Track your Manuscript
Enter Correct Manuscript Reference Number:
Get Details
Why Us
Open Access
Peer-reviewed
Rapid publication
Lifetime hosting
Free indexing service
Free promotion service
More citations
Search engine friendly
Go Back       IAR Journal of Business Management | IAR J Bus Mng, 2020; 1(3): | Volume:1 Issue:3 ( Sept. 10, 2020 ) : 80-91.
108 Downloads425 Views

DOI : 10.47310/iarjbm.2020.v01i03.001       Download PDF       HTML       XML

Making Agro-Allied Small Businesses Achieve Sustainable Productivity In Nigeria: Resource Mobilisation Approach


Article History

Received: 25.07.2020; Revision: 24. 08.2020; Accepted: 12. 09.2020; Published: 15. 09.2020

Author Details

Ihemeje, J. C1, Okafor, M. C2, ¬Adeleke, Ezekiel Olukayode3, Kingsley Nwagu4 and Zwingina Christy Twaliwi5

Authors Affiliations

1College of Management Sciences, Michael Okpara University, Umudike, Nigeria

2Department of Accounting, Michael Okpara University, Nigeria

3Department of Accounting, Adeleke University, Osun State, Nigeria

4Department of Management, Texila American University

5Department of Management, Bingham University, Karu, Nasarawa State, Nigeria


Abstract: Resource mobilization is key for attaining sustainable increase in productivity of an organization.The study determined the effect of resource mobilisation capacity on sustainable increase in productivity of agro-allied small businesses in South-South Nigeria.The instrument of data collection the research questions structured in close-ended five-point Likert scale .The evaluation of the relationship between dependent of productivity and independent variables of resource mobilization practice employed the Ordinary Least Square regression technique. The study found that resource mobilisation capacity has p0sitive and significant effect on sustainable productivity of agro-allied small businesses in South-South Nigeria. It was recommended that efforts should be made to educate the small business entrepreneurs on the benefits of resource mobilization as a viable option towards business growth and expansion.


Keywords: Resource mobilization, Productivity, Sustainable development, agro-allied business.


  1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study

Sustainable development touches on the importance of inter-generational equity, ensured by conserving resources for future generations, which is one of the major features that distinguish sustainable development policy; hence, the overall goal is the long-term stability of the economy and environment, which is only achievable through the integration and acknowledgement of economic and social concerns throughout the decision making process (Emas, 2015). In this study, sustainable development primarily concerns the substitutability of Small and medium scale enterprises involved in diverse sphere of agro-allied businesses in Nigeria and the absence of strategic entrepreneurship management techniques to ensure access and efficient utilisation of capital and needed resources for transforming creativity to innovative ventures, stimulate industry competitiveness, develop local capacity utilization through value chain systems for economic development and intergenerational equity; which recognizes the long-term scale of sustainability in order to address the needs of future generations (Stoddart, 2011). Emas, (2015) explains that, sustainable development is anchored on weak and strong sustainability concept; while the weak sustainable development explains that only the aggregate level of capital matters: man-made or manufactured capital is an adequate alternative to natural capital. Strong sustainability, on the other hand, recognizes the unique features of natural resources that cannot be replaced by manufactured capital.


Globally, agriculture plays a dominant role in the growth and development of every nation’s economy; hence, the importance is anchored on the fact that it serves as the bedrock of survival of the human race, provides variety of food for the world’s populace, earns foreign exchange



Revenue through export of surplus produce (Elikwu&Adio, 2015); provides raw materials for the industrial sector, promotes technological advancement and employment for ever increasing population (Akpan, Okon&Udoka, 2014). However, much remains to be learned about the inter-relationship between agriculture value chain and sustainable development of small and medium scale enterprises in Nigeria. Howbeit, Zubeiru (2018) states that, it is a widely recognized fact that increased productivity in agriculture increases broad base development capacity, especially in the less advanced countries. Corroborating the above assertion, it is opined that in most developing countries, agriculture is both the main traditional pursuit and the key to sustained development of modern economy, as diversification of the economy; employment and technological advancement have gone simultaneously with agricultural progress. Hence, any stagnation in agriculture translates to poor economic performance, while rising agricultural productivity leads to industrialization.


Nigeriais greatly endowed with variety of agricultural produce which can provide stimulus for the growth of processing industries. Value addition in agricultural produce provides ample opportunities for revenue generation and employment creation. Value addition is a vital component of the overall strategy towards addressing agricultural productivity, curbing post-harvest losses and ensuring food security (FAO, 2012). Processing agricultural produce into various innovative products promotes market acceptability and gives the products high economic value (Onwualu, 2012) which increases productivity and contributes to economic growth. Value chainsare the full range of activities required to bring a product or service from conception, through the intermediary phases of production and delivery to final consumers. The value chain concept is no doubt revolutionizing the agriculture industry, as focus has shifted from agricultural production to consumer demand, marketing and the coordination of product flows from producer to consumer (Olagunju, Babatunde&Salimonu, 2012). Hence, value chainsresides at the core of high-impact and sustainable initiatives focused on improving productivity, competitiveness, entrepreneurship and development of small and medium enterprises.


Small businesses represent a veritable vehicle for the achievement of national economic objectives of employment generation, increased productivity and development of entrepreneurial capabilities including indigenous technology. Other intrinsic benefits of vibrant SMEs include access to the infrastructural facilities occasioned by the existence of such SMEs in their surroundings, the stimulation of economic activities such as suppliers of various items and distributive trades for items produced and or needed by the SMEs (Olagunju, 2013), stemming from rural urban migration, enhancement of standard of living of the employees of the SMEs and their dependents and contribute to economic diversification and social stability.In both developed and emerging economies, the participation of small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs) in promoting agricultural value chain is seen as critical to the development of any economy. Thus, from the foregoing, the need to develop SMEs in promoting sustainable development of the various small business operators within the agricultural value chain cannot be over-emphasized; hence, this dissertation empirically analyses strategic entrepreneurship management and its’ effects on sustainable development of agro-allied small businesses in South-South, Nigeria.


