Aggressive strategies of the COVID-19 pandemic on the apparel industry of Sri Lanka using structural equation modeling

During the COVID-19 crisis, the apparel industry faced many challenges. Aggressive cost-cutting strategies became a top priority, and in turn, these influenced stressors and adversely affected business sustainability. This study examines the impact of aggressive strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic on business sustainability in the apparel industry of Sri Lanka. Further, it investigates whether the relationship between aggressive cost-cutting strategies and business sustainability was mediated by employee stress, considering aggressive cost reduction strategies and workplace environmental changes. This was a cross-sectional study with data collected from 384 employees in the apparel industry in Sri Lanka. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) was applied to analyze the direct and indirect effects of aggressive cost reduction strategies and workplace environmental changes on sustainability with mediating effects of stress. Aggressive cost reduction strategies (Beta = 1.317, p = 0.000) and environmental changes (Beta = 0.251, p = 0.000) led to an increase in employee stress but did not affect business sustainability. Thus, employee stress (Beta = -0.028, p = 0.594) was not a mediator in the relationship between aggressive cost-cutting strategies and business sustainability; business sustainability was not a dependent variable. The findings proved that managing workplace stress, particularly improving stressful working environments and aggressive cost reduction strategies, can enhance employee satisfaction. Thus, managing employee stress could be beneficial for policymakers to focus on the area(s) required to retain competent employees. Moreover, aggressive strategies are unsuitable to apply during crisis to enhance business sustainability. The findings provide additional knowledge to the existing literature, enabling employees and employers to predict causes of stress and serve as a significant knowledge base for further studies

Aggressive strategies of the COVID-19 pandemic on the apparel industry of Sri Lanka using structural equation modeling.

During the COVID-19 crisis, the apparel industry faced many challenges. Aggressive cost-cutting strategies became a top priority, and in turn, these influenced stressors and adversely affected business sustainability. This study examines the impact of aggressive strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic on business sustainability in the apparel industry of Sri Lanka. Further, it investigates whether the relationship between aggressive cost-cutting strategies and business sustainability was mediated by employee stress, considering aggressive cost reduction strategies and workplace environmental changes. This was a cross-sectional study with data collected from 384 employees in the apparel industry in Sri Lanka. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) was applied to analyze the direct and indirect effects of aggressive cost reduction strategies and workplace environmental changes on sustainability with mediating effects of stress. Aggressive cost reduction strategies (Beta = 1.317, p = 0.000) and environmental changes (Beta = 0.251, p = 0.000) led to an increase in employee stress but did not affect business sustainability. Thus, employee stress (Beta = -0.028, p = 0.594) was not a mediator in the relationship between aggressive cost-cutting strategies and business sustainability; business sustainability was not a dependent variable. The findings proved that managing workplace stress, particularly improving stressful working environments and aggressive cost reduction strategies, can enhance employee satisfaction. Thus, managing employee stress could be beneficial for policymakers to focus on the area(s) required to retain competent employees. Moreover, aggressive strategies are unsuitable to apply during crisis to enhance business sustainability. The findings provide additional knowledge to the existing literature, enabling employees and employers to predict causes of stress and serve as a significant knowledge base for further studies

Regression weight estimate values among variables.

Source: Author’s illustration based on AMOS result.</p

Demographic factors (N = 384).

During the COVID-19 crisis, the apparel industry faced many challenges. Aggressive cost-cutting strategies became a top priority, and in turn, these influenced stressors and adversely affected business sustainability. This study examines the impact of aggressive strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic on business sustainability in the apparel industry of Sri Lanka. Further, it investigates whether the relationship between aggressive cost-cutting strategies and business sustainability was mediated by employee stress, considering aggressive cost reduction strategies and workplace environmental changes. This was a cross-sectional study with data collected from 384 employees in the apparel industry in Sri Lanka. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) was applied to analyze the direct and indirect effects of aggressive cost reduction strategies and workplace environmental changes on sustainability with mediating effects of stress. Aggressive cost reduction strategies (Beta = 1.317, p = 0.000) and environmental changes (Beta = 0.251, p = 0.000) led to an increase in employee stress but did not affect business sustainability. Thus, employee stress (Beta = -0.028, p = 0.594) was not a mediator in the relationship between aggressive cost-cutting strategies and business sustainability; business sustainability was not a dependent variable. The findings proved that managing workplace stress, particularly improving stressful working environments and aggressive cost reduction strategies, can enhance employee satisfaction. Thus, managing employee stress could be beneficial for policymakers to focus on the area(s) required to retain competent employees. Moreover, aggressive strategies are unsuitable to apply during crisis to enhance business sustainability. The findings provide additional knowledge to the existing literature, enabling employees and employers to predict causes of stress and serve as a significant knowledge base for further studies.</div

Model fitting analysis.

