Analysis of Factors for Korea’s Export Companies to Respond to Trade Remedies: Mediation Effect of Fairness Perception

Abstract

This study analyzes the factors that enable Korea’s export companies, governments, and associations to effectively respond to the trade remedies represented by unilateral trade negotiation strategies. For this purpose, a research model was established through a deductive theoretical extension of organizational behavior theory, which can be applied directly by enterprises and related organizations. According to the results, factors that are both internal and external to a firm have a positive influence in reinforcing its capacity to respond to trade remedies. As a result, it was concluded that the reinforcement of response capacity leads to the qualitative and quantitative development of companies. This direct causal path confirmed the validity of the hypothesis that a manager’s fairness perception in trade remedies would represent leadership in organizational behavior theory. Thus, leadership was found to have a partial mediating effect between the two factors, thereby enhancing the causal relationship’s explanatory power and statistical significance.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background and Purpose of the Study

Free trade requires a normative practice based on the principles agreed upon by two or more parties, and the likelihood of fair trade is promoted by realization of free trade. However, if only fair trade, excluding free trade, were to be emphasized, the fundamental nature of free trade would be distorted, to expedite the expansion of protectionism. This will also lead to the abuse of indiscrete trade remedies based on political forces and the aggressive principle of reciprocity, causing a considerable negative impact on the global economic order. In other words, despite the boundaries between free trade and fair trade becoming more ambiguous and their fundamental roles more similar since the establishment of World Trade Organization (WTO), and although the principles of free trade tend to lead to adherence to the principles of fair trade, aspects of free trade could lead to unwanted consequences if only the principles of fair trade were emphasized. Thus, fair trade must be based on free trade, to sustain the international trade order.

While it may be rash to criticize the trade remedy system, it is mostly characterized by unfair trade practices and protectionism. Consistent institutions, from the perspective of multilateral principles, are in fact important factors in developing free and fair trade. However, in recent years multiple nations, including the United States, have implemented trade remedy measures in response to other nations, by interpreting fair trade with their own logic, and according to the principle of unilateral trade negotiation strategies and other consequential standards, such as the imbalance in trade. In the current economy, in which the global value chain has become accepted, such consequentialist regulatory measures and market closure, based on a reciprocity impacted by politics, lack a basis in international norms. The spread of protectionism is causing tremendous stress to Korean companies, especially small and medium companies, in addition to a global economic recession.

With this in mind, this study hopes to carry out research designed to provide companies and the government with fundamental countermeasures. From the perspective of organizational behavior, the factors of the research model set through the deduction method were “internal environment”, “external environment”, “change management”, “leadership”, and “organizational effectiveness”. Then, the variables of each factor were selected based on an operational definition, based on prior research. “Internal environment” and “external environment” were decided as exogenous variables, and analysis was conducted to see how change management (an endogenous dependent variable) was impacted. Additionally, by setting “leadership” as an endogenic explanatory variable in the given regression model, a hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to verify the indirect cause and effect relationship, to identify the mediator role it performs. Last, whether such “change management” affect “organizational effectiveness” significantly was analyzed, and the analysis results were summarized to deduce conclusions, implications, limitations of the study, and areas of future study.

1.2. Literature Review and Aim of the Study

There has been a significant amount of research on fair trade and trade remedies.

Park and Song (2017) argued that since the standards of fair trade adopted by the United States are ambiguous, they could not be applied as a multilateral standard [1]. METI (2019) argued that the normative direction based on international agreements is fair and serves as the principal rule that world trade must adhere to [2]. Hilf (2001) claimed that the WTO system has evolved stepwise, and strongly asserted that it is, in principle, the basis for multilateral trade [3].

Lee (2017) analyzed recent trends and characteristics, to establish mid- to long-term trade policies and trade remedy measures for the Republic of Korea [4]. Meyer (2018) claimed that international organizations could enhance their circumstances by increasing the number of trade-related laws, he also considered the possibility of enhancing the WTO’s enforcement ordinance procedures and laws related to investigations of trade remedy measures [5]. Jung and Kim (2018) argued that Korea needed to overhaul the system in response to the easing of Japan’s anti-dumping request requirements, and that research should be conducted on revising laws and regulations, so that new suppliers can change or abolish anti-dumping tariffs [6].

Kanfer and Chen (2016) reviewed studies focusing on organizational members’ motivation to set and achieve organizational goals. By synthesizing macroscopic research trends related to motivation and theories constructed through new approaches, the microscopic moderating effects of setting and achieving organizational goals were investigated [7]. Judge and Robbins (2017) defined organizational behavior theory as the study of improving organizational efficiency by using knowledge obtained from investigations on the effects of individuals, groups, and structures on organizational behavior [8]. Hashimoto (2017) argued that, despite a lack of knowledge, experience, and skills in some areas, new leaders with problem-solving skills have leadership that is of value within a developing organization, and different from the existing leadership exercised within an established organization. It was argued that a leader who can solve problems is a leader with a creative network-type leadership, which induces cooperation and sharing between customers and members of the organization [9].

This study aimed to study strategic countermeasures to actively cope with external turbulence, such as that caused by the trade remedy measures frequently used for protectionism. The quantitative research related to trade remedy measures carried out using different analytical methods, such as analyzing the economic ripple effect, is unlikely to make further progress. Therefore, to ensure new research progress, a new theoretical basis, based on prior qualitative research and practical and convincing countermeasures, must be proposed to the Korean government and companies, to help them cope with unfair trade remedy measures that are the key means of aggressive trade strategies. To that end, this study established a research model based on the theory of organizational behavior—a practical field of study that organizations can directly apply and implement—to deduce the behavior variables constituting organizational behavior. The variables were determined through their operational definitions in prior research. Furthermore, leadership, as a key factor in organizational behavior, was deduced as the managers’ fairness regarding the trade remedy measures of counterpart nations, to measure the causal relationship model between the internal and external factors of a company and the strengthening of the coping mechanism.

2. Theoretical Background on Fair Trade and Trade Remedies

2.1. Theoretical Study on Fair Trade

This study conducted a literature review based on three conceptual frameworks: norm-oriented standards, result-oriented standards, and reciprocity, to acknowledge and judge the fairness of trade actions conducted by state in their entirety.

Norm-oriented standards signify that the trade policies and systems of a nation are based on international laws and agreements: the WTO agreement, other international agreements, fundamental principles of international law, and other customary internal laws.

