CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Description of Research Objects

The data was collected by distributing questionnaires to Micro, Small, and

Medium Enterprises (MSME) in Malang for three months, starting from January
2020 to March 2020. The number of MSME in 2018 reach 112.000 unit according
to the Malang Government’s data. The sample used in this study can be seen in
Appendix 2. Based on questionnaires given, the data obtained a description of the
characteristics of respond based on age, sex, education and length of work of
respondents.

Details Number of Questionnaires

Questionnaire distributed 54
Questionnaires were responded 54
Questionnaires not responded 0
Questionnaires that are unusable 4
Questionnaires that are usable 50
Table 4.1 – Summary of Questionnaires Distributions

Based on Table 4.1, the questionnaires distributed were 54 copies, and which
where responded were 54 copies or 100% of the total questionnaires distributed
because the researcher went to each of MSMEs. Four copies of the questionnaires
are unusable due to incomplete data. In conclusion, questionnaires that can be
used for data analysis are 50 copies or 93% of all questionnaires distributed.
4.1.1 Age

The characteristics of respondents by age can be seen in the following table:

Age Frequency Percentage

19 -
32 64
25
26 -
10 20
35
36 -
5 10
45
46 -
1 2
55
56 -
2 4
65
Total 50 100
Table 4.2 – Characteristics of Respondents by Age

Based on the table above, it can be seen that aged 16-25 years as many as 32
respondents or 64%, 26-35 years as many as 10 respondents or 20%, 36-45 years
as many as 5 respondents or 10%, 46-55 years as many as 1 respondent or 2%,
and 56-65 years as many as 2 respondents or 4%.

4.1.2 Gender

The characteristics of respondents by gender can be seen in the following table:

Gender Frequency Percentage

Male 34 68
Female 16 32
Total 50 100
Table 4.3 – Characteristics of Respondents by Gender
The table above shows the gender of the respondent who participated in this
research. The number of male respondents is 34 people (68%) and the number of
females is 16 (32%).

4.2 Descriptive Statistics

Variable Minimum Maximum Mean Standard Deviation

X1 1 5 3.792 0.891
X2 1 5 3.752 0.861
Y 1 5 3.684 0.920
Table 4.4 – Descriptive Statistics Variable

Based on Table 4.4, it can be seen that the average (mean), minimum, maximum,
and standard deviation from the respondents’ answer for every variable. Every
variable has the minimum value of 1 and maximum value of 5. Moreover, all
standard deviation value is not exceeding mean value, so it can be concluded that
the data has a low level of deviation.

4.2.1 Perception (X1)

There are ten items of questions about perception variable which were given to the
respondents to be answered. The answers can be seen below:

Table 4.5 – Frequency Distribution of Perception (X1)

SS S N TS STS Total
Item Tota Mean
f % f % f % f % f % %
l

1 22.0 2 46.0 1 20.0 4.0 10

X1.1 4 8.00 2 50 3.74
1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0

1 24.0 2 42.0 1 28.0 2.0 10

X1.2 2 4.00 1 50 3.82
2 0 1 0 4 0 0 0

X1.3 5 10.0 3 64.0 1 22.0 1 2.00 1 2.0 50 10 3.78

 0 2 0 1 0 0 0

1 20.0 2 54.0 1 20.0 2.0 10

X1.4 2 4.00 1 50 3.86
0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0

18.0 2 48.0 1 20.0 12.0 2.0 10

X1.5 9 6 1 50 3.68
0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 20.0 2 54.0 1 20.0 2.0 10

X1.6 2 4.00 1 50 3.86
0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0

16.0 3 66.0 4.0 10

X1.7 8 4 8.00 3 6.00 2 50 3.84
0 3 0 0 0

16.0 2 54.0 18.0 10.0 2.0 10

X1.8 8 9 5 1 50 3.72
0 7 0 0 0 0 0

18.0 3 60.0 14.0 2.0 10

X1.9 9 7 3 6.00 1 50 3.86
0 0 0 0 0 0

X1.1 16.0 2 54.0 1 22.0 2.0 10

8 3 6.00 1 50 3.76
0 0 7 0 1 0 0 0

    3.79

Source: Processed Data

From the table above, it can be seen items 4, 6, and 9 have the highest
mean. This shows SAK EMKM helps their business in publishing financial
statement, evaluate and keep track of accounting information report, and making
decision to anticipate economic situation.