1.2 Statement of the problem

Over the last two decades, owing to the rapid and steady decline in strategic and creative thinking, decline in proper decision making by entrepreneurs and policy makers, and the absence of the capacity of small business owners to simultaneous exploit opportunities innovatively to create competitive advantage for business sustainability, emphasis in entrepreneurship literature has centred on basic managerial skills for entrepreneurs; later came the advocacy for accounting skills needed to boost entrepreneurial competencies. However, reports of high rate of business failures owned by entrepreneurs with adequate funds, accounting and managerial abilities calls for further investigations. A review of extant literature showed relationship between production capabilities and development of small-scale manufacturing enterprises (Unam&Unam, 2013); entrepreneurial skills in resource acquisition strategies and profitability of SMEs (Mohammed &Nzelibe, 2014); however, there is no available literature within the strategic entrepreneurship management construct, focusing on resource mobilisation capacity as it affects productivity of agro-allied small businesses in Nigeria.


1.3 Objective of the study

The objective of this study is to determine the effect of resource mobilisation capacity on sustainable increase in productivity of agro-allied small businesses in South-South Nigeria;


The significance of this study was premised on two major pedestals – first, that agriculture has remained the most crucial sector of the Nigerian economy upon which nearly all other sectors depend for growth and development; and secondly the contemporary nature of the study, since the government is presently seeking ways to improve the productivity of the sector and diversify the economy. Hence, the findings and recommendations of this study would be of enormous benefits to academic works, as it is a significant and major contribution to the body of knowledge, which fills the gap in contemporary literature on the strategic entrepreneurship management and development of sustainable agro-allied small businesses in Nigeria.


  1. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Conceptual framework

Resource mobilisation is sourcing andobtaining resources which are inputs into the production process. Resources include items of capital equipment, skills of individual employees, patents, brand names and finance among others. Only few resources are productive on their own if left alone.Sustainable development is ability to produce goods and services on a continuous basis to maintain manageable levels of government and external debt and to avoid extreme sector imbalances which can damage agricultural or industrial production.Productivity is index of the ratio of the value of total output to the value of the total inputs used in the agro-related production. Production efficiency isattaining production goals without wastages. Efficiency is an important factor of productive growth, specifically in developing economies where resources are meagre and opportunities for developing and adopting better technologies are limited.


Murray (2008) asserted that capacity or capability is a socially complex routine that determines the efficiency of the physical transformation of inputs to outputs. Capabilities are ordinarily not traded in factor markets. They are therefore built internally and can be difficult to imitate. A capability is the capacity for a team of resources to perform some task or activity (Grant, 1991). Capabilities refer to a firm’s capacity to deploy resources, usually in combination, using organisational processes, to produce a desired effect (Stalk, Evans & Shulman 1992). Hence, the presence of capability enables resources to begin to be utilized and the potential for the creation of output arises. The concept of ‘capability’ is the capacity of a firm to convert resources they possess into the products (goods or services). Quality goods or services might be produced by either ‘good resources’ or ‘average capability’/‘average resources’ or ‘good capability’, if capability were a type of ‘score’ of capability, particular to each firm (good firms have a high ‘capability score’). The difference, or possibly the uniqueness, of a firm largely comes from these capabilities (Foss, 2005).


According to Alexander (2005), organisations in general have three types of capabilities: basic functionalcapabilities, which includesmarketing, finance, operations, and research and development (Stalk, Evans & Shulman, 1992). Firms differ in the content of their capabilities as well as the strength of their management. Dynamic improvement capabilities according to Foss (2005), enables organisations manage change, be responsive and flexible; the learning and innovation capability (Priem& Butler, 2001). The concept exists that firms can “learn to learn.” This concept is sometimes called double-loop learning. Firms with the capability of learning to learn have less need of specific capabilities because they can adapt on the fly (Bhave, 1994).


Entrepreneurial capabilitiesare those that use the firm’s resources and develop new ones strategically (Buchanan, 2003). The ultimate goal which entrepreneurs have difficulties achieving remains sustainable competitive advantage. Sustainable competitive advantage occurs when the firm is able to create and capture value and protect it against erosion from competition (Millman& El-Gringo, 2004). There are limits to the degree to which a capability can be a source of sustainable competitive advantage. Competitors attempt to imitate successful products, services and value-creating strategies. Capabilities are diminished when key people retire, or the chemistry or culture of work groups and departments’ changes, or another firm develops a better capability (Dollinger, 2008).


Dollinger (2008) posited that resources are valuablewhen they help the organisation implement its strategy effectively and efficiently, which means that in a “strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats” model of firm performance, a valuable resource exploits opportunities or minimizes threats in the firm’s environment. A valuable resource is useful for the venture’s operation (Millman& El-Gringo, 2004). Valuable resources and capabilities are financial, technology/equipment, people and knowledge/skills such as marketing, finance, accounting and technical (Tokuda, 2005).


Financial resources represent money assets. Financial resources are generally the firm’s borrowing capacity, its ability to raise new equity, and the amount of cash generated by internal operations (Porter, 1980; Sharon, l994). Being able to raise money at below-average cost is an advantage attributable to the firm’s credit rating and previous financial performance. Various indicators of a venture’s financial resources and financial management skills are its debt-to-equity ratio, its cash-to-capital investment ratio, and its external credit rating (Baumol, Panzer &Willig, 2008). Although start-up entrepreneurs see that access to financial resources is the key to getting into business (it is certainly a necessary component), most agree that financial resources are seldom the source of sustainable competitive advantage.


