INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1690
www.rsisinternational.org
Moderating Effect of Management Policy on the Relationship between
Agricultural Commodity Export and Entrepreneurial Performance of
Exporting Firms in Nigeria
Victor Otaigbe Ayemere¹, Jamila Shua’ra², Nuhu Mohammed³
123
Department of Business Management and Marketing
123
Baze University, Abuja
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.51584/IJRIAS.2025.10100000151
Received: 09 October 2025; Accepted: 16 October 2025; Published: 18 November 2025
ABSTRACT
The main purpose of this study is to examine the moderating effect of management policy on the relationship
between agricultural commodity export and entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria. To
achieve this objective, this study postulated seven research hypotheses on the effect of management policy on
the relationship between agricultural commodity export and entrepreneurship performance of exporting firms in
Nigeria. The study adopted a quantitative research design, using a descriptive approach and a cross-sectional
survey design. The study adopted primary sources using structured questionnaires. Data was collected from 1326
owners/managers of exporting firms in Nigeria, while the sample size is 297 (Krejcie and Morgan, 1970), and
analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), and Partial Least Squares Structural Equation
Modelling (PLS-SEM). Interestingly, the study found that agricultural commodity export has a significant effect
on the entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria. Also, the study established that management
policy exerts a significant moderating effect on the relationship between agricultural commodity export and
entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria. Hence, export intensity and export capabilities have
a significant effect on entrepreneurial performance. As well, management policy has a significant moderating
effect on the relationship between export intensity and entrepreneurial performance, and the relationship between
export capabilities and entrepreneurial performance. However, the study found that export readiness has no
significant effect on entrepreneurial performance. Yet, management policy has no significant moderating effect
on the relationship between export readiness and entrepreneurial performance. The study recommends that
managers should prioritize management policy as a mechanism to sustain export intensity and revamp export
capabilities, in order to boost entrepreneurial performance, profitability, and competitiveness of firms in
international markets.
Keywords: Entrepreneurial performance, agricultural commodity export, export intensity, export readiness,
export capabilities.
INTRODUCTION
Entrepreneurial performance is confronted with various challenges that hinder business growth, sustainability,
and success (Żur, 2023). One of the key issues is limited access to financial resources, as many entrepreneurs
struggle to secure funding from banks, investors, or government grants. Furthermore, inadequate management
and technical skills can affect decision-making and operational efficiency, leading to poor business performance
(Wu et al., 2024).
Despite China's advances in technology and digitalization, many startups have difficulty integrating state-ART
innovation due to high costs and lack of technical expertise. Managing these challenges through political reform,
improved financial support, and cheaper business environments is important to maintaining growth for Chinese
entrepreneurs (Zhao et al., 2023). Canadian entrepreneurs' performance is affected by a variety of challenges
that affect the sustainability and growth of some of their businesses. Despite a strong entrepreneurial ecosystem
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1691
www.rsisinternational.org
supported by provincial initiatives, access to financial resources and a culture of innovation, Canadian
entrepreneurs are exposed to key hurdles including regulatory taxes, market competition, competition, skills and
the complexity of economic fluctuations (Crick & Crick, 2024).
Furthermore, factors such as geographical differences, limited access to international markets, and the
development of consumer behavior are challenges for corporate scalability. Creating these issues through
strategic political interventions, investment in education and technology is extremely important for improving
the performance of Canadian entrepreneurs.
Cultural factors also play an important role in entrepreneurial performance. In areas such as Colombia and
Ibaguye, family support and social attitudes discourage entrepreneurs' initiatives. Only 33.7% receive corporate
family support, and only 27.2% feel that developing a local market is viable (Dhanabagiyam et al., 2024). These
cultural restrictions can significantly hinder the establishment and growth of new companies. These cultural
restrictions can significantly hinder the establishment and growth of new companies.
The performance of entrepreneurs in the United Arab Emirates (VAE) companies disappears due to challenges
despite strong economic infrastructure and government support for the country's startups. The most important
topics include market saturation, regulatory complexity, funding restrictions, and talent aquisition. The distant
competitive market in the United Arab Emirates makes it difficult to gain footing, especially in sectors dominated
by large corporations (Elmassah et al., 2022).
Entrepreneurs also have regulatory hurdles, such as licensing procedures and compliance with developing
business laws. While government initiatives support initiation funding, many entrepreneurs still have difficulty
securing risk capital or bank loans. Furthermore, wearing and maintaining qualified personnel is a challenge due
to high labor costs and visa-related restrictions. Overcoming these challenges through political improvement,
increased investment options, and development of the workforce is important to maintain success for VAE
entrepreneurs (Elmassah et al., 2022). Furthermore, factors such as poor power supply, safety concerns and
difficulties when accessing international markets are challenges for corporate scalability (Romanus et al., 2024).
Eliminating these issues through strategic political shapes and improving financial accessibility and investment
in infrastructure and technology is extremely important to improve the performance of Nigerian entrepreneurs.
The growth of Nigerian entrepreneurship is greatly hampered by a variety of challenges affecting the
sustainability and performance of the company. One of the main issues is the lack of access to credit facilities.
Potential entrepreneurs often have difficulty when trying to secure funds due to high interest rates and strict
collateral requirements imposed by financial institutions. Furthermore, widespread corruption makes it difficult
to procure the necessary licenses and permits, making it difficult to work without covering the bribe (Alao et al.,
2025; Ihugba, 2021). Inconsistent government policies make the situation even worse as entrepreneurs have to
adapt constantly changing regulations. Some taxation is an even greater burden that exposes entrepreneurs to
numerous federal, state and local taxes that increase the costs of their business activities. Furthermore, poor
infrastructure conditions including unreliable power and inadequate road networks and production and
distribution processes lead to increased operating costs (Legain.Ng, 2024). Addressing comprehensive political
reforms, improving financial accessibility and substantial investment in infrastructure is important to improve
the performance of Nigerian entrepreneurs.
In the Nigerian context, small and medium-sized enterprises (small and medium-sized enterprises) are challenges
such as inadequate financing, low technological advancements, inefficient infrastructure, and shortages of
qualified workers (Chukwuka, 2024). These factors together hinder performance, productivity and growth.
Additionally, state guidelines, high operating costs and inadequate communications infrastructure will enhance
these challenges. Market competition is also an important issue. This is because small businesses often find it
difficult to compete with established companies with better resources and brand awareness. Furthermore,
economic instability such as inflation, fluctuating exchange rates and unpredictable market trends can hinder
business and profitability. Management challenges within entrepreneurial activities continue to contribute to
business flour. Research has shown that over 5% of entrepreneurial mistakes are attributed to management
questions (Adewuyi etal. 2025). The complexity of humanity and the inclusion of managers directly in every
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1692
www.rsisinternational.org
aspect of operations is effective leadership for success.
Another important issue is regulation and legal restrictions, where complex management, high taxation, and
"bureaucratic red tapeism" make it difficult to find and expand business (Adewuyi et al. 2025; Adeyemi &
Adebayo, 2021). Furthermore, technological advancements provide entrepreneurs who lack the knowledge and
resources to use innovative solutions. Also, entrepreneurs encounter difficulties in attracting and retaining
qualified employees as talent and HR management play a key role in business success.
Furthermore, social and cultural factors such as resistance to change, lack of support networks, and
disadvantaged business environments further hinder entrepreneurial services. Issues affecting entrepreneurs'
performance, financial limitations, skills, market competition, economic fluctuations, regulatory obstacles,
technical limitations, labor issues, and sociocultural impacts.
Utuk et al. (2023) examined a study analyzing how agricultural export activities influence entrepreneurial
performance within Nigeria, with particular attention to the potential impact of agricultural value-added
processes. Abubakar et al. (2018) investigated agricultural export performance and entrepreneurial performance.
Urriola Canchari et. al. (2018) reviewed the impact of traditional and non-traditional agricultural exports on the
entrepreneurial performance of Peru using a short- and long-run analysis. None of these studies related the effect
of agricultural export commodities on agricultural productivity in Nigeria using the four proxies (cocoa, cashew,
ginger and sesame). This simply shows there is gap in previous literature.
