Financial Resources And Performance Of Manufacturing Firms In The South-East, Nigeria

Financial Resources And Performance Of Manufacturing Firms In The South-East, Nigeria

Umeobi, Ngozi Christy¹;  Akam, Godwin Uche^2;   Okeke, M. C^3
1Department of Business Administration and Management,  Federal Polythenic Oko Anambra State.
^2&3Department of Business Administration, Chukwemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University, Igbariam Campus.

ABSTRACT

This study explored financial resources and performance of manufacturing firms in the south-east, Nigeria. This study therefore, sought to determine the nature of the relationship between financial resources and organizational effectiveness of manufacturing firms in the south-east of Nigeria. Ascertain the nature of the relationship between financial resources and productivity of manufacturing firms in the south-east of Nigeria. This study was anchored on the resource-based view (RBV) theory of the firms.  This study employed a descriptive survey approach. The population of the study is 2,176 employees, obtained from 250 manufacturing firms under study. a sample size of 471 was drawn from the population by the use of Godden’s’ formula for finite population. Questionnaire was administered to the employees of manufacturing firms, in top, middle and lower management levels respectively. The hypotheses of the study were tested by simple regression analysis, at 0.05 level of significance, through the use of SPSS computer package version 23. The study has proved that there is a significant positive relationship between financial resources and organizational effectiveness of manufacturing firms in the south-east of Nigeria. The study also revealed that financial resources positively influence the productivity of manufacturing firms in the south-east of Nigeria. based on the findings of the study, some recommendation were made, which include among others; that top management of manufacturing firms are advised to ensure the availability of adequate business finances  as a critical factor in sustaining long-term investment leading to business success. Thus, even where adequacy of funds is not an issue, they should endeavor to avoid the mismanagement of the available funds in order to boost the productivity of their firms.

Keywords: Financial Resources, Performance, Manufacturing firms

INTRODUCTION

Every organization has financial, human, and technological resources that must be utilized to carry out the organization’s mission. Effective resource allocation is frequently hampered by a number of issues, such as an excessive focus on protecting resources, organizational politics, ambiguous strategy goals, aversion to taking chances, and a lack of information (David 2007).

The consistent development of the economy arrangement pace generally relies upon the right use of wellsprings of creation and arrangement of financial resources of a firm and their further circulation. The steady lack of both brought together and decentralized funds frustrates the steady activity of the firm, associations, parts of the economy and the state all in all. Deciding the normal utilization of monetary as well as different sorts of assets includes contrasting the amount and nature of assets spent to the quantitative and subjective articulation of the objectives accomplished (Kolpina 2020). In those circumstances in which monetary changes in the state happen, the main issues are those disturbing the financial resources, their substance, and application in the organizations. The significance of this not entirely set in stone by the way that financial resources are a worth class and straightforwardly affect the phase of the creation cycle in the assembling firm and this impact turns out to be more recognizable in the examination of the super financial action. The scale and design of financial resources rely upon the complete volume of creation and its viability.

Statement of Problem

In order to compete with rivals effectively, one major approach a firm can use successfully is to take advantage and utilize new windows of opportunities optimally. However, taking advantage requires resources. The majority of organizations continue to struggle with finding resources and integrating them for the benefit of the businesses. The majority of businesses struggle to identify the resources they lack, as well as how to find and acquire them. They also confront technological, financial, market, and team obstacles (Shane and Venkataraman, 2000). Thus, different resources have positive implications performance of an organization. However, like individuals, very few organizations are born with a silver spoon in the mouth; most organizations have to acquire resources the hard way. The cost and availability of resources are the most important factors on which the success of an organization depends. The acquisition and effective utilisation of financial resources still remains a challenge confronting most manufacturing firms in South-East, Nigeria. It is against this premise that this study seeks to assess the degree to which financial resources influence performance of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria.

Objectives of the Study

The broad objective of this work is to assess the degree to which financial resources influence performance of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria. The specific objectives of this work are to:

Determine the nature of the relationship between financial resources and organizational effectiveness of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria.

Ascertain the nature of the relationship between financial resources and productivity of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria.

