Determining key factors influencing SMEs’ performance: A systematic literature review and experts’ verification

Yahaya, Hassan Dauda; Nadarajah, Gunalan Article Determining key factors influencing SMEs’ performance: A systematic literature review and experts’ verification Cogent Business & Management Provided in Cooperation with: Taylor & Francis Group Suggested Citation: Yahaya, Hassan Dauda; Nadarajah, Gunalan (2023) : Determining key factors influencing SMEs’ performance: A systematic literature review and experts’ verification, Cogent Business & Management, ISSN 2331-1975, Taylor & Francis, Abingdon, Vol. 10, Iss. 3, pp. 1-23, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/294601 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oabm20 Cogent Business & Management ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/oabm20 Determining key factors influencing SMEs’ performance: A systematic literature review and experts’ verification Hassan Dauda Yahaya & Gunalan Nadarajah To cite this article: Hassan Dauda Yahaya & Gunalan Nadarajah (2023) Determining key factors influencing SMEs’ performance: A systematic literature review and experts’ verification, Cogent Business & Management, 10:3, 2251195, DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Published online: 09 Nov 2023. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 3480 View related articles View Crossmark data MANAGEMENT | REVIEW ARTICLE Determining key factors influencing SMEs’ performance: A systematic literature review and experts’ verification Hassan Dauda Yahaya 1 * and Gunalan Nadarajah 2 Abstract: In today’s competitive business environment, SMEs face challenges in strategic orientation, resource allocation, and adapting to market changes due to their limited size and resources, which hinders access to crucial data and insights, affecting decision-making and growth opportunities. Their innovation, learning, and entrepreneurial mindset are vital in achieving sustainable competitive advantage. To ensure their longterm success and growth, targeted government support and tailored strategies prioritising innovation and continuous learning are essential for empowering SMEs to thrive amidst intense competition. By combining these efforts, SMEs can unlock their potential and succeed in the dynamic business landscape. A systematic literature review addressed this gap, developing a comprehensive framework based on Resource Base View and Institutional Theory. The study involved identifying 469 articles from reputable databases and analysing the results using a one-sample T-test. Ultimately, 16 papers were deemed most relevant for building the conceptual framework. The findings indicate that 13 factors significantly impact a firm’s strategic orientation and performance in today’s knowledge-based and uncertain global business environment. It should be noted that other relevant factors may have been overlooked, and future research should consider a more detailed approach, such as meta-analysis, to broaden the field’s knowledge. The established framework establishes a relationship between strategic orientation and firm performance. It was developed by carefully selecting and confirming the most Hassan Dauda Yahaya ABOUT THE AUTHORS Hassan Dauda Yahaya is a Principal lecturer at Mai Idris Alooma Polytechnic Geidam, Nigeria. With about 13 years of academic experience, his research interest lies in Firm strategic orientation. He completed his M.Sc. in Innovation and Entrepreneurship at the University of Wolverhampton, United Kingdom, in 2014 and received his B.Sc. from the University of Maiduguri in 2010. Currently, he is pursuing his PhD in Innovation and Entrepreneurship at Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM). In addition to his academic pursuits, He is an esteemed member of the Association of National Accountants of Nigeria (ANAN), the Association of Certified Public Accountants United Kingdom (ACPA UK), Member International institutute of Strategic management and a Fellow of the Institute of Classic Entrepreneurs of Nigeria (FICENT). Dr Gunalan Nadarajah is a Senior Lecturer in Supply Chain Management. Gunalan is Certified in Hazardous Material Handling (Pudong, China) and a Certified Teambuilding Facilitator (Penang Skills Development Centre). He has been instrumental in university-industry engagement via the PublicPrivate Research Network under the Ministry of Higher Education. He has over 15 years of manufacturing industry experience as a senior manager in plant management, logistics and supply chain management before joining UUM. Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 1 of 23 Received: 07 March 2023 Accepted: 07 August 2023 *Corresponding author: Hassan Dauda Yahaya, Mai Idris Alooma Polytechnic Geidam, Centre for Entrepreneurship Development, No 18 Commissioner’s Quarters, P. O. Box 51, Damaturu, Yobe State, Nigeria E-mail: [email protected] Reviewing editor: Hung-Che Wu, Business School, Nanfang College Guangzhou, China Additional information is available at the end of the article © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent. influential factors in SMEs’ performance literature using systematic literature review and expert verification methods. This framework has the potential to guide future research and offers valuable insights for firms aiming to enhance their strategic orientation and performance in the competitive business landscape. Overall, this study contributes to the existing body of knowledge by synthesising previous research, providing insights into theoretical and conceptual frameworks, identifying key factors influencing strategic orientation, and highlighting best practices and lessons learned. Subjects: Small Business Management; Strategic Management; Management of Technology & Innovation Keywords: entrepreneurial orientation; learning orientation; firm performance; market orientation; innovation capability; systematic literature review 1. Introduction SMEs are recognised as critical agents of economic growth as they account for most enterprises worldwide and contribute significantly to job creation and global economic development (Al Khasawneh et al., 2021; Dirgiatmo, 