While some studies provide evidence of significant effect of agricultural exports on entrepreneurial performance
in Nigeria (Nambitokan & Idris, 2023; Nazir, et. al., 2021; Okyere & Mensah 2021; Busari, et al., 2023). Others
revealed insignificant effect of agricultural exports on entrepreneurial performance (Oyetoun, 2021; Odike,
2020; Mohammed, 2020). This seemingly mixed evidence in the empirical literature calls for further
investigation. It is against this backdrop that this study is undertaken to contribute to the existing literature by
examining the effect of management policy on the relationship between agricultural commodities export and
entrepreneurial performance in Nigeria with a new methodological approach and underpinning theory in the area
of study. This paper is well divided into: introduction, the literature review, the methodology, followed by results,
discussion, as well as conclusion, and recommendations for future researchers.
LITERATURE REVIEWS
Concept Of Entrepreneurial Performance
Entrepreneurial performance as a concept is viewed differently by scholars. According to Abd Hamid et al
(2022), entrepreneurial performance is described as business performance, which symbolized firm’s ability to
increase in return on assets, sales and investment, achieve operational efficiency – increase product quality,
reduce cost, offer premium price, as well as gain market benefits such as increased market share, customer
attraction. Similarly, Gerschewski et al. (2020) conceptualized entrepreneurial performance in terms of financial
and non-financial measures, which involved realization of corporate goals, customer satisfaction, organizational
success, firm growth, profitability and market share. Yet, Ratnawati, et. al. (2023) defined entrepreneurial
performance based on financial performance level of businesses operating in export market.
However, Antonio (2006) described entrepreneurial performance in terms of export performance which is
composed of profitability, sales volume, and sales growth in the export market. In the same manner, Singh, et.
al. (2024) and Mostafiz, et. al. (2022) conceptualized entrepreneurial performance using export performance,
which is measured using financial and non-financial performance indicators. In contrast, Catanzaro and Teyssier
(2020) have described entrepreneurial performance in relation with international performance, which
demonstrated firms’ success in exporting activities, profitability, market share, and sustainability. Beside, Lobo
et al. (2023) conceptualized entrepreneurial performance in terms of international performance. Hence,
entrepreneurial performance is understood as critical factor for survival, growth and competitiveness in
international foreign scene.
Scholars have measured entrepreneurial performance differently. For instance, Gerschewski, et. al. (2020).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1693
www.rsisinternational.org
measured entrepreneurial performance using financial and non-financial measures, as well as objective and
subjective measures. The non-financial measures are subjective as they involved realization of corporate goals,
customer satisfaction, perceived success, growth and firm learning orientation. On the other hand, the financial
measures are objective as they focused on sales figure, rise in profitability, market share and number of export
market entered. In the same manner, Antonio (2006) claimed that entrepreneurial performance is composed of
subjective measures such as level of profitability, sales level, and sales growth of business enterprises. Bianchi
and Wickramasekera (2016) viewed entrepreneurial performance in terms of export performance, which is
measured in terms of growth in profitability, sales, and revenue. Therefore, the next section reviews the concept
of agricultural community export.
Agricultural Commodity Export
First and foremost, it is important to review the concept of export before discussing the agricultural commodity
export concept. Hence, the literature showed that scholars viewed the concept of export differently. For instance,
Bianchi and Wickramasekera (2016) viewed export from the perspective of export intensity, which is measured
as the percentage of sales in the overseas export market. On the other hand, Gerschewski, et. al. (2020) described
export in terms of export readiness of firms. Ali, et. al. (2023) described the concept in terms of export market
oriented behavior and dynamics, which are inherent in multicultural, complex and changing global business
landscape. Additionally, Catanzaro and Teyssier (2021) conceptualized export in terms of capabilities that help
companies to assess, recognize and exploit opportunities available at international market place. Hence, business
enterprises engage in diverse export activities, to enhance entrepreneurial performance (Catanzaro & Teyssier,
2021).
Agricultural commodity export refers to the process of selling and shipping agricultural products, including
crops and livestock, to other countries for consumption, processing, or further distribution (Oyetoun, 2021).
Similarly, Odike (2020) defined agricultural exports as various stages, from production and quality control to
transportation and marketing in foreign markets. Also, Duru and Ezenwe (2020) opine that agricultural
commodity export is the product of any export crop. In Nigeria, agricultural commodity export, involved
exportation of agricultural commodities like cocoa, cashew, ginger, and sesame.
The cocoa bean, is commonly known as cocoa, which is a seed from the Theobroma cacao plant that has been
thoroughly dried and fermented, allowing for the extraction of cocoa butter (the fat content) and cocoa solids
(the non-fat components) (Gama, et. al. 2021). Also, Musonda (2022) described a cocoa bean as Theobroma
cocoa dried and fully fermented fatty bean, from which cocoa butter and solids are derived, and used for
production of chocolate, etc. Accordingly, Jun (2023) posited that the completely dried and thoroughly
fermented fatty bean of Theobroma cacao is known as a cocoa bean, from which cocoa butter and solids are
derived. On the other hand, Tsen (2007), describes the cocoa pod as having a 3cm thick, hard, leathery exterior
that contains a delicious, mucilaginous pulp inside.
The cashew, commonly known as a tropical evergreen tree, belongs to the species Anacardium occidentale in
the Anacardiaceae family (Anayochukwu et al., 2023). Originating from South America, it produces both the
cashew nut and the cashew apple, which is considered an accessory fruit. This tree can reach heights of up to 14
meters (46 feet), although the shorter, dwarf varieties—growing up to about 6 meters (20 feet)—are often
preferred due to their earlier fruiting and higher productivity (Busari, 2023). The cashew nut itself is edible and
consumed as a snack, incorporated into various dishes, or processed into alternatives like cashew butter or
cashew-based cheese. Commonly referred to simply as "cashew," the tree is cultivated not only for its edible nut
and phenolic oil but also for a gum that can be extracted from its stem (Oni, 2023).
Ginger (Zingiber officinale Roscoe) is predominantly cultivated in the northern regions of Nigeria, with Kaduna
State being the foremost producer (Olaghere, 2022). Other notable ginger-producing areas include Benue,
Bauchi, Gombe, and Nassarawa States, among others. It is commonly sold in local markets in various forms,
including fresh rhizomes, dried rhizomes, and powdered ginger (Chubakumzuk, 2022). Nigeria generates around
50,000 metric tonnes of fresh ginger annually (Alabi et al., 2021), with approximately 10% consumed
domestically while the remaining 90% is exported. The two primary varieties cultivated in the country are the
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1694
www.rsisinternational.org
reddish and the yellowish types.
Known by different names across ethnic groups “Ridi” in Hausa, “Ekuku” in Igbo, and “Isasa” in Yoruba sesame
is resilient and performs well even under harsh climatic conditions. Nigeria ranks as the second-largest producer
in Africa and seventh globally, with an annual output of about 120,000 metric tonnes (Raw Materials Research
and Development Council [RMRDC], 2021). Major sesame-producing states include Benue, Taraba, Kebbi,
Kano, Bauchi, Kogi, Plateau, Adamawa, Kwara, Niger, Gombe, Katsina, Yobe, Borno, and Nassarawa, with
Nassarawa leading in national production.
The study adopts the concept of agricultural commodity export by Odike (2020) as various stages, from
production and quality control to transportation and marketing in foreign markets. Accordingly, Oyetoun et al.
(2021) established that agricultural products export has significant influence on entrepreneurial performance.
Also, Osabohien et al. (2019) found that agricultural products export impacts entrepreneurial performance
positively.
Accordingly, literature showed that export is composed of different dimensions such as export stimuli (Mai Xuan
& Le Tan, 2024), export intensity (Donbesuur et al., 2023), export knowledge and export commitment (Negeri
& Ji, 2023), export readiness (Gerschewski, Scott‐Kennel & Rose, 2020), and export capabilities (Catanzaro &
Teyssier, 2020). However, this study focuses on export intensity, export readiness, and export capabilities as
critical dimensions of export. Hence, the next section is on agricultural commodity export, which has been
conceptualized in terms of export intensity, export readiness, and export capabilities, and its effect on
entrepreneurial performance.