Hypotheses

The following hypotheses were formulated to guide the conduct of the study:

Hi; financial resources positively influence organizational effectiveness of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria.

Hi; financial resources positively influences productivity of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Conceptual Frame work:

Financial Resources:

Retained earnings and funds from investors, equity holders, bond holders, and financial institutions are among the sources of the capital that corporations employ to develop and carry out their goals. According to Pearce and Robinson (2009), the firm’s capacity for internal capital creation and borrowing impacts its resilience and capacity for investment.

The debt equity ratio, operating cash flow, credit score, market values of fixed assets, size of plants, flexibility of fixed assets, and vintage capital equipment are the main indications of financial resources.

Financial resources are necessary, useful, and rare resources that can be used to obtain other resources, such as acquiring machinery, paying employees, and purchasing advertising (Fry, Stoner and Hattwick, 2004). Money is obviously critical in organizations/government programmes because money is necessary for the hiring of the staff and conducting the technical analyses and the monitoring of compliance (Mazmanian and Sabatier, 1989). Also, ample finding is indispensable to provide organizations/agencies with the technical and administrative ability to ensure that they accomplish the specified goals (Fernandez and Rainey, 2006). Of course, scholars such as Fenno have regarded financial resources (e.g. budget) as a form of political control of public agencies and bureaucracies to Ting (2001), however, financial resources as a form of political control can be a double-edged sword in that punishing an agency by cutting budgets may be hinder a principal’s ability to realize her own policy goals.

Public organization/ agency budget is a typical example of financial resources. Ripely and  Franklin (2015) measured agency budgets in terms of appropriations, expenditures and changes in appropriation and expenditures. Additionally, Chun and Rainy (2005) examined financial openness by the quantity of financial resources from government sources, which was derived by deducting just the amount raised through market-oriented activities from the overall amount of financial resources for the agency. Based on these concepts, some studies concentrate on two types of budget authority (i.e., appropriations and the spending authority from offsetting collections) as financial resources because these two kinds of budget authority come from contrasting sources while appropriations come from the Nigerian treasury, and offsetting collections come primarily from business-like or market-oriented activities.

Thus, these two types of financial resources of an agency/public organization have the aforementioned four attributes for the potential for competitive advantage. Appropriations and the power to spend money obtained from compensating collections of an agency are valuable resources, as financial resources enable federal agencies to choose or implement strategies that enhance agency efficiency and effectiveness and that exploit environmental opportunities or neutralize threats (Barney and Clark, 2007). These financial resources also scarce in that the amount of these financial resources varies across public organizations/agencies (Deephouse, 2000). As Barney (1991) explained, amounts appropriated and funds available for use based on offset collections of an agency/public organization are imperfectly imitable resources because they are assigned through the complex political interactive process between the president and the national assembly. Lastly, public organizations/ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) are organized to exploit the potential of these financial resources as source of competitive advantage through the combination with their numerous components, management systems, and capabilities.

Performance

Performance entails the effectiveness of an organization in fulfilling its purpose thus referring to something completed, something currently in progress, or activities conducted in preparation for new needs (Louise, 2012). Of course, numerous definitions have been offered and over several hundred articles and book chapters on Organizational effectiveness. An organization is effective when a specific desired end is attained. Osborne and Gaebler (1992) defined effectiveness as a measure of the quality of output: How well did it achieve the desired outcome? Rainey and Steinbauer (2019) argued that effectiveness refers to whether the agency does well that which it is supposed to do, whether people in the organization/agency work hard and well, whether the actions and procedures of the organization/agency and its members are well suited to achieving its mission.

Thus, organizational performance describes the capacity of a business to fulfill its mission through strong governance, sound management and determination to achieving specified organizational goals within the set period (Stafford and Miles, 2013). Organizational performance entails the ability of an organization to realize and fully optimize its potential or target overtime. Moreover, performance is described as the achievement of financial and non-financial goals that enables a firm to remain viable and have both short and long term sustainability (Denison, 2018).

Organizational performance is usually used as a dependent variable while conducting business research and is considered to have a great significance in the field of management. Measurement and analysis of organizational performance has an important role in converting goals into reality, which is crucial and of great importance in today’s competitive environment and for the business to succeed and remain relevant to competition (Popova and Sharpanskykh, 2010).