Result-oriented standards refer to the standards of condemning the policies and measures of counterpart nations as unfair to home nations, once trading results are considered unfair. Result-oriented standards consider a situation problematic and unfair, even if the fairness of trade has not been unilaterally judged or suggested by a specific nation or when problematic policies or measures have been implemented and led to unwanted trade results. It is a strong form of government-managed trade, in which specific trade indices, such as the market share of specific products or the number of imports must be achieved.

Last, reciprocity in trade refers to a nation providing treatment and concessions equal to what counterpart nations provide, to “equalize the opportunity for competition”. This does not mean that the “results of trade are made equal”, and it is a concept somewhat equivalent to the result-oriented standards mentioned above.

Two types of reciprocity exist. The first is open or passive reciprocity, permitted under the multilateral and indiscriminate trade system under the GATT and WTO, in which the general and unconditional most-favored-nation treatment principle is reciprocally granted to all member nations. The next concept to be explained, restrictive reciprocity or aggressive reciprocity, refers to the state of bilateral balance, in which one party must open to the other as much as the other opens up to it. The parties also close trade equivalently, forming a balance.

Reciprocity is the exchange of equivalents. The action of a party is contingent on the action of the counterpart, resulting in good-to-good bad causal relationships. Fair trade based on reciprocity is likely to lead to trade managed by governments through the logic of power, rather than free trade [10], with reciprocity causing a chain of retaliations and politicization of the economy [11]. Free trade is trade based on market opening and trade liberalization, and fair trade is trade based on norms. Fair trade must be based on free trade, to make it result in good-for-good reciprocity (see Figure 1).

2.2. Overview of Trade Remedies

2.2.1. Anti-Dumping Duty

Duties to prevent dumping, or anti-dumping duties, refer to the levying of an additional charge on the difference between the normal and dumping price of a specific product. The main assumption is that once foreign products have been dumped into the domestic market, fundamental harm has already been done or is likely to be done.

2.2.2. Countervailing Duty

Countervailing duty is levied when fundamental harm occurs due to the import of products directly or indirectly subsidized or incentivized, in the case of manufacturing or production abroad or export. When substantial damages occur, or are likely to occur, or when substantial delays in the domestic industry have been verified through investigations, a duty equivalent to, or less than, the subsidy could be levied for a specific product, or for the exporter, or exporting nation.

2.2.3. Emergency Duty

Emergency duty is an additional tariff levied for the increased import of a specific product, due to lower prices abroad or other unexpected circumstances. The levying nations assumes that the increased import of the product gravely damages or is likely to gravely damage the local industry, and has to protect the economy based on domestic law and WTO agreement [12].

3. Research Design

3.1. Theoretical Basis of Research

3.1.1. Organizational Behavior

An organization is a group dedicated to achieving a common set of goals through the interaction of its members, and it has an open system to adapt to the changing environment and regulate its internal relationships [13]. Companies seek to improve organizational performance through goal-oriented, specific changes among their members and within the organizational structure [14]. An organization and an individual are in a relation that can be explained by the theory of inducements–contributions balance [15]. Therefore, the relationship between inducement by the organization and contributions by individuals can be interpreted as a system of exchanges, in which the organization and the individual make autonomous decisions through the organization’s communication process.

The exchanges must involve an open system. The organizational environment must be able to further develop the reciprocal relationship between the organization and the individual. The organization must also cope with organizational changes by modifying the organizational structure and tasks, and striving for the simultaneous optimization of social and technological systems. The organization–individual relationship changes depending on the stability or instability of the system. In addition, an organic system must be adopted in line with environmental conditions, as methods of inducement and models of motivation change according to the organization’s technological development.

Since the relevant past studies have thoroughly examined organizational behavior, a methodology of applying behavioral science knowledge to the establishment of an organization [16], this study uses it to analyze organizational level responses to trade remedies.

3.1.2. Conceptual Framework

Organizational behavior has been examined at the individual, group, and organizational levels [17]. The model applied to this study is the organizational level model, and this aspect was partially adapted to the subject of this research. The organizational behavior included in this model is largely impacted by the management; leadership plays a key role in forming the behavior and responses of the organization (see Figure 2).

3.1.3. Conceptual Definition of Variables

The following conceptual variables are extensively used in this study:

An organization’s internal environment refers to factors regarding the behavior and perception of the organization itself and its members (individuals). It is the internal mechanism of an organization that copes with external changes [18]. The external environment refers to how the network structure of individual organizations is built, and how the organization is linked to external organizations in carrying out different business activities.

Management of change refers to the responses from within and outside the organization to change and crisis. It is imperative for an organization to have competencies to cope with different changes, circumstances, and shocks [19].

Leadership refers to the process of influencing the members of the organization to achieve organizational aims, and also refers to the act of changing and renewing its members by empowering and motivating them [20].

Organizational effectiveness is the efficiency in carrying out change management in line with internal and external factors. It generally refers to the results or products of organizational behavior [21].

3.2. Research Variables and Model Settings

3.2.1. Operational Definition of Research Variables

The internal factors or corporate activities meant to cope with trade remedy measures by counterpart nations can reinforce the coping competencies of domestic exporter companies and contribute to corporate management, enhance judgment on remedy measure compliance with international norms, and ultimately increase exports.

To efficiently cope with the trade remedy measures of trading partner nations, external factors such as government assistance and public institutions are also needed. External factors, directly or indirectly, support exporting companies in strengthening their coping competencies against foreign trade regulations. When combined, the internal activities and the external factors, through cooperation with public institutions, strengthen the overall coping measures of the company against trade remedies. In essence, firms do not initially decide to export; such expanded activities are an outgrowth of innovation at the firm level [22]. Strengthening such coping competencies ultimately leads to increased exports and export flexibility (see

Table 1. Comparison of the Conceptual Definition and Operational Definition of Variables.

