Phân tích quản lý tài chính của Trường Đại học Lao động – Xã hội: cở sở để phân bổ các nguồn lực hiệu quả

THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY

Socialist Republic of Vietnam

SOUTHERN LUZON STATE UNIVERSITY

Republic of the Philippines

ANALYSIS ON FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF ULSA:

BASIS FOR EFFICIENT RESOURCE ALLOCATION

DOCTORAL DISSERTATION

ðỖ THỊ THANH HOA

(English Name: EMILY)

Supervisor: Dr. JOANNA PAULA ELLAGA

Thainguyen University of Economics and Business Administration (TUEBA)

TNU-SLSU, 2013

2

TABLE OF CONTENT

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................... 4

LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................................................. 5

ACKNOWLEDGMENT.......................................................................................................................... 6

COMMITMENT ...................................................................................................................................... 7

ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................................. 8

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 10

1.1. Background of the study ..................................................................................................... 10

1.2. Statement of objectives ....................................................................................................... 12

1.3. Hypotheses .......................................................................................................................... 15

1.4. Significance of the study ..................................................................................................... 15

1.5. Scope and limitation of the study........................................................................................ 18

1.6. Definition of terms .............................................................................................................. 20

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES .......................................... 23

2.1. Literature and studies review .............................................................................................. 23

2.1.1 Foreign literature ............................................................................................................ 23

2.1.2 Local literature................................................................................................................ 27

2.1.3 Foreign studies ............................................................................................................... 29

2.1.4 Local studies................................................................................................................... 41

2.2. Theoretical and conceptual framework ............................................................................... 52

2.2.1 Concept of quality and effectiveness:............................................................................. 52

2.2.2 The task of higher education: ......................................................................................... 54

2.2.3 Cameron’s Model of Organizational Effectiveness:....................................................... 55

2.2.4 The Balanced Scorecard ................................................................................................. 57

2.2.5 Applicability of the balanced scorecard model in higher education management in

Vietnam 59

2.2.6 Conceptual framework ................................................................................................... 61

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY........................................................................................................ 63

3.1. Research design................................................................................................................... 63

3.2. Determination of sample size .............................................................................................. 63

3.3. Sampling design and techniques ......................................................................................... 63

3.4. Subject of the study............................................................................................................. 64

3.5. Research instrument ............................................................................................................ 64

3.6. Validation of the instrument................................................................................................ 65

3.7. Statistical treatment ............................................................................................................. 65

CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................... 66

4.1. Profile of the respondent ..................................................................................................... 66

4.1.1 Gender of the respondents .............................................................................................. 66

4.1.2 Age of the respondents ................................................................................................... 66

4.1.3 The highest educational attainment of the respondents .................................................. 67

4.1.4 Monthly average income of the respondents .................................................................. 68

4.1.5 Position of the respondents............................................................................................. 68

4.2. Assess the effect of financial management in resource allocation ...................................... 69

4.2.1 Financial management of ULSA in terms of resource allocation in labor...................... 69

4.2.2 Financial management of ULSA in terms of resource allocation in equipment and

infrastructure................................................................................................................................. 73

4.2.3 Financial management of ULSA in terms of resource allocation in program ............... 75

4.2.4 Financial management of ULSA in terms of resource allocation in services provision 77

4.3. Evaluating Financial management in terms of resource allocation and propose a basis for

resources allocation for ULSA .......................................................................................................... 78

4.4. Regression analysis ............................................................................................................. 80

4.5. Hypothesis testing ............................................................................................................... 85

4.5.1 Hypothesis 1: The more investment in improving facilities, the higher effect of financial

management.................................................................................................................................. 85

4.5.2 Hypothesis 2: To increase the percentage spent on teachers and satisfaction of teachers,

it will increase the effect of financial management: .................................................................... 86

4.5.3 Hypothesis 3: Reduce administrative costs will increase the effect of financial

management:................................................................................................................................. 87

3

4.5.4 Hypothesis 4: The more investment in innovation program (method, examination, tests

and assessment), the higher effect of financial management ........................................................ 88

CHAPTER V SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............. 90

5.1. Summary ............................................................................................................................. 90

5.2. Conclusion........................................................................................................................... 92

5.3. Recommendation................................................................................................................. 95

REFERENCES..................................................................................................................................... 101

APPENDIX .......................................................................................................................................... 104

