Open Innovation in Developing an Early Standardization of Battery Swapping According to the Indonesian National Standard for Electric Motorcycle Applications
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. FACTS and SEM Approach
2.2. Open Innovation Dynamics
3. Research Methodology
3.1. FACTS Approach
3.2. SEM Approach
3.2.1. Structural Model
3.2.2. Measurement Model
- Manifest variable (indicator), which is denoted by X for indicators related to exogenous constructs or Y for indicators related to endogenous constructs;
- Loading factor (λ), which represents the direct correlation between construct and indicator;
- Latent variable or construct (ξ);
- Measurement error, which is denoted by δ for error related to exogenous constructs or ε for error related to endogenous constructs.
3.2.3. Model Evaluation
4. Results
4.1. Outer Model Analysis
4.2. Inner Model Analysis
4.3. Hypothesis Test
- The path coefficient is in the same direction as the proposed hypothesis, which is positive for a hypothesis that says “has a positive influence” or negative for a hypothesis that says “has a negative influence”.
- t-Value ≥ t-table.
5. Discussions
5.1. SEM outer Model Analysis
5.1.1. Convergent Validity of Indicators
- A1 (Battery swap components, such as battery cells, modules, and packs, must have passed the safety test)
- A2 (Standard dimensions of swapped batteries’ size, voltage, and electric current are required at all battery swap charging stations throughout Indonesia to produce equivalent performance and power without making changes or adjustments.)
- A4 (Process suitability of swapped batteries for concurrent use with other relevant products without creating unnecessary interactions)
- B1 (The application of the battery swap test standard is expected to protect the interests of the government)
- B4 (The application of the battery swap test standard is expected to protect the interests of battery swap manufacturers)
- B6 (The application of the battery swap test standard is expected to protect the interests of electric motorcycle users)
5.1.2. Convergent Validity of Constructs
5.1.3. Discriminant Validity
5.2. SEM inner Model Analysis
5.2.1. Collinearity Assessment
5.2.2. Path Value and Significance
5.2.3. Coefficient of Determination
5.2.4. Effect Size f2
5.2.5. Predictive Relevance
5.2.6. Effect Size q2
5.2.7. Hypothesis Test
5.3. Policy Implications
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Statistics Indonesia Number of Motor Vehicle by Type (Unit), 2018–2020. Available online: https://www.bps.go.id/indicator/17/57/1/jumlah-kendaraan-bermotor.html (accessed on 18 June 2020).
- Prianjani, D.; Sutopo, W.; Hisjam, M.; Pujiyanto, E. Sustainable supply chain planning for swap battery system: Case study electric motorcycle applications in Indonesia. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 495, 12081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Government of the Republic of Indonesia. Acceleration of Battery-Based Electric Motorized Vehicles for Battery Electric Vehicle for Road Transportation; Government of the Republic of Indonesia: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Sutopo, W.; Aqidawati, E.F. Learning a Supply Chain Management Course by Problem Based Learning: Case Studies in the Newspaper Industry. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Bangkok, Thailand, 5–7 March 2019; pp. 5–7. [Google Scholar]
- Government of the Republic of Indonesia Laws of the Republic Indonesia Number 20 of 2014 about Standardization and Assessment of Compatibility. Available online: https://www.bsn.go.id/uploads/download/UU-20_TAHUN_2014_TENTANG_SPK1.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2019).
- Ministry of Trade of the Republic of Indonesia. Final Report of the Standard Needs Assessment in the Dimensions of Competitiveness and Consumer Protection; Ministry of Trade of the Republic of Indonesia: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Stella, J. The Problem with Early Standardization. Available online: https://bit.ly/31pNznM (accessed on 17 June 2020).
