=84&min=1&max=12815&col=5&base=10&format=
html&rnd=new [Accessed on 12th April, 2017]

Rees, G. & French, R. [2010] Leading, Managing and Developing People. 3 rd. Edition. CIPD.

Roger, M. (1996). Non-technical essential skills handbook for apparel industry supervisors-
interpersonal communications. Retrieved from http://www.wem.mb.ca/ES17.htm

Santarelli, E., & Vivarelli, M. (2007). Entrepreneurship and the process of firms entry,
survival and growth. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16 (3) , 455

Saunders, M. and Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2016) Research Methods for Business
Students, 7th Edition, Pearson

Sekaran, U and Bougie R. (2013), Research methods for business: A skill building approach,
New Delhi, Wiley

Schiller, S. (2010). Management accounting in a learning environment. Journal of

Accounting & Organizational Change, 6(1), 123148. doi:10.1108/18325911011025722

Simon, M.K (2011), Dissertation and scholarly research: Recipes for success (2011 ed),
Seattle [Online], Q A: Dissertation Success, LLC. Available from:
http://dissertationrecipes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Conducting-P ilot-Studies.pdf
[Accessed: 13th April, 2017]

Simons, P (2014), Was bedeutet Business Partnering im Controlling?. Journal of Controlling

and Management Review, Vol 2.

Simply psychology (2017), Attitudes (Online), Available on:

https://www.simplypsychology.org/attitudes.html [Accessed on 22nd April, 2017]

83
Siriwardane, H., Low, K Y and Blietz D (2015), Making entry level accountants better
communicators: A Singapore based study on communication tasks, skills and attributes.
Journal of Accounting Education, Vol 33, 332 347

Smigla, J. E. (2003). Should the accounting profession take a step backward?. The CPA
Journal, 17.

Spitzberg, B H. and Cupach,W R, (1984) Interpersonal communication competence SAGE

Publications, Beverly Hills

Stat (2017), Exploratory Data Analysis, [Online], Available from:

http://www.stat.cmu.edu/~hseltman/309/Book/chapter4.pdf [Accessed on 20th April, 2017]

Stephanie (2009), One tailed test or two in hypothesis testing: How to decide. [Online]
Available from: http://www.statisticshowto.com/one-tailed-test-or-two/ [Accessed on 12th
April, 2017]

Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management.
Strategic Management Journal 18(7): 509533.

Teece, D. J. (2012). Dynamic capabilities: routines versus entrepreneurial action. Journal of

Management Studies, 49, 1395401.

Thompson P. (2002). How much did the Liberty shipbuilders forget? Revisionist notes on
organizational forgetting. Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University.

Tynkkynen, J A. , (2016) Finance as business partner at Marimekko : Searching for business

partnering opportunities at a Finnish design company, Unpublished thesis, Arcada
University, Finland.

Voipio (2014), Management Accountant's Modern Role and Barriers to Role Change - Case
Tech Inc. Unpublished thesis, Aalto University, Finland, [Online], Available from:
http://epub.lib.aalto.fi/en/ethesis/pdf/13681/hse_ethesis_13681.pdf [Accessed: 5th November,
2016]

Winter, S. G. (2000). The satisfying principle in capability learning. Strategic Management

Journal, 1011, Special Issue 21, 98196.

84
Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal,
24, 9915.

Winter, S. G. (2012). Capabilities: their origins and ancestry. Journal of Management

Studies, 49, 14026.

Wolf ,S . Weienberger E., Wehner, M., Kabst , R., (2015). Controllers as business partners
in managerial decision-making: Attitude, subjective norm, and internal improvements,
Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change,Vol. 11 Iss: 1, pp.24 46

Yorke, M. (1992). Quality in higher education: a conceptualization and some observations

on the implementation of a sectorial quality system. Journal of Further and Higher Education,
16(1), 90103.

Zott, C. (2003). Dynamic capabilities and the emergence of intra industry differential firm
performance:insights from a simulation study. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 97125.