2015). However, the sector accounted for almost 90% of enterprises and more than 50% of jobs globally. Moreover, in developing countries, conventional SMEs generate about 40% of domestic income (She et al., 2020). As a result, SMEs have significantly contributed to the global economy, including employment creation, poverty reduction, income creation, support for major industries, innovation, entrepreneurship promotion, and rapid industrialisation (Ahmad, 2020). In the United States and the United Kingdom, SMEs account for approximately 44% and 48% of the annual GDP of each nation, respectively, and supply 62% and 61% of total employment, respectively (Department for Business Innovation and Skills UK, 2021; Rowinski, 2022). On the other hand, SMEs make up 60% of the GDP and 75% of employment in higher middle-income nations like Singapore, whereas they make up 50% of the GDP and 70.2% of the workforce in Japan (Hironaka et al., 2017). In addition, the sector contributes 47.8% of employment and 37.4% of GDP to the Malaysian economy (Yusriza, 2021). In South Africa, SMEs account for around 52% of the nation’s GDP and 61% of all jobs, while in Ghana and Kenya, they comprise roughly 92% of firms, responsible for 70% and 60% of employment and 70% and 80% of GDP, respectively (AlKhajeh & Abdelhakeem Khalid, 2018). Comparing the SMEs’ performance across national boundaries can provide valuable insights into the antecedents of SMEs’ success in different nations (Laukkanen et al., 2013). The performance results in other countries will assist policymakers and business practitioners with comparative data that will assist in policy formulation and initiatives that support SME growth, creativity, and innovation and provide easy access to finance for the sector to boost employment generation (Basco et al., 2020). For example, social tax incentives for private businesses to invest in R&D have significantly impacted the innovation performance of SMEs in South Africa (Matekenya & Moyo, 2022). In addition, consistent strategic planning approaches are the main reason behind SME performance in Ghana (Donkor et al., 2018) while digital financial services have enabled easy access to financing for Kenyan SMEs and impacted the performance of the sector (Awinja & Fatoki, 2021). Despite the significant contributions of SMEs to the economy, SMEs’ failure rates are alarming, making it a significant concern for entrepreneurs, policymakers, and stakeholders. Research indicates that roughly one-third of SMEs fail within their first two years of operation, and more than half fail within the first five years of establishment (The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, 2019). However, failure rates can vary widely depending on industry and region. For example, businesses in highly competitive sectors like retail and hospitality may be more Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 2 of 23 vulnerable to failure due to shifting consumer preferences and intense rivalry. Furthermore, enterprises in developing countries may encounter infrastructure and regulatory barriers that increase their likelihood of failure (Fatoki, 2018; Gwadabe, 2017). It is essential to identify the reasons behind SMEs’ challenges and find ways for firms to overcome them. Firms are composed of resources such as capabilities, assets (tangible and intangible), techniques, attributes, and orientations that can be utilised to create a sustainable competitive advantage (Arsawan et al., 2022; Hossain et al., 2021; Mahdi et al., 2019) A firm’s assets can be strategically applied to maintain its competitive edge (Daft, 2007). The strategic factors that can impact management processes or activities include marketing, innovativeness, learning culture, and Entrepreneurial orientation, which SMEs can use to improve their performance. The firm’s strategic orientation refers to these processes and managerial activities, which provide the strategic direction to develop the appropriate culture for sustainable business performance (Syahdan et al., 2020). Strategically oriented firms focus on continuously realigning attitudes, cultures, beliefs, and values to maximise corporate resource generation, accelerate customer interactions to respond to their needs and monitor market competition for proactiveness (Yuan et al., 2018). This paper discovers the strategic orientations that influence SMEs’ performance, specifically innovation capability, which previous studies have overlooked. In addition to discussing firm performance, this review also addresses the following questions: “What are the key strategic orientations that influence SMEs’ performance?” and “What are the most relevant theories and models in the literature regarding the significant determinant that influence SMEs’ performance in the literature?”. Furthermore, the paper presents the results of the firm’s strategic orientation and performance. The article is divided into 10 sections, covering the concepts and tenets shaping the firm’s strategic orientations. The first section introduces the study subject and background information. Section two presents literature on firm strategic orientation, while section three describes the methodology. Section four presents the study’s results, and section five presents the theories and models found in the literature. Subsequently, section six describes the theoretical framework developed based on the literature, followed by the theoretical implications, practical implications, research limitations, suggestions for future studies, and the conclusion. 