Conceptual Definition		Operational Definition
Category	Definition	Category	Definition	Prior Research
International Environment	Internal mechanism of an organization to cope with change and crisis	Internal Factors of a Company	The internal factors of a company to cope effectively against the trade remedy measures of trading partner nations	Kim (2012)
External Environment	The form of links with external organizations to cope with different business activities	External Factors of a Company	The external factors of a company to cope effectively against the trade remedy measures of trading partner nations; cooperation with the government and public institutions	Yeoh (2005) Kim (2012)
Leadership	The human influence formed during the process of communication, to achieve organizational aims	Perception of fairness by management	The coping competencies of the company are enhanced by the company management perceiving the normative consistency of the trade remedy measures implemented by trading partner nations	Lengnick-Hall and Beck (2005)
Change Management	Responses from the internal and external environments of the organization against organizational change and crisis	Strengthening of coping competencies	Strengthening of the overall coping competencies of a company against the trade remedy policies of trading partner nations from the internal factors and external factors, such as cooperation with the government and public institutions	Shibayama (1996)
Organization Effectiveness	The results and products of organizational behavior achieved by efficient change management, according to internal and external factors	Enhanced Performance	The qualitative performance of the company is categorized as increased export, and qualitative performance is categorized as increased flexibility	Anderson, Britt, and Farve (2007) Stock, Greis, and Kasarda (2000)

).

The research variables were selected to determine the mediating effects of management’s determination of partner nations’ trade regulation fairness and compliance with internal norms on the coping mechanisms of the company.

This study seeks to identify the impacts of corporate management’s perception of trade remedy measures of trade partner nations, as either norm-oriented or results-oriented and their awareness of whether political factors, in addition to purely economic factors, are intervening in trade on regulation coping competencies .

3.2.2. Outline of Research Model

This study categorized the factors that strengthen the coping competencies of exporting companies faced with trading partner nations’ trade remedy measures into external and internal factors. Furthermore, it seeks to analyze how these internal and external factors impact the perception of fairness by the exporting companies’ management, and hopes to verify that perception’s impact on strengthening coping competencies. Moreover, it also investigates how strengthened coping competencies impact performance and increase exports. This entire structure can be represented as Figure 3 and was achieved through the operational definition of the conceptual framework, Figure 2.

3.2.3. Deductive Theory Building

Deductive theory building is a method of deduction, in which a specific conclusion is deduced from an existing theory or general principle. It is based on the principle that facts that are true about the whole are also true in partial form. When the existing theories and universal principles comply with a hypothesis reflecting empirical facts, the hypothesis develops into a principle or a theory.

The company’s internal and external factors impact organizational change. The following are the company’s internal factors: “a perception toward trade remedy policy”, “nurturing experts”, “cooperation with partner companies”, and “building of systems”. The external factors of a company are as follows: “information provision by the government and institutions”, “monetary support by the government and institutions”, “human resource support by the government and institutions”, and “reinforced diplomacy by the government and institutions”.

“Perception toward trade remedy policies” could be interpreted as the perception referred to in organizational behavior theory. “Nurturing experts”, “cooperation with partner companies”, “establishment of administrative systems”, and external factors of a company all belong to the systematization and cooperative relationship building of the components of an organization. Organic cooperation among its members could be promoted to maximize organizational efficiency and performance, to form an optimal organizational structure and enhance effectiveness.

“The perception of fairness by the management” was also assumed to impact change management by the company, to strengthen coping competencies. This variable was assumed to represent “leadership”. International businesses must be innovative, especially during periods of uncertainty. However, there is seldom a consideration of precisely how innovation can be triggered, at either the management or employee level [23]. This means that managers making critical decisions are aware of the trading partner nation’s trade remedy measure’s compliance with international norms, whether the measures are based on the arbitrary judgment and logic of the nation, and whether political factors, in addition to purely economic factors, are intervening.

Leadership is defined from a social and political perspective as the role of politicians and managers, with the competency to promote stability within an organization by adapting to the external environment [24]. Theories related to leadership assert that the organization members are more motivated when the leader accepts more challenging roles for its members and takes more enthusiastic action to strive toward achieving the given goals [25,26].

The leader’s resilience is the dynamic capacity of an organization to develop and grow over time [27]. Organizational resilience is the source of the response of an organization in the face of crisis and change. Leaders with such resilience are able to identify and utilize opportunities to develop new techniques and coping abilities, even amidst a crisis, and to cope effectively with a crisis [28].

Furthermore, “strengthening of coping competencies” comprises “strengthening of proactive monitoring against relief policies”, “strengthening of coping competencies when facing investigations”, and “actively applying for investigations”. Pursuing effective coping measures by the company against changes in the external environment in the form of trade remedy measures could be interpreted as an organization’s attempt to adapt to the environment.

“Enhanced performance” would be a form of “organizational effectiveness” achieved by the above factors. This study measured enhanced performance quantitatively and qualitatively.

3.2.4. Hypothesis Setting

Statistical hypotheses were established before the empirical testing of this study. The six hypotheses based on prior research are as follows: H1 and H2 can be represented as in Figure 4.

Hypothesis 1 (H1).

The internal factors of a company will have positive (+) effects on strengtheningtheir coping competencies against trade remedy measures.

Hypothesis 2 (H2).

The internal factors have positive (+) effects on managers’ perceptions of fairness.

Based on the above research, the hypothesis that the four internal factors of a company (perception, nurturing experts, cooperation with partner companies, and establishment of an administrative system) will have a positive impact on strengthening coping competencies in the case of lawsuits against exporting companies and the perception of fairness by managers was established (refer to Table 1. comparison of the conceptual definition and operational definition of variables).

Hypothesis 3 (H3).

The company’s external factors will have a positive (+) impact on strengthening coping competencies against trade remedy measures.

Hypothesis 4 (H4).

The company’s external factors have a positive (+) impact on the perception of fairness by the manager.

H3 and H4 can be represented as Figure 5.

Based on prior research, the external factors of the company comprising four variables (information provision by the government and institutions, financial support, human resource support, and strengthening of diplomacy) will have a positive impact on strengthening coping competencies in case of lawsuits against exporting companies and a manager’s perception of fairness.

Hypothesis 5 (H5).

A manager’s perception of fairness will havea positive (+) impact on strengtheningthe company’s coping competencies against trade remedy measures.

H5 can be represented as Figure 6.

Based on prior research, a hypothesis positing that coping competencies against the trade remedy measures of trading partner nations would be reinforced through the judgment of the manager on whether trade management by the government is based on the logic of normative orientation, results orientation, and reciprocity as the criteria of fair trade was developed.

Hypothesis 6 (H6).

Strengthening coping competencies against trade remedy measures will have a positive (+) impact on enhancing the company’s performance.

H5 can be represented as Figure 7.

The hypothesis that strengthening coping competencies against trade remedy measures would have a positive impact on enhancing the performance of the company was formulated. Performance enhancement was categorized into qualitative performance-enhanced flexibility [29], and quantitative performance-increased exports [30].