85
 APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Random Numbers

Figure 19: Random Numbers

Source: Random.org (2017)

86
Appendix 2: Questionnaire
Dear Finance Professional,

Thank you for taking your time to contribute to my research on "Factors enabling Finance
Business Partnering Capabilities for Improved Organisational Performance" as a partial
fulfilment for MBA Programme conducted by University of West London UK.

This is an anonymous survey and will take about 10 minutes to complete. Taking part in this
study is entirely voluntary. You are free to withdraw from the study at any time without any
consequences, and all information provided will be treated confidentially.

If you need clarifications or would like to get more information about the study and its result,
you can email me on archlanka@yahoo.com.

Your response with informed consent will be recorded ANONYMOUSLY.

Please click NEXT to proceed.

SECTION 1: Demographics

Please select the relevant response for the below with a :

Q1) Gender Male Female

Q2) Age Years

Q3) Marital Status

Single Married Divorced Widowed

Q4) Highest Qualification Professional Qualification (CIMA/ICASL/AAT/CMA)

Bachelors/ Undergraduate

Masters

Post graduate diploma

Other

Q5) No of years of experience in your current role Years

Q6) Are you attached to fina nce function of the company at your current capacity

Yes No

87
Q7) If you have chosen Yes for Q5, chose from below options which role best describes
your current position held in the company

Executive/Staff

First Level Manager (Office manager, Shift supervisor, Department manager, Crew
leader, Store manager)

Middle Level Manager (General manager, Plant manager, Regional manager, and
Divis ional manager etc)

Top Level Manager (Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief
Operational Officer, Chief Information Officer, Chairperson of the Board, President,
Vice president, Corporate head etc)

Finance Business Partner

Entrepreur

Consultant

Other

SECTION 2: Hypothesis Testing

Please select your level of agreement based on below scale with for the following
questions.
5 Strongly Agree
4 Agree
3 Neither agree Nor Disagree
2 Disagree
1 Strongly Disagree

2.1 Indicate as to what extent you believe that finance professionals are strategists of the
business as much as an accountant, by answering below statements on partnering
capabilities:

Finance Business Partnering Capabilities 5 4 3 2 1

FBPC 1 Finance contact/ business partner take steps to
build and nurture an external focus culture in
their business area so that it is the standard
and best practice to seek and consider global
commercial trends and insight from outside
the company in all decision making
FBPC 2 Finance contact/business partner looks

88
 carefully at both the opportunities and risks
associated with decisions, escalating risks as
necessary
FBPC 3 Finance business partner spend time away
from their desk building effective business
relationships with key stakeholders, learning
their business, their requirements, their issues
and challenges

FBPC 4 Finance business partner facilitate leaders at a

senior level to investigate multiple innovative,
visionary options to drive value in the
business.
FBPC 5 Finance business partner is transparent in
their advocacy and always consider, represent
and balance the needs of the whole
organisation in all decisions.

2.2 Indicate as to what extent you believe that finance professionals attitude matters in
performing finance partnering role in competitive business environments.

Individuals Attitudes 5 4 3 2 1
IA 1 Availability of resources to perform business
partnering task influences the individual
capacity to become a business partner
IA 2 Freedom and individual autonomy to perform
the tasks influences the individual attitude
IA 3 Increase in business demand for enhanced
partnering capabilities enables individuals to
perform partnering role
IA 4 Threat of losing the objectivity by taking a
business stance impacts individuals attitude to
become finance business partner
IA 5 Contribution to decision making is attractive

89
 and motivation for finance professionals to
become business partners

2.3 Indicate as to what extent you believe that finance professionals knowledge matters in
performing their business partnering role in competitive business environments.

Individuals Knowledge 5 4 3 2 1
IK 1 Finance Contact or Business Partner has a
comprehensive understanding of the business
area.
IK 2 Finance professional should gain cross
functional knowledge for effective
questioning and challenging
IK 3 Knowledge management systems plays a vital
role in creating and dissemination knowledge
inside organisations
IK 4 Its individuals responsibility to keep up-to-
date with their knowledge to remain relevant
and to function as business partners within an
organisation

2.4 Indicate as to what extent you believe that finance professionals vocational skills matters
in performing their business partnering role in competitive business environments.

