Factor affecting business strategy implementation - A case study in garment 10 - Nguyen Hoang Viet

Vu Thanh Tu ANH - Fulbright University in Vietnam, USA Le Xuan BA - Centural Institude for Economic Managerment, Vietnam Hervé B. BOISMERY - University of La Reuinion, France H. Eric BOUTIN - Toulon Var University, France Nguyen Thi DOAN - Vietnam Learning Promotion Association, Vietnam Haasis HANS - Dietrich - Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics (isl) Bremen - Germany Le Quoc HOI - National Economic University, Vietnam Nguyen Thi Bich LOAN - Thuong mai University, Vietnam Nguyen Hoang LONG - Thuong mai University, Vietnam Nguyen MAI - Vietnam Economist Association, Vietnam Duong Thi Binh MINH - University of Economics HoChiMinh City, Vietnam Hee Cheon MOON - Korean Trade Research Association, South Korea Bui Xuan NHAN - Thuong mai University, Vietnam Luong Xuan QUY - Vietnam Economicst Association, Vietnam Nguyen Van Song - Vietnam National University of Agriculture Nguyen TAM - California State University, USA Truong Ba THANH - University of Danang, Vietnam Dinh Van THANH - Institude for Trade Research, Vietnam Do Minh THANH - Thuong mai University, Vietnam Le Dinh THANG - University of Québec à Trois Riviéres, Canada Tran Dinh THIEN - Vietnam Institute of Economics, Vietnam Nguyen Quang THUAN - Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences, Vietnam Le Nhu TUYEN - Grenoble École de Managment, France Washio TOMOHARU - Kwansei Gakuin University, Japan Zhang YUJIE - Tsinghua University, China THE Members Editor in chief NGUYEN BACH KHOA Deputy Editor in Chief SECTRETARY OF EDITORIAL OFFICE PHAM MINH DAT Editorial SCIENTIFIC COUNCIL Dinh Van SON - Thuong mai University, Vietnam - President Pham Vu LUAN - Thuong mai University, Vietnam - Vice President Nguyen Bach KHOA - Thuong mai University, Vietnam - Deputy President INTRODUCTION Planning a methodical and consistent strategy is a very difficult mission with any manager, however implementing - organizing strategies is much more arduos task (Hrebiniak,2006). In practice and research, it is hard to list all factors affecting the stategy imple- mentation process. Different to planning stage which focuses on brainstorm ability, strategy implementation focuses on skills and operation; specially, developing process in research of strategy implementation is not seamless (Noble, 1999b). Allio (2005) exhibited that 57% companies get failure in implementing strategic decision, 83% managers assess the process of strategy implementation still contain numerous issues and inconsistence. In this article, it researches generally in theory of strategy implementation and recognizing major factors affecting strategy implementation, hence building a research model based on 5 dependent vari- ables are strategy planning; organization culture; com- munication; personnel and leadership and tested them on the sample set of 83 managers in Garment 10. 1. Theoretical basis of strategy implementation and factors affecting strategy implementation 1.1. Implementation strategies Thompson, Strickland & Gamble (2005) has emphasized that implementing strategy or realizing the strategic goals is the most complex and time-con- suming tasks in the whole process of strategic man- agement. Sashitatal & Wilemon (1996) has pointed out a number of synonyms for "implementation" as "execution - executing" which is often used in man- agement theory but is not widely used by corporate executives. An overview of research in the world that allows access leads to three different views of this term: The first opinion focuses on the process and implement the strategy in a series of steps to be planned carefully. The second point considered to implement the strategy as a series of coordinated actions in different degrees, but often in parallel and consider this act in terms of behavior. Some other authors combined the views process acts / actions to form the third access point (see Table 1). The essence of strategy implementation might be understood as a dynamic, complex, iterative process including a series of decisions and actions of man- agers and employees affected by many external fac- tors and parties in order to achieve the strategic objectives set out. To analyze the contents of strategy implementation, the researchers used a series of other related theories as theoretical representation (Agency theory) of Govindarajan & Fisher (1990), organiza- tional theory (Organization theory) of Govindarajan also & Fisher (1990), psychology (psychology) by Kim & Mauborgne (1993), social learning theory (social learning theory) of Govindarajan (1988) and expectancy theory (expectancy