Organizational performance explains the extent to which organizations achieve their goals in every aspects of business. Firm’s processes will only succeed with the existence of skilled and motivated staff, provided with accurate and urgent information supported with effective leadership. They will lead to the production and delivery of quality products and services and eventually improved financial/non-financial performance. However, several methods have been used in conceptualizing and measuring organizational performance (Wilden, Gudergan and Lings, 2013). Thus, organization’s performance can be measured in different criteria (French, Wendell and Cecil, 1983). Among them is productivity, profits, growth, turnover, cost reduction, stability, cohesion, waste production, reducing lead times at all stages of the production process, people development, effectiveness (progress toward goal attainment), quality performance, creativity, innovation, competitiveness (competitive profile), customer satisfaction, improved decision making, job satisfaction and successful product development.

The organizational resources are often used as multidimensional approach to measuring organizational performance, where financial, non-financial and operational measures assume equal importance. Thus, for measurement of performance, many researchers used money as well as non-monetary performance (Powell, 1995; Choi and Eboch 1998). And others have considered operational performance/measures. Hence, revisiting the literature, it becomes evident that the most commonly used methods for measuring organizational performance may roughly be place within financial, operational and non-financial performance.

However, performance within the scope of this study is synonymous with operational performance and non-financial performance including organizational effectiveness; which means how well an organization achieves its purpose or goal. Operational performance concerns the internal operations of the organizations (it includes such things as cost reduction, productivity and specially product quality, quality performance, waste reduction, reduction of lead times at all stages of the production process and improved people development); whereas non-financial performance includes elements such as competitiveness (competitive profile), creativity, innovation performance, improved employee morale, improved decision making capacity, customer satisfaction and successful product development.

Nevertheless, since organizational performance entails the ability of an organization to realize and fully optimize its potential or targets over time; it’s the responsibility of senior managers to guide and navigate their organizations through various goals with the purpose of achieving desired performance (Minkov and Blagoev, 2011).

Financial Resources and proxy of Performance of Manufacturing Firms

 The financial capital that organization use to formulate and implement strategies includes cash from entrepreneurs, equity holders, bond holders and financial institutions as well as retained earnings. According to Pearce and Robinson (2009), a company’s ability to borrow money and its power to generate its own finances influences both its resilience and its capacity for investment. The debt to equity ratio, operating cash flow, credit score, market prices of fixed assets, size of plants, flexibility of fixed assets, and vintage capital equipment are the major indicators of financial resources.

Financial resources are essential, priceless, and in short supply. They can be used to buy other resources like machinery, pay employees, and advertise (Fry, Stoner, and Hattwick, 2004). Additionally, organizations/agencies need sufficient funds to give them the administrative and technical capabilities necessary to ensure that they meet the legislative objectives (Fernandez and Rainey, 2006). To Filser, Eggers, Kraus, and Malovics (2014) who used structural equation modeling to test their hypotheses in their study on the effect of financial resource availability on entrepreneurial orientation (EO), customer orientation (CO), and growth in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Austria and Hungary. Findings revealed that financial resources availability is attributed to entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and, subsequently to firm growth/performance.

 Coleman (2007) postulates that human capital and financial capital has been shown to explain success in the firm performance. Firm resources are essential to generating greater value and they are the restricting factors in determining how much market demand a firm is able to satisfy (Peteraf and Barney, 2003).. Franco, Benett, and Kanfer’s (2004) study found that due to budgetary limitations, the health sector’s performance falls short of what clients would reasonably expect. Studies have indicated that an organization must collaborate with important stakeholders to develop her financial basis in order to ensure financial sustainability for competitive advantage ( Ombui, Mwende and Kariuki, 2014).

According to a research by Mays, Megan, McHugh, Shim, Perry, Lenaway, Halverson, and Ramal (2006), many public hospitals’ productivity had been hampered due to a lack of funding. Furthermore, according to their study, public hospitals have performed as expected even in cases where lack of funding is not a problem because of poor financial management.