This means that the unfair trade remedy measures of the trading partner nation will be removed, and a legal knowledge base will be established to prevent repeated unfair trade remedy measures; saving various resources needed for export, and increasing trade volume.

3.3. Research Method

3.3.1. Data Collection

Data research was conducted with a focus on companies currently exporting. A random sampling method was adopted to remove bias from the sample. The sample included not only exporters home and abroad (domestic local corporations and branches), but also research institutions, public institutions, and associations related to trade and international business management. The samples had the same score, and samples with multiple missing variables, regardless of the contents of the survey, were regarded as unfaithful responses, and six samples were excluded, resulting in 221 samples being used for the analysis, as shown

Table 2. Survey Response Results.

Category	Online		Offline		Total
	Distribution	Responses	Distribution	Responses	Distribution	Responses	Response Rate
Numbers of Survey Subjects	700	169	80	58	780	227	29.1%

.

3.3.2. Composition of Survey Questions

The survey comprised five sections. The first section was about the general information of survey subjects, including demographic data, and comprised questions assessing the subject’s type of business, and the export items, size, sales, and proportion of exports.

The second section consisted of questions on the company’s internal factors. The survey questions of Huszagh and Greene (1985); Zhang, Lee, Zhang, and Banerjee (2003); and others were referred to [30,31].

The third section consisted of questions on the external factors of the company, and the prior research of Koga (2019), Kubo and Harada (2014), and other was referred to and modified according to the intentions of the researcher [32,33].

The fourth section consisted of questions on the perceptions of fairness in trade remedy measures of trading partner nations by the company manager, and was designed for research purposes based on Zhang, Lee, Zhang, and Banerjee (2003), and Yoshida (2019), and others [31,34].

The fifth section comprised questions on how efficient countermeasures by the company against the measures of trading partner nations could impact the quantitative and qualitative performance of the company, based on survey questions from the prior research by of Yeoh (2005) and Hur (2013) [35,36]. The details are presented in

Table 3. Composition of Survey Questions.

Category	Factors	Question Number	Number of Questions	Rating Scale
General Informaton	Demographic characteristics	Section I	11	-
Exogenous Variables	Internal factors of the company	Section II	17	7-point Likert Scale
		Section III	18
Endogenous explanatory variables	Perception of fairness by the manager	Section IV	9	7-point Likert Scale
	Strengthening of coping competencies
Endogenous dependent variables	Enhancement of performance	Section V	6	7-point Likert Scale

.

3.3.3. Analysis Process and Methods

The achievement of the aims of this study required the validation of research hypotheses after verifying the reliability and validity of the measurement tool, and SPSS software (version 22.0) was utilized for this process.

The reliability of a measurement tool refers to the ability to stably and consistently assess subjects during measurement. This study utilized internal consistency measurement using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, the most widely used method in social science, to validate the measurement reliability.

Validity refers to how well the measurement tool developed to measure the subject in consideration reflects the traits. In this study, exploratory factor analysis was conducted to measure the construct validity of the factor structure, regarding which factor the questions were categorized as and the measured constructs.

Finally, a hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to validate the research hypotheses deduced through the deductive method. The causal indirect effects caused by the perception of the organization manager on external change were also analyzed.

4. Empirical Analysis

4.1. Sample Characteristics

4.1.1. Demographical Characteristics

The general information of the respondents was analyzed, to identify the demographic characteristics of the collected data. The collected survey respondents’ information showed that the companies were largely categorized into companies involved in manufacturing, processing, and trading of products; and companies involved only in trade (see

Table 4. Demographic characteristics of the sample.

Category	Item	Frequency	Percentage
Company Type	Manufacture and trade	136	61.5
	Purely trade	80	36.2
	Others	5	2.3
	Electricity and electronics	33	15.3
	Steel and metal	18	8.0
Key Export Items	Automobile and automobile parts	20	9.0
	Food	29	13.1
	Textile and clothing	25	11.3
	Petroleum and chemistry	20	9.0
	Others	76	34.3
Key Export Trading Partner Nation	USA	34	15.4
	China	90	40.7
	Japan	35	15.9
	Europe	18	8.2
	Southeast Asia	34	15.3
	others	10	4.5
Gender	Male	155	70.1
	Female	66	29.9
Age	20–30 s	115	52.1
	40–50 s	101	45.8
	60 s or older	5	2.1
Levels of Education	High school graduate	7	3.1
	Bachelor’s graduate	102	46.1
	Masters	92	41.6
	Ph.D.	20	9.2
Position	Employee, manager, deputy section chief	88	39.6
	Section chief, deputy department head, department head	88	39.4
	Director, representative director	36	17.2
	Others	9	3.8
Number of Employees	1—Not exceeding 200 employees	93	42.1
	200—Not exceeding 400 employees	41	18.5
	400 or more employees	87	39.4
Annual Average Sales	10 billion—Not exceeding 30 billion	96	43.4
	30 billion—Not exceeding 50 billion	35	15.9
	50 billion—Not exceeding 100 billion	23	10.4
	100 billion or more	67	30.3
Duration of Export	10 years—Not exceeding 30 years	147	66.5
	30 years—Not exceeding 50 years	58	26.3
	50 years—Not exceeding 60 years	16	7.2
Proportion of Export	20%—Not exceeding 40%	88	39.8
	40%—Not exceeding 60%	75	33.9
	60% or more	58	26.3

).

4.1.2. Descriptive Statistics Analysis

The descriptive statistics used to validate research hypotheses and other statistical methods are shown in

Table 5. Descriptive statistics analysis of variables.