theory) of Guth & MacMillan (1986) 12 Journal of Trade Science 4:2 (2016) 12 - 20 JOURNAL OF TRADE SCIENCE ’S JTS Nguyen Hoang Viet Thuongmai University Email: nhviet@vcu.edu.vn Keywords: Bussiness Strategy, Strategy Implementation, Garco 10 This article showed the research results of factors affecting business strategy implementation. The typicalresearch at Garco 10 with sample includes 83 managers at multi levels: company, department, division and production unit level. The result demontrates all of 5 factors: Strategy Planning, Organizational Culture, Personnel, Communication and Leadership have a positively affect company's business strategy implementation. Received: 23rd May 2016 Revised: 20th June 2016 1.2. Strategy implementation Strategy implementation can be studied of at 3 lev- els strategies: corporate level (Corporate), the business unit level (SBU) and functional level (marketing, pro- duction, human resources, ...). Case study suggests that few scientists focusing on the research strategy imple- mentation at a company level, while extensively stud- ied at SBU level (Guota & Govindarajan, 1984; Govindarajan & Fisher, 1990). The studies focused on functional-level strategy implementation are limited but almost focused on marketing strategies (Chimhanzi, 2004). Besides, there are few studies dis- cussing the strategic relationship between function strategies and business ones. There is a study by Slater & Olson (2001) on the role of marketing in business strategy implementation. While Chimhanzi (2004) studied the interaction between marketing and HR functions in implementation marketing strategies. This study is limited to implementation business strategy associated with business units on the fashion market of Vietnam's garment enterprises. 1.3. Factors affecting strategy implementation The studies testing the effect of the elements to strategy implementation can gather under 2 formats or categorize the various influencing factors into groups (Skivington & Daft, 1991; Noble, 1999b) or link these fac- tors impact a frame model (Higgins, 2005; Brenes & Mena & Molina, 2007). Both Skivington & Daft (1991) and Noble (1999b) have classified implementation vari- ables into two groups: the framework and processes but differ in content. Skivington and Daft (1991) divided into two strategic business groups: low cost and dif- ferentiation - should be implemented in two dif- ferent organizational method called the framework and processes. The framework is represented by the rules and resources / capacity remaining processes represented by these interactions, the binding provisions made. Noble (1999b) studied strategy implementation on an organi- zational structure perspective (focused on the structure and control mechanisms) and implementation process- es between individuals (focus emphasizes strategic consensus, onions autonomous strategic behavior, atti- tudes, leadership style and execution, the process of communication and interaction). Beer and Eisenstat (2000) continued to add six fac- tors including: style of management; strategic priori- ties; leadership; communications; collaboration between functions and organizational culture. Among them, the communication is considered the biggest barriers impeding the effective strategy implementa- tion. The study by Pettigrew (1992) grouped imple- mentation variables into 4 groups, including: content strategy, context (including organizational context: organizational structure, organizational culture, busi- ness environment: environmental change and environ- mental sectors in general), the process of implementa- tion (planned activities, resources, people, media, 13 journal of Trade Science JOURNAL OF TRADE SCIENCE ’S JTS Table 1: Definitions of strategy implementation Perspective Definitons Process perspective - Strategy implementation is the process of transforming strategic plans into action tasks and ensure that those tasks are performed in a direction to accomplish its objectives. Kotler (1984) cited in Noble (1999b). - Strategy implementation is an iterative process of implementing strategies, policies, programs and action plans that allows a firm to utilize its resources to take advantage of opportunities in the competitive environment (Harrington, 2006). Behavior perspective - Implementation is a series of decisions and actions committed to using resources to achieve intended outcomes (Wernham, 1985) - Implementation is a series of interventions concerning organizational structures, key personnel actions, and control systems designed to control performance with respect to desired ends. Hrebiniak & Joyce (1984) cited in Noble (1999b) - Implementation