It can be seen from 50 respondents that the result of the perception variable has an
average value of 3.79. This value indicates that respondents have good value of
perception.
4.2.2 Socialization (X2)
Socialization variable have five items of questions, which given to the
respondents to be answered. The answers can be seen below:

Table 4.6 – Frequency Distribution of Socialization (X2)

Ite SS S N TS STS Total Mean

m f % f % f % f % f % Total %

X2. 2 40.0 2 42.0 14.0 0.0 10

7 2 4.00 0 50 4.18
1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

X2. 14.0 1 34.0 2 44.0 0.0 10

7 4 8.00 0 50 3.54
2 0 7 0 2 0 0 0

X2. 16.0 1 34.0 2 46.0 0.0 10

8 2 4.00 0 50 3.62
3 0 7 0 3 0 0 0

X2. 1 22.0 2 56.0 14.0 0.0 10

7 4 8.00 0 50 3.92
4 1 0 8 0 0 0 0

X2. 2 52.0 1 30.0 10.0 2.0 10

3 6.00 5 1 50 3.50
5 6 0 5 0 0 0 0

    3.75

Source: Processed Data

From the table above, it can be seen item 1 have the highest mean. This shows
socialization of financial statement standard for MSME or SAK EMKM is
needed.

It can be seen from 50 respondents that the result of the socialization variable has
an average value of 3.75. This value indicates that respondents have good value of
socialization.

4.2.3 Implementation of SAK EMKM (Y)

There are ten items of questions about the implementation of SAK EMKM
variable which were given to the respondents to be answered. The answers can be
seen below:

Table 4.7 – Frequency Distribution of Implementation SAK EMKM (Y)

SS S N TS STS Total
Ite Mea
Tota
m f % f % f % f % f % % n
l
1 22.0 2 48.0 16.0 14.0 0.0 10
Y1 8 7 0 50 3.78
1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0
10.0 2 44.0 2 40.0 2.0 10
Y2 5 2 4.00 1 50 3.56
0 2 0 0 0 0 0
2 40.0 1 38.0 18.0 0.0 10
Y3 9 2 4.00 0 50 4.14
0 0 9 0 0 0 0
1 30.0 2 44.0 16.0 2.0 10
Y4 8 4 8.00 1 50 3.92
5 0 2 0 0 0 0
3 60.0 1 26.0 0.0 10
Y5 3 6.00 4 8.00 0 50 3.64
0 0 3 0 0 0
3 62.0 1 26.0 2.0 10
Y6 4 8.00 1 2.00 1 50 3.72
1 0 3 0 0 0
18.0 2 42.0 1 20.0 16.0 4.0 10
Y7 9 8 2 50 3.54
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
14.0 2 46.0 1 34.0 2.0 10
Y8 7 2 4.00 1 50 3.66
0 3 0 7 0 0 0
2 44.0 1 32.0 14.0 4.0 10
Y9 3 6.00 7 2 50 3.34
2 0 6 0 0 0 0
Y1 12.0 2 50.0 1 24.0 6.0 10
6 4 8.00 3 50 3.54
0 0 5 0 2 0 0 0
    3.68
Source: Processed Data

From the table above, it can be seen item 3 have the highest mean. This shows in
accounting data processing, all transactions are recorded in the general ledger
continuously.

It can be seen from 50 respondents that the result of the implementation SAK
EMKM variable has an average value of 3.68. This value indicates that
respondents have good value of implementation of SAK EMKM

4.3 Data Analysis Results

4.3.1 Research Instruments Test Results

The questionnaire in this research was used as an analysis tool. Therefore,

the analysis carried out relies more on the score of respondents in each
observation. Good data collection of instruments must meet two important
requirements, namely valid and reliable. The instrument testing used in this
research is validity and reliability test.

4.3.1.1 Validity Test

Validity testing is very necessary in a study, especially those using

questionnaires to obtain data. Validity testing is intended to determine the validity
of an understanding of the validity between concepts and empirical reality.
Validity test is a measure that shows the levels of validity and the validity of the
instrument. An instrument is said to be valid if it is able to measure and reveal
from the variable under study appropriately. The high or low validity of the
instrument indicates the extent to which the data collected does not deviate from
the description of the intended variable. Validity testing can be done by
correlating each factor or variable with the total factor or variable using the
Pearson correlation (r).