Vocational Skills 5 4 3 2 1
VS 1 Finance contact/ business partner links
financial and non-financial information to
provide insight to help in decision-making.
VS 2 Finance Contact or Business Partner is
accessible, (e.g. holds meetings) and is a good
communicator.
VS 3 Finance professionals handle time promptly
by managing routine tasks and business
partnering deliverables
VS 4 Finance professionals should occupy

90
 analytical skills coupled with IT skills to
remain relevant in the field
VS 5 Finance professional should go through CPD
programmes to keep up to date with
vocational skills required in the field
VS 6 Finance professional should work with
business colleagues to create a change-ready,
low resistance environment into which change
can be driven and thrive
2.5 Indicate as to what extent you believe that finance professionals organisational structure
matters in performing their business is partnering role in competitive business environments.

Organisational Structure 5 4 3 2 1
OS 1 Type of finances organisational structure
influences information sharing and
coordination within finance and other
departments
OS 2 Decentralised finance department would
enhance individual creativity and experiments
in performing business partnering role
OS 3 Incentives play a vital role in a decision to
become finance business partner
OS 4 Information systems has reduced the
individuals in finance organisation and made
it more flat in nature
OS 5 Finance partner should guide business
colleagues to navigate the complexities
associated with working across a matrixed/
international/multi-divisional organisation

2.6 Indicate as to what extent you believe that systems and processes matters in performing
business is partnering role in competitive business environments.

Systems and Processes 5 4 3 2 1

SNP1 Finance professionals should be conversant in

91
 IT platforms used for tasks inside the
company
SNP2 Systems play a vital role in problem solving
for finance professionals
SNP3 Finance should ensure controls are in place
within the organisation for compliance
SNP4 Finance plays a vital role in ensuring systems
implemented are trustworthy and reliable
SNP5 Systems and processes play an important role
in reducing manual tasks and encourage
finance professionals to take on a value
adding partnering role within the business

2.7 Indicate as to what extent you believe that finance capabilities support in term of
organisational performance

Organisational Performance 5 4 3 2 1
OP 1 The capabilities and alignment of employees
and systems can enhance important internal
processes and stakeholder relationships to
generate and sustain growth
OP 2 Information provided by finance business
partners will support management decisions
OP 3 Inputs from finance business partner will
bring in competitive advantage to the
companies
OP 4 Organisations would be able to attain internal
efficiency through realising cost reduction
potentials
OP 5 Insights from finance would be at acceptable
risk level hence financial performance will
improve

Thank you for your time.

92
Appendix 3 Validity SPSS Output
3.1 Finance business partnering capabilities

KMO and Bartlett's Test Communalities

Kaiser- Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .669 Initial Extraction

Bartlett's Test of Spher icity Approx. Chi-Square 50.548 FBPC1 1.000 .718
FBPC2 1.000 .578
df 10
FBPC3 1.000 .610
Sig. .000
FBPC4 1.000 .749
FBPC5 1.000 .561
Table 39: Validity Results FBPC Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.

Source: Pilot Study Data (2017)

3.2 Attitudes
Communalities
KMO and Bartlett's Test Initial Extraction
Kaiser- Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .753 IA1 1.000 .726
Bartlett's Test of Spher icity Approx. Chi-Square 38.300 IA2 1.000 .857
df 10 IA3 1.000 .588
Sig. .000 IA4 1.000 .327
IA5 1.000 .487
Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.
Table 40: Validity Results for Attitudes

Source: Pilot Study Data (2017)

3.3 Knowledge

KMO and Bartlett's Test Communalities

Kaiser- Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling .544 Initial Extraction
Adequacy. IK1 1.000 .460
Bartlett's Test of Spher icity Approx. Chi-Square 37.845 IK2 1.000 .554
df 6 IK3 1.000 .726
Sig. .000 IK4 1.000 .800
Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.
Table 41: Validity Results for Knowledge

Source: Pilot Study Data (2017)

93
3.4 Vocational Skills
Communalities
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Initial Extraction
Kaiser- Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .794
VS1 1.000 .581
Bartlett's Test of Spher icity Approx. Chi-Square 60.216
VS2 1.000 .635
df 15
VS3 1.000 .587
Sig. .000
VS4 1.000 .813

VS5 1.000 .741

VS6 1.000 .365
Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.