designates the managerial interventions that align organizational action with strategic intention. Floyd & Wooldridge (1992a) cited in Noble (1999b). Hybrid perspective - Implementation is defined as the sum of activities and choices necessary to implement a strategy ... is the process of turning strategy into action and policies (Wheelen & Hunger, 1992) - In other cases, implementation is seen as a process of action was oriented on- demand management and control (Govindarajan, 1998). communication, control, feedback) and strategic out- comes (organic results and intangible). Studies about the second group have grouped a number of elements into a model, therefore, not only group the implementation variables but also arranged them into a network of interactive relationships. Noble's research model (1990a) revolves around four main stages: pre-implementation, organization of implementation efforts, process management imple- mentation, maximizing the efficiency of cross-func- tional implement. There are 5 factors that act as levers like: goals, organizational structure, leadership, com- munication and reward. According to Noble, combin- ing these elements with each stage will improve the strategy implementation effeciency. Higgins (2005) has established 8S models includ- ing strategy and structure, resources, shared values, style, staff, systems and processes, strategic perform- ance. This model was developed from the McKinsey 7S model. Higgins has removed elements from the model's skill Mckinsey and additional resources factor. He added strategic performance factors to strengthen the focus on strategy implementation process. Brenes, Mena & Molina (2007) pointed out five key elements to successful strategy implementation. It is the process of strategic planning, consistent imple- mentation, control and monitoring implementation, leadership, promotion of the CEO, Human resources management and leadership eventually change. From the overview of study and based on actual access to the survey, the authors selected to analyze 5 factors that affect the business strategy implemented by the Vietnam garment enterprises including: Planning strategy; Organizational culture; Communications; Personnel; Leadership. Strategic planning: better implementation could not offset the shortcomings from the stage of planning (Hrebinial, 2006). Some studies mentioned factors then develop (Alexander, 1985; Allio, 2005) along with the current status of strategic planning processes (Kim & Mauborgne, 1991; Singh, 1998) because of the way construction a strategy will affect the execution efficiency. Whether a planned strategy is suitable or not is an important question for the success of strategy implementation but even a good strategy can not guar- antee absolutely that. Kim & Mauborgne (1993) showed the local level managers often desire a plan- ning process which is open, consistent and fair because it will create incentives for them in implementing the strategy. If the planning process lacked those charac- teristics, the effective implementation can not guaran- tee success. Organizational culture: one of the main challenges in strategy implementation is understanding organiza- tional culture, participants' behavior. In the business environment, organizational culture is also known as the corporate culture. Corboy & O'Corrbui (1999) identified serious mistakes in strategy implementation including the lack of understanding of the organization culture as well as an adequate evaluation of strategy from the staff, not admitted difficulties or barriers, as well as ignoring the daily business imperatives. As Marginson, (2002) strategy implementation is not only a process but also the group's commitment to the com- prehensive participation of all employees through a strong organizational culture (corporate culture). A strong culture is reflected in the work environment cre- ated for employees. Organizational culture is related to leadership style of executives - how they use the time, what objectives they focus on, what requirements were set for employ- ees, their decisions processes and their impact on orga- nizational culture. Leadership also includes the values, beliefs, behaviors such iconic dress, job title or infor- mal meetings with employees (Adkins & Caldwell, 2004). In the strategy implementation model, there's always the existence of organizational culture. The challenge occurs is how organizational culture adapt to changings of the organization. Appropriate organizational culture enhances the role of subordinate employees in participating in the process of strategy planning and implementation - It is opposite to the opinion that separates "decision mak- ers" and "implemetation people". In other words, com- panes implement strategy through spillover effects of organizational culture in the whole company. A strong organizational culture will unite employees through individual targets & behavior withi organizational tar- gets & behavior; strong culture will encourage creativ- ity of employees (Ouchi, 2001). Therefore, organiza- tional culture needs diversity, flexibility to stimulate creativity. Moreover, a organizatio culture concerned about methods to promote, encourage employees to bring efficient implementation. 