During the COVID-19 crisis, the apparel industry faced many challenges. Aggressive cost-cutting strategies became a top priority, and in turn, these influenced stressors and adversely affected business sustainability. This study examines the impact of aggressive strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic on business sustainability in the apparel industry of Sri Lanka. Further, it investigates whether the relationship between aggressive cost-cutting strategies and business sustainability was mediated by employee stress, considering aggressive cost reduction strategies and workplace environmental changes. This was a cross-sectional study with data collected from 384 employees in the apparel industry in Sri Lanka. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) was applied to analyze the direct and indirect effects of aggressive cost reduction strategies and workplace environmental changes on sustainability with mediating effects of stress. Aggressive cost reduction strategies (Beta = 1.317, p = 0.000) and environmental changes (Beta = 0.251, p = 0.000) led to an increase in employee stress but did not affect business sustainability. Thus, employee stress (Beta = -0.028, p = 0.594) was not a mediator in the relationship between aggressive cost-cutting strategies and business sustainability; business sustainability was not a dependent variable. The findings proved that managing workplace stress, particularly improving stressful working environments and aggressive cost reduction strategies, can enhance employee satisfaction. Thus, managing employee stress could be beneficial for policymakers to focus on the area(s) required to retain competent employees. Moreover, aggressive strategies are unsuitable to apply during crisis to enhance business sustainability. The findings provide additional knowledge to the existing literature, enabling employees and employers to predict causes of stress and serve as a significant knowledge base for further studies.</div

Regression weight estimate values among variables.

Regression weight estimate values among variables.</p

Factor analysis, validity, and reliability test.

During the COVID-19 crisis, the apparel industry faced many challenges. Aggressive cost-cutting strategies became a top priority, and in turn, these influenced stressors and adversely affected business sustainability. This study examines the impact of aggressive strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic on business sustainability in the apparel industry of Sri Lanka. Further, it investigates whether the relationship between aggressive cost-cutting strategies and business sustainability was mediated by employee stress, considering aggressive cost reduction strategies and workplace environmental changes. This was a cross-sectional study with data collected from 384 employees in the apparel industry in Sri Lanka. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) was applied to analyze the direct and indirect effects of aggressive cost reduction strategies and workplace environmental changes on sustainability with mediating effects of stress. Aggressive cost reduction strategies (Beta = 1.317, p = 0.000) and environmental changes (Beta = 0.251, p = 0.000) led to an increase in employee stress but did not affect business sustainability. Thus, employee stress (Beta = -0.028, p = 0.594) was not a mediator in the relationship between aggressive cost-cutting strategies and business sustainability; business sustainability was not a dependent variable. The findings proved that managing workplace stress, particularly improving stressful working environments and aggressive cost reduction strategies, can enhance employee satisfaction. Thus, managing employee stress could be beneficial for policymakers to focus on the area(s) required to retain competent employees. Moreover, aggressive strategies are unsuitable to apply during crisis to enhance business sustainability. The findings provide additional knowledge to the existing literature, enabling employees and employers to predict causes of stress and serve as a significant knowledge base for further studies.</div

The Real-World Cost-Effectiveness of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Versus Stenting in High-Risk Patients: Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of a Single-Centre Experience

Background: There are limited economic evaluations comparing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for multi-vessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD) in contemporary, routine clinical practice. Objective: The aim was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing CABG and PCI in patients with MVCAD, from the perspective of the Australian public hospital payer, using observational data sources. Methods: Clinical data from the Melbourne Interventional Group (MIG) and the Australian and New Zealand Society of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeons (ANZSCTS) registries were analysed for 1022 CABG (treatment) and 978 PCI (comparator) procedures performed between June 2009 and December 2013. Clinical records were linked to same-hospital admissions and national death index (NDI) data. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) avoided were evaluated. The propensity score bin bootstrap (PSBB) approach was used to validate base-case results. Results: At mean follow-up of 2.7 years, CABG compared with PCI was associated with increased costs and greater all-cause mortality, but a significantly lower rate of MACCE. An ICER of $55,255 (Australian dollars)/MACCE avoided was observed for the overall cohort. The ICER varied across comparisons against bare metal stents (ICER$25,815/MACCE avoided), all drug-eluting stents (DES) ($56,861), second-generation DES ($42,925), and third-generation of DES ($88,535). Moderate-to-low ICERs were apparent for high-risk subgroups, including those with chronic kidney disease ($62,299), diabetes ($42,819), history of myocardial infarction ($30,431), left main coronary artery disease ($38,864), and heart failure ($36,966). Conclusions: At early follow-up, high-risk subgroups had lower ICERs than the overall cohort when CABG was compared with PCI. A personalised, multidisciplinary approach to treatment of patients may enhance cost containment, as well as improving clinical outcomes following revascularisation strategies

Genome-wide survey of recurrent HBV integration in hepatocellular carcinoma

10.1038/ng.2295Nature Genetics447765-769NGEN