CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter discusses the presentation, analysis and interpretation of data gathered from

the five (5) key cities and capital town of Davao Region.

4.1 Results

Distribution of Respondents

Provided in the table below is the distribution of the 407 respondents gathered from the

key cities or municipality of Davao Region.

Table 4.1 Area of Distribution for Respondents

Key City/ Municipality No. of Percentage
Respondents Distribution
Nabunturan ( Comval) 10 2.46%
Tagum City 36 8.84%
Panabo City 10 2.46%
Davao City 332 81.57%
Digos City 10 2.46%
Mati City 9 2.21%
Total 407 100%

Majority of the respondents came from Davao City which is equivalent to 81.57%, followed

by the respondents coming from Tagum City at 8.84%, Nabunturan, Panabo and Digos City

have the same number of respondents at 2.46% each and lastly respondents from Mati City

represents 2.21% of the total respondents.

4.1.1 Descriptive Analysis

Demographic Profile of Respondents

Tables presented below shows the profile of the respondents in terms of age, sex,

position in the entity and the number of years that they are involved in the procurement

function of the restaurants.

Age of Respondents

Bulked of the respondents at 28.5% belongs to the age bracket of 26-30 yrs. old,

seconded by those belonging to the age bracket of 21-25 years old which represents 26.3%

of the total respondents, this was followed by the 31-35 years old respondents at 14.7% and

those belonging to the age bracket of 36-40 years old represents 10.6% of the total

respondents. Respondents who are 41-45 years old represents 9.8% while the remaining

10% belongs to the age bracket of 46-60 years old.

Table 4.1 Age of Respondents

Age Bracket Frequency Percent
21-25 yrs. old 107 26.3
26-30 yrs. old 116 28.5
31--35 yrs. old 60 14.7
36 to 40 yrs. old 43 10.6
41 to 45 yrs. old 40 9.8
46 to 50 yrs. old 18 4.4
51 to 55 yrs. old 9 2.2
56-60 yrs. old 14 3.4
Total 407 100

Sex

Table 4.2 shows the sex of the respondents which shows that majority of the respondents

are female which represents 66 % percent of the total respondents and the rest are male

equivalent to 34% of the total 407 respondents.

 Table 4.2 Sex of the Respondents
Sex Frequency Percent
Male 138 33.9
Female 269 66.1
Total 407 100

Work Position

The position occupied by the respondents in the entity are presented in Table 4.3. The

table shows that 33.7% of the respondents are in the managerial level of management, this

was followed by those belonging to the Rank and File management level at 26.8%. Out of

the 407 respondents, 25.1% occupied supervisory position in the restaurants while 14.5%

were all owners of the restaurants.

Table 4.3 Position of Respondents

Position Frequency Percent
Rank and File 109 26.8
Supervisory 102 25.1
Managerial 137 33.7
Owner 59 14.5
Total 407 100

Involvement in the Procurement Function

Greater number of respondents were involved in the procurement function for 1 to 5

years at 58.7% and those who have been involved in the purchasing function of the

restaurants for 6 to 10 years represents 25.3% while 9.1% have been involved in the

procurement function for 11 to 15 years, those involved in the procurement function for 16

to 20 years represent 2.5% and the remaining 4.4% have been in the procurement function

for more than 20 years to 40 years. Table 4.4 shows the details of the distribution of

respondents as to their years of involvement in the procurement process.

 Table 4.4 No. of years of involved in the procurement function
No. of Years Frequency Percent
1 to 5 239 58.7
6 to 10 103 25.3
11 to 15 37 9.1
16 to 20 10 2.5
21 to 25 7 1.7
26 to 30 2 .5
31 to 35 2 .5
36 to 40 7 1.7
Total 407 100

Profile of the Restaurants in Davao Region

Following below are the data relevant to the profile of the restaurants in Davao Region

in terms of: form of business organization, number of years of operation and number of

employees.

Form of Business Organization

Leading the form of business organization of the restaurants in Davao Region is the sole

proprietorship form of business organization which is equivalent to 57.7 %, followed by

corporate form of business organization at 36.1% while others are partnership form at 4.4%

and cooperative at .7%. Table 4.6 disclosed the data as to the form of business organization

of the restaurants in Davao Region.