Intellectual (Knowledge) and human resources according to Dollinger (2008), stated include the entrepreneur’s knowledge, training and experience, and his or her team of employees and managers. It includes the judgment, insight, creativity, vision, and intelligence of the individual members of an organisation. It can even include the social skills of the entrepreneur (McMullen & Shepherd, 2006). Entrepreneurs often perceive great opportunities where others see only competition or chaos; therefore, entrepreneurial perception is a resource. The entrepreneur’s values and his or her beliefs about cause and effect can form the initial imprint of the firm’s culture. Entrepreneurs who believe in racial and cultural diversity and can build a workforce around these values are even more successful than those who do not practice diversity (Tokuda, 2005). A new study indicates that diversity interacts with strategy in three ways to enhance performance: improves productivity, improves return on equity, and improves market performance (Porter, 1980, 1985).


Dollinger (2008) described technological resources as consisting of processes, systems or physical transformations. They may include labs, research and development facilities, and testing and quality control technologies. Knowledge generated by research and development and then protected by patents is a resource (Hambrick, 1983), as are formulas, licences, trademarks, and copyrights. Technological secrets and proprietary processes are resources as well.


There is a distinction between technological capital and intellectual capital. Dollinger (2008) asserted that, Intellectual capital is embodied in a person or persons and is mobile. If the person or persons leave the firm, so does the capital. Wright (2011) argued that technological resources are physical, intangible, or legal entities and are owned by the organisation. Technological resources such as, machines, computer systems, equipment, machine, tools, robots, complicated electronics, and so on, cannot be the basis for sustainable competitive advantage because they can be duplicated and reproduced (Murray, 2008). There are enough mobile and capable engineering and scientific human resources to take apart and put together any of this complex technology. A patent, however, might make it illegal for a firm’s competition to commercially develop an exact copy. However, complex technology is not worthless as a source of competitive advantage (Okorie, Kwa, Olusunle, Akinyanmi&Momoh, 2014). Although a number of firms may have the same complex technology, one firm may be more adept at exploiting this technology through its human or organisational resources. If the method of exploiting the technology is not easy to imitate, then other resources can augment technology to provide needed capabilities (Stalk, et al., 1992, Okorie, et al., 2008, Murray, 2008)plays a pivot role in the context of a sustainable economy.


Productivity is one of the key determinants of high and sustained growth and in fact a key determinant of long term growth. It remains a vital economic driver for developed and developing countries and would play a critical role in eradicating poverty especially in low-income countries. The agricultural sector generates a substantial level of revenue while increasing real income (Christiaensen& Demery, 2007). It not only employs an estimated 70 percent of the work-force in low income countries, but it is also a major contributor to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) estimated at approximately 30 percent (The World Bank, 2007).


Productivity can be defined as the index of the ratio of the value of total output to the value of the total inputs used in the agro related production (Olayemi, 2012). Productivity is measured by analyzing records of production volume by product line, type and production time (Adamides& Mead, 2006), while the productivity of the main processing lines is compared with data for main competitors where possible (Palamarchuk, 2010). Productivity in the agricultural sector is measured by value added. By definition, agricultural productivity is the primary source of economic growth and poverty reduction in most agriculture-based economies. The expansion of smallholder farming can lead to a faster rate of growth, by raising the incomes of rural cultivators and reducing food expenditure, and thus reduces income inequality (Magingxa& Kamara 2003; Bahram&Chitemi 2008).


The argument that firm growth causes higher productivity is based on the assumption that economies of scale exists; meaning that firms experience a decline in average costs as output increases (Amulu, 2014). The flaw in this argument becomes clear when one considers that SMEs tend not to operate in industries where economies of scale are present, precisely because these are not industries where they are likely to be competitive. On the other hand, economic theory supports the premise that higher productivity causes small and medium enterprise growth, since productivity can be a source of competitive advantage such as low cost production (Nichter, 2004). Adopting the framework presented above and its treatment of the role of capabilities in small and medium enterprise growth, the causal model would go something like this: factors such as education and experience can directly increase the capabilities of SMEs overs and employees; these individuals are then more likely, to adopt or create practices that heighten productivity levels, and this added productivity then contributes to growth. In reality, both of the arguments presented above appear to hold some truth (Amulu, 2014).

2.2 Theoretical framework

The Resource-based theory of entrepreneurship posits that access to resources by entrepreneurs and business owners is a significant indicator for business growth (Alvarez &Busenitz, 2001). This theory stresses the importance of financial and human resources (Aldrich, 1999). Thus, access to resources enhances the individual’s ability to detect and act upon discovered opportunities (Davidson & Honing, 2003). Financial, social and human capital represents three classes of theories under the resource – based entrepreneurship theories.

2.3 Empirical Review

Uwaleke and Elikwu (2017) evaluated the effects of equity investment financing on operational capacity development of SMEs in Nigeria. The descriptive – survey research design was employed, while the posited hypotheses were tested with a sample size of 327 respondents, using the ordinary least square logistic regression. The findings reveal that, there is a significant effect of equity investment financing on operational capacity (productivity) of SMEs in Nigeria. Hence, it is recommended that, for effectiveness of equity capital financing as a credible means of developing operational capacity (production efficiency and output) of SMEs, the government should put in place adequate infrastructures to reduce the cost of doing business in Nigeria, which will reduce volatility in cost of capital. Also, In order to achieve operational capacity (productivity) and growth, owners of SMEs should acquire basic technical and managerial skills; this will help them effectively utilize sourced funds.


Rahim and Bakar (2014) in a study investigated the impact of financial resources management on SME performance, both in the context of young and small enterprises and the process of launching new products which will eventually have an impact on performance. The sample size consisted of 500 SMEs producing diversified products and services with total respondents of 270 SMEs. The findings revealed that, financial resources management is a critical aspect of an entrepreneur’s human capital that is valuable in the discovery and exploitation of opportunities. Prudent financial resources management has significant impact on the increases of a firm’s stock, access to information, acquisition of skills for productivity and organisational performance.