Export Intensity and Entrepreneurial Performance
Donbesuur et al. (2023) defined export intensity as the degree of involvement or volume of firms’ exporting
activities, in order to increase competitiveness and grow in overseas markets. On the other hand, Bianchi and
Wickramasekera (2016) measured export intensity as a proportion of sales in export market to total sales of a
firm within a particular period, level of exporting activities (export development stage), and number of export
markets firms entered. Yet, Antonio Belso-Martinez (2006) described export intensity as a proportion of sales in
overseas market to total sales. Hence, export intensity has been established as a significant factor that drives
entrepreneurial performance.
The study of Sarma, et. al. (2022) examined the effect of export intensity on entrepreneurial performance.
Accordingly, the findings, export intensity exerts positive and significant effect on entrepreneurial performance.
However, the study of Mai Xuan and Le Tan (2024) could not found the same result, as the effect of export
intensity on entrepreneurial performance is reported not always significant. In another study, Bianchi and
Wickramasekera (2016) empirically tested antecedents of export intensity, and established that export intensity
is significantly enhanced by export commitment and motive to gain competitiveness in the international export
markets. Additionally, Nguyen et al. (2023) investigated the effect of export growth-oriented activities on
entrepreneurial performance. According the statistical outcome, export growth-oriented activities have
significant influence on the entrepreneurial performance of developing countries. Hence, giving the conflicting
results on the relationship between export intensity and entrepreneurial performance, this study develops below
hypothesis;
Hypothesis 1: Export intensity has no significant effect on entrepreneurial performance in Nigeria
Export Readiness and Entrepreneurial Performance
According to Gerschewski et al. (2020), export readiness is a broad concept that encompassed financial
preparedness for export, trade and exchange preparedness for export, and marketing preparedness for firms
engaging in export. Finance export readiness refers to ability to acquire fund to finances foreign employees,
settle transportation costs and engage foreign representatives. On the other hand, trade and exchange export
readiness suggests entrepreneurs’ preparedness to get favorable exchange rate, enjoy government supports,
access foreign currency and reduce trade barriers. However, marketing export readiness signifies ability to
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1695
www.rsisinternational.org
familiarity with export documentation, understanding of competitive environment, adapt to customer
preferences, offer competitive price overseas, and offer a unique product. Abd Hamid et. al. (2022) described
export readiness as preparedness of firms to access financial and non-financial resources, derive benefits from
export activities, and boost entrepreneurial performance.
Correspondingly, Singh, et. al. (2024) asserted that export readiness signifies firms’ preparedness to acquire
resources, knowledge and skills necessary, to undertake exporting activities. On the other hand, Gerschewski,
et. al. (2020) conceptualized export readiness in terms of organizational and product readiness. The
organizational readiness comprised of financial and human resources, top management commitment, and
supportive structure. While, product readiness focused on product design, positioning and adaptation. However,
Sriboonlue, et. al. (2024a) conceptualized export readiness in terms of technology readiness, which firms’
readiness to be optimistic and innovative in the adoption and utilization technology to support exporting
activities. In the context of agro-based industry, Sarma, Septiani, and Nanere (2022) defined export readiness as
the preparedness of firms in processed-wood industry, sugar industry, beverages and food industry to enter
international market through exporting.
The study of Gerschewski et al. (2020) empirically established that export readiness has significant effect of
entrepreneurial performance. Indicating further that the effect finance export readiness, trade and exchange
export readiness and marketing export have positive significant effect on entrepreneurial performance. Similar
result was also reported by the study of Abd Hamid et al. (2022) found a strong relationship between export
readiness and business performance.
In a similar investigation, Singh et al. (2024) established that green export readiness positively impacts export
performance, enhancing SMEs’ competitive positioning in global markets. Additionally, Sriboonlue et al.
(2024a) empirically established that technology readiness (optimism and innovativeness) exercised significant
influence on export performance expectancy. Hence, export readiness is interlinked with business growth,
enhanced competitiveness and superior entrepreneurial performance in overseas markets (Sarma, Septiani, &
Nanere, 2022). Hence, giving the conflicting results on the relationship between export readiness and
entrepreneurial performance, this study develops below hypothesis;
Hypothesis 2; Export readiness has no significant effect on entrepreneurial performance in Nigeria
Export Capabilities and Entrepreneurial Performance
Ali et al. (2023) visualized export capabilities in terms of adaptive marketing capabilities that benefits business
enterprise to achieve expansion, growth in revenue, brand reputation, and gain competitiveness in foreign market
in the course of exporting its products overseas. In the same say, Catanzaro and Teyssier (2021) described export
capabilities as process of sourcing information and marketing knowledge from international scene, building
strong customer and partners relationship, as well as exploitation of opportunities to boost entrepreneurial
performance. However, Ringo et al. (2023) viewed export capabilities in line with innovation capabilities, which
reflect firms’ ability to provide new or improved product that differs greatly from earlier product offered, in order
to gain competitive advantage in international markets.
Therefore, export capabilities have been recognized as a significant factor that enhances entrepreneurial
performance. Accordingly, Rezazadeh et al. (2023) and Gómez-Prado et al. (2022) interpreted export capabilities
as pricing capabilities, which signifies a company's ability to set prices judiciously, considering factors such as
costs, competition, and customer expectations. Uddin, et. al (2023) conceptualized export capabilities as dynamic
capabilities, which a combination of management capabilities (managers’ role in sensing, seizing and
transforming opportunities) and technological capabilities (firms’ ability to develop to introduce new products
and upgrade knowledge about the physical world in unique ways). Hence, Companies that possess dynamic
capabilities and pricing capabilities can gain a competitive advantage through favorable deals with customers,
and achieve superior entrepreneurial performance.
The study of Catanzaro and Teyssier (2021) investigated the effect of export capabilities on entrepreneurial
performance. Interestingly, the study found that entrepreneurial performance is greatly enhanced by export
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1696
www.rsisinternational.org
capabilities, demonstrating that the more business enterprises utilize their export capabilities, the greater
likelihood of boosting entrepreneurial performance. As well, Rahman, et. al. (2022) found that network
capabilities and marketing capabilities have a positive and significant impact on company performance. Similar
study by Ringo, et. al. (2023), also found that innovation capabilities are significant predictor of export
performance.
Likewise, the study of Lobo, et. al. (2023) found that export capabilities have a positive effect on
internationalization motivations and international performance. Yet, the studies of Uddin, et. al. (2023) and
Rezazadeh et al. (2023) demonstrated that management capabilities, technological capabilities and pricing
capabilities wield a positive and substantial influence on competitive advantage and overall international
performance. Additionally, Gómez-Prado et. al. (2022) established that innovation, pricing and market
intelligence capabilities have significant influence on competitive advantage and international performance.
Hence, giving the conflicting results on the relationship between export capability and entrepreneurial
performance, this study develops below hypothesis;
Hypothesis 3 Export capability has no significant effect on entrepreneurial performance in Nigeria
Management Policy as Moderator
Management policy refers to the formalized guidelines, strategic frameworks, and decision-making protocols
that govern organizational operations (Mintzberg & Waters, 2023). The traditional view of management policy
is hierarchical, compliance-focused (Porter, 1985). On the other hand, modern view of management policy
involved agile, innovation-driven, and digitally integrated (Teece, 2023). However, recent literature shown a
shift from rigid, top-down directives (traditional) approach to adaptive, data-driven, and stakeholder-inclusive
(modern) approach (Burgelman & Grove, 2023). Hence, emerging trend in management policies encompassed
formal rules and strategies guiding firm operations (e.g., export market selection, resource allocation,
compliance), as well as predictive analytics, flexible framework to retain talent and agility (Deloitte, 2024;
Gartner, 2023).
Recent studies categorize management policy into three core components: (a) Strategic Policy focus on market
positioning and competitive advantage, which featured AI-driven trend scenario planning (McKinsey, 2024) and
dynamic resource allocation (Eisenhardt, 2023). (b) Operational Policy – focus on efficiency and process
optimization, with greater emphasis on sustainable supply chains (Accenture, 2023) and remote work integration
(Bloom, et. al., 2023). (c) Governance Policy focus on compliance, ethics, and stakeholder management,
characterized by ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) mandates (WEF, 2024) and cybersecurity protocols
(ISO, 2023).