Table 4.6 Form of business organization

Forms of Business Organization Frequency Percent
Sole Proprietorship 235 57.7
Partnership 18 4.4
Corporation 147 36.1
Cooperative 3 .7
Others 4 1.0
Total 407 100
 Years of Operation of Restaurants

Based on the data presented in Table 4.7 there are 267 restaurants equivalent to 65.6%

of the total restaurants respondents has been operational for 5 to 10 years while 10.8% of

the total restaurant respondents has been operational for 11 to 15 years, followed 9.1% who

has been in the restaurant business for 16 to 20 years, 10 restaurants equivalent to 2.5% has

been operating for 46 to 50 years and more. There were 9 restaurants representing 2.2%

who has been operational for 31 to 35 years, six (6) restaurants (1.5%) has been in the

business for 36 to 40 years and three (3) had been in operation for 41 to 45 years.

The result supported the data of Census of Philippine Business and Industry (CPBI) (2018)

that although there are restaurants that opened every year, there are also restaurants that

shut down every year and the rate of those going out of business is at 40% of every

restaurant that opened. This explains the distribution of respondents based on the number

of years of their existence. Table 4.7 below shows the number of years that the restaurant

has been in operation.

Table 4.7 Years of operation of restaurants

Years of Operation Frequency Percent
5 to 10 years 267 65.6
11 to 15 years 44 10.8
16 to 20 years 37 9.1
21 to 25 years 24 5.9
26 to 30 years 7 1.7
31 to 35 years 9 2.2
36 to 40 years 6 1.5
41 to 45 years 3 .7
46 to 50 years 10 2.5
Total 407 100
 No. of Employees

Table 4.8 shows the profile of restaurants as to number of employees involved in the

procurement function of the restaurants. Thirty percent (30%) of the restaurants have 6 to

10 employees involved in the procurement process of the restaurant; 22.6% or a total of 92

restaurants had 1 to 5 employees assigned to perform the purchasing functions while 11.5%

have 16 to 20 employees, 10.6 % have 11 to 15 employees, 8.6% have 21 to 25 employees,

6.9% have 36 to 40 employees particularly those who operated several branches all over

Davao Region.

Table 4.8 No. of Employees

Number of Employees Frequency Percent
1 to 5 employees 92 22.6
6 to 10 employees 122 30
11 to 15 employees 43 10.6
16 to 20 employees 47 11.5
21 to 25 employees 35 8.6
26 to 30 employees 23 5.7
31 to 35 employees 15 3.7
36 to 40 employees 28 6.9
Missing 2 .5
Total 407 100

Level of Implementation to Supplier Relationship Management Factors

Level of Implementation to Supplier Segmentation in Restaurants

Table 4.9 presents the data as to the level of implementation to supplier segmentation

as one of the Supplier Relationship Management Factors. Based on the table, Supplier

Segmentation has a weighted average mean of 3.87 with descriptive rating of Agree

denoting that it is implemented in the restaurants. The respondents strongly agree with the

highest mean of 4.35 to the statement that the restaurants categorize or rank suppliers based

on the price and quality of goods or services that the suppliers provide.
This result supports the study of Rezae & Ortt (2011) which identified supplier selection

criteria called “element of exchange – related criterion that refers to the features and types

of the goods provided by a supplier. On the other hand, the statement with the lowest mean

of 3.05 having a descriptive rating of neither agree nor disagree which means that the

respondents neither agree nor disagree on selecting or ranking suppliers based on

relationship closeness. The relationship related criteria is also one of the supplier selection

criteria that Rezae & Ortt (2011) identified.

Table 4.9 Level of implementation to supplier segmentation factor in restaurants

Level of implementation to supplier relationship management governance

Table 4.10 exhibited that Supplier Relationship Management Governance factor is

implemented with a weighted average mean of 4.0 and the respondents strongly agreed to

statement # 4 having the highest mean of 4.21 that the committee on suppliers evaluates

the cost and gives the quality of the product to determine the best value. The table also

disclosed that the restaurants in Davao Region has internal control system with the mean

of 4.15. However the item with the lowest mean of 3.75 denotes that the respondents agreed

that the restaurant has committee on suppliers’ governance. The table is provided below.