According to Barney (2007), the ability of an organization to attract additional funding from its stakeholders, which will ultimately result in higher productivity, depends on its availability to dependable sources of funding and its capacity to produce reasonable returns on invested capital.

According to Dasanayaka (2001), there is a considerable correlation between financial resources and the effectiveness of Sri Lanka’s public hospitals. The study also showed that the poor performance of Sri Lanka’s public hospitals was caused by inadequate funding for necessities such as the purchase of appropriate and high-quality equipment, maintenance of medical equipment, and staff training for managing medical equipment, among others. The study also discovered that, despite the fact that a lack of funding was a serious problem, hospital administration was crucial in allocating the monies that were available to high-priority areas in order to boost performance.

Inmyxail and Tkahashi (2010) investigated Lao Micro, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (MSMEs) in Japan and the impact that firm resources had on their ability to function as businesses whether they were run by men or women. No matter who the organization’s leader is, the study found a strong relationship between financial resources and firm performance. The study also found that a company’s competitive edge was achieved when funds were adequate, readily available, and available.

According to a study by Wanjau, Muiriri, and Ayono (2012), there is a strong correlation between financial resources and the effectiveness of public health institutions in providing high-quality healthcare. The study found that money was essential for buying the physical resources, including medical equipment and supplies. However, important factors like the sufficiency of finances and the promptness of the government’s transfer of funds were disregarded by the study.

 Oyango and Wanyoike (2014) examined the effect training on employee performance. The study established that there was a positive relationship between funds and employee training which promoted employee skill development leading to improved performance of public hospitals in Saiya County. Njagi, Muathe and Muchemi (2018) found that financial resources had appositive statistically significant effect on the performance of public health institutions.

Theoretical Framework:

The Resource-Based view (RBV) Theory (Barney, 1991; Peteraf and Barney, 2013):

The resource- based view (RBV) Theory postulates that resources owned by an organization are critical for a firm to sustain competitive advantage and superior performance (Galbreath, 2014; Barney, 2021; Peteraf and Barney, 2013). King (2017) predicted some resources of a particular type owned and controlled by firms have the potential to generate competitive advantage which in twin leads to high superior performance. These resources include tangible assets / resources (such as human, physical, financial and organization resources), intangible resources (such as knowledge, experience, reputation, position, social and cultural aspects of an organization) and lastly organizational capability such as skills, collective learning, core competencies, building alliances, strategic decision making, informational abilities / systems, technological resources / technological networks relationship building among others (Mayer and Solomon, 2016).

The organization’s physical resources include its building and equipment, location, and access to raw materials, among other things. The availability, use, and management of resources, as well as all other related elements that have an impact on an organization’s capacity and ability to implement its strategies, are all covered by the financial resources/capability factors. The human resources in an organization are the education, practical knowledge, discernment, intellect, interpersonal relationships, and so forth. Organizational resources include formal procedures and structures as well as unofficial relationships between groups (Barney, 2021). According to Barney (2021), an organization’s resources might ultimately give it a strategic advantage since they have four qualities: they are uncommon, expensive to replicate, and non-substitutable (Barney, 2021).

Consequently, the performance of an organization is positively impacted by many resources. Organizations that own sufficient and superior physical resources, such as machinery, plant, and equipment, are more likely to perform better than those that do not (Ainuddin, Beamish, Hulland and Rouse, 2017). The performance of organizations as a whole is affected by the use of human resources, including top and middle management, administrative staff, and production personnel (Rose and Kumar, 2017).

According to Morgan, Kaleka, and Katsikeas (2014), a firm’s ability to invest and even seize new possibilities depends on its financial resources, including cash on hand, bank deposits, stocks, and derivatives: The operations of a corporation are significantly influenced by intangible resources such as expertise, culture, the reputation of the items produced by a certain company, brand name, and experience. The performance and competitiveness of a company are substantially influenced by its capabilities (King, 2017). Financial and physical assets can produce competitive advantage with no threat of duplication, according to Lippman and Rumelt’s 2013 analysis.

However, very few businesses, like individuals, are born with a silver spoon in their mouth; the majority of organizations must struggle to earn resources. The two most critical elements that determine an organization’s potential to succeed are cost and resource availability. A company has an enduring strength that it may use as a tactical advantage over rivals if it is well-positioned in terms of the cost and availability of a certain kind of resource. On the other side, disadvantages like high cost and limited availability of a resource result in a permanent strategic deficit in a company.