4.3.1.1.1 Convergent Validity Test

Convergent validity is a common level of different measurement instruments used

to measure the same construct (McDaniel and Gates, 2013: 293). Criteria for
convergent validity test is valid or cannot be done with:

1. The value of Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (KMO

MSA) greater than 0,05 and the value of Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity (Sig.)
is smaller than 0,05.
2. There is a strong correlation between variable showed by the value of
Anti-image Correlation between variable is greater than 0,05.
3. Value of factor loading from EFA is greater than 0,75.

The validity test is conducted by SPSS version 20 using the factor analysis. For
more details is presented in the table as follows:

Table 4.8 – KMO and Bartlett’s Test

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. ,739

Approx. Chi-Square 73,709

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity df 3

Sig. ,000

Source: Processed Data

From Table 4.8, it can be seen the value of KMO is greater than 0.05 and
the value of Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Sig. is smaller than 0.05 means there are
correlation between variable.

Table 4.9 – Anti-image Matrices

 Anti-image Matrices

X1 X2 Y

X1 ,388 -,200 -,163

Anti-image Covariance X2 -,200 ,402 -,148

Y -,163 -,148 ,460

a
X1 ,716 -,506 -,386

Anti-image Correlation X2 -,506 ,728a -,344

Y -,386 -,344 ,778a

a. Measures of Sampling Adequacy (MSA)

Source: Processed Data

From table 4.9, the value of MSA of each variable is greater than 0.5. It
means there is strong correlation between variable and can be processed further.

Table 4.10 – Communalities Table

Communalities
Initial Extraction

X1 1,000 ,820
X2 1,000 ,810
Y 1,000 ,775

Extraction Method: Principal Component

Analysis.

Source: Processed Data

From Table 4.10 above it can be seen that the value of extraction question.
Variable X1 have .820 value of extraction. It means about 82% of the variance of
the variable X1 can be explained by the formed factors. Variable X2 have .810
value of extraction. It means about 81% of the variance of the variable X2 can be
explained by the formed factors. Variable Y have .775 value of extraction. It
 means about 77.5% of the variance of the variable Y can be explained by the
formed factors.

Table 4.11 – Initial Eigenvalues Table

Total Variance Explained

Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %

1 2,405 80,177 80,177 2,405 80,177 80,177

2 ,333 11,108 91,285
3 ,261 8,715 100,000

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Source: Processed Data

From the table 4.11, shows that there are 1 factor that are formed from the
3 variables entered. The Eigenvalues of the factor is 2,405 with variance (80,1%).
The amount of variance that was able to be explained by the new factor that was
formed was 80,1% while the remaining 19.9% was explained by other factors that
were not studied.

Table 4.12 – Component Matrix Table

Component Matrixa

Component

X1 ,906
X2 ,900
Y ,880

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

a. 1 components extracted.

Source: Processed Data

 In table 4.12, it shows the factor loading from each variable. The value of
factor Correlations
loading
from all X1 X2 Y
variable Pearson Correlation 1 ,738** ,692**

mentioned X1 Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,000 is

greater N 50 50 50 than
Pearson Correlation ,738** 1 ,678**
0,75 (for 50
X2 Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,000
sample). It N 50 50 50
means
the Pearson Correlation ,692** ,678** 1

convergent Y Sig. (2-tailed) ,000 ,000

validity is N 50 50 50

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

fulfilled.

4.3.1.1.2 Discriminant Validity Test

Discriminant validity is the opposite of convergent validity (Aaker et al.,

2011, 268). To measure the validity of the discriminant in this study the Pearson
correlation was used. Discriminant validity will be achieved if the value of the
correlation does not exceed 0.75 (Hair et al., 2010: 317).

From the table 4.13, it shows the value of Pearson Correlation each
variable does not exceed 0.75. It means the discriminant validity is fulfilled.

Table 4.13 – Pearson Correlation Table

Source: Processed Data

4.3.1.2 Reliability Test

Reliability test is a research instrument test to determine whether the questionnaire

is reliable for the study. The reliability test was carried out with the help of the
SPSS program using the Cronbach’s (α) statistical test.

Table 4.14 – Variable Reliability Test

No Explanatio
. Variable Croncbach’s Alpha n
1 Perception (X1) 0,928 Reliable
2 Socialization (X2) 0,810 Reliable
3 Implementation of SAK EMKM (Y) 0,880 Reliable

Source: Processed Data

From Table 4.14, it can be seen that the value of Cronbach's Alpha for all
variables is greater than 0.6 means the criteria for reliability test is fulfilled.
Therefore, all variables used for research are reliable.