Table 4.10 Level of Implementation to Supplier Relationship Management

Governance
Statement Mean Descriptive Rating Interpretation
1. The restaurant has internal 4.15 Agree This indicates that SRM
control system. factor is implemented.
2. The restaurant has 3.75 Agree This indicates that SRM
committee on supplier’s factor is implemented.
governance.
3. The committee on suppliers 3.76 Agree This indicates that SRM
mentors and works with the factor is implemented.
suppliers.
4. The committee on suppliers 4.21 Strongly Agree This indicates that SRM
evaluates the cost and gives the factor is strongly
quality to determine the best implemented.
value.
5. The committee helps in 3.93 Agree This indicates that SRM
developing suppliers. factor is implemented.
Weighted Average Mean 4.0 Agree This indicates that SRM
factor is implemented.
Level of implementation to supplier performance management

The Table below revealed that the supplier performance management factor has a

weighted average mean of 4.26 which denotes that it is strongly implemented in the

restaurants of Davao Region. The statement with the highest mean of 4.26 signifies that the

respondents strongly agree that the restaurant gathers data on the lead times or delivery

time of the suppliers which is consistent with the findings of the study of Oriri and Bichanga

(2015) relevant to monitoring of supplier performance particularly delivery or lead times.

The result supported the study of Paulrajet al., (2008) who suggested that buyers should

not only consider price-based criteria, but should consider more about performance criteria,

such as quality and delivery for the relationship between buyer and supplier. The item with

the lowest mean of 4.17 signifies that the respondents agreed that the restaurants collect

data on pricing and contract compliance.

Table 4.11 Level of implementation to supplier performance management

Statement Mean Descriptive Interpretation
Rating
1. The restaurant measures and This indicates that SRM
monitors supplier performance. factor is implemented.
4.20 Agree
2. The restaurant gathers data on This indicates that SRM
the lead times or delivery time. factor is strongly
4.26 Strongly Agree
implemented.
3. The restaurant gathers data This indicates that SRM
about the quality control 4.22 Strongly Agree factor is strongly
standards observed by suppliers. implemented.
4. The restaurant collects data on This indicates that SRM
4.17 Agree
pricing and contract compliance. factor is implemented.
5. The restaurant ensures the This indicates that SRM
improvement and the factor is strongly
4.20 Agree
performance of the suppliers. implemented.
 This indicates that SRM
Weighted Average Mean 4.26 Strongly Agree factor is strongly
implemented.
Level of Implementation to Supplier Development

Table 4.12 revealed that Supplier Development is a factor of supplier relationship

management that is implemented in restaurants in Davao Region with the overall mean of

3.76. The respondents agreed that the restaurant keeps a record (database) of the suppliers’

contract and agreement is kept having the highest mean of 4.19 while the statement with

the lowest mean of 3.50 denotes the agreement of the respondents that the restaurants share

to its suppliers its procurement plans.

Table 4.12 Level of Implementation to Supplier Development

Statement Mean Descriptive Interpretation
Rating
1. The restaurant shares to its 3.50 Agree This indicates that SRM
suppliers its procurement plans. factor is implemented.
2. The restaurant assists their 3.52 Agree This indicates that SRM
suppliers in capacity building. factor is implemented.
3. The procurement personnel visit 3.60 Agree This indicates that SRM
their suppliers’ location. factor is implemented.
4. The procurement personnel 3.87 Agree This indicates that SRM
coordinate with the suppliers their factor is implemented.
supply requirements
5. The restaurant keeps a record 4.19 Agree This indicates that SRM
(database) of the suppliers’ factor is implemented.
contract and agreement is kept.
Weighted Average Mean 3.76 Agree This indicates that SRM
factor is implemented.

Level of Implementation to Information Sharing

Exhibited in Table 4.13 is the level of implementation to information sharing as a

supplier relationship management factor.

The table revealed that Information sharing as a Supplier Relationship Management factor

with an overall mean of 3.99 is implemented in the restaurants of Davao Region. With the

highest mean of 4.14 the respondents agreed that the restaurants allows the suppliers to

know what is expected from them at all times while the item with the lowest mean at 3.67

indicates that the respondents agreed that the restaurants practices frequent information

sharing with its suppliers.

Table 4.13 Level of Implementation to Information Sharing

Statement Mean Descriptive Interpretation

Rating
1. The restaurant allows the 4.14 Agree This indicates that
suppliers to know what is expected SRM factor is
from them at all times. implemented.
2. The restaurant personnel 3.82 Agree This indicates that
believes that sharing information SRM factor is
with its suppliers leads to efficient implemented.
restaurant operation.
3. The restaurant practices frequent 3.67 Agree This indicates that
information sharing with its SRM factor is
suppliers. implemented.
4. Our restaurant properly 3.99 Agree This indicates that
communicates unforeseen SRM factor is
challenges to our major suppliers. implemented.
5. The restaurant and the supplier 4.04 Agree This indicates that
keep each other informed about SRM factor is
events or changes that may affect implemented.
the other party.
Weighted Average Mean 3.99 Agree This indicates that
SRM factor is
implemented.
Level of Operational Performance of Restaurants in Davao Region

This study also aims to determine the level of operational performance of the restaurants

in Davao Region. The data presented in table 4.14 revealed the level of operational

performance of restaurants in Davao Region.