14 Journal of Trade Science JOURNAL OF TRADE SCIENCE ’S JTS Communications: Forman and Argenti (2005) stud- ied the role of the media in creative abilities as well as spread of the business strategy. Some researchers have confirmed the important role of the communication in strategy implementation process (Alexander, 1985; Schaap, 2006). And this is also confirmed in previous studies of Alexander (1985), pointed out the role of communication when it is mentioned most often in the factors contributing to successful strategy implementa- tion. Grönroos (1985) believes that an organization must make the employees understand the importance of the strategy before communicated to customers. As planned strategy, it is necessary to divide targets, but implementation will not be successful if employees are vague about strategic orientations as well as tasks, because of the divided tasks or responsibilities is not clear or information is transmitted over multiple units, multiple-level or complex organizational structures, bureaucratic relations. So, to avoid conflict between departments or functions, it is necesaing to establish a clear plan, detailed responsibilities or works (Rapa & Kauffman, 2005). Therefore, effective communication involves communicating the duties, responsibilities need to be done by employees as well as give reasons for the decision to explain the new strategic decision or why there is a change job position. According to Peng and Littlejohn (2001), commu- nication plays an important role in strategic communi- cation activities related to training, dissemination of information and knowledge in the process of strategy implementation. Therefore, good communication activities will help all employees understand the tasks and responsibilities that need to be done. Managers need to ensure that all employees understand the vision, mission and their role through the realization of the strategic vision. As Rapert and Wren (1998), if employees can easily access and exchange with com- pany's executives openly, the implementation results tend to be higher than other companies' results with limited and reigourous communication environment. Personnel: including senior, mid-level, function - level and staff. The effectiveness of strategy imple- mentation is affected by the quality of the human resources involved in this process (Govindarajan, 1989). Human resources quality, including expertise, skills, attitudes, abilities, experience and other quali- ties, depending on the requirements of a specific job or position. Viseras, Baines and Sweeney (2005) grouped 36 key success factors into three groups: human, organization and production system. Their findings revealed that successful strategy implementation depend primarily on people and less depend on the organization or system processes. Harrington (2006) also pointed out that a profound participation in the implementation of senior department will affect posi- tively to the strategy execution overall. Leadership: playing important role in strategic planning as well as strategy implementation. According to John P. Kotter (1990), leadership demon- strate roles in two main aspects: (1) guiding companies to face with constant changes. This requires leaders to have willing and changes-accepting thinking, leading enterprises and building the organizational culture which is suitable for both opportunities and chal- lenges; (2) leadership shows administrating skills to deal with possible negative issues which could be encountered. This means strategic leader is the person who has panoramic and developing-continuous view over time, future-oriented as well as follow up corpo- rate operations. Furthermore, a leader has to expose to all kinds of difficulties, obstacles, conflicts and rival- ries inside and outside but he needs to inspire his employees. Because everything does not always hap- pen as planning, therefore a not good leader will nega- tively affect the strategy implementation. Strategic leaders include senior and middle man- agers, therefore the role of senior strategy leading