APPENDIX 1. REQUEST LETTER TO CONDUCT THE SURVEY (TO RESPONDENTS)......... 104

APPENDIX 2. QUESTIONNAIRE ..................................................................................................... 105

APPENDIX 3. Cronbach alpha of factors of financial management.................................................... 109

APPENDIX 4. CURRICULUM VITAE.............................................................................................. 112

4

LIST OF TABLES

Content............................................................................................................... page

Table 1.1. Resources allocation in ULSA 2012........................................................ 11

Table 3.1. Five point Likert’s Scale ......................................................................... 64

Table 4.1: Gender of the respondents....................................................................... 66

Table 4.2: Age of the respondents............................................................................ 66

Table 4.3: Education level of the respondents .......................................................... 67

Table 4.4: Monthly everage income of the respondents............................................ 68

Table 4.6. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Financial

Management in terms of Labor Resources Allocation as to Salary ........................... 70

Table 4.7 The average value of from 1.1 to 1.4 questions......................................... 71

Table 4.8. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Financial

Management in terms of Labor Resources Allocation as to professional development

and teaching quality................................................................................................. 72

Table 4.9. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Financial

Management in terms of Labor Resources Allocation as to development career....... 73

Table 4.10. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Financial

Management in terms of Resources Allocation in equipment and infrastructure....... 74

Table 4.11. The average value of from 4.1 to 4.3 questions...................................... 75

Table 4.12. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Financial

Management in terms of Resources Allocation in program ...................................... 76

Table 4.13. The average value of from 5.1 to 5.4 questions...................................... 76

Table 4.14. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Financial

Management in terms of Resources Allocation in services provision ....................... 77

Table 4.15. The average value of from 6.1 to 6.3 questions...................................... 78

Table 4.16. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Financial

Management in terms of Resources Allocation ........................................................ 79

Table 4.17. The average value of from 7.1 to 7.6 questions...................................... 80

Table 4.18. Cronbach alpha coefficient.................................................................... 82

Table 4.19. F-test and Significance test.................................................................... 83

Table 4.20. The regression models........................................................................... 84

Table 4.21. gamma’s value and level of significance of hypothesis 1 ....................... 86

Table 4.22. gamma’s value and level of significance of hypothesis 2 ....................... 86

Table 4.23. gamma’s value and level of significance of hypothesis 3 ....................... 87

Table 4.24. gamma’s value and level of significance of hypothesis 4 ....................... 88

Table 1.1. Resources allocation in ULSA 2012........................................................ 96

Table 5.1. The optimal rate of items in resource allocation....................................... 97

5

LIST OF FIGURES

Content............................................................................................................... page

Figure 1.1. Limitation of study ................................................................................ 19

Figure 2.1. Model Balanced Scorecard..................................................................... 45

Figure 2.2 Diagram of the Balanced Scorecard ........................................................ 58

Figure 2.3. Research paradigm................................................................................. 61

Figure 4.1: percent of position of sample. ................................................................ 69

6

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Joanna Paula Ellaga who

has instructed her dedicatedly to complete this Dissertation.

I also would like to thank the lecturers of the University of Southern Luzon,

Thai Nguyen University, faculty and staff of University of Labour and Social Affairs

for helping me during the survey of Financial management: basis for resources

allocation.

Thanks for my family and all my beloved friends who have shared,

encouraged and supported me so much during my DBA program to made my study

feasible.

The Author

Do Thi Thanh Hoa

7

COMMITMENT

The authors declare that this is my own research. The information is used in

the dissertation is credible. The evaluation criteria of financial management: the basis

for allocating resources have not been available in Vietnam in general and Hanoi in

particular. The evaluation criteria of financial management: the basis for allocating

resources have not been available in Vietnam in general and Hanoi in particular. The

problem of resources allocation in the financial university has been mentioned.

However, no specific studies at the University of Socialist Labor and other

universities in Vietnam. This study may provide the basis for financial management to

allocate resources effectively, in accordance with the actual situation of ULSA, and

the reference to the financial management of the other schools and policy makers

regarding the allocation of resources for education. The author strongly believes that

the thesis is the first study in Vietnam to build resource allocation model suitablely for

University Labor – Social Affairs, and therefore it is also the first study to introduce

the method of applying the standards of resources allocation of the university.

Therefore, the findings and conclusions of the dissertation has not been published in

any other work yet.

