CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
The performance of small and medium
enterprises (SMEs) has become a very important area to researchers as they are
very important drivers of economic growth and development in any economy. SMEs
are considered to represent the driving force of sustainable local economic
development throughout the world. SMEs generate employment and diversify the
economy (Stamatovića & Zakic, 2010). In addition, SMEs are regarded as the
engines of growth and key source of dynamism, innovation and flexibility
(Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD] 2010). In most
economies, SMEs play important role in innovation, economic, social prosperity,
and poverty reduction (OECD, 2010). Haider, Asad and Fatima (2017) argued that
SMEs play an important role in economic growth, innovation and competitiveness,
which ultimately enhances the standard of living of people of any country. Similarly,
Ismail, Dassanayaka and Mudalige (n.d) opined that in addition to SMEs
contribution to economic development, SMEs play a key role in social
development, reduction of poverty through more equal distribution of wealth,
more engagement of female citizens, social stability through reduction in
unemployment, use of domestic resources thereby creating a chain of new
ventures that are important for the development of any country. According to
Small and Medium Enterprise Development Agency of Nigeria (SMEDAN) (2013), SMEs
are growth supporting sectors that not only contribute significantly to improve
living standards, but also bring substantial local capital formation and are
responsible for driving innovation and competition in developing economies. The
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] came to a
conclusion that SMEs account for approximately about 90% of firms and employ
about 70% of workforce in the world. It has 2 been observed by Abor and Quartey
(2010) that SMEs contributes significantly to the Gross Domestic Product and
employment rate of most nations of the world (OECD, 2016). Precisely, in the
United Kingdom (UK), SMEs account for over 99% of the UK‟s 3.8 million
businesses, 56% of employment and 52% of total UK GDP (Peprah, Mensah &
Akosah, 2016). Also in India, SMEs contribute about 45% of industrial output,
40% of exports, employ 60 million people, create 1.3 million jobs every year
and produce more than 8,000 quality products for the Indian and international
markets (Capacity Development Centre, 2012). And more recently SMEs contribute
about 45% to the Indian GDP (Indian Bureau, of Statistics, Author Article,
2016) Abor and Quartey (2010) opined that in the report of United Nations
Industrial Development Organisation, (UNIDO) in 1999, SMEs represent over 90%
of private business and contribute to more than 50% of employment and of GDP in
most African countries. For example in Ghana, SMEs in the report of Capacity
Development Centre Ghana, 2012, contribute not less than 75% to the GDP and
therefore have significant impact on economic growth and accounted for about
75% of the nations total employment. In South Africa, SMEs contribute between
52% and 57% to the country‟s GDP and provide about 61% of employment to the
citizens of the country (Abor & Quartey, 2010). Also, in Nigeria SMEs for
the past five years contribute about 48% to the GDP and above 50% employment
opportunities (NBS, 2017). According to the Director, Monitoring and Research
Division, Banji Oyelaran-Oyeyinka, SMEs in countries at the same level of
development with Nigeria, contributes much higher proportion to GDP than
currently observed in Nigeria. Similarly, the minister of communication in
Nigeria, Adebayo Shittu, decried the poor contribution of the SMEs to the GDP
in Nigeria, even as noted that currently 96 percent of businesses in the
country are controlled by SMEs. Abdullahi, Abubakar, Aliyu, Umar, Umar, Sabiu,
Naisa, Khalid, and Abubakar, (2015), argued that SMEs in Nigeria should be
providing over 65% of employment to Nigerians and 3 contributes significantly
to the GDP of the country. However, the authors further argued that SMEs sector
in Nigeria remains stagnant as a result of so many problems that faces the
industry. The cause of the underperformance of SMEs in Nigeria may be
attributed to lack of access to finance (Olughor, 2015), behaviour of the
entrepreneur (Arshad, Rasli, Arshad & Zain, 2014) and the turbulence in the
business environment (Teece, 2007). As critical as these factors, the underperformance
especially in Nigeria is believed to be caused by unfavourable competitive
advantage and lack of proper orientation of the entrepreneurs. One of the
prominent reasons that have been outlined by Arshad et al., (2014) that might
be responsible for the underperformance of SMEs in Nigeria is the behaviour of
entrepreneurs, which can be referred as Entrepreneurial Orientation [EO]
(Arshad et al., 2014). EO represents the overall organisational entrepreneurial
abilities. EO may be a very important predictor of SME performance especially
when SMEs are operating in a turbulent business environment like Nigeria
(Jalali, 2012; Hoq & Chauhan, 2011). Consequently, EO may be very useful
for entrepreneurs when operating in a turbulent business environment, as turbulence
has been earmarked by Teece (2007) as one of the reasons for underperformance
of SMEs. Teece (2007) also opined that SMEs with high EO may have a superior
performance especially within fast-changing industries. EO has been studied
using different dimensions by authors. For example Miller (1983) conceptualise
EO as having three dimensions, namely, innovativeness, proactiveness and risk
taking. EO was measured using the three dimensions developed by Miller (1983),
(Mahmood & Hanafi, 2013). EO is a crucial factor that help firm to build
and sustain a competitive advantage, particularly for those firms in
fast-changing market environments. (Racela, 2014).
1.2 Statement of the Problem
SMEs that display high EO may enjoy
competitive advantage (Al-Swidi & Al-Hosam, 2012), and if sustained might
lead to superior long-term performance as argued by the resource based view of
the firm (RBV) developed by Barney (1986). The resource-based view (RBV) argues
that firms possess resources, a subset of which enables them to achieve
competitive advantage, and a subset of those that lead to superior long-term
performance. Resources that are valuable and rare can lead to the creation of
competitive advantage (Barney, 1986). Consequently, adhering to the
postulations of the RBV, competitive advantage can act as a mediator between EO
and performance. However, less attention has been paid to the mediating effect
of competitive advantage on the relationship between EO and SME performance
(Ibrahim & Mahmood, 2016). Very few studies (Ibrahim & Mahmood, 2016;
Mahmood & Hanafi, 2013) have examined the mediating effect of competitive
advantage on the relationship between EO and SME performance. Consequently,
this study aim to fill this gap of knowledge by examining the relationship
between EO and SME performance through competitive advantage. The study of
Ibrahim and Mahmood (2016) and that of Mahmood and Hanafi (2013) examined the
effect of EO on SME performance, studying competitive advantage as a mediating
variable. However, these studies (i.e., the studies of Ibrahim & Mahmood,
2016 and Mahmood & Hanafi, 2013) exhibited some weaknesses which needed to
be improved on. For example in the study of Ibrahim and Mahmood (2016), the
authors failed to report the sampling technique adopted for their study. In
addition, the authors also opted to measure EO as a unidimensional construct.
This study measured EO based on the three dimensions 5 developed by Miller
(1983). On the other hand, the study of Mahmood and Hanafi (2013), with a
population of 1040, utilised just 165 responses for analysis, which constitutes
just 15.86 response rate.
The response rate of their study is
considered not suitable for analysis (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013).
Similarly, as in the case of Ibrahim and Mahmood (2016), the study of Mahmood
and Hanafi (2013) studied EO as a unidimensional construct. EO in this study
was measured by three variables (i.e., innovativeness, proactiveness and risk
taking) which formed the independent variables of the study. Innovativeness
reflects the tendency to engage in and support new ideas, novelty,
experimentation and creative processes resulting in newness (Arshad et al.,
2014). Innovativeness has been found as an important predictor of SME
performance by different authors (e.g., Mbizi, Hove, Thondhala & Kakava,
2013; Al-Swidi & Al-Hosam, 2012). Despite the importance of innovativeness
in predicting SME performance, no study to the best knowledge of the researcher
has examined the indirect effect of innovativeness on SME performance through
competitive advantage.
Format: MS Word
Chapters: 1 - 5, Preliminary Pages, Abstract, References
Delivery: Email
Delivery: Email
No. of Pages: 115
NB: The Complete Thesis is well written and ready to use.
NB: The Complete Thesis is well written and ready to use.
Price: 10,000 NGN
In Stock
Masters Project Topics in Accounting and Finance
Our Customers are Happy!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Add Comment