4.3.2 Multiple Regression Analysis

Linear regression uses to calculate the influence of the independent variables

namely Perception (X1) and Socialization (X2) on dependent variable which is
Implementation of SAK EMKM (Y). Multiple Regression equation functionates
to find the relation between independent and dependent variables by using SPSS
for Windows version 20. The regression model is presented in the table below.

Table 4.15 – Multiple Regression Analysis

Standardize
Unstandardized d
Depende Independe
nt nt Coefficients Coefficient Explanatio
t Sig.
s n
Variable Variable
Std.
B Error Beta
2.09 0.04
7.875 3.762
(Constant) 3 2  
2.52 0.01
Y 0.324 0.129 0.362
X1 1 5 Significant
3.08 0.00
0.889 0.288 0.443
X2 1 3 Significant
R: 0.753        
R Square: 0.566
Adjusted R Square: 0.548
30.68
F Count: 4
Sig. F: 0.000
F table: 3.195
t table: 2.012        

Source: Processed Data

The regression equation obtained based on Table 4.15 is as follows:

Y = 7,875 + 0,324 X1 + 0,889 X2

From the equation above, it can be interpreted as follows:

 The constant value (α) of 7,875, means if there are no independent

variables of Perception and Socialization, then the value of
Implementation of SAK EMKM is 7,875.
  The regression coefficient of b1 = 0,324, means the implementation of
SAK EMKM will increase by 0,324 for every addition point of X1
(Perception). If the Perception increases by one, then the Implementation
of SAK EMKM will increase by 0,324 with the assumption other variable
is constant.
 The regression coefficient of b2 = 0,889, means the implementation of
SAK EMKM will increase by 0,889 for every addition point of X2
(Socialization). If the Socialization increases by one, then the
implementation of SAK EMKM will increase by 0,889 with the
assumption other variable is constant.

Based on the above interpretation, it can be seen that Perception and Socialization
increased will be followed by an increase in the Implementation of SAK EMKM.
The most dominant variable which influences the Implementation of SAK EMKM
is Socialization since it has the biggest value of beta standardized coefficient and t
value.

4.3.2.1 Determinant Coefficient (R2)

Coefficient of determination has a purpose to calculate the contribution or

influence of independent variables on the dependent variable using Determinant
Coefficient (R2). From the table above, the result of adjusted R2 is 0,548. It means
that 54,8% Implementation of SAK EMKM will be influenced by independent
variable in this research, which are Perception and Socialization. Whereas another
45,2% Implementation of SAK EMKM will be affected by another variable that is
not described in this research.

Moreover, the coefficient of correlation was also obtained to show the relation of
each independent variable and dependent variable. R value (coefficient
correlation) is 0.753, it states that the relation of independent variables, namely
Perception (X1) and Socialization (X2) on Implementation of SAK EMKM is
considered as strong category caused it is in the range of 0.6 – 0.8.
4.3.3 Classical Assumption of Regression

Classical assumption must be tested in order to use the multiple linear regression.
To get an unbiased and efficient test value from a multiple regression equation, it
is necessary to test how the regression model produced meets the classical
assumption requirements. The classic assumption test carried out in this research
was a normality test, multicollinearity test, and heteroscedasticity test. The results
are presented below:

4.3.3.1 Normality Test

This test is carried to know if the residual value scattered normally or not. The
procedure of the test is done by using Kolmogorov-Smirnov with the conditions
of hypotheses:

H0 : residual is scattered normally

H1 : residual is not scattered normally

If the value of sig. (p-value) is > 0,05 then H0 is accepted, which means that the
normality is qualified. The result of the normality test can be seen below:

Table 4.16 – Normality Test Result

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Unstandardized Residual Test
 N 50
Normal Parameters a,b Mean .0000000
Std. Deviation 4.12318375
Most Extreme Absolute .086
Differences Positive .059
Negative -.086
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .606
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .856

a. Test distribution is Normal. Source: Processed

Data

b. Calculated from data.

From the calculation, it can be seen that the sig. value is 0.856 and greater than
0.05 (0.856 > 0.05), and it is found that the residual has already had a normal
distribution or the assumption of normality has been met.