The Author

Do Thi Thanh Hoa

8

ABSTRACT

Starting from current reality in Vietnam, the mechanism of financial of

education, including tuition fees are not renovated, a system of wage scales also take

the average, so is not to encourage the dynamism and creativity of teachers and

education managers; cost norms for training between branches, jobs is still averaged

and not practical; mechanisms for allocating budget for institutions is also

unreasonable. Attracting investment from social resources for of higher education

(including public schools) are limited (the Resolution No. 05- NQ/BCSð January 06,

2010)

University of labour and social affairs (ULSA) is also in this general situation.

Now, tuition fees of ULSA are in regulated frame, infrastructure is poor, the system

of wage doesn’t encourage the employee, state budget invested in ULSA is limited,

financial management is not good, resource allocation is not reasonable.

The objective of this dissertation is to analyze the current status of financial

management including resource allocation of University Labor - Social, in order to

offer solutions to better allocate resources for it. From the survey of managerial staff

and lecturers of University of Labor – Social Affairs, dissertation assessed the impact

of financial management, including the allocation of resources to the factor labor,

equipment and facilities, program and course providers.

The dissertation used methodology of the questionnaire survey, descriptive

statistical analysis, regression to give proposal for the resources allocation of the

university.

From the analysis of actual allocation of resources in the University of Labor

and Social Affairs, the dissertation determine the respondent’s profile (gender, age,

the highest education level, montly average income, the number of years of services

9

in the university, position), profile of the respondents is in accordance with the actual

situation of ULSA. Secondly, the author assess the effect of resources allocation to

the factors: labor, equipment and infrastructure, course program and providing

services. Determining the impact of these factors is to adjust the allocation of

resources for effectiveness Finally, the researcher proposes a basis for an efficient

financial resources allocation for the university through regression model. These

model showed that the priority of investment to get high efficency.

10

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the study

Education in our Vietnam ver the next decade in the context of developing world

is more rapid and complex changes. Globalization and international integration in

education has become an inevitable trend. Scientific and technological revolution,

information technology and communications, intellectual economy growing strongly,

direct impact on the development of education in the world… Fast-growing demand

for education to meet the demands of industrialization and modernization of the

country, economic development in depth knowledge with advanced technologies and

international integration, while the resources to education is limited, will create

pressure on educational development. (The decision No 711/Qð-TTg June 13, 2012)

The core problem of a university education (higher education) can be summed up

in three words: quality, efficiency and social justice. And with ULSA is two words:

quality and finance. How to manage finance to get high quality and financial

management here is allocating the resources.

The decision No 711/Qð-TTg June 13, 2012 also confirm necessary educational

solutions development phase 2011-2020 is: Increasing resources for investment and

innovating education financing mechanism. To continue renewing education

financing mechanisms to mobilize, allocate and use more effectively the resources of

public and social investment in education and enhancing the autonomy of the

institution, make transparency and responsibility to the State, the learner and society

to ensure financial resources for a number of Vietnamese educational institutions are

capable of integrating and international competition.

Current status of resources allocation in ULSA:

11

Table 1.1. Resources allocation in ULSA 2012

No Content Amount (VND) Rate

1 Salary for faculty 28,150,143,000 42.6%

2

professional development and teaching

quality 5,096,875,000 7.7%

3 Career development 1,377,176,000 2.1%

4 equipment and infrastructure 6,587,828,000 10.0%

5 Course program 8,002,749,000 12.1%

6 service provision 16,869,174,000 25.5%

Total 66,083,945,000 100%

Source: Accounting Department of ULSA, 2012

Currently, the quality of the teachers is inadequate, the salary of each teacher

is not high, and method of payment of salary for each teacher on fix rank and

seniority to lose the its leverage. In 2012, the average income of a teacher is

6.721.000VND/month (= 320 USD / month), this salary does not encourage teachers,

Thus, teachers are not interested to prepare good lecture, add and update knowledge.

Moreover, the construction of the system of fixed wage scale, the time of wage

increasing is 3 years, this salary payment does not reflect the true quality of teachers.

Training program is now not really completed, ULSA invested about 12% for

program but basic teaching methods are still in the old lines, mostly by traditional

methods. The traditional method mean that learning is mainly based on lectures so

acquiring knowledge processes are passive, unilateral, does not expand the vision.

When problems of practices are improper such as theory, most students fall into an

embarrassing situation and dare not to process. Students are not interested in program.

Therefore, the school should innovate program and method to meet current needs.