SUMMATION DISSERTATION BY DO THI THANH HOA
PREFACE
In this summary dissertation, all figures and tables are numbered as in dissertation
Financial management in public universities and university general labor - in
particular society is always a hot issue that is needed attention, but in fact there is a few
research on this issue. Financial mechanism of the university need to be renewed. The
allocation of financial resources for labor did not provide enough motivation for the
development, salaries is average, so do not encourage the dynamism and creativity of
teachers and administrators; allocation mechanism for the organization is irrational,
uncontrollable quality on a large-scale investment from the state budget. Attracting
investment from social resources for higher education (including public schools) is also
limited. Thus, "Financial Management at the University of Labor - Social: basis for
allocation resources" were chosen as the thesis.
The structure of dissertation includes 6 chapters.


CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1.1. BACKGROUND OF STUDY
Education in our country over the next decade in the context of developing world are
more rapid and complex changes. Globalization and international integration in education
has become an inevitable trend. 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 the
resources to education is limited, will create pressure on educational development.
From the unreasonable current status of resources allocation in ULSA:
- 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.
- 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. Students are not interested in program. Therefore, the school should innovate

program and method to meet current needs.
- The amount of investing equipment and facility of ULSA is small. The
procurement of equipment and facilities were not timely and did not meet the
requirements.
- Providing services of ULSA now account for a relatively large proportion of
25.5%, but the service is not really efficient. Administrative procedures are cumbersome,
providing information to students and parents is slow and inaccurate, service attitude is
not good.


ULSA need to allocate resources suitable to get high quality. Thus, analyzing the
financial management: basis for efficient resources allocation is very necessary.
1.2. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
In recent years, many principals have errors in financial management, leading to
serious disunity, even corruption cases occur, adversely affecting the reputation of the
school as well as the professional subject.(Thanh Binh, 2012)
This study focuses on financial management of ULSA, so that we can allocate
suitably resources because ULSA today are still subsidized so it is not interested much in
financial efficiency.
The specific objectives of this dissertation are:
1. To determine the profile of the respondents in terms of the following
1.1. gender
1.2. age
1.3. highest educational attainment
1.4. monthly average income
1.5. position
2. To assess the effect of financial management in resources allocation in the
following areas:
2.1. labor
2.1.1. salary

2.1.2. professional development and teaching quality
2.1.3. career development
2.2. equipment and infrastructure


2.3. course program
2.4. service provision
3. To propose a basis for resources allocation for ULSA
From the reality of management systems in public universities in general and the
university of Labor and Social Affairs in particular, the allocation of resources is
important in the financial management of the university. Appropriate resources allocation
will help financial managers to achieve better efficiency and improve the quality of
training, to be the basis for implementing of strategic objectives most effectively, to
avoid waste and inefficient in the use of resources. So this dissertation is necessary to
contribute to strengthen financial management: the basis for efficient resources
allocation.
1.3. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
In the future, before the training needs of the society increasing, financial
management solution of ULSA will effectively improve the quality of training,
investment efficiency and raise the responsibilities of the education and training facilities
to meet the demand of high quality human resources of the country, protect the legitimate
interests of learners and require continual innovation knowledge to serve society.
The beneficiaries of this dissertation research is firstly managers of ULSA,
especially financial managers; managerial staff; faculty of ULSA; students of ULSA; the
other public university and the budget allocation planner.
So the research on financial management of ULSA is very meaningful in this
context. This will be the basic for allocating resources. This study is expected to help
improve the financial management of ULSA effectively.



1.4. SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
- Field of study: Effect of financial management: the basis for resource allocation
- Subject of study: University Labor – Social Affairs.
- Space: 43, Tran Duy Hung Street, Ha Noi, Vietnam.
- Industry: Education


CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
2.1. REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIES
This section present of 19 literatures and studies related to the topic.
2.2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
The concepts of financial management and the impact of the allocation of resources
have been currently scattered in several related documents, including the concept of
Arthur M.Hauptman. (2006) and the Balanced Scorecard model was developed by Robert
Kaplan and David Norton
2.3. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
From the theories and concepts mentioned above, the thesis proposed main content of
financial management: the basis for resource allocation as follows:


Figure 2.3. Research paradigm

financial management:
resources allocation

Investment
in services
provision

Investment in

program

The
interest of
program

Professional
development and
quality of the
faculty and

Suitability
of program
with
student

Faculty and
managerial
staff
satisfaction

Student
career
development

Developme
nt career

Investment
in labour


administrative
procedure

Providing
information

Is equipment
and house
sufficient?

Efficient resources allocation

Is equipment
and house
suitable?

Investment in
educational
equipment and
infrastructure

Solving
comments
and
queries

Is equipment
and house
modern?



CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY
3.1. RESEARCH DESIGN
This studies is University of Labour and Social Affairs. I use the data from
questionaire of teachers and managerial staff.
3.2. DETERMINATION OF SAMPLE SIZE
I chose sample following Slovin fomular
n=

N
1 + Ne 2

= 221

This is included:
-

n (teacher) 71% = 71% x 221 = 157

-

n (managerial staff) 29% = 29% x 221 = 64

3.3. SAMPLING DESIGN AND TECHNIQUES
For the sampling of teachers and managerial staff, I use method of Stratified
random sampling (SRS) for the sample: arrange teachers by name and then pick out a
sample in order alphabet. To determine the gap k = N/n, then chose the first one in the
list, then chose 1+k, 1+2k,…
3.4. SUBJECT OF THE STUDY

Study subjects are financial management of ULSA: base of allocation resources. To
assess financial management and allocation resources must collect original data. Thus,
for initial data must do sample survey for teachers are teaching and staff are working in
ULSA. Then I used SPSS 16.0 to process data.
3.5. RESEACH INSTRUMENT
- Questionnaire: Used to evaluate the satisfaction level of teachers and managerial staff,
assessment of training environment using 5 point Likert’s Scale:


Scale

Range

Choice Description

5

4 .2 0 – 5 .0 0

Strongly Agree

4

3 .4 0 – 4 .1 9

Agree

3

2 .6 0 – 3 .3 9


Fairly Agree

2

1 .8 0 – 2 .5 9

Disagree

1

1 .0 0 – 1 .7 9

Strongly Disagree

3.6. VALIDATION OF THE INSTRUMENT
- For reliability, I methods T. Test – retest method (reliability test)
- Spearman rank difference correlation coefficient may be used to determine
reliability of the responses.
3.7. STATISTICAL TREATMENT
In this research, I use some statistical method to analyze factors affecting
financial management and allocation resources at ULSA. Descriptive statistics, ANOVA
test were used to analyze relationship between affecting factors with financial
management. Regression and correlation method were applied to analyze effect of
factors.
To measure and assess the analysis of the results, the thesis is conducted the
reliability test of the collected information with alpha at 5% significance level.


CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter presents the results obtained from survey data and data collection
following the objectives that the dissertation outlined.
4.1. PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENT
Gender

Valid

Frequency

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulative
Percent

77

34.8

34.8

34.8

144

65.2


65.2

100

221

100

100

Frequency

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulative
Percent

20-30

49

22.2

22.2

22.2


30-40

69

31.2

31.2

53.4

103

46.6

46.6

100

221

100

100

Male
Female
Total

Ages


Valid

over 40
Total

Education level

Valid

High
school
diploma

Frequency

Percent

Valid
Percent

Cumulative
Percent

3

1.4

1.4

1.4


Associate
degree

19

8.6

8.6

10

Bachelor
degree

91

41.2

41.2

51.1

98

44.3

44.3

95.5


10

4.5

4.5

100

221

100

100

Master
degree
an upper
Other
Total

Per average income

Valid

Frequency

Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative
Percent

under 5

50

22.6

22.6

22.6

5-under 7

59

26.7

26.7

49.3

7-under
10

85


38.5

38.5

87.8

over 10

27

12.2

12.2

100


Total

221

100

100

How long have you teach in university
Valid
Percent

Frequency

Percent
Valid

Under 3
year

Cumulative
Percent

29

13.1

13.1

13.1

6-Mar

33

14.9

14.9

28.1

8-Jun

21


9.5

9.5

37.6

138

62.4

62.4

100

221

100

100

Frequency

Percent

Valid
Percent

157


71

71

71

64

29

29

100

221

100

100

over 8
Total

Oposition

Valid

lecturer
manager
Total


Cumulative
Percent

The profile of respondents met the survey requirements and are in accordance with
the real situation in ULSA.
4.2. ASSESS THE EFFECT OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT IN RESOURCE
ALLOCATION

Verbal description
Strongly Agree
Agree

q1tb – Salary
Frequency

Fairly Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Total

Valid Percent
0

0

17

7.8


149

68.4

47

21.5

5

2.3

218

100

q2tb – professional development and teaching quality
Verbal description
Strongly Agree
Agree
Fairly Agree
Disagree

Frequency

Valid Percent
0

0


27

12.3

169

76.4

25

11.3


Strongly Disagree
Total

0

0

221

100

q3tb – development career
Verbal description
Frequency
Valid Percent
Strongly Agree

0
0
Agree
28
13
Fairly Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

162

75.4

25

11.6

0

0

Total
215
100
q4tb – Effect of resource for equipment and
infrastructure
Verbal description
Frequency
Valid Percent
Strongly Agree

0
0
Agree
5
2.3
Fairly Agree
Disagree

125

57.1

79

36

Strongly Disagree

10

4.6

Total

219

100

q5tb – Effect of resource for investing program
Verbal description

Strongly Agree

Frequency

Agree
Fairly Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Total

Valid Percent
0

0

45

20.4

134

60.6

41

18.5

1

0.5


221

100

q6tb – Effect of resource for investing in providing
services
Verbal description
Strongly Agree
Agree
Fairly Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Total