2. Literature review The fifth industrial revolution has radically transformed; as a result, entrepreneurs, top managers, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) owners, and strategists must identify the factors that can help them overcome these challenges. Strategic orientation is crucial for businesses to attain competitive advantage and high performance (Davis & Aggarwal, 2020). The resource-based theory posits that strategic orientations are intangible resources that can enhance firm performance by expanding enterprises’ access to funds, knowledge, market and digital technology that impacts business operations. Recent strategic research has revealed that intangible resources and knowledge are more beneficial to the firm because they create proactive mindsets that help study the competitor’s strategy and provide sustainable competitive advantages. Firms with more significant organisational networks, information, and technology increase their learning chances and absorption capacity during crises (Powell et al., 1996). The COVID-19 pandemic has had a catastrophic impact on the global economy, particularly on SMEs. These businesses struggle to maintain their operations due to their limited financial resources during times of crisis (Charoensukmongkol, 2022; Kurniawan & Iskandar, 2023). The pandemic has significantly declined revenue, cash flow issues, layoffs, and closures (Geidam et al., 2021), making it a critical priority for stakeholders to address the menace caused by the global pandemic (Charoensukmongkol & Phungsoonthorn, 2022). Globally, policymakers view firm strategic orientation and innovation as essential to achieving their developmental goals and objectives (Lückenbach et al., 2019). The process is accomplished Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 3 of 23 by proposing an innovation catch-up and innovation-driving strategies to guide and stimulate firm performance (Dombrowski et al., 2018). Firms with a strong strategic orientation, such as Entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation, and learning orientation, have access to information on innovation policies and may even influence the government to modify policies and regulations in their favour (Alkahtani et al., 2020; Moreira et al., 2022). For instance, firms use politics to encourage or safeguard innovative products with government support. Due to the competitive advantages and legislative assistance, these businesses will successfully create new goods and services with technology. The government can also provide necessary funding for research and development to firms to expand their capabilities and remain competitive (Rehman et al., 2020). Moreover, the funding benefits and the creation of modern technologies help firms engage in inventive activity, which enhances their abilities (Vaitoonkiat & Charoensukmongkol, 2020b). To summarise, strategic orientation is crucial in supporting businesses to overcome market challenges and attain competitive advantage and high performance (Seran & Bez, 2021). Nevertheless, this is possible when policymakers view innovation as essential to achieving the goals and objectives of firms by creating a robust strategic orientation mindset among firms and providing them with access to necessary information on innovation that can improve the sector’s capabilities for better performance. 3. Methodology A literature review is crucial for building on previous research and advancing knowledge. Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) are particularly effective for aggregating empirical data to answer specific research questions and assessing the reliability of all available evidence (Okoli & Schabram, 2010; Salisu et al., 2021). Furthermore, identifying the boundaries of current research is essential for extending the knowledge frontier; analysing significant publications and identifying research gaps can determine the breadth and depth of existing research (Xiao & Watson, 2019). By identifying relevant references and proposing guidelines for conducting SLRs, previous studies have established a standard roadmap for several systematic reviews (Okoli & Schabram, 2010). This study has critically used SLR and expert verification to identify the critical variables affecting SMEs’ strategic orientation and performance while proposing a framework that outlines the interactions between these variables. This method enables in-depth analysis and discovery of undiscovered notions while making relevant material visible. 3.1. Data collection procedure for the study Data collection for the current study followed management review protocols commonly used to explore, discover, and enhance any research topic by allowing researchers to make modifications during the study using a database from well-established academic publishers such as Elsevier, Emerald, Taylor & Francis, M.I.S. Quarterly, and Springer. These protocols ensure that the reviews are less susceptible to researcher bias. However, to achieve the objective of a systematic literature review, this study employed a stringent search strategy with specified inclusion and exclusion criteria for articles. The search strategy involved identifying and selecting relevant keywords and search terms such as “strategic orientation,” “strategic capabilities,” “firm performance,” and “business performance,” selecting appropriate databases containing articles, and modifying the keywords during the search process. 3.2. Criteria for inclusion The importance of including relevant data in the systematic literature review process cannot be overstated. Firms must integrate orientations that enhance performance and prevent business failure (Chen et al., 2021). In addition to financial and tangible assets, intangible assets such as innovation, entrepreneurial learning, and marketing information have become increasingly important for balancing finance and strategy (Abor & Quartey, 2010). Therefore, this study only includes publications from Scopus-indexed journals and the Web of Science published from 2012 to 2022 to ensure the quality and influence of research on firm strategic orientation and related innovative Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 4 of 23 studies that can influence firms’ performance (Chih et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2021). The authors employed a stringent search strategy with specified inclusion and exclusion criteria for articles, including the identification and selection of pertinent keywords and search terms and selecting the appropriate databases to use (Elsevier, Emerald, Taylor & Francis, M.I.S. Quarterly, and Springer) (David Tranfield & S, 2003) 3.3. Extraction of data This study followed a rigorous process guided by the SLR framework to ensure the accuracy of the exercise (see Figure 1). The initial step was to check for irrelevant data, as recommended by (Hinderks et al., 2020). Next, as suggested, the researchers set the inclusion criteria to review the journal articles’ abstracts, methods, and discussion sections to assess their viability (Marcos-Pablos & García-Peñalvo, 2018). Finally, the researcher used Mendeley and Excel to manage the data and facilitate the screening process from January 2022 to December 2022. In Step 1, the study identified 469 journal articles from reputable internet databases, including Elsevier, Emerald, Taylor & Francis, MIS-Quarterly, and Springer. In Step 2, the study excluded 248 articles because they were in a non-English language, lacked abstracts, were editorials or notes, or were generic reports that did not describe firm performance. In Step 3, the abstracts of the remaining papers were reassessed, eliminating an additional 188 articles. In Step 4, each article’s introduction and entire text were scrutinised against the inclusion criteria. In Step 5, the quality of the remaining 41 papers was reassessed, eliminating Figure 1. SLR framework. Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 5 of 23 an additional 19 articles. Finally, in Step 6, the 16 remaining articles met all inclusion criteria for the systematic literature review. These publications shared a similar study topic, objective, framework, and findings. Subsequently, the researchers provided the definitions and measurement items used to assess the strategic orientations and innovation factors driving firm performance to ensure a consistent portrayal of the determinants. The study extracted 12 essential determinants of SMEs’ performance construct and strategic orientation to determine their influence on firm performance. These determinants included social media quality, customer service quality, information quality, customer orientation, competitor orientation, firm innovative involvement, SME performance, interfunctional coordination, commitment to learning, shared vision, open-mindedness, and government institutional support. In selecting the final 16 journal articles for the review exercise, the definitions and measurements of the determinants of firms’ strategic orientations were carefully assessed to ensure they were compatible with previous studies. For example, in the current study, the selected publications highlighted the connections between strategic orientation and its impact on performance, providing insights into the critical factors that influence performance in a constantly changing business environment (Chege et al., 2020). Table 1 details the quality assessment criteria used to extract the 16 journal articles from the five databases, which include Web of Science and Scopus. Table 1. List of journal articles used for the SLR Journals Database Authors/dates No. of Journals selected Paper quality Elsevier (Baker et al., 2022; Jiang et al., 2021; Margarida Vicente & T, 2015; Tajvidi & Karami, 2021; Yuan et al., 2018; Zhang & Zhu, 2021). 6 Web of Science and SCOPUS Emerald (Ahmad et al., 2019; Alhakimi & Mahmoud, 2020; Hamzah et al., 2020; Ismail & Mohamad, 2022; Pham & Hoang, 2019). 5 Web of Science and SCOPUS Taylor & Francis (Fallah et al., 2018; O’Dwyer & Gilmore, 2019). 2 Web of Science and SCOPUS M.I.S (Covin & Wales, 2012) 1 Web of Science and SCOPUS Springer (Adam & Alarifi, 2021; Alkahtani et al., 2020). 2 Web of Science and SCOPUS Table 2. The number of journal articles and scores Quality assessment of Selected articles Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor Total Articles rating % >86% 66% −85% 46%-65% <15%-45% <15% 100% Number of articles 6 5 3 1 1 16 Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 6 of 23 3.4. Quality assessment Two methods were used to assess the selected articles’ quality level. Firstly, the reputation of the databases was considered, and secondly, the articles were evaluated based on quality criteria. The selected articles were published in Business Management journals and conference proceedings with a higher rating. Those indexed by Web of Science or Scopus were considered qualitative journals. The quality of the articles was examined in the second phase based on three primary quality issues: rigorous scrutiny, credibility, and relevance. These issues were considered in accordance with the (Obana & Hanakawa, 2014) framework. Table 1 presents the quality of the selected journal articles from the databases. Both study authors carried out the quality assessment process independently, based on the earlier criteria, which included clear objectives, conclusions, and proper data collection and analysis procedures. The criteria were scored on a scale of 1 for clear, 0.5 for partially apparent, and 0 for unclear to clarify the article’s goals, method, and results. The overall score for each article was obtained by adding the individual scores. Table 2 presents the quality assessment results, which showed that six articles received excellent ratings, while only two received low ratings. 3.5. Determinant extraction The 16 articles selected for the review were carefully examined, and from them, 12 essential determinants of strategic orientation and SME performance construct were extracted. The identified determinants include social media quality, customer service quality, information quality, customer orientation, competitor orientation, firm innovative involvement, SME performance, inter-functional coordination, commitment to learning, shared vision, open-mindedness, and government institutional support. 3.6. Expert review In this phase of SLR and expert verification, the following process was carried out: a. Identifying suitable experts for the study. b. Preparing questionnaires in line with global ethical considerations. c. Results of expert verification and analysis. 