- Riitta, S. Managing Change towards Lean Enterprises. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 1994, 14, 66–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fadillah, H.; Jusuf, A.; Santosa, S.P.; Dirgantara, T. Li-ion NCA Battery Safety Assessment for Electric Vehicle Applications. In Proceedings of the 2018 5th International Conference on Electric Vehicular Technology (ICEVT), Surakarta, Indonesia, 30–31 October 2018; pp. 172–178. [Google Scholar]
- McNerney, J.; Needell, Z.A.; Chang, M.T.; Miotti, M.; Trancik, J.E. TripEnergy: Estimating Personal Vehicle Energy Consumption Given Limited Travel Survey Data. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2017, 2628, 58–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Needell, Z.A.; Trancik, J.E. Efficiently Simulating Personal Vehicle Energy Consumption in Mesoscopic Transport Models. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2018, 2672, 163–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sutopo, W.; Rahmawatie, B.; Fahma, F.; Nizam, M.; Purwanto, A.; Louhenapessy, B.B.; Kadir, E.A. A technical review of BMS performance standard for electric vehicle applications in Indonesia. Telkomnika 2018, 16, 544–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sutopo, W.; Kadir, E.A. Designing framework for standardization case study: Lithium-ion battery module in electric vehicle application. Int. J. Electr. Comput. Eng. 2018, 8, 220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trancik, J.E. Renewable energy: Back the renewables boom. Nature 2014, 507, 300–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ahmed, M.; Kim, Y.-C. Energy Trading with Electric Vehicles in Smart Campus Parking Lots. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, P.-T.; Shen, D.-J.; Yang, C.-J.; Huang, K.D. Development of a Hybrid Electric Motorcycle that Accords Energy Efficiency and Controllability via an Inverse Differential Gear and Power Mode Switching Control. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hu, J.; Jiang, X.; Jia, M.; Zheng, Y. Energy Management Strategy for the Hybrid Energy Storage System of Pure Electric Vehicle Considering Traffic Information. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, H.-J.; Cha, H.-J.; Won, D. Economic Routing of Electric Vehicles using Dynamic Pricing in Consideration of System Voltage. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Long, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, H.; Hou, X.; Xiao, J. A Developed Vehicle Terminal of Time-Sharing Rental Electric Vehicle Using Acoustic Communication Technology. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 5408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Oldenbroek, V.; Smink, G.; Salet, T.; van Wijk, A.J.M. Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle as a Power Plant: Techno-Economic Scenario Analysis of a Renewable Integrated Transportation and Energy System for Smart Cities in Two Climates. Appl. Sci. 2019, 10, 143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sutopo, W.; Astuti, R.W.; Suryandari, R.T. Accelerating a Technology Commercialization; with a Discussion on the Relation between Technology Transfer Efficiency and Open Innovation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2019, 5, 95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Witherell, P.; Rachuri, S.; Narayanan, A.; Lee, J.H. FACTS: A Framework for Analysis, Comparison, and Testing of Standards; Systems Integration Division Engineering Laboratory, US Department of Commerce: Washington, DC, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Aristyawati, N.; Fahma, F.; Sutopo, W.; Purwanto, A.; Nizam, M.; Louhenapessy, B.B.; Mulyono, A.B. Designing framework for standardization and testing requirements for the secondary battery a case study of lithium-ion battery module in electric vehicle application. In Proceedings of the 2016 2nd International Conference of Industrial, Mechanical, Electrical, and Chemical Engineering (ICIMECE), Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 6–7 October 2016; pp. 207–212. [Google Scholar]