Frequency

Valid Percent
0

0

17

7.7

131

59.2


46

20.9

27

12.2

221

100


Almost answers are in the normal range to less than agree. The range of 3 to less
than 4 is nearly from 60% to 80%
- For the questions: q4tb - Effect of resource for equipment and infrastructure and
q6tb - Effect of resource for investing in providing services
Almost answers are in the disagree range to less than normal. The range of 2 to
less than 3 is nearly from 50% to 80%
- Preliminary assessment is that the financial management and allocation of
resources of ULSA are assessed at medium level.
4.3. EVALUATING FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT IN TERMS OF RESOURCES
ALLOCATION AND PROPOSE A BASIS FOR RESOURCES ALLOCATION
FOR ULSA.

q7tb – Evaluating generally financial management and
resources allocation
Verbal description

Frequency


Valid Percent

Strongly Agree
2

0.9

111

50.6

83

37.9

23

10.6

0

0

219

100

Agree
Fairly Agree

Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Total

Overall, through the evaluation table of evaluating generally

financial

management and resources allocation, preliminary assessment is that the financial


management and allocation of resources of ULSA are assessed at fairly agree level.
two major factors negatively affect the financial management of the school, these are
lack of financial resources and unsuitable allocation of the resources.
After processing the data by SPSS 16.0 software, the results of the regression model
is expressed as follows:

Y = -0.240 + 0.292x2 + 0.287x3 + 0.19x5 + 0.121x6 + 0.192x1 + 0.133x4
Y

Financial management: resources allocation (qtb7)

X1 Salary (q1tb)
X2 professional development and quality (q2tb)
X3 development career (q3tb)
X4 effect of resource for equipment and infrastructure (q4tb)
X5 effect of resource for investing program (q5tb)
X6 effect of resource for investing in providing services (q6tb)


Thus, the factor most strongly affecting the financial management and the
allocation of resources is the factor of professional development and teaching quality (a1
= 0.292). The least influential factor on the Y (financial management and the allocation
of resources) is effect of resource for investing in providing services. This shows that the
investment in labor resources (including satisfaction, professional development and
teaching quality, development career) have the most impact.


4.4.HYPOTHESIS TESTING
I use the gamma’s test of Goodman and Kruskal and the Tau-b of Kendall to test
hypotheses that were presented in chapter one. The gamma’s value is received range from
-1 to 1. The hypothesis is accepted when the alpha level of significance is less than 0.05.
Statistical result showed that the Pearson Correlation value is from 0,5 to 0.8. So,
there are

relationships between the financial management and the factors . The

significance level is less 0.05 (Sig = 0.000) to reflect meaningful relationships. Thus, all
hypotheses are accepted.


CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. SUMMARY
The dissertation with the aim proposing a suitable way of financial resources
allocation, analysis of the factors affecting the allocation of resources in financial
management and give a better model of resource allocation for ULSA. The dissertation
uses the research method through questionnaire survey, descriptive statistical analysis,
analysis of regression models to derive the impact of the factors, thereby making
appropriate recommendations for financial resources allocation at ULSA.
5.2. CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the results of this study on the University of Labor – Social Affairs
showed that financial management of ULSA currently require to be renewed, the
resource allocation in order of priority: resources for labor should be a top priority,
followed by investment in development programs, then followed by equipment and
infrastructure, and ultimately to provide services. On this basis, ULSA can plan
appropriate financial allocations based on existing financial resources and its ability to
mobilize.
5.3. SOLUTION TO ASSESS AND IMPROVE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT:
ALLOCATION RESOURCES AT ULSA
From the regression model:

Y = -0.240 + 0.192x1+ 0.292x2 + 0.287x3 + 0.133x4+ 0.19x5 + 0.121x6


This showed that the relationship between these factors, so financial management
of ULSA in terms of resources allocation currently require to be renewed, the resource
allocation in order of priority:
1. labor
2. course programs
3. equipment and infrastructure
4. service provision
On this basis, ULSA can allocate appropriate financial resources to achieve the
best performance as follow:

Table 5.1. The optimal rate of items in resource allocation

No

Items


rate of
2012

A

B

1

1
2
3
4
5
6

Salary for faculty
42.60%
professional development
and teaching quality
7.70%
Career development
2.10%
equipment and
infrastructure
10.00%
Course program
12.10%
service provision
25.50%

Total
100.00%

The
The
optimal
relative
rate by
coefficient
formula

The suggested
optimal rate

1.00

42.60%

4= 3* total(1)
/total(3)
46.11%

1.52
1.49

11.70%
3.13%

12.67%
3.39%


0.69
0.99
0.63

6.90%
11.98%
16.07%
92.38%

7.47%
12.97%
17.39%
100.00%

2

3=1*2

From that, ULSA can plan appropriate financial allocations based on existing
financial resources and its ability to mobilize and consistent with the actual situation of
ULSA, have appropriate strategy to improve the quality of training.