4.3.3.2 Multicollinearity Test

Multicollinearity test is done to obtain that there is no perfect linear

relation or there is no relation between independent variables. The test is done by
comparing the value of tolerance resulted from multiple regression calculations. If
the value of tolerance is ≤ 0.1, then multicollinearity exists. The multicollinearity
result can be seen below:

Table 4.17 – Multicollinearity Test Result

Independent Collinearity Statistics

Variable Tolerance VIF
X1 0.447 2.239
X2 0.447 2.239

Source: Processed Data

According to Table 4.17, the following results of each independent variable:

  Tolerance for Perception is 0.447
 Tolerance for Socialization is 0.447

Based on the result test, it is shown that the overall value of tolerance is < 0.1, so
it can be concluded that the multicollinearity does not occur between the
independent variables. Multicollinearity test can also be done by comparing VIF
value (Variance Inflation Factor) with a value of 10. If VIF value is > 10, then
multicollinearity occurs. These are the test results of each independent variable:
 VIF for Perception is 2,239
 VIF for Socialization is 2,239
From the test results, it can be concluded that there is no multicollinearity
between independent variables. Thus, the assumption test of the absence of
multicollinearity is fulfilled.

4.3.3.3 Heteroscedasticity Test

Heteroscedasticity testing is done to test whether in the regression model there is
residual variance inequality from one observation to another. If the residual
variance of observation to another observation is constant, it is called
homogenous. The test procedure is carried by using the Heteroscedasticity Chart
Scatterplot.

Figure 4.1 – Heteroscedasticity Scatterplot

Source: Processed Data

From the result of the test, it can be shown the scatterplot doesn’t have any
pattern, so it can be concluded that heteroscedasticity does not occur in this
regression equation or in another word it can be concluded that residual value has
a homogenous (constant) variance.

With all the classical assumptions of the above regression is fulfilled, it can be
said that the multiple linear regression model used in this research is feasible or
appropriate. So, the interpretation of the results of multiple regression analysis
that has been done can be drawn.

4.3.4 Hypothesis Test

 Hypothesis testing is an important part of research, after data is collected
and processed. Its main purpose is to answer the hypothesis made by the
researcher.

Hypothesis testing is an important part of research, after data is collected and

processed. Its main purpose is to answer the hypothesis made by the researcher.

4.3.4.1 F Test

This test is used to analyze whether all independent variables, which

entered into the model have a simultaneous effect on the dependent variable.
Based on table 4.15, it can be seen that the value Sig. F (0.000) < α = 0.05 so it
can be settled that the model used in this research is significant and it shows that
Perception and Socialization influence Implementation of SAK EMKM
simultaneously. Moreover, the regression model used is proper for the hypothesis.

4.3.4.2 T Test

This test is used to find out whether each independent variable partially
influence dependent variable. According to Table 4.15, the results are presented as
follows:

1. Perception of MSME towards the use of SAK EMKM has a positive

influence on the implementation of SAK EMKM (H1).
T test result between X1 (Perception) with Y (Implementation of SAK EMKM)
shows the sig. (0,015) < α = 0.05 means the effect of X1 (Perception) to Y
(Implementation of SAK EMKM) is significant. This means H0 is rejected dan H1
is accepted. The conclusion is that the Implementation of SAK EMKM affected
by Perception significantly. Moreover, with increasing the Perception of MSME
toward the use of SAK EMKM will make the Implementation of SAK EMKM
increased as well.

2. Socialization of SAK EMKM has a positive effect on the

implementation of SAK EMKM (H2).
T test result between X2 (Socialization) with Y (Implementation of SAK EMKM)
shows the sig. (0,003) < α = 0.05 means the effect of X2 (Socialization) to Y
(Implementation of SAK EMKM) is significant at 5% alpha. This means H0 is
rejected dan H1 is accepted. This means that Implementation of SAK EMKM
influenced significantly by Socialization. With increasing the Socialization of
SAK EMKM, it will increase the Implementation of SAK EMKM.

From the overall results it can be concluded that the independent variables have a
significant effect on the Implementation of SAK EMKM simultaneously and
partially. And it can be seen from two independent variables, the most dominant
one on influence the Implementation of SAK EMKM is Socialization because it
have greater value of the beta coefficient and t count.