Table 42: Validity re sults for Vocational Skills

Source: Pilot Study data (2017)

3.5 Organisational Structure

KMO and Bartlett's Test Communalities

Kaiser- Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .669 Initial Extraction

Bartlett's Test of Spher icity Approx. Chi-Square 23.763 OS1 1.000 .542

df 10 OS2 1.000 .628

Sig. .008 OS3 1.000 .405

OS4 1.000 .384

OS5 1.000 .693

Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.

Table 43: Validity Results for Organi sational Structure

Source: Pilot Study data (2017)

3.6 Systems and Processes

Communalities
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Initial Extraction
Kaiser- Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .775
SNP1 1.000 .766
Bartlett's Test of Spher icity Approx. Chi-Square 67.510
SNP2 1.000 .603
df 10
SNP3 1.000 .805
Sig. .000
SNP4 1.000 .781
SNP5 1.000 .780
Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.

Table 44: Validity Results for Systems and Processes

Source: Pilot Study Data (2017)

94
3.7 Organisational Performance
Communalities
KMO and Bartlett's Test Initial Extraction
Kaiser- Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .636 OP1 1.000 .833
Bartlett's Test of Spher icity Approx. Chi-Square 80.223 OP2 1.000 .745
df 10 OP3 1.000 .743
Sig. .000 OP4 1.000 .662
OP5 1.000 .769
Extraction Method: Pr incipal Component Analysis.

Table 45: Validity Results for Organi sational Performance

Source: Pilot Study data (2017)

Appendix 4 Reliability SPSS Output

4.1 Finance business partnering capabilities

Case Processing Summary

N %
Reliability Statistics
Cases Valid 20 100.0
a Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
Excluded 0 .0
.859 5
Total 20 100.0

a. Listw ise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Item Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N

FBPC1 3.80 .768 20 Scale Statistics

FBPC2 4.00 .858 20 Mean Variance Std. Deviation N of Items

FBPC3 3.80 .834 20 18.80 11.432 3.381 5

FBPC4 3.65 .933 20

FBPC5 3.55 .826 20

95
 Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item Scale Variance if Corrected Item- Total Cronbach's Alpha if
Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Item Deleted

FBPC1 15.00 7.684 .742 .816

FBPC2 14.80 7.747 .617 .845
FBPC3 15.00 7.684 .661 .834
FBPC4 15.15 6.871 .754 .809

FBPC5 15.25 7.882 .619 .844

Table 46 : Reliability St atistics for FBPC V ariable

Source: Pilot survey data (2017)

4.2 Individual Attitudes

Case Processing Summary Reliability Statistics

N % Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
Cases Valid 20 100.0 .825 5
a
Excluded 0 .0
Total 20 100.0
a. Listw ise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Item Statistics Scale Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N
Mean Variance Std. Deviation N of Items
IA1 4.00 .858 20
19.30 10.747 3.278 5
IA2 4.05 .887 20
IA3 3.85 .988 20
IA4 3.45 .605 20

IA5 3.95 .887 20

Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item Scale Variance if Item Corrected Item- Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted Deleted Correlation Deleted
IA1 15.30 6.747 .732 .757
IA2 15.25 6.197 .852 .717
IA3 15.45 6.682 .605 .799

IA4 15.85 8.871 .419 .839

IA5 15.35 7.397 .531 .817
Table 4: Reliability Stati stics for Individual Attitudes Vari able

Source: Pilot Study Data (2017)

96
4.3 Individual Knowledge

Case Processing Summary Reliability Statistics

N % Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

Cases Valid 20 100.0 .797 4

a
Excluded 0 .0
Total 20 100.0
a. Listw ise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Item Statistics Scale Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N Mean Variance Std. Deviation N of Items
IK1 3.70 .979 20 16.10 7.884 2.808 4
IK2 4.30 .865 20
IK3 4.05 .887 20
IK4 4.05 .826 20

Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item Scale Variance if Item Corrected Item- Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted Deleted Correlation Deleted
IK1 12.40 4.884 .472 .820
IK2 11.80 5.011 .549 .774
IK3 12.05 4.576 .664 .718

IK4 12.05 4.471 .782 .664

Table 5 : Reliability Statistics for Knowledge variable

Source: Pilot Survey Data (2017)

4.4 Vocational Skills

Case Processing Summary Reliability Statistics

N %
Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
Cases Valid 20 100.0
.873 6
a
Excluded 0 .0
Total 20 100.0
a. Listw ise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

97
 Item Statistics
Scale Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N
Mean Variance Std. Deviation N of Items
VS1 3.95 .759 20
23.25 17.250 4.153 6
VS2 3.65 .933 20

VS3 3.55 .826 20

VS4 4.15 .933 20
VS5 4.10 .912 20
VS6 3.85 .933 20

Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item Scale Variance if Item Corrected Item- Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted Deleted Correlation Deleted

VS1 19.30 13.168 .636 .858

VS2 19.60 11.937 .689 .849
VS3 19.70 12.642 .669 .852
VS4 19.10 11.253 .819 .824

VS5 19.15 11.608 .774 .833

VS6 19.40 13.095 .486 .884

Table 6 : Reliability Statistics for Vocational Skills variable

Source: Pilot survey data (2017)

4.5 Organizational Structure

Case Processing Summary Reliability Statistics

N % Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

Cases Valid 20 100.0 .752 5

a
Excluded 0 .0
Total 20 100.0

a. Listw ise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Item Statistics Scale Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N Mean Variance Std. Deviation N of Items
OS1 3.70 .923 20 18.85 10.134 3.183 5
OS2 3.75 1.070 20
OS3 3.95 .826 20
OS4 3.40 .821 20
OS5 4.05 .826 20

98
 Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item Scale Variance if Item Corrected Item- Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted Deleted Correlation Deleted
OS1 15.15 6.661 .550 .696
OS2 15.10 5.884 .598 .679
OS3 14.90 7.463 .441 .734

OS4 15.45 7.839 .353 .762

OS5 14.80 6.589 .676 .655

Table 7 : Reliability Statistics for Vocational Skills variable

Source: Pilot survey data (2017)

4.6 Systems and Processes

Case Processing Summary Reliability Statistics

N % Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

Cases Valid 20 100.0 .909 5

a
Excluded 0 .0
Total 20 100.0
a. Listw ise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Item Statistics Scale Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N Mean Variance Std. Deviation N of Items
SNP1 4.05 .945 20 20.50 16.158 4.020 5
SNP2 3.80 1.005 20

SNP3 4.35 .875 20

SNP4 4.10 1.071 20
SNP5 4.20 .768 20

Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item Scale Variance if Corrected Item- Total Cronbach's Alpha if
Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Item Deleted
SNP1 16.45 10.366 .806 .881
SNP2 16.70 10.747 .668 .912

SNP3 16.15 10.661 .828 .878

SNP4 16.40 9.726 .791 .887
SNP5 16.30 11.379 .809 .886
Table 8 : Reliability Statistics for Systems and Processes variable

Source: Pilor survey data (2017)

99
4.7 Organisational Performance

Case Processing Summary Reliability Statistics

N % Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

Cases Valid 20 100.0 .911 5

a
Excluded 0 .0
Total 20 100.0
a. Listw ise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Item Statistics Scale Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N Mean Variance Std. Deviation N of Items

OP1 4.00 .795 20 20.55 16.155 4.019 5

OP2 4.30 .865 20

OP3 4.30 .923 20
OP4 4.05 1.050 20
OP5 3.90 1.021 20

Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item Scale Variance if Item Corrected Item- Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted Deleted Correlation Deleted
OP1 16.55 10.997 .859 .879
OP2 16.25 10.934 .782 .891
OP3 16.25 10.618 .778 .891

OP4 16.50 10.263 .712 .908

OP5 16.65 10.029 .786 .890

Table 9 : Reliability Statistics for Organisational Performance

Source: Pilot study data (2017)