David et. al. (2021) posited that management policy refers to the overall set of continuous actions and procedures
employed by organizations to effectively organize and align their resources and operations with their strategic
goals, mission, and vision. It involves analyzing the external and internal environments, formulating strategies,
implementing them effectively, and continuously evaluating and adjusting them to achieve competitive
advantage and organizational success (Thompson & Strickland, 2020). In the agricultural value chain especially
as it relates to commodity export, strategic management involves management of those key activities that
enhances productivity, sustainability, profitability by optimizing resource use and adapting to market trends
within the sector (David et. al., 2021).
Management policy in agric-business focuses on understanding, analysis and effective management of the
internal environment, external environment and development of sustainable agricultural sub-sector, which is
associated with costs, technology, risks and financial planning in the agricultural value chain (Food &
Agricultural Organisation, 2020). However, in the context of this study, management policy is conceptualized in
terms of strategic agility, which described firms’ strategic alternative or action that involves ability of managers
to recognize opportunities, mobilize resources and exploit opportunities, to enhance export intensity, export
readiness and export capabilities, and boosts entrepreneurial performance (Platin & Ataman, 2024; Sriboonlue,
Sriboonlue, & Onputtha, 2024b; Donbesuur, et. al., 2023; Nambitokan & Idris, 2023).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1697
www.rsisinternational.org
Literature has established the effect of management policies (strategic, operational, and compliance-related
decisions) on competitiveness and sustainable entrepreneurial performance (Knight et al., 2023). Also, Wales et
al. (2023) found that effective management policies (strategic, operational, and organizational decisions)
significantly influence export performance. Accordingly, Paul and Rosado-Serrano (2023) reported the role of
strategic agility and policy adaptability in enhancing export outcomes. Equally, Leonidou, et. al. (2010)
established firms that have strategic policies - clear export strategies (e.g., market diversification, pricing models)
outperform peers. Yet, Kotabe and Helsen (2020) and Sousa et al. (2008) have established that operational
policies - efficient logistics, quality control, and supply chain management reduce export barriers and improve
export success.
Additionally, the effect of management policies in driving export success has been documented. For instance,
firms that adopt digital transformation policies - AI-driven market analysis tools report 30% faster export
expansion (McKinsey, 2023). Yet, it was found that Blockchain improves supply chain transparency, reducing
trade delays (IBM, 2022). Still, firms that comply with sustainability policies - ESG (Environmental, Social,
Governance) standards enhances access to EU markets (Accenture, 2023; WTO, 2023). Furthermore, firms that
implement flexible strategic policies in UK have greater access to ASEAN markets (Office for National
Statistics, 2024).
Moreover, management policies as a moderating variable implies that entrepreneurs who align management
policies with export market opportunities have greater possibilities to promote export intensity, export readiness,
and export capabilities to achieve superior entrepreneurial performance. Hence, management policies allow
business entities to achieve their growth potentials and drive benefits from the export markets to boosts
entrepreneurial performance in domestic and foreign countries. Therefore, given the conflicting results and
arguments, this study develops below hypotheses;
Hypotheses 4 Management policy has no significant moderating effect on the relationship between agricultural
commodity exports (export intensity, readiness, and capabilities) and entrepreneurial performance in Nigeria
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
The underpinning theories of this study are resource-based view, dynamic capabilities view and institutional
theory. The theories offer a valuable framework for justifying huge support on the effect of agricultural
commodity export on entrepreneurial performance, as well as the moderating effect of management policy on
such relationships. In this study, export intensity and export readiness are viewed as valuable resources that can
influence entrepreneurial performance at international market scene, especially as export intensity demonstrated
degree of firms’ involvement in export activities and ability to entre foreign markets, and also, export readiness
emphasized on preparedness of firms to utilize financial and non-financial resources, implement supportive
structure, design, position and adapt product to export market, appease customers, and boost entrepreneurial
performance.
Yet, export capabilities were recognized as very essential in boosting entrepreneurial performance, through
constant acquisition of market knowledge, reconfiguration of internal and external capabilities, and adaptation
of product to foreign markets, to enhance customer satisfaction, gain competitive advantage and achieve superior
performance level. Furthermore, the institutional theory emphasized that firms can align their strategic decisions
and policies, in consolidating resources and capabilities efforts, to achieve superior entrepreneurial performance.
Hence, management policies are strategic tools for reconfiguration of resources and capabilities to boost
entrepreneurial performance.
The framework for this study is depicted in Figure 2.1 below. Agricultural commodity export is the independent
variable with its proxies as: (i) export intensity; (ii) export readiness; and (iii) export capabilities. While, the
dependent variable (entrepreneurial performance), which is measured in terms of international export
performance. The model depicts that management policy will act as a moderating variable on the relationship
between agricultural commodity export and entrepreneurial performance.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1698
www.rsisinternational.org
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework, 2025
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study adopted a quantitative research using cross cross-sectional survey, in order to establish the causal
effect between agricultural commodity export and entrepreneurial performance, and also, test the moderating
effect of management policy on such a relationship. A well-structured questionnaire is used as a technique of
data collection. In the context of this study, the population is 1,326 SMEs in Nigeria that engage in the
exportation of agricultural commodities like cocoa, cashew, ginger, and sesame (SMEDAN, 2024). On the basis
of the study population (1,326 Agricultural Commodities Exporting SMEs in Nigeria), the sample size is 297
SMEs, determined using Krejcie and Morgan's (1970). Given the nature of the respondents who comprise owners
and managers of SMEs, who undertake various forms of exporting activities, engage in export decision making,
and initiate management policies to sustain competitiveness in foreign market scenes, a simple probability
sampling technique was used. The study used Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) and structural
equation modelling, using partial least squares (PLS) to analyzed the data as suggested (Nuhu & Hussaini, 2017).
This method of data analysis was adopted in running preliminary analysis, data cleaning, and descriptive
statistics, testing assumptions of multiple regression, assessing measurement and structural models, and
establishing cause and effect relationships between variables. In this study, entrepreneurial performance was
measured using a questionnaire adopted from Singh et al. (2024). Accordingly, the measure of export intensity
was adopted from Donbesuur, et. al. (2023). On the other hand, the measure of export readiness was adopted
from Gerschewski, et. al. (2020). Yet, the measure of export capabilities was adopted from Catanzaro and
Teyssier (2020) and Shin, et. al. (2015). Finally, management policy was measured and adopted from Shin et al.
(2015).
RESULTS
Based on the sample size of the study, 297 questionnaires were distributed to the respondents (owners/managers
of SMEs that involves in exporting of agricultural commodities). Interestingly, the study retrieved 234
questionnaires. While, 63 questionnaires were not returned by the respondents. Accounting for 21% of
unreturned questionnaires and translating into a valid response rate of 79%. The data cleaning is primary aimed
at making sure that the data is suitable for multivariate analysis by assessing missing values (determine whether
it is accurately filled and keyed into SPSS), and detection of outliers to make sure that no extreme values exist
in the data set which was conducted. Accordingly, this study assessed missing values using Analyze, Descriptive
statistics, frequency function of SPSS, and the findings showed that there are no missing scores in the dataset.
This study assessed outliers using Analyze, Descriptive statistics, descriptive function of SPSS. Based on the
findings, the following questionnaires 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, and 219, were
detected to be outliers with extreme scores above 3.29, and as such, were deleted from the dataset.
The descriptive statistics showed that 189 respondents who participated in the survey are male, accounting for
85.1% and 14.9% of the total respondents. On the other hand, female respondents are 33, accounting for 14.9%
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1699
www.rsisinternational.org
of the total respondents. Also, the descriptive statistics showed that respondents who are in the age bracket 31-
40 years are the majority (80 respondents), followed by respondents who are in the age bracket 18-30 years (71
respondents), 41-50 years (39 respondents), and above 50 years (32 respondents). Accounting for 36%, 32%,
17.6% and 14.4% of the total respondents. On the corporate existence of the exporting firms, descriptive statistics
showed that most of firms (78) have survived for 6-10 years, accounting for 35.1% of the exporting firms.