Chen (2014) in a study investigated financial effects and firm performance in Chinese manufacturing firms. The study employed a large panel of Chinese manufacturing firm data in 1998-2007 and established productivity models applying both direct and indirect approaches. The findings revealed that financial factors are highly decisive to firms’ total factor productivity and production productivity. Increases of the availability of finance to firms can directly improve productivity at firm level. The effects of finance on productivity are also related to firm’s liquidity, ownership, export status, state share, foreign investment and sensitivity of cash flow to productivity.


Olagunju (2013) explored the structure, the financial viability of agro-processing industries and the effect of credit access on value addition (value chain financing) by different agro-processing units in Oyo State, Nigeria. A multistage random sampling method was used to select a sample of 160 credit and non-credit agro-processors by using proportional allocation method. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The extent of value addition has been about 34% and 20% for credit and non-credit users in the cassava mill sector respectively. The maximum value addition has been observed in fruits/vegetable processing (103%) followed by cashew based units. The results obtained for the processors with credit indicated that they are efficient than their counterparts producing without credit. This result points to the positive impact of credit on value chain activities. There was under capacity utilization in almost all types of processing industries in the state due to lack of adequate supplies of raw material, bottlenecks in market penetration and marketing strategies, inadequate credit. The break-even output is very low hence the agro industries in the state were running into loss due to low capacity utilization. Improvement in basic infrastructure like developing railway links, metallic roads, cool chains, adequate/ uninterrupted power supply, disposal of sewage/ industrial effluents, housing, control of traffic congestion can bring a positive change on resource utilization.


Unam and Unam, (2013) in a study assessed the role of Microfinance Banks (MFBs) in promoting the production capabilities and development of small-scale manufacturing enterprises in Nigeria. Data for the study was obtained through structured questionnaire administered to 40 small-scale manufacturing enterprises. This was complemented with an interview on five officials of MFBs. The results showed that MFBs provided both financial and social intermediation services which had significant effect on the productivity of the small-scale businesses. This study recommended that MFBs should intensify in the provision of social intermediation services, and Nigerian government should develop infrastructure like power and transport systems in order to reduce the cost of production.


Kipene, Lazaro and Isinika (2013) examined labour productivity performance of small agro-processing firms in Mbeya and Morogoro, Tanzania, focusing on the effect of human capital factors. A survey of 107 agro-processing firms was conducted in Mbeya and Morogoro Regions, Tanzania. Descriptive statistics and regression analysis was employed in estimating the effect of factors on labour productivity. Results show that the trend of labour productivity among different types of small agro-processing firms varies. Animal feed, cooking oil and milling firms tend to have higher labour productivity than bakeries and milk processing firms. Moreover, the experience of workers, education of managers and female managers has a positive effect on labour productivity in small agro-processing firms. Contrary to expectations, the number of workers with education above standard seven has a negative effect on labour productivity. Through these findings the study recommends investment in physical and human capital factors for the growth of labour productivity and employment creation.


Mohammed and Nzelibe (2014) examined the skills required by entrepreneurs for the enhancement of the performance of SMEs, find solutions to the problems facing the SMEs in Nigeria and identify the option strategies needed by new ventures as demonstration alternatives. The study focused on the issues of resource acquisition strategies and challenges militating against prosperity and profitability of SMEs in Nigeria. The study used simple t-test and survey methodology through questionnaire (administered) as an instrument of primary data collection from a stratified random sample of 250 owners and employees of SMEs in major industrial cities in Nigeria. Major findings include entrepreneurial skills, proper record keeping, access to financing, concessional taxation, longer period of operation and consistent policies were found to be significant factors required for business success and profitability in Nigeria. Seminars and workshops are recommended to improve SMEs entrepreneurs‟ capabilities, as well as the institutional co-ordination of the efforts of relevant agencies and institutions, and the streaming of the myriad of taxes stifling SMEs.

  1. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research design

The research design used in this study was the cross-sectional survey design, associated with the deductive approach used for descriptive research purpose, on the basis that it involves sampling of elements selected from the population of interest, collection of quantitative data to be measured at a single point in time.


3.2 Population of the study

The population of SMEs for this study consisted of all agro-allied SMEs in the selected States, of the South-South region, registered with the states’ MSME development agencies and the states’ Ministries of Trade Commerce and Industry; with a minimum capital base of one million Naira.


3.3 Sample and sampling

The determination of the sample size for obtaining respondents’ responses was premised on statistical estimation model considering degree of confidence (Ihemeje, Umeh&Ogbanje, 2011) expected from this type of study. For the purpose of determining the minimum returnable sample size from the given population, the Taro Yamane (1967) sample size estimation technique was employed.


Based on the applied sample estimation technique, a sample size of three hundred and eighty seven (387) was arrived at, as the sample size of agro-allied small and medium scale enterprises registered with the AkwaIbom Micro-Finance and Enterprise Development Agency (AKMEDA), the Delta Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Agency (DSMSMEDA) and the Rivers state Micro Finance Agency (RIMA). However, in order to achieve a minimum response rate of 65% as posited by Cochran (1977) and Bartlett, Kotrlik and Higgins (2001),


Furthermore, for the purpose of this study, the multistage random sampling techniques were adopted. This was because the study captured multi-chain aggregate study groups which formed different clusters (firms in various stages of the value chain); hence, the multistage sampling technique. The stratified sampling was adopted to select only SMEs in Agricultural related businesses, from registered SMEs in AkwaIbom, Delta and Rivers states; the cluster sampling was adopted to further group the SMEs according to the value chain they belong; while the random sampling was adopted to give every member of the population the opportunity of being selected.


For the purpose of this study, both primary and secondary data were collected for the purpose of analysis and test of postulated hypotheses. The primary data for the study were collected through the administration of a structured and close-ended questionnaire, which served as the instrument for data collection.

The questionnaire being an instrument of primary data collection based on stated research questions was structured in close-ended five-point Likert scale and sub-divided into four main sub-sections.