Variables	Minimum	Maximum	Average	Standard Deviation	Variance
PerMoni	1.0	7.0	5.285	1.1502	1.323
PerCounter	2.0	7.0	5.579	1.0485	1.099
PerIni	2.0	7.0	5.281	1.2184	1.485
EduConter	1.0	7.0	5.597	1.2416	1.542
EduIni	2.0	7.0	5.439	1.1955	1.429
CooperCounter	1.0	7.0	5.441	1.2092	1.462
SysCounter	1.0	7.0	5.638	1.1302	1.277
SysIni	1.0	7.0	5.385	1.2179	1.483
PerRule	1.0	7.0	5.489	1.0855	1.178
PerPower	1.0	7.0	5.258	1.4018	1.965
PerReci	1.0	7.0	5.294	1.3001	1.690
EduRule	2.0	7.0	5.629	1.0608	1.125
EduPower	1.0	7.0	5.502	1.2084	1.460
EduReci	1.0	7.0	5.507	1.2527	1.569
CooperRule	1.0	7.0	5.262	1.2113	1.467
CooperPower	1.0	7.0	5.104	1.3256	1.757
CooperReci	1.0	7.0	5.312	1.2818	1.643
InfoMoni	1.0	7.0	5.376	1.3945	1.945
InfoCounter	1.0	7.0	5.548	1.2445	1.549
InfoIni	1.0	7.0	5.457	1.2948	1.677
CostCounter	2.0	7.0	5.505	1.2368	1.530
CostIni	1.0	7.0	5.425	1.2468	1.555
ManCounter	3.0	7.0	5.525	1.1264	1.269
ManIni	1.0	7.0	5.480	1.2195	1.487
DiploCounter	1.0	7.0	5.484	1.1662	1.360
DiploIni	1.0	7.0	5.081	1.2730	1.621
InfoRule	2.0	7.0	5.489	1.1505	1.324
InfoPower	1.0	7.0	5.416	1.2751	1.626
InfoReci	2.0	7.0	5.430	1.1835	1.401
ManRule	2.0	7.0	5.523	1.0956	1.200
ManPower	1.0	7.0	5.353	1.3012	1.693
ManReci	2.0	7.0	5.489	1.1144	1.242
DiploRule	1.0	7.0	5.326	1.1727	1.375
DiploPower	1.0	7.0	5.168	1.3255	1.757
DiploReci	1.0	7.0	5.168	1.2906	1.666
RuleMoni	1.0	7.0	5.385	1.3388	1.792
RuleCounter	1.0	7.0	5.405	1.3328	1.776
RuleIni	1.0	7.0	5.330	1.3499	1.822
PowerMoni	1.0	7.0	5.416	1.2893	1.662
PowerCounter	1.0	7.0	5.597	1.1969	1.433
PowerIni	2.0	2.0	5.665	1.1466	1.315
ReciMoni	1.0	1.0	5.376	1.3413	1.799
ReciCounter	1.0	1.0	5.367	1.2886	1.661
ReciIni	2.0	2.0	5.443	1.2183	1.484
MoniExp	1.0	7.0	5.459	1.2797	1.638
MoniResil	1.0	7.0	5.367	1.3506	1.824
CounterExp	1.0	7.0	5.448	1.3662	1.867
CounterResil	1.0	7.0	5.462	1.3733	1.886
IniExp	1.0	7.0	5.204	1.4489	2.099
IniExp	1.0	7.0	5.290	1.4357	2.061

.

4.2. Testing the Reliability and Validity of Measurement Tool

4.2.1. Correlation Analysis

The corrected item-to-total correlation, which measures the correlation between a specific question and the rest of the questions based on the domain sampling model, was validated (see

Table 6. Correlation Analysis of the Factors.

Category	Internal	External	Fairness	Confront	Performance
Internal	1
External	0.807	1
Fairness	0.694	0.774	1
Confront	0.882	0.911	0.869	1
Performance	0.612	0.587	0.632	0.608	1

Note: Correlation significant at the 0.01 level.

).

As a criterion for interpreting a correlation coefficient, it can be said that there is a clear correlation in the case of ±0.30–±0.70, and that there is a considerably high correlation in the case of ±0.70–±1.00. All of the given factors showed an overall high correlation, validating the reliability of the measurement tool. Therefore, no items were excluded from further analysis.

4.2.2. Measurement of Internal Consistency

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is generally used to measure reliability and confirm internal consistency. The results of the reliability measurements based on the data collected in this study are shown in

Table 7. Reliability Statistics.

Cronbach’s Alpha	Number of Items
0.923	5

.

As a result of the statistical testing on reliability, it was found that there were five items and that Cronbach’s alpha was 0.923. A coefficient of 0.6 and higher is generally considered to have high reliability generally, and a coefficient of 0.7 and higher is considered to have high reliability according to rigorous standards.

The correlation of totals refers to the correlation coefficient between a single item and all remaining items. According to

Table 8. Statistics on Item Total.

Category	Scale Average in Item Deletion	Scale Variance in Item Deletion	Correlation of Revised Item-Total	Cronbach’s Alpha in Item Deletion
Internal	21.6590	11.551	0.829	0.901
External	21.6687	11.488	0.855	0.896
Fairness	21.6284	10.887	0.825	0.900
Confront	21.6283	11.340	0.922	0.885
Performance	21.6995	10.753	0.657	0.946

, all five items showed stable correlations. When some items were excluded, the Cronbach’s alpha was lower than the alpha coefficient when all items were included (0.923), emphasizing the importance of each item in the reliability statistics. Although the performance (enhancement of performance) was slightly above the alpha coefficient, the increase was not notable, and it was applied in the further analysis.

4.2.3. Construct Validity Test

The construct validity test is the most frequently used and significant validity test. It is a statistical analysis that enables the researcher to assess whether the subject has been appropriately measured using the measurement tools applied by the researcher; an exploratory factor analysis is generally used.

Bartlett’s spherical test is a test to see whether the conducted factor analysis is appropriate, and an analysis with 0.5 or higher Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measurement is interpreted as the questions having sufficient correlation. According to

Table 9. KMO and Bartlett’s test.

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Test		0.932
Bartlett’s unit matrix testing	Approximate chi-squre	9129.795
	Df	1225
	Level of significance	0.000

, in the case of Bartlett’s unit matrix testing, the approximate chi-square value was 9129.795, being statistically significant at the level of 0.01, and satisfying the assumptions of factor analysis (see Table 9).

As the general criteria for factor analysis when the factor loading and commonality are 0.4 or higher, the construct validity of the items comprising each factor was tested as a general criterion for factor analysis. As shown in

Table 10. Rotation Component Matrix.