Results of the study shows that the level of operational performance of restaurants is

very high. With the highest mean of 4.463, the respondents strongly agreed that having

good relationships with the suppliers enabled the restaurant to produce quality food

products leading to their very high operational performance.

This is consistent with the argument of Zsididin and Ellram (2001) that relationship with

suppliers result in advantages such as improvement of product quality, overall cost

reduction, flexibility to cope with changes, enhance customer satisfaction.

The result is supported by Kanyan & Ngana (2016) who concluded that having good

relationship with the suppliers leads to better operational performance of food industry.

The result also confirms the study conducted by Suga (2018) duly supported by Tran

(2015) and Adnan et al (2016) who identified maintaining good relationship with the

suppliers as one of the key success factors for high operational performance in full service

restaurants.

Although the respondents recognized that having good relationship with their suppliers

enabled them to produce good quality products, the item with the lowest mean of 4.22 with

descriptive equivalent of Strongly Agree indicates that restaurant maintains good

relationship with the suppliers and this leads to reduction of cost to our food products. This

result supported the statement of the McDonald’s UK supply chain director Connor

McVeigh as he stated in one interview that “partnership doesn’t mean we are soft on price”.
Table 4.14 shows the results as to the Level of Operational Performance of restaurants in

Davao region is provided below.

Table 4.14 Level of Operational Performance

Statement Mean Descriptive Interpretation

Rating
1. Our restaurant maintains good This indicates that
relationship with the suppliers and this Strongly the restaurant has
4.22
leads to reduction of cost to our food Agree very high operational
products. performance.
2. Having good relationships with the This indicates that
suppliers enables our restaurant to Strongly the restaurant has
4.46
produce quality food products. Agree very high operational
performance.
3. Keeping good relationships with the This indicates that
suppliers allows our restaurant to Strongly the restaurant has
4.41
meet/ deliver customers’ order on Agree very high operational
time. performance.
4. Sustaining good relationships with This indicates that
the suppliers allows our restaurant to Strongly the restaurant has
4.29
be flexible to environmental changes Agree very high operational
and still meet the market needs. performance.
5. Overall, supplier relationship This indicates that
management has positively Strongly the restaurant has
4.43
contributed to the operational Agree very high operational
performance of our restaurant. performance.
This indicates that
Strongly the restaurant has
Weighted Average Mean 4.36
Agree very high operational
performance.

4.2 Regression Analysis

4.2.1 Multiple Regression Analysis Assumptions

To be able to determine the drivers that affect operational performance of

restaurants in Davao Region, multiple regression analysis was performed to test the
explanatory and predictive influence of the independent variables namely supplier

segmentation, supplier relationship management governance, supplier performance

management, supplier development and information sharing to the dependent variable

(Operational Performance). Prior to applying the stepwise method, the researcher

determine if the data fit for multiple regression analysis using a normality test,

autocorrelation, multicollinearity and heteroscedasticity.

Normality Test.

The normal probability plot and the Kolmogorov- Smirnov test and Shapiro-Wilk

tests were performed to check if the standardized residuals are normally distributed. The

results showed that the p values of .000 for Kolmogorov- Smirnov and .000 for Shapiro-

Wilk respectively are significant. Since these values are less than .05, the null hypothesis

which corresponds to a normal distribution of the variable is rejected.

Multicollinearity Test

Performing the collinearity test, the collinearity statistics as shown on the Table

4.2.2 has no Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values greater than 5 for model 3. The result

signifies a strong presence of collinearity. The highest VIF for Model 3 is 1.624 provided

on Table 4.2.2. On collinearity diagnostics (see Appendices), the highest condition index

is 20.555 which is lesser than 30. Therefore, there is no multicollinearity issue for Model

3.

Homoscedasticity Test

Homoscedasticity Test was performed by testing the presence of a pattern in a graph

as the ZPRED (X) and ZRESID (Y) were measured on the scatterplot. The graph (see

Appendix) does not show the presence of a pattern, therefore all the relevant variables in

Model 3 are part of the model.