- Pratiwi, R.A.; Fahma, F.; Sutopo, W.; Pujiyanto, E.; Ayundyahrini, M. Designing Parameter for Developing Standard of Manual Wheelchair. Int. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. 2018, 15, 127–134. [Google Scholar]
- Prianjani, D.; Fahma, F.; Sutopo, W.; Nizam, M.; Purwanto, A.; Louhenapessy, B.B.; Mulyono, A.B. The standard development for the National Standard of Indonesian (SNI) of the cell traction battery Lithium-ion Ferro phospate secondarry for electric vehicles applications. In Proceedings of the 2016 2nd International Conference of Industrial, Mechanical, Electrical, and Chemical Engineering (ICIMECE), Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 6–7 October 2016; pp. 213–218. [Google Scholar]
- Rahmawatie, B.; Sutopo, W.; Fahma, F.; Purwanto, A.; Nizam, M.; Louhenapessy, B.B.; Mulyono, A.B. Designing framework for standardization and testing requirements of battery management system for electric vehicle application. In Proceedings of the 2017 4th International Conference on Electric Vehicular Technology (ICEVT), Bali, Indonesia, 2–5 October 2017; pp. 7–12. [Google Scholar]
- Pīlēna, A.; Mežinska, I.; Lapiņa, I. Standardization as a Catalyst for Open and Responsible Innovation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7, 187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chesbrough, H. Open innovation: A new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation. Open Innov. Res. New Paradig. 2006, 400, 1–19. [Google Scholar]
- West, J.; Gallagher, S. Challenges of open innovation: The paradox of firm investment in open-source software. R&D Manag. 2006, 36, 319–331. [Google Scholar]
- Kaplan, D. Structural Equation Modeling: Foundations and Extensions; Sage Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2008; Volume 10, ISBN 1452245126. [Google Scholar]
- Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed.; Guilford: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Ghozali, I.; Latan, H. Partial Least Squares Konsep, Teknik dan Aplikasi Menggunakan Program Smartpls 3.0 Untuk Penelitian Empiris; Badan Penerbit UNDIP: Semarang, Indonesia, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Pfoser, S.; Schauer, O.; Costa, Y. Acceptance of LNG as an alternative fuel: Determinants and policy implications. Energy Policy 2018, 120, 259–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qi, W.H.; Qi, M.L.; Ji, Y.M. The effect path of public communication on public acceptance of nuclear energy. Energy Policy 2020, 144, 111655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zaman, S.; Wang, Z.; Rasool, S.F.; uz Zaman, Q.; Raza, H. Impact of critical success factors and supportive leadership on sustainable success of renewable energy projects: Empirical evidence from Pakistan. Energy Policy 2022, 162, 112793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Will, C.; Schuller, A. Understanding user acceptance factors of electric vehicle smart charging. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2016, 71, 198–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nosi, C.; Pucci, T.; Silvestri, C.; Aquilani, B. Does Value Co-Creation Really Matter? An Investigation of Italian Millennials Intention to Buy Electric Cars. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Globisch, J.; Dütschke, E.; Schleich, J. Acceptance of electric passenger cars in commercial fleets. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2018, 116, 122–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prianjani, D.; Sutopo, W.; Pujiyanto, E.; Fahma, F. Designing framework for standardization and testing requirements of battery swap for electric motorcycle application in Indonesia. Int. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. 2018, 15, 141–148. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, N.; Tang, L.; Pan, H. Analysis of public acceptance of electric vehicles: An empirical study in Shanghai. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2018, 126, 284–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, X.; Ma, Y.; Shao, S.; Ma, T. What determines consumers’ acceptance of electric vehicles: A survey in Shanghai, China. Energy Econ. 2022, 108, 105805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adu-Gyamfi, G.; Song, H.; Obuobi, B.; Nketiah, E.; Wang, H.; Cudjoe, D. Who will adopt? Investigating the adoption intention for battery swap technology for electric vehicles. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 156, 111979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gulzari, A.; Wang, Y.; Prybutok, V. A green experience with eco-friendly cars: A young consumer electric vehicle rental behavioral model. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2022, 65, 102877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rauter, R.; Globocnik, D.; Perl-Vorbach, E.; Baumgartner, R.J. Open innovation and its effects on economic and sustainability innovation performance. J. Innov. Knowl. 2019, 4, 226–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chesbrough, H.W.; Appleyard, M.M. Open innovation and strategy. Calif. Manage. Rev. 2007, 50, 57–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yun, J.; Liu, Z. Micro-and Macro-Dynamics of Open Innovation with a Quadruple-Helix Model. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yun, J.J.; Zhao, X.; Jung, K.; Yigitcanlar, T. The culture for open innovation dynamics. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perkmann, M.; Walsh, K. University–industry relationships and open innovation: Towards a research agenda. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2007, 9, 259–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jonsson, L.; Baraldi, E.; Larsson, L.-E.; Forsberg, P.; Severinsson, K. Targeting academic engagement in open innovation: Tools, effects and challenges for university management. J. Knowl. Econ. 2015, 6, 522–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Striukova, L.; Rayna, T. University-industry knowledge exchange: An Exploratory Study of Open Innovation in UK Universities. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 2015, 18, 471–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huggins, R.; Prokop, D.; Thompson, P. Universities and open innovation: The determinants of network centrality. J. Technol. Transf. 2020, 45, 718–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sarkar, S.; Costa, A.I.A. Dynamics of open innovation in the food industry. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2008, 19, 574–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bogers, M.; Chesbrough, H.; Heaton, S.; Teece, D.J. Strategic management of open innovation: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Calif. Manage. Rev. 2019, 62, 77–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, F.D.; Venkatesh, V. A critical assessment of potential measurement biases in the technology acceptance model: Three experiments. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 1996, 45, 19–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Creswell, J.W.; Creswell, J.D. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches; Sage Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2017; ISBN 1506386717. [Google Scholar]
- IEC 62840-2:2016; Electric Battery Swap System—Part 2: Safety Requirement. International Electrotechnical Commission [IEC]: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016. Available online: https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/25983 (accessed on 17 March 2020).