100
Appendix 5 AVE and CR Calculation

Variable Item Factor Item Measurement AVE Composite

Loading Reliability Error Reliability
Partnering Capability

FBPC1 0.847 0.717 0.283

Finance Business

FBPC2 0.760 0.578 0.422

0.64 0.90
FBPC3 0.781 0.610 0.390
FBPC4 0.865 0.748 0.252
FBPC5 0.749 0.561 0.439
IA1 0.852 0.726 0.274
IA2 0.926 0.857 0.143
Attitude

IA3 0.767 0.588 0.412 0.60 0.88

IA4 0.572 0.327 0.673
IA5 0.698 0.487 0.513
IK1 0.678 0.460 0.540
Knowledge

IK2 0.744 0.554 0.446

0.63 0.87
IK3 0.852 0.726 0.274
IK4 0.894 0.799 0.201
VS1 0.762 0.581 0.419
Vocational Skills

VS2 0.797 0.635 0.365

VS3 0.766 0.587 0.413
0.62 0.91
VS4 0.902 0.814 0.186
VS5 0.861 0.741 0.259
VS6 0.604 0.365 0.635
OS1 0.736 0.542 0.458
Oraganisational

OS2 0.792 0.627 0.373

Structure

OS3 0.636 0.404 0.596 0.51 0.84

OS4 0.533 0.284 0.716
OS5 0.832 0.692 0.308
SNP1 0.875 0.766 0.234
Systems and
Processes

SNP2 0.776 0.602 0.398

SNP3 0.897 0.805 0.195 0.75 0.94
SNP4 0.884 0.781 0.219
SNP5 0.883 0.780 0.220
OP1 0.913 0.834 0.166
Organisational
Performance

OP2 0.863 0.745 0.255

OP3 0.862 0.743 0.257 0.75 0.94
OP4 0.814 0.663 0.337
OP5 0.877 0.769 0.231

Table 47: AVE and Composite Reliability

Source: Pilot Survey Data (2017)

101
Appendix 6 Sample Profile Analysis

6.1 Frequency Tables

Statistics
Gender of Marital Status Highest Is the respondent Current
the of the Qualification of attached to finance Position
participant participant the respondent department
N Valid 84 84 84 84 84
Missing 0 0 0 0 0

Mode 1 2 1 1 1
Table 48: St atistics for Sample Profile Nominal Vari ables

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Gender of the participant

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Male 44 52.4 52.4 52.4

Female 40 47.6 47.6 100.0

Total 84 100.0 100.0
Table 49: Gender Statistics

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Marital Status of the participant

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Single 39 46.4 46.4 46.4

Married 45 53.6 53.6 100.0

Total 84 100.0 100.0
Table 50: M arital St atus St atistics

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Highest Qualification of the respondent

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Pr ofessional Qualification 52 61.9 61.9 61.9
Bachelors/Undergraduate 14 16.7 16.7 78.6

Masters/Post Graduate Diploma 17 20.2 20.2 98.8

Post Graduate Diploma 1 1.2 1.2 100.0
Total 84 100.0 100.0
Table 51: Quali fication St atistics

Source: Survey Data (2017)

102
 Is the respondent attached to finance department
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Yes 66 78.6 78.6 78.6
No 18 21.4 21.4 100.0
Total 84 100.0 100.0
Table 52: Current Department St atistics

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Current Position
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Executive 24 28.6 28.6 28.6
First Level Manager 17 20.2 20.2 48.8

Middle Level Manager 8 9.5 9.5 58.3

Top Level Manager 8 9.5 9.5 67.9
Finance Business Partner 8 9.5 9.5 77.4
Consultant 4 4.8 4.8 82.1

Other 15 17.9 17.9 100.0

Total 84 100.0 100.0
Table 53: Current Position St atistics

Source: Survey Data (2017)

6.2 Graphical Representation

Figure 21: Sample Profile - Gender Figure 20: Sample Profile Marit al St atus

Source: Survey Data (2017) Source: Survey Data (2017)