is also reflected in engagement and commitment to the strategic guidelines. In fact, there are senior executives who expressed the unwilling to help as well as transfer energy to lower levels, and unfaithfulness to the busi- ness. Since then, it will gradually create negative sig- nals which affect negatively to other employees of the enterprise and the irresponsibility of the executive board will become the leading factor adversely affect- ing strategy implementation process. If senior executives have role of orientation, power transmission, the middle level plays role as the "main actors" - who have a key role in strategic communica- tion activities (Aaltonen and Ikavalko, 2002), as well as the people who directly guide, support, and manage enterprise resource. Without cohesion, commitment among middle managers with lower employees, it will not create positive effects as well as good business 15 journal of Trade Science JOURNAL OF TRADE SCIENCE ’S JTS results. In addition, the relationship between senior executives, mid-level to lower level also affects the strategy implementation. 2. Hypothesis and methodology From the above analysis, the researchers propose the following hypothesis: Hypothesis H1: Strategy planning affects strategy implementaion positively. Hypothesis H2: Organizational culture affects strat- egy implementaion positively. Hypothesis H3: Communication affects strategy implementaion positively. Hypothesis H4: Personnel affect strategy imple- mentation positively. Hypothesis H5: Leadership affects strategy imple- mentation positively. Assumed research model of factors affecting strat- egy implementation of the com- pany with the dependent variable is strategy implementation that is explained by five factors which are relatively independent vari- ables in the regression model. The regression equation is the following form: With: TTCL: strategy implementa- tion; HD: strategy planning; NS: Personnel; TT: Communication; VH: Organizational culture; LD: Leadership. Scales are taken mostly from the Alexander's model (1985); Noble (1999b) and Govindarajan (1989), combining with the per- sonal views of the research team. Firstly, the scale was developed through qualitative research methods used in group discus- sions with experts. The author group consulted 5 experts including 2 scientists who spe- cialized in strategic manage- ment; 02 CEO and 1 marketing and sales manager. The aim of the discussions is to find out these experts' opin- ion about the factors that affect the strategic business implementation of the SBU fashion among the domes- tic market of Vietnamese garment enterprises. Next, they evaluated the variables in the model of this research to decide which elements need to retain, remove or supplement. Finally, the overall results of discussions and building official scales. The main con- tent of the questionnaire consists of 3 parts. The first part is general question such as gender, age, experience and current position; the second part includes 25 ques- tions corresponding to 5 major dependent variables and the third part measures the overall strategy imple- mentation (table 2). These variables were measured according to 5 Likert scale distance (from 1: complete- ly disagree to 5: completely agree). 16 Journal of Trade Science JOURNAL OF TRADE SCIENCE ’S JTS TTCL = á + â1HÐ + â2VH + â3TT + â4NS + â5LÐ + å Table 2: Scale of variables affect company's business strategy implementation Source: Authors Variable Expressions Symbol Strategy planning (HÐ) - The strategic planning is conducted methodically and openly HÐ1 - The company's strategy is planned systemly and feasibility. HÐ2 Personnel (NS) - Personnel of board and directors have good qualifications and competence NS1 - The company’s trainings get best performance NS2 - Staff satisfied with the treatment regime NS3 Communication (TT) - Employees are communicated and understood the vision, mission and strategic plan. TT1 - Communication method is appropriate, fast and accurate. TT2 - Employees easily give feedback to higher management level TT3 Organizational culture (VH) - The company has good standards, values, habits and cultural traditions. VH1 - Comfortable and professional working environment. VH2 - Culture promotes consensus and action commitment VH3 Leadership (LÐ) - Leadership provides inspirational to company’s employees LÐ1 - Leaders are always responsible, close to operation situation. LÐ2 Strategy implementation (TTCL) - Strategy implementation achieves the objectives TTCL1 - The strategy implementation process is appropriate, clearly TTCL2 - Deploy strategies in line with resources - Strategy implementation is consistent