However, 68 firms have survived for 1-5 years, 40 firms have survived for 11-15 years, and 36 firms have
survived for more than 15 years. Accounting for 30.6%, 18% and 16.2% of the total exporting firms. Yet, the
results showed that most of the respondents are occupying top level management position (183), accounting for
82.4% of the total respondents. While, 32 respondents are middle level managers and 7 are lower level managers,
accounting for 14.4% and 3.2% of the total respondents. Moreover, the descriptive statistics showed that 79
firms have exported their products to 3-5 countries, 70 firms have exported their products to 1-3 countries, 40
firms have exported their products to 6-7 countries, and 33 firms have exported their products to more than 7
countries.
Hence, the perception of respondents or difference in perceptions on research variables perception are
determined based on the mean value and standard deviation coefficient. The findings in Table 4.3 showed that
the respondents have a stronger perception about the variables, and that their perception did not vary
significantly, as the value ranges from 3.0075 to 4.6252, and .59414 to 1.66310, respectively. See table 5.1 below;
Table 5.1: Mean and Standard Deviation
Variables
Mean
Standard Deviation
1.
Entrepreneurial Performance
4.6252
.46380
2.
Export Intensity
4.2757
1.07999
3.
Export Readiness
3.8121
1.05382
4.
Export Capabilities
3.8251
.59414
5.
Management Policy
3.0075
1.66310
Source: Researchers, 2025
The essence of reliability analysis is to determine the extent at which latent variable is consistently measured by
research instrument, with minimum amount of error (Hair et al., 2014). According to Pallant (2020), Cronbach’s
Alpha is used as common measures of internal consistent reliability, with acceptable value above 0.5.
Accordingly, Table 4.4 showed that all the study variables have satisfactory reliability level, as the value ranges
from 0.572 to 0.992. Based on this outcome, entrepreneurial performance has Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.888, export
intensity has Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.933, export readiness has Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.832, export capabilities
have Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.572, and management policy has Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.992. See table 5.2 below;
Table 5.2: Reliability Analysis
Variables
Items
Cronbach’s Alpha
1.
Entrepreneurial Performance
5
0.888
2.
Export Intensity
5
0.933
3.
Export Readiness
7
0.832
4.
Export Capabilities
6
0.572
5.
Management Policy
6
0.992
Source: Researchers, 2025
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1700
www.rsisinternational.org
Measurement Model
Measurement model assessment, according to Hair et al. (2014), entails evaluation of individual item reliability,
internal consistency reliability, convergent validity, as well as discriminant validity to establish the reliability
and validity of research instruments. The highlight of this assessment is shown in Figure 5.1 below;
Figure 5.1: Measurement Model, 2025
Individual item reliability is evaluated in order to make sure that all items that measure latent variables are
reliable through their outer loadings, in which loadings above 0.5 are regarded satisfactory (Hair et al., 2019).
The findings in Table 5.3 showed that all items that measure latent variables have adequate loadings above 0.5.
Hence, the outer loadings of item are acceptable and the indicators have a satisfactory level of reliability. Internal
consistency reliability is assessed to determine the extent at which latent variable is consistently measured by
research instrument, with minimum amount of error. According to Hair et al. (2014), Cronbach’s Alpha and
composite reliability are used as common measures of internal consistent reliability, with acceptable value above
0.6. Accordingly, Table 4.12 showed that all the latent variables in this study have satisfactory level of reliability,
as the value ranges from 0.791 to 0.993. Based on the results, entrepreneurial performance has composite
reliability of 0.925, export intensity has composite reliability of 0.954, export readiness has composite reliability
of 0.867, export capabilities have composite reliability of 0.791, and management policy has composite
reliability of 0.993.
Convergent validity is assessed to determine the extent at which instruments measured what it is supposed to
measure. According to Hair et al. (2014), average variance extract (AVE) is used as common measures of
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1701
www.rsisinternational.org
convergent validity, with acceptable value above 0.5. Accordingly, Table 4.12 showed that all the latent variables
in this study have satisfactory level of convergent validity, as the value ranges from 0.791 to 0.993. Based on the
outcome, entrepreneurial performance has AVE of 0.714, export intensity has AVE of 0.811, export readiness
has AVE of 0.531, export capabilities have AVE of 0.688, and management policy has AVE of 0.959.
Table 5.3: Construct Reliability and Validity
Latent Variables
Outer
Loadings
Cronbach's
Alpha
Composite
Reliability
Average Variance
Extracted (AVE)
Entrepreneurial Performance
0.885
0.899
0.925
0.714
0.761
0.830
0.901
0.840
Export Capabilities
-0.540
0.544
0.791
0.688
0.864
0.885
0.965
Export Intensity
0.547
0.932
0.954
0.811
0.974
0.968
0.976
0.957
Export Readiness
0.760
0.825
0.867
0.531
0.788
0.827
0.873
0.527
0.517
Management Policy
0.966
0.992
0.993
0.959
0.977
0.983
0.972
0.986
0.992
Discriminant validity is assessed using Fornell-Larcker and Cross-Loading criteria, as both are considered a
good measure of testing validity of research instruments. According to this criteria, both the latent variables and
individual items that measure research constructs must load strongly in their own constructs, in columns and
rows. Also, Table 5.4 showed that all the latent variables have loaded strongly in their own constructs both in
columns and rows.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1702
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 5.4: Fornell-Larcker Criterion
Entrepreneurial
Performance
Export
Capabilities
Export
Intensity
Export
Readiness
Management
Policy
Entrepreneurial
Performance
0.845
Export Capabilities
-0.682
0.829
Export Intensity
0.790
-0.599
0.900
Export Readiness
0.049
-0.050
0.096
0.729
Management Policy
0.137
-0.142
0.036
0.145
0.980
Furthermore, the cross-loading criterion in Table 5.5 showed that all the items that measure the latent variables
have loaded strongly in their own constructs both in columns and rows. Hence, the discriminant validity is
satisfied.
Table 5.5: Cross Loadings
Entrepreneurial
Performance
Export
Capabilities
Export
Intensity
Export
Readiness
Management
Policy
ENTPF1
0.885
ENTPF2
0.761
ENTPF3
0.830
ENTPF4
0.901
ENTPF5
0.840
EXCAP2
0.410
-0.540
EXCAP4
-0.593
0.864
EXCAP5
-0.560
0.885
EXCAP6
-0.666
0.965
EXINT1
0.500
-0.247
0.547
EXINT2
0.789
-0.532
0.974
EXINT3
0.762
-0.585
0.968
EXINT4
0.744
-0.632
0.976
EXINT5
0.717
-0.634
0.957
EXR1
0.011
-0.005
0.078
0.760
EXR2
0.034
-0.082
0.092
0.788
EXR3
0.034
-0.057
0.081
0.827
EXR4
0.051
-0.022
0.091
0.873
EXR5
0.035
-0.010
0.025
0.527
EXR7
0.003
-0.053
-0.039
0.517
MPOL1
0.104
-0.118
0.009
0.125
0.966
MPOL2
0.099
-0.131
0.010
0.133
0.977
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1703
www.rsisinternational.org
MPOL3
0.150
-0.159
0.052
0.159
0.983
MPOL4
0.172
-0.172
0.067
0.147
0.972
MPOL5
0.125
-0.113
0.020
0.138
0.986
MPOL6
0.128
-0.123
0.026
0.140
0.992
Structural Model
Statistically, structural model is evaluated to find out the effect of predicting variables on the criterion variable,
using coefficient of determination (R square), effect size (f square), Beta, t-statistics and p-value. The assessment
was shown in Figure 5.2. Also, the assessment on the effect of agricultural commodity export on entrepreneurial
performance, as well as effect of management policy as moderator on the relationship between agricultural
commodity export and entrepreneurial performance is shown in Tables 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, and 5.9.
Figure 5.2: Structural Model, 2025
The direct effect of agricultural commodity export on entrepreneurial performance was assessed using B, t-
statistics and p-value. Based on this assertion, a value +1 signifies positive effect, while, a value of -1 symbolizes
a negative effect; which can be significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level, when the value exceeds 1.26, 1 tailed. The
outcome was shown in Table 4.15. Based on the findings, export intensity has a positive significant effect on
entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria (B = 0.589, t-value = 11.166, p-value = 0.000). Hence,
export intensity is a significant factor that drive entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria.
Equally, the findings showed that export capabilities have a significant effect on entrepreneurial performance of
exporting firms in Nigeria (B = -0.318, t-value = 5.262, p-value = 0.000). Therefore, export capabilities have
become an important factor that drive entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria.