3.7. Identification of suitable experts Identifying suitable experts from academia and industry for the study was challenging at this stage due to the respondents’ engagement. Nonetheless, the study aimed to identify experts based on specific criteria: industry practitioners with at least five years of experience in business operations, information technology compliance, and a minimum qualification of not less than SSCE; and academic experts in Innovation and entrepreneurship with a minimum of a master’s degree or PhD, at least five years of working experience, teaching in a reputable University or Polytechnic and published in high-impact journals in Scopus or Web of Science. Expert evaluation and systematic literature review are complementary approaches that can work together to improve the quality of a systematic literature review. These approaches help identify critical studies and concepts and assess the quality of individual studies and findings from multiple studies systematically and rigorously (Cabrera et al., 2023). Moreover, an expert evaluation can evaluate, confirm, rank, and suggest the influence of factors intended to construct a conceptual framework (Al-Zubidy & Carver, 2019). To identify and select the suitable experts for the study, the researcher utilised the judgmental sampling technique, which allows the researcher to choose a sample most beneficial to the research objectives based on their knowledge (Sim et al., 2018). Thus, given the limited Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 7 of 23 development (R&D), and operations, on short-term performance (Krasnikov & Jayachandran, 2008). However, different capabilities coexist within an organisation and are often interconnected. These capabilities are developed over extended periods and deeply ingrained within the organisational structure regardless of the organisation’s market or industry. Consequently, studying individual capabilities in isolation over short time frames while disregarding their interrelationships can lead to an incomplete and potentially flawed understanding of firm capabilities (Krasnikov & Jayachandran, 2008). Thus, it is essential to explore the previously overlooked relationship between strategic orientations, firm capability, and environmental support (see the definition of innovation capability in Table 8) 5.5. Environmental support (ES) Previous studies have emphasised the significant impact of institutional regulations and support on business development, including various forms of assistance, such as loans, tax relief, business diagnostic services, financial support, and social support, in both developed and developing Table 8. Definition of innovation capability Factors Operational definition Reference Innovation Capability Innovation capability is the extent to which a firm creates new products by leveraging innovative behaviours, strategic capabilities, and internal technological processes. (Vicente et al., 2015) Table 7. Definition of learning orientation Factors Operational definition Reference Commitment to learning The degree to which SMEs are dedicated to investing in learning and translating past experiences into procedures that drive the firm’s conduct to grasp the business landscape periodically. (Özşahin et al., 2011) Shared vision A shared vision is an extent to which firm employees comprehend the direction of learning and the focus of learning to achieve the organisational objectives. (Özşahin et al., 2011) Open-mindedness The degree to which SMEs are consistently proactive in comprehending activities and operational routines and accepting new ideas results in endless creativity and innovation. (Özşahin et al., 2011). Table 9. Definition of government institutional support Factor Operational definition Reference Government institutional support The degree to which the government provide easy access to finances, financial backing, training, and friendly government policy will enable a business climate for investment and sustainability. (Li & Atuahene-Gima, 2001). Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 14 of 23 economies (Kurniawan & Iskandar, 2023; Shu et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2021)). Institutional support programs are vital for SMEs in several nations as they can overcome market and institutional failures (Dekel-Dachs et al., 2021; Gilaninia, 2017). In some countries, enduring commercial ties can replace weak government institutions, as evidenced in Asian and Eastern European nations and Italian and American industrial clusters, where these private orderings are prominently displayed. Moreover, previous research in developing countries has shown a positive correlation between government institutional support and SME performance (Saruchera & Mpunzi, 2023; Wang et al., 2021). (Please refer to Table 9 for the variable definition). 5.6. Firm performance evaluation (FP) Performance is a multifaceted concept that scholars have attempted to define precisely. However, a single definition has not been agreed upon due to varying analytical levels, terminology issues, and conceptual assessment bases. Depending on the questions asked, a firm’s performance can be defined as a summary of the results of its operations expressed in monetary and non-monetary terms (Challis & Clarkson, 2020; Yeniaras et al., 2021). Nevertheless, there is agreement that performance is usually associated with success expectations (Ma, 2006; Taticchi et al., 2010). Financial performance is critical in evaluating key performance indicators such as profitability, liquidity, and market share, and it is contingent upon the success of local and international businesses (Amoah et al., 2021). However, financial measures are lagging predictors based on past transactions and actions and may not encourage healthy behaviour that prioritises long-term value creation over short-term performance (Manuele, 2009). Furthermore, financial statements summarise a company’s situation in a specific period, making them insufficient to provide an accurate picture of its actual performance (Kaplan & Norton, 2001; Waruhiu, 2014). Despite their undeniable potential, financial performance measurements have limitations and shortcomings in evaluating firm performance (Barker & Barker, 1995). An integrated approach considering financial and non-financial measures is necessary for a more comprehensive performance assessment. Non-financial performance measures a firm’s accomplishments expressed in non-monetary terms and includes innovation, employee, marketing, and operational performance (Nakku et al., 2019). Non-financial measures are critical in linking financial measurement and strategy, providing a comprehensive method of strategic implementation that considers dynamic technology trends and the need to create and manage intangible assets, which have become the primary source of competitive advantage for businesses (Lin, 2015; Monteiro et al., 2019). The Balanced Scorecard highlights the relationship between the system and strategic performance measurement, emphasising the need for non-financial performance measures and their contribution to national economic growth and development. (Table 10 defines the variables). 