Variables	Factor Loading						Commonality
	H-1	H-2	H-3	H-4	H-5	H-6
PerMoni	0.658						0.571
PerCounter	0.751						0.681
PerIni	0.667						0.693
EduConter	0.716						0.651
EduIni	0.656						0.573
CooperCounter	0.702						0.600
SysCounter	0.707						0.591
SysIni	0.585						0.597
PerRule		0.624					0.665
PerPower		0.629					0.693
PerReci		0.730					0.743
EduRule		0.545					0.589
EduPower		0.488					0.532
EduReci		0.649					0.627
CooperRule		0.659					0.598
CooperPower		0.590					0.598
CooperReci		0.665					0.689
InfoMoni			0.340				0.590
InfoCounter			0.399				0.626
InfoIni			0.628				0.654
CostCounter			0.565				0.620
CostIni			0.727				0.699
ManCounter			0.684				0.613
ManIni			0.735				0.673
DiploCounter			0.115				0.611
DiploIni			0.119				0.623
InfoRule				0.474			0.608
InfoPower				0.454			0.639
InfoReci				0.460			0.620
ManRule				0.398			0.681
ManPower				0.351			0.702
ManReci				0.376			0.577
DiploRule				0.629			0.680
DiploPower				0.698			0.773
DiploReci				0.631			0.738
RuleMoni					0.737		0.726
RuleCounter					0.734		0.680
RuleIni					0.691		0.677
PowerMoni					0.537		0.656
PowerCounter					0.493		0.582
PowerIni					0.449		0.569
ReciMoni					0.542		0.630
ReciCounter					0.579		0.686
ReciIni					0.517		0.609
MoniExp						0.672	0.660
MoniResil						0.788	0.765
CounterExp						0.769	0.754
CounterResil						0.806	0.779
IniExp						0.761	0.771
IniResil						0.785	0.744

, most of the 50 items satisfied the condition. However, seven items, InfoMoni, InfoCounter, DiploCounter, DiploIni, ManRule, ManPower, and ManReci were verified to be less than 0.4 for factor weight; these items were excluded before validating the research hypotheses (see Table 10).

4.3. Hypotheses Validation and Analysis Results

4.3.1. Hypothesis Validation

A hierarchical regression analysis could be carried out in addition to the path analysis, to consider mediated effects. To test the research hypotheses 1, 2, and 5 of this study, a regression analysis of the following research model was carried out.

Three-step regression analysis was conducted according to the hierarchical regression model shown in Figure 8. The steps of the analysis were as follows:

• Step 1; Regression analysis for Model 1, to validate whether the independent variables significantly impact the mediating variables.
• Step 2; Regression analysis for Model 2, to validate whether independent variables significantly impact the dependent variables.
• Step 3; Multiple regression analysis on Model 3, to validate whether the dependent and mediating variables significantly impact the dependent variables.

The analysis results for Model 1 were as follows (

Table 11. Summary of Model 1.

Model	R	R2	Adjusted R2	Standard Error of Estimate
1	0.694 a	0.481	0.479	0.70675

^a Predictor variables: (constant), internal.

).

The value of R² is the goodness-of-fit, and shows the causal relationship model between the independent variables and dependent variables set by the researcher, or how the estimated regression straight line explains the total variation in the data. According to Table 11, the model shows that the company’s internal factors explain 48.1% of the changes in managers’ perceptions of fairness.

The analysis of variance (ANOVA) shows that the regression formula and model, estimated using the F-value and Sig. (level of significance) were statistically significant. According to the ANOVA (

Table 12. ANOVA for Model 1.

Model		Sum of Squares	df	Average Square	F	Significance Level
1	Regression Analysis	101.393	1	101.393	202.994	0.000 a
	Residual	109.388	219	0.499
	Total	210.782	220

Dependent variable: fairness. ^a Predictor variable: (constant), internal.

), the F-value was 202.994, with the regression formula being statistically significant at a significance level of 0.01.

The statistical significance of the dependent variables comprising the regression formula estimated is shown in the table of regression coefficients (

Table 13. Constant for Model 1.

Model		Nonstandard Coefficient		Standard Coefficient	t	Significance Level
		B	SD	Beta
1	(Constant)	1.196	0.302		3.960	0.000
	Internal	0.785	0.055	0.694	14.248	0.000

Dependent variable: fairness.

). According to the analysis results, the company’s internal factors impacted the regression coefficient, 0.785, and are significant at the 0.01 level. Thus, Hypothesis 2 was accepted.

Next, the analysis results of Models 2 and 3 are as follows (

Table 14. Diagnosis of Multicollinearity.

Category		Confront	Internal	Fairness
Pearsons’s coefficient	Confront	1.000	0.875	0.880
	Internal	0.875	1.000	0.694
	Fairness	0.880	0.694	1.000
Significance level (one side)	Confront		0.000	0.000
	Internal	0.000		0.000
	Fairness	0.000	0.000

).

First, in the multiple regression analysis of Model 3, in the diagnosis of multicollinearity of two independent variables, the internal factors of the company and the perception of fairness by the manager, the coefficient of correlation was 0.694, and less than 0.80, indicating that there would be no issues from the high correlation between the independent variables (see Table 14).

According to the goodness-of-fit analysis, the company’s internal factors explain 76.6% of the changes in strengthened coping competencies; together with the perception of fairness, they explained 90.9% of the changes in strengthened coping competencies. Furthermore, as the mediating variable of perception of fairness by managers was added to Model 2 in Model 3, the value of R² increased to 0.909, increasing the explanation for dependent variables as much as the amount of change in ΔR² (0.143) (see

Table 15. Summary of Models 2 and 3.

Model	R	R2	Adjusted R2	Standard Error of Estimate	Statistical Change
					Change of R2	Change of F	df1	df2	Change of Sig. F
2	0.875 a	0.766	0.765	0.39898	0.766	715.462	1	219	0.000
3	0.953 b	0.909	0.908	0.24907	0.143	343.982	1	218	0.000

^a Predictor variable: (constant), internal. ^b Predictor variable: (constant), internal, and fairness.

).

The F-value of Model 2 was equal to 715.462, as shown in the summary of Models 2 and 3 in

Table 16. ANOVA of Models 2 and 3.

Model		Sum of Squares	df	Average Square	F	Significance Level
2	Regression Analysis	113.892	1	113.892	715.462	0.000 b
	Residual	34.862	219	0.159
	Total	148.754	220
3	Regression Analysis	135.230	2	67.615	1089.974	0.000 c
	Residual	13.523	218	0.062
	Residual	148.754	220

Dependent variable: confront. ^b Predictor variable: (constant), internal. ^c Predictor variable: (constant), internal, fairness.

. The F-value of Model 3 with the mediating variable added was 1089.974, and the amount of change (ΔF) was 343.982; significant at the level of 0.01. In other words, there were statistically significant differences between Model 3, considering the perception of fairness by the manager as the mediating variable, and Model 2, which did not consider the mediating variable.