with the company’s resources TTCL3 Official survey was carried out with the method of non-probability sampling and conducted in two ways which are direct survey and survey sent via email. The period time is from 7/2015 to 10/2015 with the participants are the presi- dent/vice president of the Executive Board, CEO and Deputy CEO, Director and Deputy Director of the May 10's member companies and head of planning, strategic, business, marketing, human resources department. All of the participants have 3 - 28 experience years in strategic man- agement, and the average number of 8.2 years. Before sending the questionnaire, survey subjects will be contacted in advance by tele- phone to collect email addresses, then the questionnaire was sent along with a letter of introduction to explain the methods and objec- tives of the research to the sample in 2 ways: (1) 80 emails sent, 61 of which are valid respondents (76%); (2) directly giving ques- tionnaire to other 32 people; after removing 1 incomplete respondent; the final sample is 92 people (82.1%). 3. Research Result Table 3 synthetizes the statistic results of inde- pendent variable which is component of company's bussiness strategy implementation, to exhibit the aver- age value (M) of 5 factors scale range as assumed inde- pendent variable affects dependent variable. In gener- al, the average value of scale ranges is all above aver- age, several ranges reach good level as above 4. Besides, the standard deviation value of scale ranges in same group is quite centralized although there is small difference. Inspecting the reliability of 5 factors through Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient. All components have above 0,7 Alpha Coefficient (Table 4) meet the admis- sible standard (Nunnally, 1978). The independent vari- able EFA analysis result displays all observation vari- able focus on 5 action factors. KMO Coefficient = 0.738 (meet 0.5 < KMO < 1) so that EFA is suitable for data and Chi-quare of Bartlett inspection meets 542.127 with Sig = 0.000 (meet sig < 0.05); thus obser- vation variables are correlated in general. Extracted variance is 72.256% (meet > 50%) expresses 5 vari- able explain 72.256% data fluctuation, at Eigenvalue Coefficient = 1.213 (> 1). Analysing dependent vari- able presents 2 observation variable to be converge into one group. KMO Coeficient = 0.710, Bartlett Sig = 0.000, extracted variance is 73.691% with Eigenvalue Coefficient = 2.211. To solve rotation matrix to get independent variable and dependent vari- able, the result displays the independent variable scale range guarantee unidirectional. Hence, concepts' scale range satisfy both value and reliability. Table 4 presents the analysis result of Pearson cor- relation to quantify the extent of linear linkage. It is 17 journal of Trade Science JOURNAL OF TRADE SCIENCE ’S JTS Table 3: Description Statistic Source: Analysis Result from SPSS 20.2 software. Variable Component Average (M) Standard Deviation (SD) Alpha Coefficient Strategy Planning HÐ1 4.15 .854 0.8 HÐ2 4.02 .722 Organizational Culture VH1 4.15 .854 0.73VH2 4.02 .722 VH3 3.41 .688 Communication TT1 3.94 .698 0.76TT2 4.17 .574 TT3 4.11 .527 Personnel NS1 3.55 .784 0.81NS2 3.65 .877 NS3 3.33 .873 Leadership LÐ1 3.17 1.174 0.73 LÐ2 3.41 1.127 Strategy Implementation TTCL1 3.76 .857 0.9TTCL2 3.76 .957 TTCL3 3.44 .794 - - - - clear that the dependent variable TTCL has linear cor- related with all 5 independent variables, including inadequate correlated weakly with the independent variables of HD and LD, meaning at 0:01. The phenomenon of multicollinearity between 5 independent variables were measured through toler- ances and variances inflation factor (VIF). VIF values range from 1:04 to 1:38, the value <10 showed multicollinearity phenomenon is negligible and stable variables. Based on the regression results in Table 5, it can see the value of R in 0.740, the value of the square of the correlation coefficient (Rsquare) = 0.547 shows the relevance of the model is 54.7%, or, 5 other independent variables in the model explained 54.7% of the varia- tion of the variable strategy implementation. Value squared correlation coefficient adjust- ment (Adjust Rsquare) more accurately reflects the suitabil- ity of the model for the overall hit rate is relatively high at 51.3% (see Table 5). The analytical results of the regression coefficients in the model shows that all independent variables with sig- nificance level (Sig) by 0.000. This confirms 5 inde- pendent variables H?, NS, VH, TT, L? are dependent variables affecting the reliability TTCL with 99%, and this effect is positive because all Beta coefficients are positive (table 6). Ordering the impor- tance of each factor depends on the beta. The higher Beta fac- tors have the stronger their effects are Arranging descending order of influence level fac- tors to implemeta- tion of Garment 10 as follows: L e a d e r s h i p , Personnel, strategy planning, Organization Culture and Communications. All 5 hypothesis H1 to H5 are accepted. 