Table 3.7: Reliability Test Result

S/N

Questionnaire Constructs

Cronbach Alpha Reliability Result

Number of Items

Remark

1

Strategic Entrepreneurship Management (SEM)

0.776

6

Reliable

2

Sustainable Technological Advancement (STA)

0.825

5

Reliable

3

Sustainable Capacity Utilization (SCU)

0.769

5

Reliable

4

Sustainable Employment Generation (SEG)

0.792

5

Reliable

5

Sustainable Increase in Productivity Level (SIP)

0.920

5

Reliable

6.

Sustainable Financial Performance (SFP)

0.888

5

Reliable

7.

Sustainable Business Growth (SBG)

0.931

5

Reliable

Source: SPSS 22.0


Reliability test was conducted for each of the latent variable based on the number item that measured it. The result indicated that all the variables are reliable and are certified for further analysis, as all the variables have values of the Cronbach Alpha above 0.7. A value of 0.7, Pallant (2004) asserted is generally recommended, however, Hinton, Brownlow, McMurray and Cozens (2004) stated that, an “Alpha score above 0.75 is generally taken to have a high reliability.


For the purpose of primary data collection, a total of five hundred and ninety five (595) copies of the structured close-ended questionnaire.

3.4 Analytical technique

The evaluation of the relationship between dependent and independent variables was performed using the Ordinary Least Square regression technique. The first step involved defining the variables of interest.


3.5 Model specification

Therefore, the general form for the model is given as:

Y= f (X1, X2,Xn) …………..…………………………. 1

Where:

Y = dependent variable of Sustainable Development of Agro-Allied Small Businesses;

f = a function to be specified

X = independent variable of Strategic Entrepreneurship Management


In specific form, equation 1translates into equation 2 thus:

Y = a + X1 + X2 + X3 +………, + Xn + e……………….…………… 2

a = constant

x1, x2, x3,…………,xn are independent variables e = residual or stochastic term (which reveals the strength of x1 … xn; if e is low, this implies that the amount of unexplained factors is low, then the residual R and R2 will be high and vice versa.

The functional model for the independent variable is stated as follows:


RMC = f (FIC, HCC, PRC, RMS) ………………….…………………………… 3


SIP = Sustainable Productivity (Output and Efficiency)


FIC3 = Financial Capacity

HCC4 = Human Capital Capacity

PRC5 = Production Capacity

RMS6 = Raw Materials Sourcing Capacity

β0 = Unknown constant to be estimated

β1 = Unknown coefficients to be estimated

Ui= Error Term

β1> 0

The ‘a priori expectation’ in the model is that the independent variable is expected to have a positive relationship and effect on sustainable development of agro-allied small businesses, measured by sustainable technological advancement, sustainable capacity utilization, sustainable employment generation, sustainable productivity (output and efficiency), sustainable financial performance and sustainable business growth. The mathematical expression is represented as; β1 – β5 > 0 implying that a unit increase in the independent variables will lead to increase in Sustainable Development of Agro-allied Small Businesses by a unit.


  1. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION


Table 4.1: How resource mobilisation capacity increases productivity of agro-allied small businesses in South-South Nigeria

 Variables

Agreement Scale


SA

(%)

A

(%)

UN

(%)

D

(%)

SD

(%)

Resource mobilisation capacityas an indicator of SEMcanhelp achieve zero wastage level in operational process


36%


53%


2%


6%


3%

Resource mobilisation capacityas an indicator of SEMcanhelp production output meet market demand


38%


54%


2%


5%


1%

Resource mobilisation capacityas an indicator of SEMcanensure available personnel are skilled and competent to achieve optimum operational efficiency


41%


57%


1%


1%


0

Resource mobilisation capacityas an indicator of SEMcanhelp maintain a minimum level of operational and overhead costs


33%


62%


3%


1%


%

Resource mobilisation capacityas an indicator of SEMcanhelp to achieve quality and target output of products


28%


65%


3%


2%


2%

Source: Field Survey (2020)


The analysis revealed that, 89% of the sample size agreed that, resource mobilisation capacityas an indicator of strategic entrepreneurship management can help achieve zero wastage level in operational process.The analysis indicates that, 92% of the sample size agreed that, resource mobilisation capacityas an indicator of strategic entrepreneurship management can help production output meet market demand. The 98% of the sample size agreed that, resource mobilisation capacityas an indicator of strategic entrepreneurship management can ensure available personnel are skilled and competent to achieve optimum operational efficiency.Also, on whether resource mobilisation capacityas an indicator of strategic entrepreneurship management canhelp maintain a minimum level of operational and overhead costs, 95% of the sample size agreed that, resource mobilisation capacityas an indicator of strategic entrepreneurship management canhelp maintain a minimum level of operational and overhead costs.Finally, 93% of the sample size agreed that, resource mobilisation capacityas an indicator of strategic entrepreneurship management canhelp to achieve quality and target output of products.

4.1 RESULTS


Table 4.2:Regression Result on resource mobilisation capacity of strategic entrepreneurship management and effect on sustainable productivity

Dependent Variable: SIP



Method: Least Squares



Date: 06/08/18 Time: 20:29



Sample: 487




Included observations: 487













Variable

Coefficient

Std. Error

t-Statistic

Prob.  











FIC

0.132630

0.136447

3.639007

0.0003

HCC

0.202404

0.243046

2.378915

0.0178

PRC

0.368742

0.341148

8.961455

0.0267

RMS

0.048259

0.024702

2.144025

0.2532

C

0.363193

0.306714

1.184139

0.2370











R-squared

0.734377

    Mean dependent var

8.171548

Adjusted R-squared

0.265793

    S.D. dependent var

3.130941

S.E. of regression

1.623890

    Akaike info criterion

3.822062

Sum squared resid

1242.035

    Schwarz criterion

3.883123

Log likelihood

-906.4727

    Hannan-Quinn criter.