103
Figure 22: Sample Profile - Qualifications
Source: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 24: Sample Profile - Department Figure 23: Sample Profile - Role

Source: Survey Data (2017) Source: Survey Data (2017)

104
Appendix 7 Responses for Likhert Scale Questions
SA A N D SD Total
Variable Q
Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Responses

FBPC 1 16 19% 44 52% 17 20% 5 6% 2 2% 84

FBPC 2 27 32% 43 51% 8 10% 4 5% 2 2% 84

Finance Bus iness Partnering
FBPC 3 20 24% 40 48% 17 20% 4 5% 3 4% 84
Capabilities
FBPC 4 21 25% 39 46% 15 18% 6 7% 3 4% 84

FBPC 5 14 17% 36 43% 23 27% 7 8% 4 5% 84

IA1 21 25% 38 45% 18 21% 6 7% 1 1% 84

IA2 33 39% 29 35% 12 14% 8 10% 2 2% 84

Attitudes IA3 26 31% 36 43% 15 18% 6 7% 1 1% 84

IA4 12 14% 29 35% 37 44% 6 7% 0 0% 84

IA5 38 45% 29 35% 10 12% 5 6% 2 2% 84

IK1 20 24% 41 49% 12 14% 8 10% 3 4% 84

IK2 54 64% 19 23% 7 8% 2 2% 2 2% 84

Knowledge
IK3 37 44% 33 39% 7 8% 5 6% 2 2% 84

IK4 35 42% 35 42% 8 10% 4 5% 2 2% 84

VS1 25 30% 43 51% 11 13% 4 5% 1 1% 84

VS2 19 23% 34 40% 20 24% 11 13% 0 0% 84

VS3 18 21% 32 38% 24 29% 10 12% 0 0% 84

Vocational Skills
VS4 37 44% 29 35% 13 15% 3 4% 2 2% 84

VS5 36 43% 33 39% 11 13% 3 4% 1 1% 84

VS6 29 35% 37 44% 11 13% 6 7% 1 1% 84

OS1 21 25% 41 49% 14 17% 7 8% 1 1% 84

OS2 17 20% 39 46% 16 19% 8 10% 4 5% 84

Organisational Structure OS3 23 27% 31 37% 20 24% 7 8% 3 4% 84

OS4 16 19% 42 50% 20 24% 5 6% 1 1% 84

OS5 30 36% 39 46% 12 14% 3 4% 0 0% 84

SNP1 27 32% 38 45% 12 14% 5 6% 2 2% 84

SNP2 23 27% 46 55% 10 12% 3 4% 2 2% 84

Systems and Processes SNP3 44 52% 25 30% 10 12% 3 4% 2 2% 84

SNP4 31 37% 30 36% 14 17% 3 4% 6 7% 84

SNP5 34 40% 39 46% 7 8% 2 2% 2 2% 84

OP1 18 21% 49 58% 13 15% 4 5% 0 0% 84

OP2 37 44% 36 43% 7 8% 4 5% 0 0% 84
Organisational Performance OP3 26 31% 45 54% 9 11% 3 4% 1 1% 84
OP4 22 26% 44 52% 12 14% 4 5% 2 2% 84
OP5 18 21% 42 50% 18 21% 4 5% 2 2% 84
Table 54: Likhert Scale Responses

Source: Survey Data (2017)

105
Appendix 8 EDA Statistics on Outliers
8.1 Finance Business Partnering Capability

Figure 25: Histogram for FBPC

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Finance Business Partnering Capability Stem-and-Leaf Plot

Frequency Stem & Leaf

7.00 1 . 3333333
3.00 1 . 455
11.00 1 . 66677777777
22.00 1 . 8888888888999999999999
23.00 2 . 00000000000000111111111
9.00 2 . 222333333
9.00 2 . 444455555

Stem width: 10.00

Each leaf: 1 case(s)