In the coefficient analysis, the regression coefficient of the company’s internal factors was 0.832, significant at a 0.01 level. Thus, Hypothesis 1 was adopted. Furthermore, the regression coefficient value of the company’s internal factors declined to 0.485 in Model 3, where the manager’s perception of the fairness mediating variable was added. The coefficient value for the manager’s perception of fairness was 0.442. This is the partial mediating effect of the perception of fairness by the manager variable on the impact of internal factors on the coping competencies of the company. Both the dependent and mediating variables were significant at the level of 0.01. In other words, as hypothesized, it was verified that the perception of fairness by managers positively impacted the strengthening of coping competencies, in the form of a mediating effect. Hypothesis 5 was also adopted (see

Table 17. Coefficient for Models 2 and 3.

Model		Nonstandard Coefficient		Standard Coefficient	t	Significance Level
		B	SD	Beta
2	(Constant)	0.954	0.170		5.600	0.000
	Internal	0.832	0.031	0.875	26.748	0.000
3	(Constant)	0.426	0.110		3.870	0.000
	Internal	0.485	0.027	0.510	18.004	0.000
	Fairness	0.442	0.024	0.526	18.547	0.000

Dependent variable: confront.

).

Next, the same processes and methods were applied to validate Hypotheses 3, 4, and 5, according to the following research model (Figure 9): a summary of the results is presented in

Table 18. Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis Results (1).

Category	Fairness	Confront
	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3
Internal	0.785 *	0.832 *	0.485 *
Fairness	-	-	0.442 *
R2	0.481	0.766	0.909
F	202.994 *	715.462 *	1089.974 *
ΔR2	-	-	0.143
ΔF	-	-	343.982 *

* p < 0.01.

. The results of each hierarchical regression analysis of Hypotheses 3, 4, and 5 are in the Appendix A (

Table A1. Summary of Model 1.

Model	R	R2	Adjusted R2	Standard Error of Estimate
1	0.754 a	0.568	0.566	0.64458

^a Predictor variables: (constant), external.

,

Table A2. ANOVA for Model 1.

Model		Sum of Squares	df	Average Square	F	Significance Level
1	Regression Analysis	119.791	1	119.791	288.317	0.000 a
	Residual	90.991	219	0.415
	Total	210.782	220

Dependent variable: fairness. ^a Predictor variable: (constant), external.

,

Table A3. Constant for Model 1.

Model		Nonstandard Coefficient		Standard Coefficient	t	Significance Level
		B	SD	Beta
1	(Constant)	0.896	0.271		3.302	0.001
	External	0.842	0.050	0.754	16.980	0.000

Dependent variable: fairness.

,

Table A4. Diagnosis of Multicollinearity.

Category		Confront	Internal	Fairness
Pearsons’s coefficient	Confront	1.000	0.877	0.880
	External	0.877	1.000	0.754
	Fairness	0.880	0.754	1.000
Significance level(one side)	Confront		0.000	0.000
	External	0.000		0.000
	Fairness	0.000	0.000

,

Table A5. Summary of Models 2 and 3.

Model	R	R2	Adjusted R2	Standard Error of Estimate	Statistical Change
					Change of R2	Change of F	df1	df2	Change of Sig. F
2	0.877 a	0.769	0.768	0.39619	0.769	728.678	1	219	0.000
3	0.938 b	0.880	0.879	0.28653	0.111	200.705	1	218	0.000

^a Predictor variable: (constant), external. ^b Predictor variable: (constant), external, fairness.

,

Table A6. ANOVA for Models 2 and 3.

Model		Sum of Squares	df	Average Square	F	Significance Level
2	Regression Analysis	114.378	1	114.378	728.678	0.000 b
	Residual	34.376	219	0.157
	Total	148.754	220
3	Regression Analysis	130.856	2	65.42	796.930	0.000 c
	Residual	17.898	218	0.082
	Residual	148.754	220

Dependent variable: confront. ^b Predictor variable: (constant), external. ^c Predictor variable: (constant), external, fairness.

and

Table A7. Coefficient for Models 2 and 3.

Model		Nonstandard Coefficient		Standard Coefficient	t	Significance Level
		B	SD	Beta
2	(Constant)	0.1.012	0.167		6.072	0.000
	External	0.823	0.030	0.877	26.994	0.000
3	(Constant)	0.631	0.124		5.110	0.000
	External	0.465	0.034	0.495	13.843	0.000
	Fairness	0.426	0.030	0.507	14.167	0.000

Dependent variable: confront.

).

According to the results, the company’s external factors explain 56.8% of the changes in the manager’s perception of fairness, with the regression result of Model 1 being significant at a 0.01 level. Furthermore, the company’s external factors had an impact on the regression coefficient, 0.842; significant at the 0.01 level. Thus, Hypothesis 4 was supported.

In Model 2, the coefficients between independent and dependent variables and R² and F values were all significant at the level of 0.01; thus, Hypothesis 3 was adopted. In addition, in the case of Model 3, F-values were all significant at the level of 0.01. ΔR² increased with the addition of the mediating variable by 0.111 (0.880–0.769) compared with Model 2, and there was a significant difference for ΔF, 200.705, with Model 2, not including mediating variables. Furthermore, the power of explanation for the mediating variable could be predicted, with the regression coefficient of the independent variable decreasing from 0.823 to 0.465. Thus, Hypothesis 5 was validated with the indirect causal relationship from the mediating effect of 0.426.

Last, a simple regression analysis was conducted to validate Hypothesis 6 (see

Table 19. Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis Results (2).

Category	Fairness	Confront
	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3
External	0.842 *	0.823 *	0.465 *
Fairness	-	-	0.426 *
R2	0.568	0.769	0.880
F	288.317 *	728.678 *	796.930 *
ΔR2	-	-	0.111
ΔF	-	-	200.705 *

* p < 0.01.

).

The value of R² was 0.362, indicating that the goodness of fit for the causal model or the estimated regression formula explained 36.2% of the total change in the data (see

Table 20. Model Summary.

Model	R	R2	Adjusted R2	Standard Error of Estimate
1	0.602 a	0.362	0.359	0.93805

^a Predictor variable: (constant), confront.

).

According to the ANOVA results, the F-value was 124.397, and significant at a 0.01 level; it was verified that the estimated regression formula and model were statistically significant (

Table 21. ANOVA ^a.