However, the result further showed that export readiness has no significant effect on entrepreneurial performance
of exporting firms in Nigeria (B = -0.024, t-value = 0.475, p-value = 0.318). Suggesting that export readiness
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1704
www.rsisinternational.org
cannot drive the entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria. Notwithstanding, the results showed
that management policy has a significant effect on entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria (B
= 0.076, t-value = 2.064, p-value = 0.020). Hence, management policy is a critical driver of entrepreneurial
performance of exporting firms in Nigeria.
Table 5.6: Direct Effect
Original
Sample (O)
Standard
Deviation
(STDEV)
T Statistics
(|O/STDEV|)
P
Values
Export Capabilities -> Entrepreneurial
Performance
-0.318
0.060
5.262
0.000
Export Intensity -> Entrepreneurial
Performance
0.589
0.053
11.166
0.000
Export Readiness -> Entrepreneurial
Performance
-0.024
0.052
0.475
0.318
Management Policy -> Entrepreneurial
Performance
0.076
0.037
2.064
0.020
Coefficient of determination is assessed using the level of R square (R
2
), in which a value of 0.3, 0.5 and 0.6 is
regarded as small, medium and large (Chin, 1988). Hence, R square is evaluated in order to determine the ability
of exogenous variables to explain endogenous variables. According to the outcome in Table 4.16, agricultural
commodity export (export intensity, export readiness, and export capability) and management policy explained
69.8% variance in entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria. Hence, the R
2
value of the research
is 0.698.
Table 5.7: R Square
R Square
R Square Adjusted
Entrepreneurial Performance
0.698
0.692
Moderating Effect
In analyzing the moderating effect of management policy on the relationship between agricultural commodity
export and entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria, Beta, t-statistics and p-value were used.
Based on this assertion, a value +1 signifies positive effect, while, a value of -1 symbolizes a negative effect;
which can be significant at 1%, 5% and 10% level, when the value exceeds 1.26, 1 tailed. Based on the outcome
in Table 4.18, management policy exercises a positive and significant moderating effect on the relationship
between export intensity and entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria (B = 0.075, t-value =
1.452, p-value = 0.074).
On the contrary, the study found that management policy has no significant moderating effect on the relationship
between export readiness and entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria (B = -0.044, t-value =
0.989, p-value = 0.162). Nonetheless, the result further showed that management policy has positive and
significant moderating effect on the relationship between export capabilities and entrepreneurial performance of
exporting firms in Nigeria (B = 0.091, t-value = 1.427, p-value = 0.077). Suggesting that management policy is
a critical driver of entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1705
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 5.8: Moderating Effect
Original
Sample (O)
Standard
Deviation
(STDEV)
T Statistics
(|O/STDEV|)
P Values
Moderating Effect 1 -> Entrepreneurial
Performance
0.075
0.051
1.452
0.074
Moderating Effect 2 -> Entrepreneurial
Performance
-0.044
0.045
0.989
0.162
Moderating Effect 3 -> Entrepreneurial
Performance
0.091
0.064
1.427
0.077
Statistically, predictive power of exogenous variables on endogenous variable is assessed using predictive
relevance, and value of construct crossvalidated redundancy (Q
2
) as a benchmark. Hence, predictive relevance
tends to explain the predictive ability of the entire model in research, which is evaluated in terms of predictive
power of the exogenous variables on endogenous variable. The outcome of this assessment is shown in Figure
5.3.
Figure 5.3: Predictive Relevance
Correspondingly, the outcome in Table 5.9 showed that the model has a strong predictive power, as the value of
construct cross-validated redundancy (Q
2
) is 0.459. Hence, predictive relevance is quite acceptable, as any value
above 0.1 is within the acceptable threshold value (Hair et al., 2014).
Table 5.9: Construct Crossvalidated Redundancy
SSO
SSE
Q² (=1-SSE/SSO)
Entrepreneurial Performance
1110
600.10
0.459
Export Capabilities
888
888
Export Intensity
1110
1110
Export Readiness
1332
1332
Management Policy
1332
1332
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1706
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 5.10: The Structural Model Result/Assessment (Hypotheses Test)
Hypotheses
FINDINGS
Decision
H
01
Export intensity has no significant effect on entrepreneurial
performance in Nigeria.
Not Supported
Rejected
H
02
Export readiness has no significant effect on entrepreneurial
performance in Nigeria.
Supported
Accepted
H
03
Export capabilities have no significant effect on entrepreneurial
performance in Nigeria.
Not Supported
Rejected
H
04
Management policy has no significant effect on entrepreneurial
performance in Nigeria.
Not Supported
Rejected
H
05
Management policy has no significant moderating effect on the
relationship between export intensity and entrepreneurial
performance in Nigeria.
Not Supported
Rejected
H
06
Management policy has no significant moderating effect on the
relationship between export readiness and entrepreneurial
performance in Nigeria.
Supported
Accepted
H
07
Management policy has no significant moderating effect on the
relationship between export capabilities and entrepreneurial
performance in Nigeria.
Not Supported
Rejected
DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS
The research findings provided great insights on the effect of agricultural commodity export on entrepreneurial
performance of exporting firms in Nigeria. This is demonstrated by the empirical evidence on the significant
effect of export intensity on entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria, as well as significant
effect of export capabilities on entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria. Hence, the
entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria is strongly influenced by the intensity of export
activities, as well as the ability of entrepreneurs to develop the needed capabilities. Lending support to the first
and third hypotheses (1 and 3) has been achieved.
On the contrary, the study established that export readiness has no significant effect on the entrepreneurial
performance of exporting firms in Nigeria. Suggesting that even though export readiness is an important driver
of entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms, the same results could not be found in the Nigerian context,
due to contextual factors like cultural background, political and economic factors, as well as bureaucratic
bottlenecks of the operating environment. Thus, the second hypothesis 2 has been achieved and answered.
Yet, the study established that the effect of management policy on entrepreneurial performance of exporting
firms in Nigeria, as exogenous variable and moderator is statistically positive and significant. Demonstrating it
as a critical factor that drives entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria, as management policy
emphasized on international opportunities recognition, opportunity exploitation and adoption of strategic agility
to improve competitiveness, enhance entrepreneurial performance and achieve optimum growth. Hence,
hypotheses have been achieved, and have been answered.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In line with research findings, the study concluded that: Agricultural commodity export is key to entrepreneurial
performance and growth of exporting firms in Nigeria. Entrepreneurial performance is greatly enhanced by the
export intensity and ability of entrepreneurs to fine tune export capabilities, in line with the changing trends in
the market environment. Management policy is key for sustainable entrepreneurial performance of exporting
firms in Nigeria. Managers can achieve superior entrepreneurial performance based on their ability to improve
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1707
www.rsisinternational.org
competitiveness in international market through opportunities recognition and exploitation, and development of
strategic agility.
Based on the above findings, it is recommended that: Managers of exporting firms should see agricultural
commodity export as opportunity to grow their businesses and achieve superior entrepreneurial performance, by
sustaining export intensity, and developing entrepreneurial capabilities, to improve competitiveness at
international market scene. Exporting firms’ managers must continuously develop dynamic export capabilities,
in order to achieve their optimum growth potentials. The managers must recognize that the effect of agricultural
commodity export, is greatly enhanced by management policy, as it encourages entrepreneurs to recognize
international opportunities, exploit opportunities, and develop strategic agility, to achieve superior
entrepreneurial performance. Policy makers like SMEDAN and Nigeria Export and Import Bank should continue
to support exportation of agricultural commodities to overseas market, through various intervention, for firms to
grow and contribute to economic development of Nigeria.
Contribution to Knowledge and Suggestions for Further Studies
This study has contributed to literature in the field of agricultural commodity export and entrepreneurial
performance of exporting firms. Also, the study provided valuable knowledge on how management policy
moderated the relationship between agricultural commodity export and entrepreneurial performance.
Specifically, the contributed to knowledge by proving useful information on the effect of export intensity and
export capabilities on entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms. Likewise, the provided useful insights on
the significant moderating effect of management policy on the relationship between export intensity and
entrepreneurial performance, export capabilities and entrepreneurial performance.