- National Standardization Body. Pengantar Standardisasi, Edisi Kedua; BSN Jakarta: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2011, 19, 139–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chin, W.W. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In Modern Methods for Business Research; Psychology Press: London, UK, 1998; Volume 295, pp. 295–336. ISBN1 1135684138. ISBN2 9781135684136. [Google Scholar]
- Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1988; pp. 20–26. [Google Scholar]
- Santosa, P.I. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif: Pengembangan Hipotesis dan Pengujiannya Menggunakan SmartPLS; Andi: Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, W.N.; Li, B.; Wang, Y. Design of Battery Fast-Swap System for Electric Vehicle. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2014, 628, 190–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Authors | Study Object | Number of Constructs | Number of Indicators | FACTS | SEM |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Prianjani et al. [25] | LiFEPO4 battery cell standard | 3 | 15 | ✓ | - |
Aristyawati et al. [23] | LiFEPO4 battery module standard | 6 | - | ✓ | - |
Rahmawatie et al. [26] | LIFEPO4 battery management system standard | 4 | 14 | ✓ | - |
Pratiwi et al. [24] | Manual wheelchair standard | 7 | - | ✓ | - |
Nosi et al. [37] | The intensity of e-car purchases by millennials | 6 | 34 | - | ✓ |
Prianjani et al. [39] | Conceptual model framework standardization and testing battery swapping in Indonesia | 4 | - | ✓ | - |
Wang et al. [40] | Public acceptance of electric vehicles | 12 | 43 | - | ✓ |
Globisch et al. [38] | Using the TAM model as an SEM indicator of electric taxi acceptance | 11 | - | - | ✓ |
Zhao et al. [41] | Consumers’ acceptance of electric vehicles | 6 | 27 | - | ✓ |
Adu-Gyamfi et al. [42] | Investigating the adoption intention for battery swap technology for electric vehicles | 7 | 27 | - | ✓ |
Gulzari et al. [43] | A young consumer electric vehicle rental behavioral model | 7 | 27 | - | ✓ |
This study | Development of battery swap testing standards using FACTS and SEM methods | 7 | 58 | ✓ | ✓ |
Stakeholder Requirements | Standard Reference (Adopted from IEC 62840-2:2016) |
---|---|
Protection against electric shock | Chapter 7 |
Equipment constructional requirements | Chapter 8 |
Electromagnetic compatibility | Chapter 9 |
Marking and instruction | Chapter 10 |
Construct | Indicators | Code |
---|---|---|
National uniqueness | Conformity to standardization goals | A1 |
Exchangeability | A2 | |
Diversity control | A3 | |
Compatibility | A4 | |
Increased empowerment of resources | A5 | |
Communication | A6 | |
Security, safety, and health | A7 | |
Environmental conservation | A8 | |
Technology transfer | A9 | |
Reducing trade barriers | A10 | |
Protection of stakeholders | Protecting the government | B1 |
Protecting battery swap R&D | B2 | |
Protecting battery swap laboratories | B3 | |
Protecting the battery swap industry | B4 | |
Protecting the electric motor industry | B5 | |
Protecting electric vehicle users | B6 | |
Protection against electric shock | Standard contains protection against electric shock | C1 |
Standard contains constructional equipment requirements | C2 | |
Standard contains electromagnetic compatibility | C3 | |
Standard contains marking and instruction | C4 | |
Protection against direct and indirect contact | C5 | |
Protection for power supply equipment | C6 | |
SBS charging equipment protection | C7 | |
Direct contact | C8 | |
Protection in battery enclosure | C9 | |
Protection regulations on coupler | C10 | |
Protective measures on energy with high voltage | C11 | |
Protective measures for unexpected events | C12 | |
Control signals on the shielding conductors | C13 | |
Additional protection | C14 | |
Manual reset of circuit breakers, residual current devices, and other equipment | C15 | |
