Relational and Firm operational performance

Business managers attach great importance to their relationships with their participants50. With Relational Social Capital's support, employees can handle jobs more efficiently by using the resources provided by relationships: experience, information, mutual consent3. Relationships with customers or partners can help businesses improve, innovate business activities51, 52. Companies can rapidly enhance quality, reduce costs, improve responsiveness, and better manage assets through new insights from the Relational SC of managers53.

Relational SC is considered an asset of the company54. Granovetter (1983)55 proposed that relationships create reciprocity between individuals. Organizational performance is highly effective with internal and external individuals56. SC relationship and the growth or performance of companies correlate53, 57, primarily Relational SC of senior leaders58, 43, 59. According to Wang, Wang & Liang (2014)31, relationships with colleagues, customers, shareholders, suppliers, and strategic partners greatly influence business performance. Therefore, the study proposes the following hypothesis:

H: Relational (REL) has a positive impact on FOP.

Cognitive social capital and Firm operational performance

Cognitive SC refers to mutual understanding among people and knowledge, shared vision, shared goals, and shared opportunities among people within the company and others36, 60, 46, 44, 48. Cognitive SC refers to the shared vision, mutual learning2, shared goals, and a common approach to organizational tasks61, 62. Cognitive SC provides a shared vision for everyone, which helps achieve a common goal in the future56. The CSC promotes organizational value creation activities that positively impact their performance60. The CSC has a positive and significant influence on employee's and leaders' performance in the enterprise63, 59. SC awareness plays an essential role in gaining business advantage to doing business over competitors and generate revenues and overall business performance44, 49. Therefore, the study proposes the following hypothesis:

H: Cognitive social capital (CSC) has a positive impact on FOP.

Social Interaction Ties and Firm Operational Performance

SIT shows the level of intimacy, regular contact, understanding, and sympathy between managers and other subjects in the network44. SIT describes personal relationships created through previous relationships64, closeness to others that facilitate the transfer of knowledge65, increasing willingness to exchange information66. SIT refers to mutual understanding among people in the company and others36.

According to Granovetter (1992)64, openness and interpersonal trust of people inside or outside the organization are essential to building new relationships. Strong relationships facilitate quick access to information, increasing businesses' competitive advantage49. Understanding, cohesion, and sharing among colleagues within the company create a favorable and effective working environment67. Managers play a rather important role68. SIT promotes businesses' creativity and development46, 69, 44. Based on this premise, the study proposes the following hypothesis:

H: Social Interaction Ties (SIT) has a positive impact on FOP.

Trusts and Firm Operational Performance

Relationships are built, strengthened, and developed based on mutual respect, trust and close relationships22. Mutual trust between parties facilitated the transfer of knowledge65 and increased willingness to exchange information66. Trust is considered the most critical aspect of SC as the basis for creating and maintaining relationships70, 44. Partners and customers who trust the business increase openness in information sharing and reduce transaction costs22. Trust is also an important determinant when companies choose partners for cooperation71, 44. Wu (2008)72 concluded that trust, network relationships help to improve enterprise competitiveness. Transaction consistency, commitment, and confidence are essential for repeated transactions between partners 73. A high degree of confidence helps keep customers and partners, reduces transaction costs38, 74, 44, and increases competitiveness62. Accordingly, the hypothesis is built as follows:

H: Trust (TRU) has a positive impact on FOP.

Structural social capital and Firm operational performance

Interpersonal connection helps develop interpersonal trust, and it defines network strength56. The SSC is a network of relationships and ties48. The SSC is defined as a set of relationships within and outside the organizational network38, 36. Relationships within a business are relationships between colleagues, managers, and employees, and between departments42, 75. Relationships with partners, suppliers, customers, etc. are external network relationships22, 41, 42. Network relational structure can be measured by quantity and quality75, interpersonal interaction54, the strength of the network35, 36. Among them, interpersonal interaction is an essential SSC aspect 54.

SSC is sometimes used to replace financial capital and bring better business performance76, 77, 78. The SSC promotes the value creation activities of the organization and has a positive impact on its performance. Phusavat et al. (2011)79 concluded, SSC positively and significantly affects financial performance (ROI, ROA, ROS) and productivity of employees and leaders in enterprises63. A firm has a strong relationship structure that enhances competitive advantage and revenue and profit49. Therefore, the hypothesis is built as follows:

H: Structural social capital (SSC) has a positive impact on FOP.

Measurement model

As a result of reliability analysis (Table 1), all observed variables meet the reliability standard. CSC has the lowest KMO of 0.685. However, the KMO coefficient is still guaranteed to be greater than the minimum reliability in the analysis of 0.687. Standardized Loading of all Items is satisfactory, which is of statistical significance and has SMC> 0.3. Alpha and CR coefficients of the factor groups are > 0.8, so it can be said that the scales used in the research ensure reliability81, 80.

Reliability analysis: According to Hair et al. (2014), a scale achieves general reliability when the CR index is ≥ 0.7. Checking the test results in Table 2 shows that all Scales have CR> 0.7. Therefore, the Scales achieve general reliability.