Additionally, the study empirically proven how the effect of agricultural commodity export on entrepreneurial
performance is influenced by management policy in the context of exporting firms in Nigeria. Underscoring the
critical effect of management policy in driving export intensity and shaping export capabilities to enhance
entrepreneurial performance of exporting firms in Nigeria.
Based on the research findings, it is suggested that: Future research can investigate the effect of agricultural
commodity export on entrepreneurial performance by integrating other dimensions like export commitment and
export benefit. Future research can examine the model in a new context by increasing the samples or surveying
a diverse group of respondents. Further studies can measure the questionnaire using more items or modify the
questionnaire, to improve robustness of findings. Future study can test the model in different setting, within or
outside Nigeria.
REFERENCES
1. Abd Hamid, O., Ahmad, A. N., & Abdullah, M. A. (2022). Awareness of halalan toyyiban, HAS practices,
export readiness and food SMEs’ business performance in east coast region, Malaysia. Journal of Halal
Industry & Services, 5(1).
2. Abubakar, M. B., Magaji, Y. B., Bawuro, A. F., & Wajiga, H. (2018). Agricultural export performance and
entrepreneurial performance in Nigeria: error correction modelling approach. Journal of Emerging Trends in
Economics and Management Sciences, 9(1), 45-51.
3. Adebayo, S. (2020). The impact of infrastructure on small business growth in Nigeria. Journal of Business
Development, 15(3), 45-60.
4. Akinyemi, F. O., & Adejumo, O. O. (2018). Government policies and entrepreneurship performance in
Nigeria. African Journal of Economic Policy, 25(1), 78-92.
5. Alabi, O. O.; Madaki, M. J.; Sanusi, S. O.; Umar, S. A. Omole, E. B.; Olumuyiwa, S. A.; David, H. S.
Emeghara, U. U.; Waziri-Ugwu, P. R. & Shaba, M. G. (2021). Factors influencing export performance of
ginger (Zinbiger officinale) in Nigeria. Russian Journal of Agricultural and Socio-Economic Sciences, 2(110),
February.
6. Alao, T. O., Onivefu, O. V., Onivefu-Bello, C. O., & Raji, K. A. (2025). The Influence of Small-Scale
Businesses in Employment Generation and Entrepreneurial performance in Nigeria: A Case Study of Selected
Business in Suburban Lagos. African Journal of Commercial Studies, 6(1), 53-64.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1708
www.rsisinternational.org
7. Ali, H., Li, M., Qiu, X., & Farooq, Q. (2023). Global mindset and adaptive marketing capabilities in the
internationalization of mature Chinese SMEs: international opportunity perspective. Sustainability, 15(3),
2044.
8. Anayochukwu, V. E., Ibrahim, M., & Ngare, L (2023). Economic viability of value-added cashew products
processed in Southeast zone, Nigeria. Heliyon 9 (2023) e12791
9. Antonio Belso-Martinez, J. (2006). Do industrial districts influence export performance and export intensity?
Evidence for Spanish SMEs' internationalization process. European Planning Studies, 14(6), 791-810.
10. Ayemere, O. V. & Onyeukwu, P. E. (2022). Agricultural Commodity Export and Nigeria’s Gross Domestic
Product (2009 – 2018). International Journal of Innovation and Economics Development, 8(2), 7-33.
11. Bakare, A. S. (2021). The crowding-out effects of corruption in Nigeria: An empirical study. Journal of
Business Management and Economics 2(2), 59-68.
12. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage.
13. Bianchi, C., & Wickramasekera, R. (2016). Antecedents of SME export intensity in a Latin American
Market. Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 4368-4376.
14. Busari, A. O., Agboola, T. O., Akintunde, O. K. & Jimoh, L. O. (2023). Competitiveness of Nigerian palm oil
in the world market: an econometric analysis. Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences, 20(1), April.
15. Campos, K. P. (2025). Entrepreneurial Bricolage's Contingent Effect on Entrepreneurial Leadership and
Sustainability Performance: Evidence from Small Firms in Davao Region, Philippines. Review of Integrative
Business and Economics Research, 14(2), 152-165.
16. Catanzaro, A., & Teyssier, C. (2021). Export promotion programs, export capabilities, and risk management
practices of internationalized SMEs. Small Business Economics, 57(3), 1479-1503.
17. CBN (2024). Exchange Rate Policies and Export Competitiveness
18. Central Bank of Nigeria (2023). Statistical Bulletin, Abuja.
19. Chin, W. W. (1998). Commentary: Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. MIS quarterly, vii-
xvi.
20. Chubakumzuk, J. (2022). Economic analysis of organic ginger farming in Longleng District: A case study
Pongo, Yongnyah, Yongam and Bhumnyu Village. Agripreneur: Jurnal Pertanian Agribisnis, 11(1), 01-11.
21. Chukwuka, E. J. (2024). Contemporary Entrepreneurship: An International Entrepreneurship perspective for
Economic Development of Nigeria. World, 2579, 0544.
22. Crick, J. M., & Crick, D. (2024). Regional-level coopetition strategies and company performance: Evidence
from the Canadian wine industry. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 36(7-8), 965-994.
23. David, M. E.; David, F. R.; & David, F. R. (2021). Closing the gap between graduates' skills and employers'
requirements: A focus on the strategic management capstone business course. Administrative Sciences, 11
(1), 10.
24. Dewasiri, N. J., Kanwal, P., & Yadav, A. K. (2025). Enhancing supply chain resilience in the face of
sustainability challenges with entrepreneurial orientation. In Impacts of Entrepreneurial Orientation on
Supply Chain Management (pp. 167-196). IGI Global.
25. Dhanabagiyam, S., Blessy Doe, M., Thamizhselvi, M., Irfan, M., Thalari, S. K., & Libeesh, P. C. (2024).
Factors influencing growth of micro entrepreneurship in the hospitality industry: An empirical study in
India. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 2285260.
26. Donbesuur, F., Owusu-Yirenkyi, D., Ampong, G. O. A., & Hultman, M. (2023). Enhancing export intensity
of entrepreneurial firms through bricolage and international opportunity recognition: The differential roles of
explorative and exploitative learning. Journal of Business Research, 156, 113467.
27. Duru, I. U., & Ezenwe, U. (2020). Empirical investigation of the impact of exports on entrepreneurial
performance: Evidence from Nigeria. International Journal of Publication and Social Studies, 5(1), 18-43.
28. Food and Agricultural Organisation (2021). Database. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations, Rome. Retrieved 01/07/2022 from https://www.faostat.org/
29. Freeman, R.E. et al. (2023). Stakeholder Theory Revisited. Academy of Management Review.
30. Gama, E. N.; Ahungwa, G. T.; & Folorunso, S.T. (2021). An econometric analysis of cocoa production in
Nigeria (1970-2018). Dutse Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences (DUJOPAS), 7(2), June.
31. Gerschewski, S., Scott‐Kennel, J., & Rose, E. L. (2020). Ready to export? The role of export readiness for
superior export performance of small and medium‐sized enterprises. The World Economy, 43(5), 1253-1276.
32. Gómez-Prado, R., Alvarez-Risco, A., Cuya-Velásquez, B. B., Arias-Meza, M., Campos-Dávalos, N., Juarez-
Rojas, L., ... & Yáñez, J. A. (2022). Product innovation, market intelligence and pricing capability as a
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1709
www.rsisinternational.org
competitive advantage in the international performance of startups: Case of Peru. Sustainability, 14(17),
10703.
33. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural
Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Los Angeles: USA: SAGE Publications Inc.
34. Hair, J. F., Jr., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Black, W. C. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.).
Cengage.
35. Khan, E. A., Chowdhury, M. M. H., Hossain, M. A., Mahmud, A. S., Baabdullah, A. M., & Dwivedi, Y. K.
(2024). Performance of small firms in a circular economy: configuring challenges and entrepreneurial
orientation. Management decision, 62(8), 2428-2450.
36. Knight, G. et al. (2023). International Business in the Digital Age. Journal of World Business.
37. Leonidou et al. (2010). Export promotion: A literature review.
38. Lobo, C. A., Fernandes, C., Ferreira, J., Veiga, P. M., & Gerschewski, S. (2023). The determinants of
international performance for family firms: understanding the effects of resources, capabilities, and market
orientation. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 13(3), 773-811.