3.846068

F-statistic

217.0317

    Durbin-Watson stat

1.754739

Prob(F-statistic)

0.008213




Source: Author’s Computation, 2020 (E-views 9.0)


SIP = 0.36 + 0.13 FIC + 0.2 HCC + 0.37 PRC + 0.05 RMS …………………….. (6)

SEE = 0.31: 0.13, 0.24, 0.34

= 1.18: (3.6; 2.3; 8.9, 2.1)

= 217: Prob (F-statistic) = 0.0082

R2 = 0.734: Adj. R20.2657




4.2 Interpretation of results

From table 4.14, since the calculated t-value (FIC 3.6 > 1.96; HCC2.3 > 1.96; PRC 8.9 > 1.96 and RMS 2.1 > 1.96) are greater than the tabulated value (1.96), which implies that,all the indicators (FIC, HCC, PRC and RMS) of resource mobilisation capacity individually have significant effect on sustainable productivity; we therefore, reject the null hypothesis (H03). Hence, we conclude that resource mobilisation capacity has significant effect on sustainable productivity of agro-allied small businesses in South-South Nigeria. Also, by examining the overall fit and significance of Sustainable Increase in Productivity (SIP) model, it can be observed that the model does have a good fit, as indicated by the relatively high value of the F-statistic, 217.8 and it is insignificant at the 5.0 per cent level; that is, the P Value (rho value) of 0.0082 being less than 0.05 probability levels implies that there is a 0.0082 chance that the equation as a whole is not significant.


More so, the (R-square) value of 0.734377 shows that the model does have a good fit too. It indicates that about 73.43 percent of the variation in Sustainable Increase in Productivity is explained by FIC, HCC, PRC and RMS, while the remaining 26.57 percent is captured by the error term.


The test of hypothesis three as shown in Table 4.2, the calculated t-value for FICis 3.6, HCC is 2.3, PRC is 8.9 and RMS is 2.1 (financial capacity, human capital capacity, production capacity and raw material sourcing capacity, as indicators of resource mobilisation capacity of strategic entrepreneurship management); while the tabulated value is given as ±1.96, under 95% confidence levels. Since the calculated t-value (FIC 3.6 > 1.96; HCC2.3 > 1.96; PRC 8.9 > 1.96 and RMS 2.1 > 1.96) are greater than the tabulated value (1.96), which implies that,all the indicators (FIC, HCC, PRC and RMS) of resource mobilisation capacity individually have significant effect on sustainable productivity; hence, thenull hypothesis (H03) is rejected and the alternate hypothesis accepted, which states that,resource mobilisation capacity has significant effect on sustainable productivity of agro-allied small businesses in South-South Nigeria.


4.3 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

Prior to this study, extant literature variedly discussed the concepts of entrepreneurship and strategic management (concerned with growth and wealth creation (Amit &Zott, 2001; Hitt& Ireland, 2000; Hitt, Ireland, Camp & Sexton, 2002; Morris, 1998; Priem& Butler, 2001) and strategic entrepreneurship (concerned with entrepreneurial actions, strategic actions, entrepreneurial orientation and strategic renewal as listed by Singh, 2009); however, this study projected strategic entrepreneurship management as a new concept. Since there was no extant literature that completely integrated strategic entrepreneurship management as a concept, this concept was developed as an improvement on the works of Amit and Zott (2001), Hitt and Ireland (2000), Hitt, Ireland, Camp and Sexton (2002), Morris (1998), Priem and Butler ((2001) and Singh (2009), to successfully integrate risk propensity, innovation and creativity, resource mobilisation capacity, knowledge management, strategic alliances and marketing strategies as components of strategic entrepreneurship management concept, and thus lays foundation for strategic entrepreneurship management model and theory, which is a significant contribution to the body of knowledge.


  1. CONCLUSION AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Conclusions

Based on findings of hypothesis, the study concludes that resource mobilization capacity as indicators strategic entrepreneurship management has positive and significant effect on sustainable increase in productivity of agro-allied small businesses in South-South Nigeria. This is confirmed by the analysis of research question three which shows that, resource mobilisation capacity can help achieve zero wastage level in operational processes, help production output meet market demand, engage skilled and competent manpower to achieve operational efficiency and help achieve target output of quality products.


5.2 Implications of the study

The educational implication of this study was multidimensional, as it among others. The study filled the existing gap in both literature and empirical studies regarding the absence of any study on the effect of strategic entrepreneurship management on development of sustainable agro-allied small businesses operating in South-South States of Nigeria.


Furthermore, this study established the fact that, the trend in mortality rate and stagnant nature of agro-allied businesses in South-South Nigeria can be reversed to businesses with sustainable performance, growth and development in terms of technological advancement, capacity utilisation, employment generation, increasing productivity (output and efficiency), financial performance and growth, with the adoption and integration of strategic entrepreneurship management practices. This study serves as a reference point for students, researchers, scholars, consultants and practitioners who are desirous in carrying out further research to retest and deepen the validity of strategic entrepreneurship management as a new concept and model and to extend the research to areas not covered in this study.


The policy implications of this dissertation on the empirical analysis of the effect of strategic entrepreneurship management on development of sustainable agro-allied small businesses in Nigeria, among others include; Integration of the strategic entrepreneurship management model into the training and capacity development modules for empowerment schemes prior to disbursements of loans and grants. This will help reduce mortality rate of businesses and foster increased collaborations to sustain development of agro-allied businesses in Nigeria; Reduce constraints to accesses to long-term agricultural loans needed for economic activities, promote technological advancement, encourage employment generation and boost productivity for sustained diversification and economic growth; Prioritise the provision of supportive infrastructures needed to drive the agro-allied sector, as this will provide a platform for sustainability of business productivity, growth and expansion; stimulate innovative and creative participation of youths in the agricultural sector to reduce the rising unemployment and insecurity in Nigeria.