However, an organization is not capable just because it has resources. Their use within a company will determine a lot. The use, in turn, is based on organizational behavior, which has forces and affects such the caliber of leadership, management philosophy, shared values and culture, and caliber of work environment. Among others, organizational politics, power dynamics, and climate.

Empirical Review

Filser, Eggers, Kraus and Malovics (2014) investigated the impact of financial resource availability on entrepreneurial orientation (EO), customer orientation (CO) and on growth in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) in Austria and Hungary.  Structural equation modeling was employed to test the hypotheses. Findings revealed that financial resource availability is attributed to entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and, subsequently to firm growth/performance

Wamiori,  Namusonge  & Sakwa (2016) examined the effect of access to finance on financial performance of manufacturing firms in Kenya. The objective of this study was to examine the effect of access to finance on financial performance of manufacturing firms in Kenya. The research scope focused on manufacturing firms in Kenya. The target population of the study was 199 manufacturing firms based in Nairobi County taken to be a representative of all manufacturing firms in Kenya. In order to collect data from the sampled respondents, stratified random sampling was used to classify each of the twelve sub sectors into individual strata. Simple random sampling procedure was then used to select the sample in order to ensure each and every firm in the target population was represented. The study adopted a survey design that was both descriptive and exploratory in collecting data. The key findings were that access to finance had a positive influence on the financial performance of manufacturing firms. There was a significant linear relationship between access to finance and manufacturing firm’s financial performance. The study assists policy makers in coming up with better policies on improvement of financial performance. The study adds to the literature on manufacturing firm’s financial performance.

There are more empirical works on this topic with reference to other sectors and geographical location.

METHODOLOGY

The research design adopted for the study was the descriptive survey research method. This enables the research to generate data for the study and for the test of hypotheses. The research area for this study is south-east geopolitical zone of Nigeria which comprises five state namely, Anambra state, Enugu state, Imo state, Abia state and Ebonyi state. The sources of data for this research were primary data and secondary data. The study’s population comprises of 250 manufacturing firms exiting in the south-east geopolitical zone of Nigeria. However, twenty manufacturing firms were selected for the study (four firms from each of the state in the zone) by the use of purposive or judgmental sampling. Thus, the study population for this research comprises all permanent (senior and junior) employees, i.e., the total staff strength of the twenty manufacturing firms selected for the study. The total staff strength of the manufacturing firm selected for the study was 2,176. Sample size of 471 was mathematically determined by Godden’s (2004) formula. 22. A stratified (random) sampling was used in this study.

Using this method, stratification of the employees was strictly based on their positions in organizational hierarchy: top, middle and lower levels Management respectively. That is, manufacturing firms employees in top and middle Management levels, and those who are in supervisory Management positions in addition to those in Junior Positions were randomly selected. For the analysis of data, percentages and tables were used. The degree of correlation or relationships between variables was determined by the use of Simple Regression Analysis. Thus, the hypotheses were tested by simple regression analysis through the use of SPSS computer package version 23.

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

The total population of the study is 2,176 and the sample size of 471 was determined used for the study.

Analysis of Data (Hypotheses Testing)

Hypothesis one

H₀:       financial resources not positively influence the organizational effectiveness of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria.

H₁:       financial resources positively influence organizational effectiveness of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria.

Coefficients^a

1. Dependent Variable: organizational effectiveness

R = 0.977

R² = 0.954

F = 6204.575

T = 78.769

DW = 0.129

Interpretation:

The regression sum of square (750.615) is greater than the residual sum of squares (36.051), which indicates that more of the variation in the dependent variable is not explained by the model. The significance value of the F statistics (0.000) is less than 0.05, which means that the variation explained by the model is not due to chance.

R, the correlation coefficient which has a value of 0.977, indicates that there is positive relationship between financial resources and organizational effectiveness of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria. R square, the coefficient of determination, shows that 95.4% of the variation in the organizational effectiveness of manufacturing firms is explained by the model.