18 Journal of Trade Science JOURNAL OF TRADE SCIENCE ’S JTS Table 4: Results of Pearson correlation analysis ** Correlation significance at 0:01 (2-tailed) * Correlation significance at 0.05 (two-tailed) Source: The results from SPSS 20.0 analysis HÐ VH TT NS LÐ TTCL HÐ 1 .200* .049 .159 .380** .380** VH .200* 1 .331** .303** .384** .622** TT .049 .331** 1 .456** .608** .539** NS .159 .303** .456** 1 .512** .472** LÐ .216** .384** .408** .312** 1 .328** TTCL .380** .622** .539** .472** .328** 1 Table 5: Results of regression analysis Source: The results from SPSS 20.0 analysis Model R R2 Adjusted R2 Std. Error of the Estimation Durbin Watson 1 0.740 0.547 0.531 .481 2.069 Table 6: Results of regression analysis Source: The results from SPSS 20.0 analysis Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Collinearity Statistics Beta Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF (Constant) .229 .355 .646 .519 HÐ .312 .063 .281 3.588 .000 .945 1.158 VH .264 .079 .224 4.588 .000 .945 1.058 TT .089 .059 .206 1.513 .013 .836 1.196 NS .218 .072 .324 3.041 .003 .755 1.325 LÐ .325 .053 .356 6.178 .000 .748 1.337 4. Recommendation First of all enhance the connection, closeness between the leaders and employees through daily con- tact in work as well as group activities. Motivating employees is to gain great sympathy, to make employ- ees feel peacefull and trust. Moreover, organization's leaders need to meet all partners, to be full of enthusi- asm for all employees, and then understand the gener- al situation because following activity situation of organization is important. Leaders should heighten all employees' ideas, execute their ideas usually and reduce the gap between leaders and employees to rec- ognize organization activities. Thus, leadership style needs to change to be suitable for organizational status and employees' aspiration. Organizational leadership role is expressed clearly through the person who plays leader role and then departmental managers. To increase the leader's influence its necessary handle well the relationship between managers (Low -mid- high) to create organizational culture in organization. The second point is personnel which affects deeply business strategy implementation. The top managers have important roles in strategic managerment. Therefore, top managers need to me trained methodi- cally and professionally for strategic management in general and implementation in particular. Managers need to help employees understand the importance of bussiness strategy and benefit of organization and indi- vidual if executing busniess strategy effectively. It needs to be ensured that all level of managers and employees have enough ability to take their role, be trained great and direct managers have ability in man- agerment and guidance. If departmental managers and employees need to be informed same and concurrent information to ensure agreement. Besides, need to planning and evaluate frequently human resource to enhance ability and employee level, labor turnover and labor arrangement. Public announcement of salary and bonus commitment clearly, fairly; promotional sched- ule to help employees feel comfortable and dedicate. Thirdly, effectiveness of bussiness strategy depends on the method and coherence in creating and planning bussiness strategy, as well as inplementation method. Even, there are several organizations make mistake in strategy planning such as lacking vision, unclear mission and not focusing on create the core Hence, some organizations may create business strate- gy but not follow or implement or careless, non- research bussiness strategy could be seen as not have bussiness stratefy. Organization need to focus on cre- ate bussiness strategies scientifically, systematically and coherently. Esspeciallys, organization needs to do market research frequently, periodly with carefulness, depth. The market which organization operates in is always changed fast and strongly as present, bussiness strategy need ensure the flexibility, suitable "open" level to accommodate with them. Besides organizational culture need to be cared and seen as factor to activities commitment of all organiza- tion. Managers and administrator need to understand clearly and create the value emphasys the agreement and activities commitment