The study compared social, economic, and environmental sustainability between SMEs and large vegetable seed companies. Data from 262 organizational respondents showed that large firms recorded slightly higher sustainability scores in social and economic areas, but none of the differences were statistically significant. Environmental sustainability was almost identical between the two groups.
The findings challenge the common assumption that larger organizations, because they have greater financial resources, technology, and managerial capacity, will automatically have stronger sustainability practices.
Why company size may not tell the whole story
Corporate sustainability has become increasingly important as businesses face pressure to remain financially viable while protecting employees, supporting communities, and reducing environmental impacts.
Large companies generally have greater access to specialized employees, digital systems, formal monitoring procedures, environmental management technologies, and investment capital. These resources can make it easier to establish structured sustainability programs.
SMEs operate under different conditions. They may have fewer financial and technological resources, but their smaller organizational structures can allow faster decisions, closer communication, and stronger relationships with employees, farmers, suppliers, and local communities.
The vegetable seed industry provides an important setting for examining these differences. Seed companies operate across networks involving plant breeding, production, quality control, distribution, farmers, research institutions, and government agencies. Their decisions can affect farmer livelihoods, seed availability, production resilience, resource use, and environmental management.
Against this background, the researchers examined whether differences in company size translated into meaningful differences in sustainability implementation.
262 respondents from the vegetable seed industry
The research used a quantitative, cross-sectional comparative design. The company was treated as the unit of analysis, while individual respondents provided information about organizational practices.
The survey involved 262 respondents, including:
- 154 respondents representing SMEs
- 108 respondents representing large firms
Participants occupied managerial, supervisory, or strategic operational positions and were responsible for supervising at least five employees. This was intended to ensure that respondents had sufficient knowledge of their companies' operations and sustainability practices.
The researchers measured three sustainability dimensions: social, economic, and environmental. Each dimension was represented by three indicators, producing nine sustainability indicators in total.
Social sustainability covered occupational health and safety, employee welfare and development, and responsibility toward surrounding communities.
Economic sustainability included long-term business performance and continuity, efficient use of organizational resources, and creation of sustainable economic value.
Environmental sustainability covered the reduction of operational environmental impacts, responsible use of materials and energy, and management of waste and emissions.
The researchers used statistical analysis in R to test the reliability of the measurements and determine whether the sustainability indicators could be compared fairly between SMEs and large firms.
Large firms scored slightly higher, but differences were not significant
The results showed a consistent but modest advantage for large firms in observed sustainability scores.
Social sustainability averaged 3.32 for SMEs and 3.42 for large firms. The latent mean difference was 0.258, with a p-value of 0.125, meaning the difference was not statistically significant.
Economic sustainability showed the largest gap. SMEs recorded an average of 3.23, compared with 3.38 for large firms. The latent difference was 0.292, with a p-value of 0.070. Although this result came closest to conventional statistical significance, it still did not meet the 5 percent threshold.
Environmental sustainability was almost identical. SMEs recorded 3.23, while large firms recorded 3.26. The latent difference was only 0.017, with a p-value of 0.902.
As a result, all three hypotheses predicting significant differences between SMEs and large firms were not supported.
Additional Welch and permutation tests produced consistent conclusions, strengthening the researchers' confidence that the observed pattern was not driven by a particular statistical method.
Environmental sustainability shows the strongest convergence
The environmental result is particularly notable because SMEs often face greater financial, technological, and knowledge barriers when implementing environmental initiatives.
Despite those potential constraints, the vegetable seed SMEs in the study reported environmental practices comparable to those of larger companies.
The researchers suggest that environmental sustainability does not always require extensive formal systems or large investments. Smaller firms may incorporate resource conservation, waste reduction, and environmental responsibility directly into everyday operations through managerial oversight and operational simplicity.
The finding does not mean SMEs face no sustainability challenges. Rather, it indicates that organizational size alone does not determine whether a company implements sustainability practices effectively.
Different organizational strengths can produce similar outcomes
The findings are interpreted through Contingency Theory, which argues that organizational effectiveness depends on how a company's structure and resources fit its operating environment.
Large firms may have advantages in capital, specialization, formal procedures, technology, and monitoring systems. SMEs may offset their resource limitations through flexibility, shorter decision-making processes, local knowledge, and closer stakeholder relationships.
As Fajrina, Young, and Putri of Philippine Women’s University and Widya Gama University argue in their study, sustainability outcomes can emerge from different organizational configurations rather than from company size alone.
This perspective has practical implications for policymakers and industry leaders. Sustainability programs should not automatically treat SMEs as weaker performers that simply need to imitate large corporations.
Instead, SME support could prioritize access to finance, technical training, sustainability measurement, and collaborative environmental innovation. Large companies, meanwhile, can focus on integrating sustainability across business units and supply-chain partners.
Industry associations and governments could also provide shared training programs, sustainability measurement frameworks, waste-management infrastructure, and knowledge-sharing platforms that benefit companies of different sizes.
What the findings mean for Indonesia's seed industry
For Indonesia's vegetable seed sector, the results suggest that sustainability policies should focus less on organizational size and more on the specific capabilities and operating conditions of each company.
This is particularly important because seed companies occupy a strategic position in agricultural systems. Their relationships with farmers and other supply-chain actors can influence production quality, business continuity, resource use, and agricultural resilience.
The researchers conclude that different combinations of resources, managerial proximity, flexibility, and stakeholder relationships may allow SMEs and large companies to achieve broadly comparable sustainability outcomes.
However, the researchers also acknowledge important limitations. The study used a cross-sectional design, focused on a single industry, and relied on assessments from organizational informants. These factors limit the ability to generalize the findings to other sectors or establish cause-and-effect relationships.
Future research could follow companies over a longer period and incorporate objective sustainability indicators to determine how management capabilities, financing, regulation, stakeholder relationships, and other factors influence sustainability performance.
Author profiles
Nur Fajrina is affiliated with Business Administration Studies, Conrado Benitez College of Business Education, Philippine Women’s University, Philippines. Her research in this article focuses on corporate sustainability, firm size, and organizational management.
Felina C. Young is affiliated with Business Administration Studies, Conrado Benitez College of Business Education, Philippine Women’s University, Philippines. She contributed to the study's analysis of corporate sustainability and organizational differences.
Rosita Widya Putri is affiliated with Agribusiness Studies, Faculty of Agriculture, Widya Gama University, Malang, Indonesia, with research interests connected to agribusiness and agricultural systems.
The supplied article does not specify the authors' academic degrees, so no degree titles are added here to avoid introducing information that is not supported by the source material.
Research source
0 Komentar