With the linear regression model, the error of estimate is low, with a value of about .34782. The Durbin Watson statistics of 0.129, which is not more than 2, indicates there is no autocorrelation.

Financial resources coefficient of 0.977 indicates a positive significance between financial resources and organizational effectiveness of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria, which is statistically significant (with t = 78.769).  Therefore, the null hypothesis should be rejected and the alternative hypothesis accordingly accepted. Thus, financial resources significantly and positively influence organizational effectiveness of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria.

Hypothesis two

Ho: financial resources do not decidedly impact productivity in manufacturing firms south east, Nigeria.

Hi: financial resources positively influence productivity of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria.

Table2: Coefficients^a

1. Dependent Variable productivity

R         =0.736

R2       = 0.541

F          = 540.703

T          = 23.253

DW     = 0.102

Interpretation:

The relapse amount of square (310.814) is more prominent than the lingering amount of squares (263.273) which demonstrates that a greater amount of the variety in the reliant variable is made sense of by the model. The importance worth of the F measurements (0.000) is under 0.05, and that implies that the variety clarified by the model isn’t expected for possibility.

1. the connection coefficient which has a worth of 0.736, demonstrates that there is a positive connection between financial resources and productivity. R square, the coefficient of assurance, shows that 54.1% of the variety in productivity is made sense of by the model.

With the straight relapse model, the blunder of gauge is low, with a worth of around 0.75000. The Durbin Watson measurement of 0.102, which isn’t more than 2, demonstrates there is no auto relationship between financial resources coefficient of 0.736, shows a positive huge relationship between financial resources and productivity, which is genuinely critical (with t = 23.253). In this manner, the invalid speculation ought to be dismissed and the elective speculation appropriately acknowledged. Hence financial resources emphatically impacts productivity in manufacturing firms south east, Nigeria.

Discussion of Results

The test of hypothesis using simple regression analysis showed that financial resources positively influence organizational effectiveness of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria. The financial resources coefficient of 0.977 indicates a positive significance between financial resources and performance of manufacturing firms, which is statistically significant (with t = 78.769). This finding appears consistent with Filser, Eggers, Kraus and Malovics (2014) assertions that financial resources availability is attributed to entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and, subsequently to firm growth/performance. it has also found strong research and intellectual support in Wernefelt (1984), in his study of resources and returns which concludes that resources such as brand names, technology, skilled personnel, trade contacts, machinery, efficient procedures and financial capital are the foundation for attaining and sustaining competitive advantage position/superior performance.

Also the test of hypothesis using simple regression analysis showed that financial resources positively influence productivity of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria. The financial resources coefficient of 0.736, shows a positive huge relationship between financial resources and productivity, which is genuinely critical (with t = 23.253). This finding appears consistent with Wamiori,  Namusonge  & Sakwa (2016) examined the effect of access to finance on financial performance of manufacturing firms in Kenya. The objective of this study was to examine the effect of access to finance on financial performance of manufacturing firms in Kenya. The research scope focused on manufacturing firms in Kenya. The target population of the study was 199 manufacturing firms based in Nairobi County taken to be a representative of all manufacturing firms in Kenya. In order to collect data from the sampled respondents, stratified random sampling was used to classify each of the twelve sub sectors into individual strata. Simple random sampling procedure was then used to select the sample in order to ensure each and every firm in the target population was represented. The study adopted a survey design that was both descriptive and exploratory in collecting data. The key findings were that access to finance had a positive influence on the financial performance of manufacturing firms. There was a significant linear relationship between access to finance and manufacturing firm’s financial performance. The study assists policy makers in coming up with better policies on improvement of financial performance. The study adds to the literature on manufacturing firm’s financial performance.

CONCLUSION

The continuously increasing pressure of competition and global markets is forcing organizations to become more effective and productive, with a view to increasing overall competitiveness. Effectiveness and productivity is one of the major outcomes of operative financial resources.   This study has specifically addressed financial resources and performance of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria, with particular reference to twenty selected manufacturing firms in the South-East. The study has proved that there is a significant positive relationship between financial resources and organizational effectiveness of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria. The study also revealed that financial resources positively influence the productivity of manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations are made.