5.3 Recommendations of the study

Since the finding of hypothesis three revealed that, resource mobilisation capacity has significant effect on sustainable productivity of agro-allied small businesses in Nigeria, the following recommendations are therefore proffered. Since the findings reveal the constraints being encountered in accessing long term finance to boost productivity, it is recommended that, efforts should be made to educate the small business entrepreneurs on the benefits of equity financing as a viable option towards business growth and expansion. Also, it is recommended that the government through the various intervention agencies should restructure the long-term loan policies to give access to more growth oriented agro-allied businesses, to increase their presently low capacity to procure heavy duty technology to increase productivity and achieve food security in Nigeria. Owing to the abundance but high cost of raw materials needed for uninterrupted operations, it is recommended that, small business owners should take advantage of the membership of cooperative societies and as well maintain good business relationship with suppliers; this will guarantee continuous supply of needed materials and uninterrupted operations of the business.


REFERENCES

  1. Adamides, E. D., & Mead, I. L. (2006). Transferring capabilities in international manufacturing operations: The role of the home manufacturing knowledge management practices and attitudes: Journal of Operations Management, 16, 195-214.

  2. Adesoye, A.F. (2015) Effect of medium term expenditure framework on budgetary process and performance in Nigeria; A comparative analysis of the pre and post MTEF introduction era; Unpublished M.Sc Thesis submitted to the school of Postgraduate Studies, Nasarawa State University Keffi

  3. Akpan, S.B., Okon, U.E., &Udoka, S.J. (2014). Assessment of empirical relationships among remittances and agricultural productivity indicators in Nigeria (1970-2012): American Journal of Economics; 4(1), 52-61

  4. Alexander, K. (2005). From Google to Noodles: A Chef Strikes Out on His Own: New

  5. Amulu, C.C. (2014) Entrepreneurial development and growth of small scale industries in Enugu State: A study of selected small-scale enterprises; A Master thesis submitted in partial fulfilment for the award of Master in Business Administration (MBA) degree in management, department of management, faculty of business administration, University of Nigeria Enugu Campus

  6. Awotide, B.A., Abdoulaye, T., Alene, A., & Manyong, V.M. (2015). Impact of access to credit on agricultural productivity: Evidence from smallholder cassava farmers in Nigeria: A contributed paper prepared for oral presentation at the International Conference of Agricultural Economists, Milan Italy, August 9 - 14

  7. Barham, J., & Chitemi, C. (2008). Collective action initiatives to improve marketing performance lessons from farmer groups in Tanzania, Collective action for property rights (Capri) Working Paper No. 74.

  8. Baumol, W. Panzer, J. &Willig, R. (2008). Contestable markets and the theory of industry structure: New York: McGraw Hill

  9. Buchanan, L. (2003) “Bringing back a classic,” Inc., August 2003: 46

  10. Burrone, E., & Jaiya, G. S. (2005). Intellectual Property (IP) Rights and innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises Geneva: World intellectual property organisation.

  11. Castillejo, A., Barrachina, M., Llopis, A., & Samchis, J. (2012). The role of process innovation on SME growth; Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology

  12. Chauvin, N.D., Mulangu, F., & Porto, G. (2012). Food production and consumption trends in Sub-saharan Africa: Prospects for the transformation of the agricultural sector; United Nations Development Program (UNDP), Regional Bureau for Africa, WP 2012-011: February 2012.

  13. Chen, M. (2014). Financial effects and firm productivity: Evidence from Chinese manufacturing data, School of Economics, University of Nottingham Journal, 6(13), pp, 1-33

  14. Christiaensen, L., & Demery, L. (2007). Down to earth agriculture and poverty reduction in Africa, The World Bank Group.

  15. Dollinger, M.J. (2008). Entrepreneurship strategies and resources; (4th ed), Lombard, Illinois U.S.A., Marsh Publications

  16. Dong, F., Lu, J., & Featherstone, A.M. (2010). Effects of credit constraints on productivity and rural household income in China: Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011-1070. Working Paper 10-WP 516, www.card.iastate.edu

  17. Efendioglu, U. (2010): Technology development and capacity-building for competitiveness in a digital society: A concept note, UN Commission on Science and Technology: UNCTAD.

  18. Emas, R. (2015). The concept of sustainable development: Definition and defining principles; Florida International University

  19. Eze, C.C. (2010). Agricultural finance policies and rural development in Nigeria; Paper delivered at the 84th Annual Conference of the Agricultural Economics society Edinburgh 29-31st, March.

  20. FAO. (2012). The business model approach for agribusiness-led development: FAO’s contributions to value chains methodology presented at the 3rd Raw Materials Research and Development Council (RMRDC) International Conference, Abuja

  21. Foss, Nicolai J., & Lyngsie, J. (2011). The emerging strategic entrepreneurship field: Origins, Key Tenets, and Research Gaps (January 22, 2011).

  22. Hazarika, G., & Alwang, J. (2003). Access to credit, plot size and cost inefficiency among smallholder tobacco cultivators in Malawi. Agricultural Economics, 29(1), pp. 99-109.

  23. Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., Camp, S. M., & Sexton, D. L. (2002), "Strategic Entrepreneurship: Integrating entrepreneurial and strategic management perspectives In M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, S. M. Camp and Sexton D. L. (eds), Strategic Entrepreneurship: Creating a New Integrated Mindset, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

  24. Zhang, Q. X., Ling, Y. F., Sun, Z., Zhang, L., Yu, H. X., Kamau, S. M., & Lu, R. R. (2012). Protective effect of whey protein hydrolysates against hydrogen peroxide-induced oxidative stress on PC12 cells. Biotechnology letters34(11), 2001-2006.

  25. Kipene, V., Lazaro, E., &Isinika, A.C. (2013). Labour productivity performance of small agro-processing firms in Mbeya and Morogoro, Tanzania: Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development,4(3), pp. 125 - 134

  26. Koutsomanoli-Filippaki, A., Margaritis, D., & Staikouras, C. (2009). Efficiency and productivity growth in the banking industry of Central and Eastern Europe: Journal of Banking and Finance; 33 (2009) 557–567

  27. Lans, T., Verstegen, J., & Mulder, M. (2011). Analysing, pursuing and networking: Towards a validated three-factor framework for entrepreneurial competence from a small firm perspective. International Small Business Journal, 29(6), 695-713.