39. Ma, D., Chen, H., & Wei, X. (2025). Social media resources and entrepreneurial opportunity
evaluation. Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 27(1), 61-82.
40. Mai Xuan, D., & Le Tan, B. (2024). Relationship among government export support, perceived export stimuli,
barriers and export performance. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 2336646.
41. McKinsey (2024). The Future of Corporate Policy.
42. Mostafiz, M. I., Sambasivan, M., & Goh, S. K. (2022). Foreign market knowledge, international opportunity
recognition, and the performance of export‐manufacturing firms. Strategic Change, 31(1), 179-191.
43. Musonda, I. (2022). Is entrepreneurial performance led by exports in Zambia. Lusaka, Zambia: Ministry of
Finance and National Planning – Planning and Economic Management.
44. Nambitokan, E. A., & Idris, M. (2023). Effect of Export Trading on Entrepreneurial performance, in
Nigeria. Journal ID: JIJOSAM, 1(2/008), 89-111.
45. National Bureau of Statistics (2018). Survey Report, Abuja.
46. Nazir, M. A.; Aluko, O. A.; Xuexi Huo (2021). Determinants, efficiency and potential of agri-food exports
from Nigeria to the EU: Evidence from the stochastic frontier gravity model Original Paper. Agricultural
Economics, Czech, 67(8), 337-349.
47. Negeri, A., & Ji, Q. (2023). Export knowledge, export commitment and coffee export performance in
Ethiopia. Heliyon, 9(6).
48. Odike, A. I. & Andohol, I. (2020). Agricultural exports and entrepreneurial performance in selected West
African countries. World Academics Journal of Management, 8(1), 29-39, March.
49. Okyere, E & Mensah, A. C. (2021). Impact of cocoa price shock on the bank profitability in Ghana. Journal
of Economics and International Finance. 13(4), 152-162, October - December
50. Olaghere, I. L.; Osasona, K. K.; Omotesho, O. A; & Ifeoluwa, T. A. (2022). Economic potentials of ginger
value chain in Kaduna State, Nigeria. WBJAERD, 4(2), 101-204, July – December.
51. Olawale, F., & Garwe, D. (2010). Obstacles to the growth of new SMEs in South Africa: A principal
component analysis approach. African Journal of Business Management, 4(5), 729-738.
52. Oni, T. O. (2023). Determinants of cashew supplies and prospects for diversification into agro-allied
industries in Nigeria. International Agricultural Journal Policy and Research, 11, 35-45.
53. Osabohien, R., Akinpelumi, D., Matthew, O., Okafor, V., Iku, E., Olawande, T., & Okorie, U. (2019).
Agricultural exports and entrepreneurial performance in Nigeria: An econometric analysis. In IOP Conference
Series: Earth and Environmental Science 331, (1), 012002). IOP Publishing.
54. Oyaniran, T. (2020) Current state of Nigeria agriculture and agribusiness sector. AfCFTA Workshop.
https://www.pwc.com/ng/en/assets/pdf/afcfta-agribusiness-current-state-nigeria-agriculture-sector.pdf
55. Oyetoun, D. A.; Antwi, M. A.; Oduniyi, O. S.; Oni, T. O.; & Rubhar, T. T. (2021). Performance of agricultural
export products on entrepreneurial performance in Nigeria. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural
Development, 11(1), 47-52.
56. Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step-by-step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (7th ed.).
McGraw-Hill Education.
57. Paul, J. & Rosado-Serrano, A. (2023). Digital Exporting: A Meta-Analysis. International Marketing Review.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN APPLIED SCIENCE (IJRIAS)
ISSN No. 2454-6194 | DOI: 10.51584/IJRIAS |Volume X Issue X October 2025
Page 1710
www.rsisinternational.org
58. Peng, M. Y. P., & Chang, Y. S. (2023). Do social network relationships and overseas market orientation affect
SMEs’ international performance? A dynamic internationalization capability perspective. Sage Open, 13(1),
21582440231153050.
59. Platin, N., & Ataman, G. (2024). Evaluating the impact of firm size, firm age, international opportunity
recognition, and business network on internationalisation performance. Business & Management Studies: An
International Journal, 12(4), 1024-1046.
60. Rahman, A. A., Pratikto, H., & Siswanto, E. (2022). The effect of entrepreneurial orientation on firm
performance: The role of networking capability. Brilliant International Journal of Management and
Tourism, 2(3), 263-280.
61. Ratnawati, R., Rokhman, M., Rochayatun, S., Meldona, M., & Rahayu, Y. N. (2023). Financial attitude and
financial performance of export MSMEs: Financial well-being as a mediating. International Journal of
Applied Economics, Finance and Accounting, 16(1), 77-85.
62. Rezazadeh, J., Bagheri, R., Karimi, S., Nazarian-Jashnabadi, J., & Nezhad, M. Z. (2023). Examining the
impact of product innovation and pricing capability on the international performance of exporting companies
with the mediating role of competitive advantage for analysis and decision making. Journal of Operations
Intelligence, 1(1), 30-43.
63. Ringo, D. S., Tegambwage, A. G., & Kazungu, I. (2023). Innovation capabilities and export performance of
SMEs: does managers' risk-taking propensity matter?. Journal of Money and Business, 3(1), 74-88.
(Questionnaire)
64. Sarma, M., Septiani, S., & Nanere, M. (2022). The Role of Entrepreneurial Marketing in the Indonesian Agro-
Based Industry Cluster to Face the ASEAN Economic Community. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6163.
65. Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2019). Research methods for business: A skill-building approach (7th ed.). Wiley.
66. Singh, V. K., Keshari, A., Singh, D., Singh, P. C., & Gautam, A. (2024). Green export strategies and SMEs
export performance: mediating roles of innovation, readiness, and activities. Journal of Innovation and
Entrepreneurship, 13(1), 87.
67. Sriboonlue, O., Sriboonlue, U., & Onputtha, S. (2024b). The Impact of Strategic Agility on Operational
Responsiveness and Firm Performance of Import, Export, and Logistics Enterprises. Asian Administration &
Management Review, 7(1).
68. Sriboonlue, U., Chaiprasit, K., & Onputtha, S. (2024a). Enhancing Operational Efficiency: Investigating
Technology Readiness, Acceptance, and Utilization of Thailand National Single Window in Import, Export,
and Logistics Businesses. Asian Administration & Management Review, 7(2).
69. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.
70. Teece, D. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities.
71. Teece, D. (2020). Dynamic Capabilities and Resilience. Strategic Management Journal.
72. Teece, D. (2023). Dynamic Capabilities in the Digital Age. Strategic Management Journal.
73. Thompson, A. A., & Strickland, A. J. (2020). Strategic management: Concepts and cases. (13th ed.). New
Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Company Publishing Limited.
74. Tsen, W. H. (2007). Exports, Domestic Demand and Entrepreneurial performance: Some Empirical Evidence
of the Middle East Countries. Journal of economic cooperation among Islamic countries, 28(2).
75. Uddin, M. H., Razzak, M. R., & Rahman, A. A. (2023). Sustainable supply chain management practices,
dynamic capabilities and competitive advantage: Evidence from Bangladesh ready‐made garments
industry. Business Strategy & Development, 6(2), 176-188.
76. Utuk, I. O., Akpan, B. L., Eduno, E. B., & Udo, A. B. (2023). Agricultural Export and Entrepreneurial
performance in Nigeria: Does Agriculture Value Added Matter?. International Journal of Research and
Innovation in Social Science, 7(11), 880-892.
77. WEF (2024). Global Governance Policy Trends.
78. Wendata A. K. (2023). Impacts of education and the adoption of improved sesame seeds on productivity of
sesame farms in Burkina Faso. African Journal of Economic Review, Volume 11(2), March.
79. WTO (2023). Global Trade Outlook
80. Wu, S., Luo, Y., Zhang, H., & Cheng, P. (2024). Entrepreneurial bricolage and entrepreneurial performance:
The role of business model innovation and market orientation. Heliyon, 10(4).
81. Żur, A. (2023). Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: Challenges for research and
practice. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 1(2), 7-28.