4.4 Discussion of the Research Result

In this study were taken as many as 50 people who have become

respondents. Test Instrument of the study consisting of the validity test and
reliability test. The results obtained from the validity test, convergent and
discriminant is valid. It was concluded that these items could be used to measure
the research variables. Followed by the reliability test using Cronbach alpha
where each variable was found to be reliable because the value of Cronbach alpha
is greater than 0.6.

The next is classic assumption test. The classic assumption test consists of
normality test, multicollinearity test, and heteroscedasticity test. Starting from the
normality test, it can be seen in the Normality Test Results table where the test is
carried out using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov method, with a significant value
where the value is greater than 0.05, which means that the unstandardized is
normally distributed. Then the second test is the multicollinearity test with a
tolerance value of each variable greater than 0.1 and VIF value greater than 10
then it can be concluded that there is no multicollinearity between independent
variables. The third test is the heteroscedasticity test with the results using a
scatterplot diagram that does not form a specific pattern, so there is no
heteroscedasticity. It can be concluded that the homogeneity has a variety
(constant) or in other words there are no symptoms of heteroscedasticity.

After the calculation from regression analysis, the influence perception and
socialization on implementation of SAK EMKM has been conducted, the result
obtained are as follows:

4.4.1 The Influence of Perception on The Implementation of SAK EMKM

Perception (X1) influences the implementation of SAK EMKM (Y). It has

been proven from the result from the first hypothesis (H1) with a significance of
0,015 < 0,05. The regression coefficient is 0.324, and it indicates that the
perception of MSME perpetrators has a positive effect on the implementation of
SAK EMKM. It means that the better the perception of MSME perpetrators, the
higher the implementation of SAK EMKM will be.

The perception of MSME perpetrators can affect their willingness to use and
implement the SAK EMKM. Narsa, Widodo, and Kurnianto (2012) did a research
about MSME readiness in the implementation of Financial Accounting Standards
Without Public Accountability (SAK ETAP). From this research, it was found the
perception that financial records are difficult. This is one of the reason most of
MSME perpetrators didn’t implement the SAK ETAP. IAI creates SAK EMKM
which is simpler than SAK ETAP hope to make the perception about financial
report changes. When the perception about financial report becomes better, the
possibility of implementation of SAK EMKM will increase.

Other perception found in their research is that without financial reports the
business continues to run and provide benefits. This perception comes up because
without financial report according to the standard, the business still produce
income and many of MSME perpetrators only focusing the business on the
income without any intention to make the business go to the next level which is
taking cost. This is also one of the reason most of MSME perpetrators didn’t
implement the financial report according to the standard. According to the
Constructive Perception Theory, the perception is influenced by the hypothesis
and expectation. With giving a better understanding to MSME perpetrators about
SAK EMKM can help them to have better understanding of their business
financial position, it will make the perception about SAK EMKM better and make
the implementation of SAK EMKM higher. The result of this research supports
the previous result from research conducted by Nuril Badria and Nur Diana
(2018) which stated that perception of MSME towards the use of SAK EMKM
has a positive influence on the implementation of SAK EMKM.

4.4.2 The Influence of Socialization on The Implementation of SAK EMKM

Socialization (X2) influences the implementation of SAK EMKM (Y). It

has been proven from the result from the second hypothesis (H2) with a
significance of 0,003 < 0,05. The regression coefficient is 0.889, and it indicates
that the socialization of SAK EMKM has a positive effect on the implementation
of SAK EMKM. It means that the better the socialization of SAK EMKM, the
higher the implementation of SAK EMKM will be.

Socialization can influence the implementation of SAK EMKM by giving

the information about it to the MSME perpetrators. “Analisis faktor-faktor yang
mempengaruhi pelaku usaha mikro kecil menengah tentang pentingnya pelaporan
keuangan berdasarkan SAK ETAP” states that the importance of financial
reporting based on SAK ETAP is influenced by information and socialization of
SAK ETAP (Wicaksono, 2016). According to the Role Theory in individual level,
socialization taught the roles that must be carried out by individuals. As MSME
perpetrator, with expectation, traits and goal SAK EMKM has, MSME
perpetrators can understand the use and benefit for implementing SAK EMKM.
Socialization can be done in seminar or workshop where not only giving
information, but also learning how to implement it. The result of this research
supports the previous result from research conducted by Nuril Badria and Nur
Diana (2018) which stated that socialization of MSME towards the use of SAK
EMKM has a positive influence on the implementation of SAK EMKM.