4.2.2 Influence of Supplier Relationship Management Factors to Operational

Performance of Restaurants

To determine supplier relationship management factors that drive operational performance

of restaurants in Davao Region, a stepwise multiple regression was utilized.

Table 4.2.1 shows the correlation of the supplier relationship management factors and

operational performance. This table shows weak correlation between Operational

performance and the supplier relationship management factors such as segmentation, SRM

governance, supplier performance management and supplier development while there is

moderate correlation between operational performance and information sharing.

Table 4.2.1. Summary of Pearson’s r Results

Operational Performance Correlation Strength
Segmentation 0.382*
Weak
Sig. (1-tailed) 0.000
Governance 0.306*
Weak
Sig. (1-tailed) 0.000
Performance 0.375*
Weak
Sig. (1-tailed) 0.000
Development 0.286*
Weak
Sig. (1-tailed) 0.000
Information Sharing 0.415*
Moderate
Sig. (1-tailed) 0.000
*. Significant at 0.01 level of significance
.
Table 4.2.2 and Table 4.2.3 reveals that out of the five independent variables, there

are only three (3) significant variables that can explain the variance of operational

performance of restaurants. The R-square value of 0.233 means that 23.3% of variations

in operational performance of restaurants are explained by information sharing, supplier

segmentation and supplier performance management.

The result of the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) shows an F-test value that of
40.157 and p-value of .000 which is below .05. This indicates that the three independent

variables (i.e. information sharing, segmentation, performance) are all related to the

operational performance of restaurants.

The results showed that only information sharing, supplier segmentation and supplier

performance management have significant relationship with operational performance of

restaurants. This provided an answer to problem statement # 4 if there is a significant

relationship between the supplier relationship management factors and operational

performance of restaurants in Davao Region.

Table 4.2.2 ANOVAa

Sum of Mean
Model Squares df Square F Sig.
1 Regression 25.680 1 25.680 83.102 .000b
Residual 122.991 398 .309
Total 148.672 399
2 Regression 32.935 2 16.468 56.487 .000c
Residual 115.737 397 .292
Total 148.672 399
3 Regression 34.679 3 11.560 40.157 .000d
Residual 113.992 396 .288
Total 148.672 399
a. Dependent Variable: Operational Performance
b. Predictors: (Constant), Information Sharing
c. Predictors: (Constant), Information Sharing, Segmentation
d. Predictors: (Constant), Information Sharing, Segmentation, Performance

Table 4.2.2 shows the beta coefficients of information sharing, segmentation and

performance. The beta coefficients indicate that a one unit change in the independent

variable (i.e., information sharing, segmentation, performance) leads to a one unit change

in operational performance of restaurants. In this case, the best predictor of operational

performance of restaurants is information sharing (B=.227) followed by segmentation

(B=.202) and performance (.135).

Table 4.2.2. Model Summaryd of Stepwise Regression Analysis

Model Unstandardized Collinearity

Coefficients Statistics
t Sig.
Std.
Β Tolerance VIF
Error
1 (Constant) 2.863 0.167 17.152 0.000
Information Sharing 0.376 0.041 9.104* 0.000 1 1
R = 0.415 ; R = 0.172; ΔR = 0.170; F-Stat = 82.876 ; Sig. = 0.00
a 2 2 *

2 (Constant) 2.301 0.197 11.661 0.000

Information Sharing 0.277 0.045 6.197* 0.000 0.804 1.243
Segmentation 0.246 0.049 4.995* 0.000 0.804 1.243
R = 0.470b; R2 = 0.221; ΔR2 = 0.217; F-Stat = 56.397*; Sig. = 0.00
3 (Constant) 2.097 0.213 9.827 0.000
Information Sharing 0.227 0.049 4.64* 0.000 0.663 1.509
Segmentation 0.202 0.052 3.869* 0.000 0.707 1.414
Performance 0.135 0.055 2.43* 0.016 0.616 1.624
R = 0.482c; R2 = 0.233; ΔR2 = 0.226; Durbin-Watson = 1.845; F-Stat = 40.029*; Sig. = 0.00
*. Significant at 0.01 level of significance.
a. Predictors: (Constant), Information Sharing
b. Predictors: (Constant), Information Sharing, Segmentation
c. Predictors: (Constant), Information Sharing, Segmentation, Performance
d. Dependent Variable: Operational Performance

The equation is presented as follows:

Operational Performance = bo (Constant) +b1 (Information Sharing)+
b2 (Segmentation)+ b3 (Performance)+ Ɛ