Protection of persons in accordance with standard | C16 | |
Compliance of telecommunications network with standard | C17 | |
Equipment constructional requirements | Compliance with standard | C18 |
Switch | C19 | |
Contactor | C20 | |
Circuit breakers | C21 | |
Relay | C22 | |
Electrical measurements | C23 | |
Clearances and creepage distance | C24 | |
Resistance against mechanical, electrical, thermal, and environmental stresses | C25 | |
Minimum level of protection against mechanical impact | C26 | |
Material flammability and resistance against effects of solvents or liquids, vibration, and shock | C27 | |
Protective coating on the exposed surface in corrosion test | C28 | |
Enclosure stability in dry heat test | C29 | |
External parts of insulating material and parts are subject to heat and fire tests. | C30 | |
Ball pressure test | C31 | |
Resistance to tracking | C32 | |
Resistance to solar radiation | C33 | |
Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) | Compliance with EMC requirements of residential location | C34 |
Compliance with industrial sites’ EMC requirements | C35 | |
Marking and instruction | Marked with complete information | C36 |
Legible, durable, and visible marks | C37 | |
Prohibition of plastic usage for markings | C38 | |
Indication of dangerous occurrence using visual signals | C39 | |
Conclusion | Consideration of national uniqueness and stakeholder protection | C40 |
Stakeholder confidence when implementing standard | C41 | |
Sustainability of standard | C42 |
Construct | Number of Indicators | Measurement Model |
---|---|---|
National uniqueness (ξ1) | 10 (X1, …, X10) | X1 = λX1 ξX1 + δ1 (1) X2 = λX2 ξX2 + δ2 (2) . . X9 = λX9 ξX9 + δ9 (9) X10 = λX10 ξX10 + δ10 (10) |
Stakeholder protection (ξ2) | 6 ((X11, …, X16) | X11 = λX11 ξ11 + δ11 (11) . . X16 = λX16 ξ16 + δ16 (16) |
Protection against electric shock (ξ3) | 12 (X17, …, X28) | X17 = λX17 ξ17 + δ17 (17) . . X28 = λX28 ξ28 + δ28 (28) |
Equipment constructional requirements (ξ4) | 16 (X29, …, X44) | X29 = λX29 ξ29 + δ29 (29) .. X44 = λX44 ξ44 + δ44 (44) |
Electromagnetic compatibility (ξ5) | 2 (X45, X46) | X45 = λX45 ξ45 + δ45 (45) X46 = λX46 ξ46 + δ46 (46) |
Marking and instruction (ξ6) | 4 (X47, …, X50) | X47 = λX47 ξ47 + δ47 (47) .. X50 = λX50 ξ50 + δ50 (50) |
SNI implementation (η1) | 4 (Y1, …, Y4) | Y1 = λy1 + ε1 (51) . . Y4 = λy4 + ε4 (54) |
SNI acceptance (η2) | 3 (Y5, Y6, Y7) | Y5 = λy5 + ε5 (55) Y6 = λy6 + ε6 (56) Y7 = λy7 + ε7 (57) |
Criteria | Description | Reference |
---|---|---|
Convergent validity of indicators | Loading factor ≥ 0.5 | [58] |
Convergent validity of constructs | Cronbach’s alpha ≥ 0.5 | [58] |
Discriminant validity | Cross-loading with the (average variance extracted) value of a construct and the correlation of that construct with other constructs. The value for each construct must be greater than the correlation value between constructs and other constructs | [58] |
Collinearity assessment | VIF ≥ 0.2 or VIF ≤ 5 | [59] |
Path coefficient | The path coefficient values range from −1 to +1.The minimum path coefficient value is 0.2, and the ideal is more significant than 0.3 to express a meaningful relationship | [60] |
Coefficient of determination (R2) | Square adjusted value ≥ 0.25 | [61] |
Effect size f2 | Large (f2 = 0.35), medium (f2 = 0.15), small (f2 = 0.02) | [61] |
Predictive relevance Q2 | Certain endogenous constructs have predictive relevance if Q2 = 0 | [60] |
Effect size q2 | Large (q2 = 0.35), medium (q2 = 0.15), small (f2 = 0.002) | [60] |
Hypothesis test | t-Value ≥ t-table | Hypothesis acceptance rules |
Construct | Indicators | Loading Factor | Decision | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not Valid | |||
National uniqueness | A1 | 0.288 | ✓ | |
A2 | −0.022 | ✓ | ||
A3 | 0.787 | ✓ | ||
A4 | −0.359 | ✓ | ||
A5 | 0.662 | ✓ | ||
A6 | 0.650 | ✓ | ||
A7 | 0.513 | ✓ | ||
A8 | 0.621 | ✓ | ||