  28. McMullen, J., & Shepherd, D. (2006). “Entrepreneurial action and the role of uncertainty in the theory of the entrepreneur,” Academy of Management Review 31 (1), 132-150.

  29. Meeusen, W., & Van de Broeck, J. (1977) Efficiency estimation from Cobb-Douglas production function with compared error”, International Economic Review,18(2), 435-444

  30. Mendola, M. (2007). Agricultural technology adoption and poverty reduction: A propensity-score matching analysis for rural Bangladesh; Food Policy 32 (3), 372–393.

  31. Mohammed, U.D., & Nzelibe, C.G.O. (2014). Entrepreneurial skills and profitability of small and medium enterprises (SMEs): Resource acquisition strategies for new ventures in Nigeria; Proceedings of 25th International Business Research Conference 13 - 14 January, 2014, Taj Hotel, Cape Town, South Africa.

  32. Monday, J.U., Akinola, G.O., Ologbenla, P., & Aladeraji, O.K. (2015). Strategic management and Firm Performance: A study of selected manufacturing companies in Nigeria: European Journal of Business and Management; 7(2), pp 161 - 171

  33. Muritala, T., Awolaja, A.M., & Bako, Y.A. (2012). Impact of small and medium enterprises on economic growth and development: American Journal of Business and Management; 1(1). Pp. 18 - 22

  34. Murray, A. (2008). “A contingency view of Porter’s generic strategies,” Academy of Management Review 13, 390–400;

  35. Simeon, N. (2004). Enhancing productive opportunities in rural Pernambuco: Community-driven development in Brazil; Harvard Kennedy School of Government, Massachusetts

  36. Nikiforos, M. (2011). “On the desired rate of capacity utilization:” Economics Department Working Paper Series, 16/2011. New York, NY: The New School for Social Research.

  37. Nwosu, F.O., Oguoma, N.N., Ben-Chendo, N.G., & Henri-Ukoha, A. (2010). The agricultural credit guarantee scheme fund: Its roles, problems and prospects in Nigeria’s quest for agricultural development, Researcher, 2(3), pp. 87-90.

  38. Okorie, N.N., Kwa, D.O., Olusunle, O.O., Akinyanmi, A.O., & Momoh I.M. (2014). Technopreneurship: An urgent need in the material world for sustainable Nigeria; European Scientific Journal. 10.

  39. Olagunju F.I. (2013) Impact of credit access on value chain activities of Agro-processing industries in Oyo State, Nigeria: International Journal of Agric-Science 3(8): 636-648,

  40. Onwualu, A.P. (2012). Agricultural sector and National Development: Focus on value chain approach: 5th edition of the Annual Lecture of Onitsha Chamber of Commerce: Onitsha – Anambra State, Nigeria

  41. Radam, A., Abu, M.L., & Abdullah, A.M. (2008). Technical efficiency of small and medium enterprise in Malaysia: A Stochastic frontier production model;Int. Journal of Economics and Management 2(2), 395 – 408

  42. Rahim, H.A., & Bakar, S.M. (2014). The Impact of Financial Resources Management on SME Performance: International Journal of Humanities and Social Science; 4(9), pp. 198 -200

  43. Sazali, A.M., Alias R., & Rossazana A. R. (2014). Technical efficiency on furnitureindustry in Malaysia; The Asian Economic Review Journal of the Indian Institute of Economics, 46 (2), 377-384.

  44. Singh, G. (2009). Strategy, innovation and entrepreneurship: The strategy, innovation and entrepreneurship nexus in the biotechnology small and medium enterprises (SMEs); A Thesis presented for the degree of Doctor of Business Administration of the University of Western Australia, Graduate School of Management

  45. Stalk, G., Evans, P., & Shulman, L. E. (1992). Competing on capabilities: The new rules of corporate strategy. Harvard business review70(2), 57-69.

  46. Stoddart, H. (2011). A Pocket guide to sustainable development governance: Stakeholder Forum

  47. Tokuda, A. (2005). The critical assessment of the resource-based view of strategic management: The source of heterogeneity of the firm; Ritsumeikan International Affairs, 3, pp.125-150

  48. Unam, M.J., & Unam, F.J. (2013). Promoting production capabilities of small-scale manufacturing business through microfinance banking in Nigeria: JORIND 11(2) December, 2013, www.transcampus.org/journals; www.ajol.info/journals/jorind

  49. UNCTAD. (2011). TNC-SME Linkages for development: Issues, Experiences, Best Practices, Geneva

  50. UNDP. (2001). Human development report 2001: Making new technologies work for human development, New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  51. Uwaleke, U.J., Elikwu, M.I., & Adio, A.I. (2017). Equity investment financing and operational capacity development of SMEs in Nigeria: Journal of Educational Research and Entrepreneurship Development, 1(1), 68-86

  52. World Bank. (2007). Agriculture for development, World development report 2008:World Bank, Washington DC

  53. World Bank. (2008). Agriculture for development, World development Report 2009: World Bank, Washington DC

  54. Wright, P. (2011). “A refinement of Porter’s Strategies,” Strategic Management Journal 9: 93–101.

  55. Zeller, M., Diagne, A., & Mataya, M.C. (2007). Market access by smallholder farmers in Malawi: Implications for technology adoption, agricultural productivity and crop income; Journal of Agricultural Economics. 19(1-2): 219-229.

  56. Zubeiru, E.I. (2018). Agricultural financing, productivity and economic growth in Nigeria: A Ph.D Thesis Submitted to the Department of Business Administration of the Nasarawa State University, Keffi.



About IAR Journals
International Academic & Research Consortium is a Scientific Research Consortium under the banner of IARCON Knowledge Hub Private Limited, with the main aim to promote the development and strengthening of the interfaces between various ..
View More
Copyright © 2020 International Acedemic Research Journals. All Rights Reserved.
Designed & Developed by