We think they will be relevant, not only to the selected manufacturing firms in the South-East of Nigeria, but also to other manufacturing firms in Nigeria.

Top management of manufacturing firms are advised to ensure that the acquisition of financial resources in their firms should be done in accordance with the laid down legal procedures failure to which it may lead to the acquisition of inappropriate, perhaps excessively complex and substandard equipment leading to poor performance of the manufacturing facility.

Top management of manufacturing firms are advised to ensure the availability of adequate business finances  as a critical factor in sustaining long-term investment leading to business success. Thus, even where adequacy of funds is not an issue, they should endeavor to avoid the mismanagement of the available funds in order to boost the productivity of their firms.

REFERENCES

1. Rose, R.C and Kumar, N. (2017), Blockade for Career Advancement in Japanese Organizations Abroad: The Case of Malaysian Subsidiaries, American Journal of Applied Sciences, 4(1), 8-13
2. Ainuddin, R.A, Beamish, P.W., Hulland, J.S., and Rouse, M.J. (2007), Resource Attributes nd Firm Performance in International Joint Ventures, Journal of World Business, 42, 47-60.
3. Barney, J.B. (1991), Looking Inside for Competitive Advantage, Academy of Management Executive, 1x (4), 56.
4. Barney, J.B. (2007), Gaining and Sustaining Competitive Advantage, 3^rd Edition, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
5. Barney, J.B. and Clark, D.N. (2007), Resource-Based Theory: Creating and Sustaining Competitive Advantage, New York: Oxford University Press.
6. Choi, T.Y. and Eboch, K. (1998), The Total Quality Management (TQM) Paradox: Relations among Total Quality Management Practices, Plant Performance and Customer Satisfaction, Journal of Operations Management, 17, No. (1), 59 – 75.
7. Chun, Y.H and Rainey, H.G. (2005), Goal Ambiguity and Organizational Performance in U.S. Federal Agencies, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(4), 529 – 557.
8. Coleman (2007). Organizational Capital and Pecking Order Predictions about Dividends and Debt. The Review of Financial Studies, 15(1), 1-33.
9. Danasayaka, S.W. S.B. (2001), Performance of Healthcare Equipment in the Eye of Good Governance: A case Study of Sri Lanka Public Sector, Post-Doctoral Thesis, Sheffield, UK
10. David (2007). African financial systems: A review. Review of Development Finance 1(6), 79 – 113.
11. Deephouse, D.L. (2000), Media Reputation as a Strategic Resource: An Integration of Mass Communication and Resource-Based Theories, Journal of Management, 26(6), 1091 – 1112.
12. Denison, D.R. (2008), Corporate Culture and Organizational Effectiveness, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
13. Fernandez, S. and Rainey, H.G. (2006), Managing Successful Organizational Change in the Public Sector, Public Administration Review, 66(2), 168 – 176.
14. Filser R, Eggers D, Kraus E & Malovics G (2014). Investigated the impact of financial resource availability on entrepreneurial orientation (EO). Journal of Finance, 46(3), 427-466.
15. Franco, L.M, Bennett, S. and Kanfer, R. (2002), Health Sector Reform and Public Sector Health Worker Motivation: A Conceptual Framework, Social Science and Medicine, 54, 1255 – 1266.
16. Fry, Stoner & Hattwick, (2004). The determinants of financial resources. Journal of International Money & Finance, 13(6), 100-116.
17. Godden, B. (2004), Sample Size Formulas, Journal of Statistics, 3, 66.
18. Gupta, P., & Srivastava, A. & Sharma, D (2010). Capital structure and financial performance: Evidence from India. Greater Noida. Gautam Budha University press.
19. Inmyxail, S. and Takahashi, Y. (2010), The Effect of Firm Resources on Performance of Male and Female Headed Firms in the case of Lao Micro , Small and Medium Sized Enterprise (MSMEs), Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation, Hiroshima University Japan, (6), 63 – 90
20. King, A.W. (2007), Disentangling Interfirm and Intrafirm Causal Ambiguity: A conceptual Model of Causal Ambiguity and Sustainable Competitive Advantage, Academy of Management Review, 32, (1), 156 – 178.
21. Louise, J. (2017), What is Organizational Performance, Sydney: Pitcher Partners Growth
22. Mayer, K.J and Salomon, R. (2016), Capabilities, Contractual Hazard and Governance: Integrating Resource-based Transaction Cost Perspectives, Academy of Management Journal, 49, 942-959.
23. Mays, G.P., Megan, C., McHugh, M., Shim, K., Perry, N., (2016), Institutional and Economic Determinants of Public Health System Performance, American Journal of Public Health, 93(3), 523-531.
24. Mazmanian, D.A. and Sabatier, P.A. (2019), Implementation and Public Policy: With a New Postscript, Laham, MD: University Press of America.
25. Minkov, M. and Blagoev, V. (2016), What do Project GLOBE’s Cultural Dimensions Reflects? An Empirical Perspective, Asia Pacific Business Review, 18(1), 27-43
26. Morgan P, Kaleka H, and Katsikeas G (2014).The effect of technology adoption on performance of youth led micro and small enterprises. An Unpublished Phd Thesis. Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology.
27. Njagi, E., Muathe, S. and Muchemi, A. (2018), Financial Resources, Physical Resources and Performance of Public health Institutions in Embu Country Kenya, European Journal of Business and Management, 10 .(8), 41-47.
28. Ombui, K., Mwene, H. and Kariuki, J. (2014), Factors affecting Effective Implementation of Strategic Change at the Cooperative Bank of Kenya, International Journal Article, 1(3), 1-23.
29. Onyango, J.W. and Wanyoike, D.M. (2014), Effects of Training on Employee Performance: A Case Study of Health Workers in Siaya Country, Kenya, European Journal of Medical Sciences, 1(1), 11-15
30. Osborne, D.E. and Gaebler, T. (2018), Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sectors, Google Books, Google.com.ng.
31. Pearce D and Robinson Z (2009). Determinants of Access to Microfinance Servics Among Self Employed Persons with Disabilities in Nairobi Kenya. Unpublished MBA Thesis, University of Nairobi.
32. Peteraf and Barney, 2013). Resource based theory and performance. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 52(3), 160 – 178.
33. Peteraf, M.A. and Barney, J.B (2013), Unraveling the Resurce-based Tangle, Managerial and Decision Economics, 24(4), 309-323.
34. Popova and Sharpanskykh, (2010). Determinants of organizational performance of Banks in Ghana: An Empirical Approach, Baltic Journal of Management, 2(1), 67-69.
35. Powell, T.C. (2015), Total Quality Management as Competitive Advantage: A Review and Empirical Study, Strategic Management Journal. 16(1), 5-37
36. Rainey, H.G. and Steinbauer, P. (2019), Galloping Elephants: Developing Elements of a Theory of Effective Government Organizations, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9(1), 1-32.
37. Ripely & Franklin (2015). Impact of financial Capital Management on Profitability. European Scientific Journal, 10(1), 374 – 381.
38. Shane, S. and Venkataraman, S. (2020), The Promise of Entrepreneurship as a Field of Research, Academy of Management Review, 25, 217-226
39. Stafford, D. and Miles, L. (2013), Integrating Cultures after a Merger, Boston: Bain and Company
40. Ting, M.M. (2011), The Power of the Purse and its Implications for Bureaucratic Policy-making, Public Choice, 106, 243-274.
41. Wamiori,  Namusonge  & Sakwa (2016) Effect of access to finance on financial performance International Finance Review, 8(12), 30-32.
42. Wanjau, K.N., Muiruri, B.W. and Ayondo, E. (2012), Factors Affecting Provision of Service Quality in the Public Health Sectors: A Case of Kenyatta National Hospital, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(13), 1-13.
43. Wendell and Bell ,Cecil H (1983).Organisational Development (2nd ed.) Prentice Hall,New Delhi.
44. Wernefelt, B. (2014), A Resource-based View of the Firm, Strategic Management Journal. 5(2), 171-180
45. Wilden, R., Gudergan, S. and Lings, I. (2013), Dynamic Capabilities and Performance: Strategy, Structure and Environment, Long Range Planning,. 46, (1-2), 72-96