for bussiness strategy target and be the pioneer to follow cultural value which is created. However, the bussiness strategy effort could be unsuccessful if there is not any support and com- mitment from employees and mid-level managers. Alexander (1985) emphasized the connection between employees and managers initially. The participation and commitment should be developed and maintain throughout all implementation period. If the mid-level managers and employees are allowed to participate in creating bussiness strategy implementation plan, the commitment will be definite. Finnaly, communication affects the connection and the agreement of all members in organization for bussiness strategy implementation activities. Solutions need to be informed all employees, worker to make them understand clearly about internal media, benefit, responsibility in supplying information, feedback to managers. The agreement maybe different between different levels; if all members in organization are not informed and understand the same information the information which be passed to too many levels it reduces the agreement (Noble,199b). Communication activities need to inform mission, responsibility fre- quently as well as giving the reasonable explaining reason for all new strategic decisions or the reason why there is several changes in work. Enhancing exchange openly between department, groups which have impor- tant role in trainning, broadening knowledge and learn- ing during strategy implemetation. 5. Conclusion Implementing company's business strategy is a complicating research area and brings the most diffi- 19 journal of Trade Science JOURNAL OF TRADE SCIENCE ’S JTS culties to administration. The inspection result exhibits all 5 initial assumptive factors includeding strategy planning - organizational culture - personnel - commu- nication- leadership all affect bussiness strategy imple- mentation of Garco 10 with reliability above 95%. The implementation period and research result still have many limitations such as researching only one organi- zation in garment industry. The research is also limited in bussniess strategy range for domestic fashioned SBU with incomplete affected factors. This is recom- mendation for research orientation in the future. Reference: 1. Alexander (2011), Successfully Implementing Strategic Decisions, Long Range Planning. 2. Hrebiniak, L.G. (2006), Obstacles to Effective StrategyImplementation, Organizational Dynamics, 35, 12-31. 3. Peng, W. and Littlejohn, D., (2001), Organisational communication and strategy imple- mentation - a primary inquiry, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol 13, Iss 7, pp.360-363. 4. Yang Li, Sun Guohui, Martin J. Eppler (2008), Making Strategy Work: A Literature Review on the Factors influencing Strategy Implementation, ICA Working Paper. 5. Govindarajan, V. & Fisher, J (1990), Strategy, Control Systems, and Resource Sharing: Effects on Business-Unit Performance, Academy of Management Journal. 6. Gupta, A. K. & Govindarajan, V. (1984), Business Unit Strategy, Managerial Characteristics, and Business Unit Effectiveness at Strategy Implementation, Academy of Management Journal. 7. Higgins, J.M. (2005), The Eight S of Successful Strategy Execution, Journal of Change Management, vol 5. 8. Noble, C.H (1999a), Building the strategy implemen- tation network, Business Horizons-bloomington, vol 42. 9. Noble, C.H. (1999b), The Eclectic Roots of Strategy Implementation Research, Journal of Business Research, vol 45. Summary Baøi baùo naøy trình baøy keát quaû nghieân cöùu caùc yeáu toá aûnh höôûng ñeán hoaït ñoäng trieån khai chieán löôïc kinh doanh (CLKD). Nghieân cöùu ñieån hình taïi Toång coâng ty may 10 vôùi taäp maãu laø 83 nhaø quaûn trò caáp coâng ty, caùc phoøng, khoái, xí nghieäp tröïc thuoäc,… Keát quaû cho thaáy caû 5 yeáu toá: Hoaïch ñònh chieán löôïc, Vaên hoùa toå chöùc, Nhaân söï thöïc thi, Truyeàn thoâng noäi boä vaø Laõnh ñaïo chieán löôïc ñeàu aûnh höôûng tích cöïc ñeán thöïc thi CLKD cuûa coâng ty. 20 Journal of Trade Science JOURNAL OF TRADE SCIENCE ’S JTS NGUYEN HOANG VIET 1. Personal Profile: - Name: Nguyen Hoang Viet - Date of birth: 26 April 1980 - Title: Associate Professor - Workplace: Vietnam University of Commerce - Position: Head of Strategic Management 2. Major research directions: Strategic management - Marketing - Trade policies 3. Publications the author has published his works: - Journal of Business Studies - Journal of Economic Development - Journal of Development Economics - Journal of Economics Studies - Journal of Marketing - International Journal of Business and Management - International Journal of Marketing Studies