Figure 26: Normal Q-Q Plot for FBPC

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

106
Figure 27: Detrended Normal Q-Q plot for FBPC

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 28: Box Plot for FBPC

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

107
8.2 Attitude

Figure 29: Histogram for Attitude

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Attitude Stem-and-Leaf Plot

Frequency Stem & Leaf

5.00 1 . 11111
1.00 1 . 3
3.00 1 . 455
12.00 1 . 666677777777
13.00 1 . 8888888999999
21.00 2 . 000000000001111111111
23.00 2 . 22222222222222233333333
6.00 2 . 445555

Stem width: 10.00

Each leaf: 1 case(s)

Figure 30: Normal Q-Q Plot for Attitude

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

108
Figure 31: Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot for Attitudes

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 32: Box Plot for Attitudes

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

109
8.3 Knowledge

Figure 33: Histogram for Knowledge

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Knowledge Stem-and-Leaf Plot

Frequency Stem & Leaf

8.00 12 . 00000000
1.00 13 . 0
4.00 14 . 0000
6.00 15 . 000000
16.00 16 . 0000000000000000
10.00 17 . 0000000000
17.00 18 . 00000000000000000
13.00 19 . 0000000000000
9.00 20 . 000000000

Stem width: 1.00

Each leaf: 1 case(s)

Figure 34: Normal Q-Q Plot for Knowledge

110
So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 35: Detrended Q-Q Plot for Knowledge

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 36: Box Plot for Knowledge

Source: Survey Data (2017)

111
8.4 Vocational Skills

Figure 37: Histogram for Vocational Skills

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Vocational Skills Stem-and-Leaf Plot

Frequency Stem & Leaf

9.00 1 . 888888889
39.00 2 . 001111222222233333333333333444444444444
29.00 2 . 55555556666666677777778888999
7.00 3 . 0000000

Stem width: 10.00

Each leaf: 1 case(s)

Figure 38: Normal Q-Q Plot for Vocational Skills

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

112
Figure 39: Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot for Vocational Skills

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 40: Box Plot for Vocational Skills

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

113
8.5 Organisational Structure

Figure 41: Histogram for Organisational Structure

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Organisational Structure Stem-and-Leaf Plot

Frequency Stem & Leaf

.00 1 .
8.00 1 . 44444455
12.00 1 . 666677777777
21.00 1 . 888888888889999999999
25.00 2 . 0000000000000000001111111
9.00 2 . 222223333
9.00 2 . 444445555

Stem width: 10.00

Each leaf: 1 case(s)

Figure 42: Normal Q-Q Plot for Organi sational Structure

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

114
Figure 43 - Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot for Organisational Structure
So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 44: Box plot for Organisational Structure

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

115
8.6 Systems and Processes

Figure 45: Histogram for Systems and Processes

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Systems and Processes Stem-and-Leaf Plot

Frequency Stem & Leaf

5.00 1 . 33333
.00 1 .
7.00 1 . 6666777
13.00 1 . 8888888899999
22.00 2 . 0000000000001111111111
16.00 2 . 2222222222333333
21.00 2 . 444444444444555555555

Stem width: 10.00

Each leaf: 1 case(s)

Figure 46: Normal Q-Q Plot for Systems and Processes

Source: Survey Data (2017)

116
 Figure 47: Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot for Systems and Processes

Source: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 48: Box Plot for Systems and Processe s

Source: Survey Data (2017)

117
8.7 Organisational Performance

Figure 49: Histogram for Organisational Performance

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Organisational Performance Stem-and-Leaf Plot

Frequency Stem & Leaf

9.00 16 . 000000000
4.00 17 . 0000
5.00 18 . 00000
3.00 19 . 000
24.00 20 . 000000000000000000000000
12.00 21 . 000000000000
10.00 22 . 0000000000
7.00 23 . 0000000
1.00 24 . 0
9.00 25 . 000000000

Stem width: 1.00

Each leaf: 1 case(s)

Figure 50: Normal Q-Q Plot for Organi sational Performance

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

118
 Figure 51: Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot for Organisational Performance
So urce: Survey Data (2017)

Figure 52: Box Plot for Organisational Performance

So urce: Survey Data (2017)

119
Appendix 9 Supervisor Meeting Records

120
121
122
123
124