Convergence test: Hair et al. (2014) said that for a scale to achieve convergence, the CR must be > AVE and AVE must be > 0.5. Besides, Anderson & Gerbring (1988) argue that the scale achieves convergent value when the normalized weights of the scale are both higher than 0.5 and statistically significant (P <0.05). Table 4 shows that all plates satisfy the conditions given by Hair et al. (2014)83 and Anderson & Gerbring (1988)80. Therefore, all scales reach convergence.

Test of distinction: According to Hair et al. (2014)83, the scales achieve differentiation when the MSV index <AVE and ASV <AVE. Table 2 shows that the Scales satisfy the above conditions. Therefore, the Scales achieve differentiation.

Bootstrap test (Table 3) results give a minimal absolute CR value compared to 2. The difference is minimal; at the same time, it is not statistically significant at a 95% confidence level83, 80. Thus, it can be concluded that the estimates in the model can be reliable.

ML (Maximum Likelihood) and Bootstrap's estimated results in the linear structural model analysis show that all relationships in the research model are statistically significant (P <10%).

After analyzing the affirmative factors, the author performs the theoretical model testing by the method of linear structural model analysis (SEM) to test the causal relationship between the factors in the model. The results from the SEM analysis (Figure 2) show that the test indicators of the model all meet the test standard CFI = 0.931, CMIN / df = 2.839, TLI = 0.915, RMSEA = 0.070. Thus, the research model Suggested rescue is appropriate.

Structural model

Accordingly, the author has tested the causal relationships between the factors in the model, showing that REL & CSC positively impact FOP at the significance level of 10%. SIT has a positive effect on FOP at the 5% significance level. TRU and SSC both have an effect on two FOPs at the 1% significance level. SSC has the strongest influence on FOP (Beta = 0.364), followed by TRU (Beta = 0.213) and SIT (Beta = 0.213) ranked third (Table 4). Two groups of factors, REL and CSC, have not high influence (Beta = 0.098).

Discussion

In a rapidly developing country like Vietnam, the theoretical review shows that surprisingly few researchers pay attention to consider SC and its influence on FOP systematically. In order to occupy this research gap, the study has proposed a model that describes how five different aspects of SC of managers affect FOP in SMEs in Ho Chi Minh City. The empirical findings predominantly support the proposed model by proving that all five SC elements have a positive effect on FOP. The study found that all five aspects of SC, REL, CSC, SIT, TRU & SSC directly impact FOP. Compared to the study of Chow & Chan (2008)42, Aslam et al. (2013)44, Mahajan & Benson (2013)88, and Wang, Wang & Liang (2014)31, the results of this study add two new aspects: SIT and TRU. Simultaneously, the results of data analysis have proven that SC has a direct impact on FOP rather than an indirect effect like the results of a previous study.

According to the research results of Chow & Chan (2008)42, Aslam et al. (2013)44, Mahajan & Benson (2013)88 and Wang, Wang & Liang (2014)31, Nguyen & Ha (2020)2, Ha & Nguyen (2020)9, REL, CSC, SSC affect FOP through intermediate variables. This study has demonstrated that REL, CSC, SSC have a positive and direct impact on FOP. SSC & TRU are the two groups of factors that have the most decisive influence on FOP. This result is also consistent with the theory of Putnam (2000)40, Adler & Kwon (2002)22. Similar to the research results of Chow & Chan (2008)42, Aslam et al. (2013)44, and Mahajan & Benson (2013)88, the leader's SC has a significant influence on the FOP of SMEs.

SC relates to relation, cognitive, interaction, trust, and structure aspects, based on studies by Chow & Chan (2008)42, Aslam et al. (2013)44, Wang, Wang & Liang (2014)31 to verify the direct relationship. of SC to FOP. Our work fills the research gap by constructing a model to illustrate direct interactions between SC and FOP in SMEs. Therefore, this research odel can be used as a modern theoretical model in other studies to evaluate SC & FOP. Our experimental results have confirmed all the hypotheses. This result means that SC contributes directly to the performance of SMEs.

Conclusion and Implications

The experimental findings largely support the suggested model by proving that all five SC elements have a positive effect on FOP (REL, CSC, SIT, TRU & SSC). Simultaneously, the results of data analysis prove that SC has a direct impact on FOP rather than an indirect effect like the results of a previous study.

According to research results, to increase enterprises' efficiency, managers should raise financial capital, innovate the industry, and invest and develop their own SC. To increase SC, managers need to improve communication, engagement, friendliness, regular communication, and trust with individuals inside and outside the business. Trustful and friendly relationships with stakeholders are an invisible resource that helps companies improve their competitiveness and increase operational efficiency. Cohesion which is about taking the time to exchange, sharing the corporate vision, mission, and shared goals with colleagues will create cohesion, sympathy, and mutual support to go together to the final destination, allowing enterprises to operate effectively and facilitate sustainable growth.

Limitations and further studies

This study's results have supplemented the theory and practice for SC studies that directly affect the business performance of the business. However, this study also entails shortcomings which require thorough considerations so that the following tasks can be completed. Although our outcomes are consistent with our preceding results, the use of the survey design does not allow us to characterize levels of management to research recent issues. Second, the convenient sampling method is limited to representing the population. To confirm this study's results, future research may use random sampling and focus on SC studies with a specific industry's performance.