Operational Performance = (2.097) +b1 (.227)+b2 (.202)+ b3 (.135)+ Ɛ

Operational Performance= 2.097 +(3.985) (.227)+ (3.877) (.202) + (4.263) (.135)

Operational Performance = 2.097+.904595+.783154+.575505

Operational Performance= 4.36 (Strongly Agree)

4.2.3. Moderating Effect of the Relationship between Supplier Relationship

Management Practices and the Operational Performance of the Restaurants

Hierarchical multiple regression is performed to be able to determine the

moderating effect of the respondents profile in terms of; number of employees involved in

the procurement process and the years of existence. The result is presented in Table 4.2.3

for moderating variable number of employees and Table 4.2.4 for moderating variable

Years of Operations.

The result showed that the respondents’ profile has no significant moderating

effect between supplier relationship management factors and operational performance. The

result denotes that regardless of the number of employees involved in the procurement

process and the number of years that the restaurant existed, the operational performance is

not affected.

Table 4.2.3 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Moderating Variable No. of
Employees
R2-chng F df1 df2 p
Supplier Segmentation 0.0036 1.6554 1.0000 396.0000 0.199
Supplier Performance Mgt 0.0009 0.4277 1.0000 396.0000 0.5135
Governance 0.0012 0.5377 1.0000 394.0000 0.4638
Supplier Development 0.002 0.882 1.0000 396.0000 0.3482
Information Sharing 0.0009 0.4519 1.0000 396.0000 0.5018
Level of confidence for all confidence intervals in output: .95

Table 4.2.4 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Moderating Variable No. of
Years of Operation
R2-chng F df1 df2 p
Supplier Segmentation 0.000 0.001 1.0000 399.000 0.981
Supplier Performance Mgt 0.000 0.095 1.0000 399.000 0.758
Governance 0.000 0.101 1.0000 397.000 0.750
Supplier Development 0.000 0.201 1.0000 399.000 0.654
Information Sharing 0.000 0.000 1.0000 399.0000 0.984
Level of confidence for all confidence intervals in output: .95
4.2.4. Hypotheses Testing

The study results show that there is a significant relationship between the

independent variables specifically information sharing, segmentation and performance

on the operational performance of restaurants in Davao Region hence null hypothesis

1 and 2 are rejected.

As to the moderating effect of the respondents profile, the result of the study show

that there is no moderating effect and that the respondents profile cannot significantly

moderate the relationship between supplier relationship management practices and the

operational performance of the restaurants in Davao Region. Thus null hypothesis 3

is accepted.

Table 4.2.5 _Hypothesis testing

Null Hypotheses Accepted?
Ho1-There is no significant relationship between the supplier No
relationship management factors and operational performance of
restaurants in Davao Region.

Ho2-There is no factor of the independent variable that can best No

predict the operational performance of restaurants in Davao Region.

Ho3-The respondent’s profile cannot significantly moderate the Yes

relationship between supplier relationship management practices and
the operational performance of the restaurants in Davao Region
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents conclusions and recommendations drawn by the researcher based on

the result of the study.

Conclusion

This study was conducted to determine the level of implementation of supplier relationship

management factors namely supplier segmentation, supplier performance management,

supplier relationship management governance, supplier development and information

sharing of the restaurants in Davao Region; whether these factors mentioned above has

significant influence on the operational performance of restaurants in Davao Region and

which of the factors best predict operational performance of restaurants in Davao Region.

The study is geared towards determining the level of operational performance of the

restaurants in Davao Region. Given the profile of the restaurants, this study also aimed to

determine variables that can significantly moderate the significant relationship between

supplier relationship management practices and the operational performance of the

restaurants in Davao Region.

Applying

1st paragraph – discuss the purpose of the study and the statistical tool used

2nd paragraph – discuss briefly the demographic profiles of the respondents (do not insert

tables)

3rd paragraph – discuss the profile of respondents

4th paragraph- discuss the factors that significantly influence the performance of restaurants

as well as the moderating effect

Recommendation:

Based on the significant variables of the study the researcher would like to recommend the

following:

For the management:

1. Since information sharing significantly influence the performance of restaurants,

what would you recommend to the management of the restaurants?

2. Add more…

For the Future Researchers

1. Future researchers may explore other variables not covered in this study that might

influence the performance of restaurants

2. Conduct studies on the effect of SRM practices to performance of other industries

such as manufacturing, service etc.