Model		Sum of Squares	df	Average Square	F	Significance Level
1	Regression analysis	109.461	1	109.461	124.397	0.000 a
	Residual	192.705	219	0.880
	Total	302.166	220

Dependent variable: performance. ^a: predictor variable: (constant) confront.

).

Analysis of the regression coefficient showed a coefficient value of 0.858, significant at a 0.01 level. Therefore, Hypothesis 6, that the strengthening of coping competencies by the company positively impacts the performance enhancement of the company, was accepted (see

Table 22. Coefficient ^a.

Model		Nonstandard Coefficient		Standard Coefficient	t	Level of Significance
		B	SD	Beta
1	(Constant)	0.692	0.424		1.630	0.000
	Internal	0.858	0.077	0.602	11.153	0.000

^a Dependent Variable: Performance.

).

4.3.2. Analysis Results

The results of the testing analysis of this study were as follows:

The company’s internal factors had a positive impact on strengthening coping competencies against trade remedy policies. The goodness of fit for the correlation model was considerably high (76.5%) and statistically significant. Furthermore, the power of the explanation for the independent variable was 83.2%, which also had a significant impact.

Second, the impact of internal factors of the company on the manager’s perception of fairness showed a goodness of fit of 48.1%. The independent variables had a statistically significant impact of 78.5%. Furthermore, validation of the mediating effect between the company’s internal factors and strengthening of coping competencies; the goodness of fit of the model (ΔR²: 0.143); changes in the statistical significance (ΔF: 343.982); decreased regression coefficient of independent variables (from 0.832 to 0.485); and regression coefficient of mediating variables (0.442) were found to be significant. In conclusion, the perception of fairness by the manager was found to strengthen and increase the correlation, by serving as a partial mediator between the internal factors of the company and strengthening coping competencies.

Third, the impact of external factors of the company on the strengthening of coping competencies was 82.3%, and the goodness of fit was 76.9%, with a statistically significant regression formula and model. However, since the construct validity of strengthened diplomacy with trading partner nations was not tested before the hypothesis validation, this variable was excluded from the regression model. In addition, the impact of the variable on the strengthened coping competencies of the company was not verified. Furthermore, the significant impact (84.2%), power of explanation (56.8%), and statistical significance of the model were verified in the correlation model of the company’s external factors. The manager’s perception of fairness supported the positive impact hypothesis. However, because it was found that there was a lack of construct validity for the human resource support variable in the given regression model, the variable was excluded from the hypothesis validation process. Thus, the impact of the given variable could not be verified.

Fourth, an analysis of the perception of fairness by the manager was conducted as the mediating effect between external factors and strengthened coping competencies, as well as internal factors. As a result, increased goodness of fit (ΔR²: 0.111), change in statistical significance (ΔF: 200.7050, and impact of independent variables (from 0.823 to 0.465) were partially replaced by the mediating effect (0.426) when the mediating variable was added. As a result, the impact of the manager’s perception of fairness also mediated the impact of external factors of the company on the strengthening of coping competencies, ultimately strengthening the correlation.

Fifth, the impact of the strengthened coping competencies of the company against trade remedies on the enhanced performance, increased trade, and enhanced export flexibility of the company was analyzed. The estimated regression formula explained 36.2% of the total change in the data; it was confirmed that the regression formula and model had statistical significance. Furthermore, as the strengthening of coping competencies of the company had a significant impact of 85.8% on performance enhancement, the conclusion that strengthening coping competencies against the trade remedy measures of trading partner nations had a positive impact on enhancing export performance was deduced.

5. Conclusions and Implications

Empirical testing was conducted, to analyze the factors for countermeasures and strengthening of competencies when companies fundamentally face trade remedy measures by trading partner nations. The results showed the internal and external factors of the company have positive impacts on the strengthening of coping competencies, and that the perception of fairness by the manager, which is leadership in organizational behavior theory, has mediating effects that enhance the power of explanation and the certainty of correlation. It was also concluded that such strengthening of coping competencies increases companies’ exports, by resolving the burden of exports through solving disputes with trading partner nations. The academic and practical implications and contributions of this study are as follows.

5.1. Implication for Theory Development

First, it evaluated empirical phenomena in trade and commerce based on the principles of organizational behavior and investigated the linkages and correlations between international business and policies related to trade and commerce. It expands the field of research by applying organizational behavior in trade and commerce.

5.2. Implication for Business and Management Practice

Second, company business strategies to promote competencies to cope with the rising risks of rapid globalization were deduced. The necessity for reciprocity among members, due to limited bounded rationality [37] in decision-making within the organization, applies not only to employees, but also to middle and top managers. Although knowledge serves as the key component for business management, whether employees of a company have the required knowledge is vague and difficult to judge. According to Li’s (2014) analysis, relatively more knowledge related to a specific situation gathered by the manager leads to stronger tendencies to communicate with employees [38]. In other words, if an understanding of given circumstances is promoted by the management with decision-making authority and the perception of fairness of trade remedy measures by the trading partner nation through communicating organically with employees, there will be additional potential problem-solving capabilities [39]. An example of such an interaction is empowering leadership [40], in which the manager has the capability to accurately perceive fairness and attribute authority and decision-making power to employees. Moreover, relational leadership is process-based leadership that emphasizes the social dynamism between leaders and subordinates, to increase performance [41]. If such leadership is based on the trust between the manager and members of the company, the internal and external factors of the company will be activated, to maximize the strengthening of coping competencies against trade remedy measures.

In conclusion, managers must monitor the overall circumstances of trade and commerce, and accumulate relevant knowledge. Furthermore, strengthening competencies by combining information within and outside the organization and relevant action must be achieved through the leadership, by continuously exchanging information with, and motivating, lower-rank employees.

5.3. Implication for Readers and Limitations of the Study

The limitations of this study are as follows.

First, this study’s countermeasures for trade remedies presuppose the rational thinking and moral implementation of participating countries. However, in reality, the logic of power is overflowing, and there are many cases in which countries disagree with judgments based on norms and refuse to implement them. If institutional mechanisms and measures were sought to enforce the implementation of the outcome of the dispute, it is expected that there would have been an opportunity to narrow the gap between theory and reality.

Second, causal relationships between the factors in the research model were identified. However, it is believed that more practical implications would have been provided if practical implementation measures of the government and corporation had been proposed to strengthen the ability to respond to trade remedies; this study did not reach the relevant area.

The search for a more practical and contextual response strategy that can compensate for these shortcomings is left for future studies.