6. Conceptual framework construction A conceptual framework is essential in identifying and defining related concepts and their relationships (Tobi & Kampen, 2018). In line with this, this paper proposes a methodological structure to facilitate understanding firm strategic orientations and their impact on SMEs’ performance, which Table 10. Definition of SMEs’ performance Factors Operational definition Reference SMEs’ performance The degree to which SMEs enhanced their ability to grow in profit Returns on Investment, cash flow and other non-financial indicators, i.e., improving innovation, business strategy, and employee and customer satisfaction. (Gonza´lez-Benito et al., 2009) Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 15 of 23 is critical in the dynamic business ecosystem. The proposed conceptual design describes factors influencing a firm performance, including information technology orientation, market orientation, learning orientation, behavioural orientation, and regulation. These factors reflect why firms should focus on these orientations to remain competitive and successful. The contribution of this proposed conceptual structure is to explore the critical factors for understanding firm performance. To achieve a sustainable competitive advantage, firms must strategically apply their resources, capabilities, assets, and orientations (Barney et al., 2011). Nevertheless, sustained competitive advantage conditions include superior resources, retroactive competition, imperfect resource mobility, and proactive competition response (Tate & Bals, 2018). Moreover, Entrepreneurial orientation has been identified as a mindset that improves business operations and generates firm competitiveness (Nurfarida et al., 2021; Ravaonorohanta & Sayumwe, 2020). Furthermore, the interaction of institutions and firms is described by institutional theory (North D, 1990). An institutional framework is a set of critical political, economic, and legal ground rules that serve as the foundation for production, distribution, and exchange. The rules and regulations that govern the actions, operations and strategic decisions of businesses that are part of institutions are called institutions (Peng et al., 2009). Firms increase their chances of surviving and succeeding by effectively responding to the institutions around them (Suchman, 1995). An institution can be formal, for example, rules and regulations, or informal, such as attitude, norms, cultures, and moral standards (North D, 1990). 7. Theoretical implication Scholars have attempted to develop a theoretical framework for accurately characterising the determinants of firm strategic orientations and their significance in the present knowledge-based economy. This framework has implications for current enterprises, future enterprises, policymakers, and academia. However, the interactions between the Resource-Based View (RBV) and Institutional Theory which are key components of this framework, have yet to be thoroughly examined and require additional empirical research. Several models and theories have been studied to explore the relationship between a firm’s strategic direction and performance. The framework is one of the first models that incorporate firm capability, environmental support and strategic orientation factors at a firm performance level. Furthermore, despite previous independent examinations and careful debates in the literature, limited research has investigated the value of strategic direction on firm performance using an integrated model that considers information technology. Consequently, this new conceptual model and theoretical framework could enhance the existing knowledge on strategic orientation and firm performance and lead to new avenues of research. For instance, researchers can use a systematic literature review to identify and synthesise existing research, which can offer a better understanding of the theoretical and conceptual frameworks used to study strategic orientation and the key factors that affect it. Such information can be used to develop new theories and models to study strategic orientation and guide future research in this field. 8. Practical implication This paper is based on a comprehensive literature review of selected research from business management and academic journals. The results reveal a list of potential determinants used in various organisational contexts to determine the strategic orientation of firm performance. However, it is important to note that the same determinants may lose relevance in other fields. Therefore, it is necessary to collect determinants specific to a firm’s specifications and scale of operation to achieve a superior competitive advantage and measure firm success. Furthermore, previous research has shown that strategic orientation significantly impacts firm performance, particularly in telecommunications, insurance, research, supply chain, and retail chain enterprises. Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 16 of 23 Therefore, this study contributes to the decision-making processes of firms before investing in intangible assets and other capabilities that significantly impact innovation and operational performance. Specifically, this research can help firms, academics, and policymakers understand the various facets of effective management of diverse firm strategic orientations. Furthermore, from a managerial perspective, a systematic literature review can assist managers in making more informed decisions about their firm’s strategic orientation. By synthesising existing research, managers can better understand the key factors influencing strategic orientation and the best practices for enhancing firm performance and preventing business failure. As a result, managers can use the research findings to develop more effective strategies and allocate resources more efficiently. In addition, a systematic literature review can help managers identify potential gaps in their firm’s strategic orientation and develop plans to address them. For example, the review highlights the importance of organisational culture in shaping strategic orientation. In that case, managers can take steps to assess and improve their firm’s culture to better align with their strategic goals. To achieve these study outcomes, managers must understand the crucial stages that lead to successfully implementing these orientations. Regarding regulatory factors, businesses should also be aware of their environment’s inherent difficulties and unpredictability. This study will guide firms, entrepreneurs, strategists, and policymakers to improve and support the operations of small businesses in various economies. 9. Research limitations and suggestions for further studies This study has limitations, like other studies in this field. Firstly, the determinants examined in this study are based on theoretical research, which may not always reflect the reality of the business world. Secondly, this study focuses on the SME sector, and the determinants may differ for other sectors. Although this study provides a theoretical basis for understanding the determinants that impact a firm’s performance and strategic orientation, to address these limitations, there is a need for further empirical research, such as case studies, to validate the findings of this study. Additionally, researchers may employ meta-analysis techniques to increase knowledge in this field. Thirdly, biases may exist due to the complexity of word definitions and methods of text interpretation. In addition, this study has taken steps to eliminate bias as much as possible to ensure the reliability of findings. As a result, researchers and practitioners can use this study’s findings to understand better the practical challenges of firm strategic orientation and performance issues in the current knowledge-based economy. Moreover, practitioners can use this study’s classification system to evaluate how they can exploit the various orientations in their setting and identify the practical barriers they may face. To further enhance the applicability of the study’s findings, statistical approaches such as PLSEM and AMOS should be employed to evaluate the framework presented in this SLR. The test would provide a clear picture of the most influential factor(s) on the strategic orientation and performance of the firm. Researchers can also use this literature review to summarise existing studies, establish new research questions, and position and organise their efforts. The framework offered in this study can be employed to explain and assess the strategic orientation of firms. 10. Conclusion This study presents a comprehensive literature analysis that examines potential factors and theories influencing firms’ strategic orientations and performance from 2012 to 2022, resulting in the identification and selection of 16 studies. The results indicate that twelve elements were categorised into five contexts: orientation towards information technology, market, learning, behaviour, and regulation. In addition, 17 experts validated and confirmed these identified aspects that could impact a company’s strategic orientation and performance. It is worth noting that most strategic orientation studies on the current research issue have focused on non-information Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 17 of 23 technology orientation. Therefore, researchers should also pay attention to novel orientations, such as behavioural orientations and regulation, which can aid in satisfying customer demand and facilitating interaction between the stakeholders in the supply chain. Moreover, additional experiments by researchers may be required using theories or models to identify factors that could affect the success of a firm’s performance. Finally, the study highlighted that researchers could use the current theoretical structure and conceptual model using qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-method approaches to produce more refined models. Researchers can use these approaches to refine, validate and identify factors affecting strategic orientation and performance. This study’s findings can also guide future research questions and improve the practical implementation of firm strategic orientation and performance. Author details Hassan Dauda Yahaya 1 E-mail: [email protected] Gunalan Nadarajah 2 1 Mai Idris Alooma Polytechnic Geidam, Centre for Entrepreneurship Development, Damaturu, Yobe State, Nigeria. 2 Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok Kedah, Malaysia. Disclosure statement Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) face significant challenges in the fifth industrial revolution. One of the critical hurdles is selecting the right business strategy to improve performance and gain a sustainable competitive advantage. In today's dynamic knowledge economy, SMEs must develop their strategic orientations and capabilities to enhance creativity, innovation, and strategic decision-making. However, this pressure to perform drives a need for precision and coherence and a culture of entrepreneurship that can boost operational efficiency and business success. Numerous articles have identified the benefits of strategic orientation and firm performance, creating significant interest in studying this domain. To this end, this study conducted a systematic literature review to identify the most relevant determinants that can influence SMEs' performance. Citation information Cite this article as: Determining key factors influencing SMEs’ performance: A systematic literature review and experts’ verification, Hassan Dauda Yahaya & Gunalan Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195. References Abor, J., & Quartey, P. (2010). Issues in SME development in Ghana and South Africa. International Research Journal of Finance & Economics, 39(January), 218–228. Adam, N. A., & Alarifi, G. (2021). Innovation practices for survival of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the COVID-19 times: The role of external support. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-021-00156-6 Ahmad, N. N. (2020). The effectiveness of additional PRIHATIN SME economic stimulus package (PRIHATIN SME +) in Malaysia post-COVID-19 outbreak: A conceptual paper. Global Business, 12(4), 754–764. http://gbmrjournal.com/pdf/v12n4/V12N473.pdf Ahmad, S. Z., Abu Bakar, A. R., & Ahmad, N. (2019). Social media adoption and its impact on firm performance: The case of the UAE. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 25(1), 84–111. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-08-2017-0299 Ahmed, F., Kitchlew, N., Bajwa, S. U., & Shahzad, K. (2018). Congruence of market orientation and organisational learning: Performance perspective. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Science, 12(1), 309–329. Alhakimi, W., & Mahmoud, M. (2020). The impact of market orientation on innovativeness: Evidence from Yemeni SMEs. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 14(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10. 1108/apjie-08-2019-0060 Alharbi, R. K. (2022). Saudi Arabia ’ s small and medium enterprises (SMES) sector post-covid-19 recovery: Stakeholders’ perception on investment sustainability. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, ahead-of-p(ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/ ijoa-10-2021-2993 Ali Abbasi, G., Abdul Rahim, N. F., Wu, H., Iranmanesh, M., & Keong, B. N. C. (2022). Determinants of SME’s social media Marketing adoption: Competitive industry as a moderator. SAGE Open, 12(1), 215824402110672. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211067220 Al Idrus, S., Ahmar, A. S., & Abdussakir. (2018). The effect of organisational learning on market orientation moderated by job satisfaction. Cogent Business & Management, 5(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 23311975.2018.1475048 Alkahtani, A., Nordin, N., & Khan, R. U. (2020). Does government support enhance the relation between networking structure and sustainable competitive performance among SMEs? Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/ s13731-020-00127-3 AlKhajeh, M. H. A., & Abdelhakeem Khalid, A. (2018). Management Accounting practices (MAPs) impact on small and medium enterprise Business performance within the Gauteng Province of South Africa. Journal of Accounting and Auditing: Research & Practice, 2018, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.5171/2018.345766 Al Khasawneh, M., Abuhashesh, M., Ahmad, A., Masa’deh, R., & Alshurideh, M. T. (2021). Customers online engagement with social media Influencers’ content related to COVID 19. Studies in Systems, Decision and Control, 334, 385–404. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-030-67151-8_22 Alrousan, M. K., Al-Adwan, A. S., Al-Madadha, A., & Al Khasawneh, M. H. (2020). Factors affecting the adoption of e-marketing by decision makers in SMEs: Evidence from Jordan. International Journal of E-Business Research, 16(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10. 4018/IJEBR.2020010101 Al-Shami, S. A., Alsuwaidi, A. K. M. S., & Akmal, S. (2022). The effect of entrepreneurial orientation on innovation performance in the airport industry through Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 18 of 23 learning orientation and strategic alignment. Cogent Business & Management, 9(1). https://doi.org/10. 1080/23311975.2022.2095887 Alshanty, A. M., & Emeagwali, O. L. (2019). Market-sensing capability, knowledge creation and innovation: The moderating role of entrepreneurial-orientation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 4(3), 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2019.02.002 Al-Zubidy, A., & Carver, J. C. (2019). Identification and prioritisation of SLR search tool requirements: An SLR and a survey. Empirical Software Engineering, 24(1), 139–169. Empirical Software Engineering. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10664-018-9626-5 Amoah, J., Belás, J., Khan, K. A., & Metzker, Z. (2021). Antecedents of sustainable SMEs in the social media space: A partial least square-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) approach. Management & Marketing, 16(1), 26–46. https://doi.org/10.2478/ mmcks-2021-0003 Arasli, H., Abdullahi, M., & Gunay, T. (2021). Social media as a destination marketing tool for a sustainable heritage festival in Nigeria: A moderated mediation study. Sustainability, 13(11), 3–6. https://doi.org/10. 3390/su13116191 Arsawan, I. W. E., Koval, V., Rajiani, I., Rustiarini, N. W., Supartha, W. G., & Suryantini, N. P. S. (2022). Leveraging knowledge sharing and innovation culture into SMEs sustainable competitive advantage. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 71(2), 405–428. https://doi.org/10. 1108/IJPPM-04-2020-0192 Awinja, N. N, & Fatoki, I. O. (2021). Effect of Digital financial services on the growth of SMEs in Kenya. African Journal of Empirical Research, 2(1), 79–94. https://doi.org/10.51867/ajer.v2i1.16 Baker, W. E., Mukherjee, D., & Gattermann Perin, M. (2022). Learning orientation and competitive advantage: A critical synthesis and future directions. Journal of Business Research, 144(January), 863–873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.02.003 Baker, W. E., & Sinkula, J. M. (1999). Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science the synergistic effect of market orientation and learning orientation on organizational performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4), 411–427. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0092070399274002 Bamfo, B. A., Kraa, J. J., & Wright, L. T. (2019). Market orientation and performance of small and medium enterprises in Ghana: The mediating role of innovation. Cogent Business & Management, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1605703 Barker, R. C., & