Balogun K. Olalekan


This study examines the extent to which business innovation would influence firm’s competitiveness in Nigeria. The study covered South South geopolitical zone in Nigeria and 5 responds from 20 SMEs were randomly selected from Rivers, Akwa Ibom, Edo, Delta, Bayelsa and Cross River states respectively making the sample 100 respondents. Face and content validity were used in ascertaining the validity of the research instrument while Cronbach alpha was used to determine the reliability and a result of 0.7 and above was achieved for each of the constructs. Multiple regression was used in testing the null hypotheses and from our findings, both process innovation and administrative had significant effect on firms’ competitiveness. Furthermore, administrative innovation had a stronger effect. The study further recommends that entrepreneurs should ensure they venture into areas where they have passion rather than just going in for the profit. It was also recommended that government create a conducive environment for SMEs to thrive.

JEL: L20; M10; M20

Article visualizations:

Hit counter


business, innovation, competitiveness, SMEs, South South

Full Text:



Aiginger, K. (2006). Competitiveness: From a Dangerous Obsession to a Welfare Creating Ability with Positive Externalities. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 6(5), 101-119.

Ajzen, I. (1987). Attitudes, traits, and actions: Dispositional prediction of behavior in personality and social psychology. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. New York: Academic Press.

Ajzen, I, & Fishbein, M. (1969). The prediction of behavioral intentions in a choice situation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 5(4), 41-56.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Becheikh, N., Landry, R. and Amara, N. (2006). Lessons from innovation empirical studies in the manufacturing sector: a systematic review of the literature from 1993–2003 . Technovation, 26(5), 644–664.

Campos, N. F & Coricelli, F. (2002). Growth in transition: what we know, what we don’t, and what we should. Journal of Economic Literature 40(3), 793-836.

Chaminade, C. and Van-Lauridsen, J. (2006). Innovation policies for Asian SMEs: an innovation system perspective. London: Edward Elge.

Di Mauro, F., Dees, S. & McKibbin, W. J. (2008). Globalization and Economic Interdependence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Egert, B. (2002). Investigating the Balassa-Samuelson hypothesis in the transition: do we understand what we see. BOFIT Working Paper, No. 6.

Enyia, C. D. & Nwuche, C. A. (2020). Innovation: A catalyst for effective engagement and economic growth in challenging times. European Journal of management and Marketing studies 5(4), 82-95.

Eudey, G. (1998). Why is Europe forming a monetary union? Business Review, November/December, FED, Philadelphia, 13-21.

European Commission (2009). EU policy challenges 2009–2019. A report to the President. Brussels: Director-General for Internal Policies.

Featherstone, K. (1999). The Road to Maastricht. Negotiating Economic and Monetary Union. Oxford University Press: Oxford.

Findley, R., O’Rourke, K. H. (2007). Power and Plenty. Trade, War, and the World Economy in the Second Millennium. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Frishammar, J., Lichtenthaler, U. & Richtnér, A. (2013). Managing process development: key issues and dimensions in the front end. R & D Management, 43(3), 213-226.

Gilpin, R. (2000). The Challenge of Global Capitalism. The World Economy in the 21st Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Harrison, N. J. and Watson, T. (1998). The focus for innovation in small and medium service enterprises. Conference Proceedings of 27th Annual Meeting of the Western Decision Sciences Institute, (pp. 7–11). Reno, NV.

Issing, O., Gaspar, V., Angeloni, I., Tristani, O. (2001). Monetary Policy in the Euro Area. Strategy and Decision Making and the Central Bank. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kaptein, M. (2004). Business Codes of Multinational Firms: What Do they Say? Journal of Business Ethics 50(5), 10-18.

Ketels, H. M. C. (2006). Michael Porter’s Competitiveness Framework – Recent Learnings and New Research Priorities. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 6(5), 1-10.

Kowalski, P., Kowalski, T., Wihlborg, C. (2007). Poland. The EMU entry strategy vs. the monetary issues. Poznań University of Economics Review 7(2), 59-88.

Krugman, P. (1994). Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession. Foreign Affairs, vol.73(2), 15-32.

McGahan A. M. (1999). Competition, Strategy and Business Performance. California Management Review 41(3), 74–101.

Neary, P. J. (2006). Measuring Competitiveness, . IMF Working Paper, WP/06/209.

Parida, V., Patel, P. C., Frishammar, J. & Wincent, J. (2016). Managing the front-end phase of process innovation under conditions of high uncertainty. Quality & Quantity, 51(219), 1-18.

Pelkmans, J. (2006). European Integration, Methods and Economic Analysis. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.-Prentice Hall.

Porter M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: The Free Press.

Porter, M. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: The Free Press.

Porter, M. E. (2003). Building the Microeconomic Foundations of Prosperity: Findings from the Business Competitiveness Index. Global Competitiveness Report 2003-2004 of the World Economic Forum.

Rodrik, D. (1996). Understanding economic policy reform. Journal of Economic Literature 34(1), 9-41.

Siggel, E. (2006). International Competitiveness and Comparative Advantage: A Survey and a Proposal for Measurement. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade 2(1), 105-112.

Solow, R. M. (1987). Growth Theory and After. Retrieved from Nobel Prize Lecture, December 8 :

Wydawnictwo C. H. & Schwab, K. (2010). Global Competitiveness Report 2010–2011. Geneva: World Economic Forum.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2020 Balogun K. Olalekan

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The research works published in this journal are free to be accessed. They can be shared (copied and redistributed in any medium or format) and\or adapted (remixed, transformed, and built upon the material for any purpose, commercially and\or not commercially) under the following terms: attribution (appropriate credit must be given indicating original authors, research work name and publication name mentioning if changes were made) and without adding additional restrictions (without restricting others from doing anything the actual license permits). Authors retain the full copyright of their published research works and cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the license terms are followed.

Copyright © 2015-2018. European Journal of Management and Marketing Studies (ISSN 2501 - 9988) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing GroupAll rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library. All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and standards formulated by Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002), the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003) and  Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Copyrights of the published research works are retained by authors.