A9 | −0.186 | ✓ | ||
A10 | 0.366 | ✓ | ||
Stakeholder protection | B1 | −0.076 | ✓ | |
B2 | 0.563 | ✓ | ||
B3 | 0.852 | ✓ | ||
B4 | 0.026 | ✓ | ||
B5 | 0.716 | ✓ | ||
B6 | −0.112 | ✓ | ||
SNI implementation | C1.1 | 0.876 | ✓ | |
C1.2 | 0.374 | ✓ | ||
C1.3 | −0.114 | ✓ | ||
C1.4 | 0.890 | ✓ | ||
Protection against electric shock | C2.1 | 0.135 | ✓ | |
C2.2 | 0.609 | ✓ | ||
C2.3 | −0.132 | ✓ | ||
C2.4 | 0.647 | ✓ | ||
C2.5 | 0.116 | ✓ | ||
C2.6 | 0.327 | ✓ | ||
C2.7 | 0.028 | ✓ | ||
C2.8 | 0.439 | ✓ | ||
C2.9 | 0.599 | ✓ | ||
C2.10 | 0.734 | ✓ | ||
C2.11 | 0.450 | ✓ | ||
C2.12 | 0.469 | ✓ | ||
Equipment constructional requirements | C3.1 | −0.353 | ✓ | |
C3.2 | −0.005 | ✓ | ||
C3.3 | 0.377 | ✓ | ||
C3.4 | 0.611 | ✓ | ||
C3.5 | 0.589 | ✓ | ||
C3.6 | 0.701 | ✓ | ||
C3.7 | 0.511 | ✓ | ||
C3.8 | 0.214 | ✓ | ||
C3.9 | 0.245 | ✓ | ||
C3.10 | −0.233 | ✓ | ||
C3.11 | 0.533 | ✓ | ||
C3.12 | 0.114 | ✓ | ||
C3.13 | 0.102 | ✓ | ||
C3.14 | 0.172 | ✓ | ||
C3.15 | −0.253 | ✓ | ||
C3.16 | −0.238 | ✓ | ||
Electromagnetic compatibility | C4.1 | −0.765 | ✓ | |
C4.2 | 0.977 | ✓ | ||
Marking and instruction | C5.1 | −0.655 | ✓ | |
C5.2 | 0.361 | ✓ | ||
C5.3 | 0.449 | ✓ | ||
C5.4 | −0.197 | ✓ | ||
SNI acceptance | C6.1 | 0.003 | ✓ | |
C6.2 | 0.640 | ✓ | ||
C6.3 | 0.934 | ✓ |
Construct | Cronbach’s Alpha | Decision | |
---|---|---|---|
Valid | Not Valid | ||
National uniqueness | 0.678 | ✓ | |
Stakeholder protection | 0.586 | ✓ | |
SNI implementation | 0.844 | ✓ | |
Protection against electric shock | 0.648 | ✓ | |
Equipment constructional requirements | 0.628 | ✓ | |
Electromagnetic compatibility | 1.000 | ✓ | |
Marking and instruction | 0.564 | ✓ | |
SNI acceptance | 0.516 | ✓ |
Construct (Latent Variable) | Electromagnetic Compatibility | Equipment Constructional Requirements | SNI Implementation | SNI Acceptance | National Uniqueness | Marking and Instruction | Stakeholder Protection | Protection against Electric Shock |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Electromagnetic compatibility | 1.000 | |||||||
Equipment constructional requirements | 0.832 | |||||||
SNI implementation | 0.831 | 0.964 | ||||||
SNI acceptance | 0.542 | 0.561 | 0.886 | |||||
National uniqueness | 0.528 | 0.661 | 0.469 | 0.736 | 0.810 | |||
Marking and instruction | 0.167 | 0.405 | 0.892 | |||||
Stakeholder protection | 0.342 | 0.650 | 0.789 | 0.597 | 0.577 | 0.861 | ||
Protection against electric shock | 0.486 | 0.706 | 0.772 | 0.594 | 0.643 | 0.187 | 0.696 | 0.832 |
Construct | Indicators | VIF | Decision |
---|---|---|---|
National uniqueness | A3 | 1.700 | Valid |
A5 | 1.184 | Valid | |
A6 | 1.421 | Valid | |
A7 | 1.226 | Valid | |
A8 | 1.241 | Valid | |
Stakeholder protection | B2 | 1.048 | Valid |
B3 | 1.526 | Valid | |
B5 | 1.532 | Valid | |
SNI implementation | C1.1 | 2.140 | Valid |
C1.4 | 2.140 | Valid | |
Protection against electric shock | C2.4 | 1.168 | Valid |
C2.9 | 2.080 | Valid | |
C2.10 | 1.203 | Valid | |
C2.11 | 1.972 | Valid | |
Equipment constructional requirements | C3.4 | 2.505 | Valid |
C3.5 | 2.401 | Valid | |
C3.6 | 1.582 | Valid | |
C3.7 | 2.217 | Valid | |
Electromagnetic compatibility | C4.2 | 1.000 | Valid |
Marking and instruction | C5.2 | 1.182 | Valid |
C5.3 | 1.182 | Valid | |
SNI acceptance | C6.2 | 1.137 | Valid |
C6.3 | 1.137 | Valid |
Hypothesis | Path | Path Coefficient |
---|---|---|
H1 | Electromagnetic compatibility → SNI implementation | −0.218 |
H2 | Equipment constructional requirements → SNI implementation | 0.513 |
H3 | Marking and instruction → SNI implementation | 0.244 |
H4 | Protection against electric shock → SNI implementation | 0.384 |
H5 | SNI implementation → SNI acceptance | 0.143 |
H6 | National uniqueness → SNI acceptance | 0.473 |
H7 | Stakeholder protection → SNI acceptance | 0.109 |
R2 | R2 Adjusted | Accuracy | |
---|---|---|---|
SNI implementation | 0.664 | 0.657 | Strong |
SNI acceptance | 0.340 | 0.329 | Medium |
Hypothesis | Path | f2 | Effect Size |
---|---|---|---|
H1 | Electromagnetic compatibility → SNI implementation | 0.121 | Medium |
H2 | Equipment constructional requirements → SNI implementation | 0.513 | Large |
H3 | Marking and instruction → SNI implementation | 0.168 | Medium |
H4 | Protection against electric shock → SNI implementation | 0.283 | Large |
H5 | SNI implementation → SNI acceptance | 0.019 | Small |
H6 | National uniqueness → SNI implementation | 0.301 | Large |
H7 | Stakeholder protection → SNI acceptance | 0.010 | Small |
Latent Variable | SSO | SSE | Q2 = (1 − SSE/SSO) |
---|---|---|---|
Electromagnetic compatibility | 190,000 | 190,000 | 0 |
Equipment constructional requirements | 760,000 | 760,000 | 0 |
SNI implementation | 380,000 | 174,968 | 0.540 |
SNI acceptance | 380,000 | 317,710 | 0.164 |
National uniqueness | 950,000 | 950,000 | 0 |
Marking and instruction | 380,000 | 380,000 | 0 |
Stakeholder protection | 570,000 | 570,000 | 0 |
Protection against electric shock | 760,000 | 760,000 | 0 |
Hypothesis | Path | Path Coefficient | t-Value | t-Table | Decision |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1 | Electromagnetic compatibility has a positive effect on SNI implementation | −0.218 | 4.237 | 1.042 | Accepted |
H2 | Equipment constructional requirements have a positive effect on SNI implementation | 0.513 | 9.315 | 1.042 | Accepted |
H3 | Marking and instruction have a positive effect on SNI implementation | 0.244 | 3.097 | 1.042 | Accepted |
H4 | Protection against electric shock has a positive effect on SNI implementation | 0.384 | 7.479 | 1.042 | Accepted |
H5 | SNI implementation has a positive effect on SNI acceptance | 0.143 | 1.636 | 1.042 | Accepted |
H6 | National uniqueness has a positive effect on SNI acceptance | 0.473 | 5.755 | 1.042 | Accepted |
H7 | Stakeholder protection has a positive effect on SNI acceptance | 0.109 | 1.123 | 1.042 | Accepted |
Construct | Removed Indicators | Standards |
---|---|---|
Protection against electric shock | C2.1 | IEC 60204-1:2016 |
C2.3 | IEC 61851-23:2014 | |
C2.5 | IPXXB | |
C2.6 | IPXXB | |
C2.7 | IEC 60364-4-41: 2005+AMD: 2017 CSV | |
C2.8 | IEC 60364-4-41:2005 | |
C2.11, C2.12 | IEC 60364 series, IEC 60479 series, IEC TR 60755:2017, IEC 61008 series, IEC 61009 series, IEC 60947-2 | |
Equipment constructional requirements | C3.1 | IEC 61439-1:2011 |
C3.2 | IEC 60947-3:2008+AMD1:2012+AMD2:2015 CSV | |
C3.3 | IEC 60947-4-1:2018 | |
C3.9 | IEC 62262:2002 | |
C3.12 | IEC 61439-1:2011 | |
C3.13 | IEC 60695-2-11 | |
C3.14 | IEC 60695-10-2 | |
C3.15 | IEC 60112:2003+AMD1:2009 CSV | |
C3.16 | IEC 61439-1:2011 | |
Electromagnetic compatibility | C4.1 | IEC 61000 series, IEC 61851-21-2:2018 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Sutopo, W.; Prianjani, D.; Fahma, F.; Pujiyanto, E.; Rasli, A.; Kowang, T.O. Open Innovation in Developing an Early Standardization of Battery Swapping According to the Indonesian National Standard for Electric Motorcycle Applications. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 219. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8040219
Sutopo W, Prianjani D, Fahma F, Pujiyanto E, Rasli A, Kowang TO. Open Innovation in Developing an Early Standardization of Battery Swapping According to the Indonesian National Standard for Electric Motorcycle Applications. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2022; 8(4):219. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8040219
Chicago/Turabian StyleSutopo, Wahyudi, Dana Prianjani, Fakhrina Fahma, Eko Pujiyanto, Amran Rasli, and Tan Owee Kowang. 2022. "Open Innovation in Developing an Early Standardization of Battery Swapping According to the Indonesian National Standard for Electric Motorcycle Applications" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 8, no. 4: 219. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8040219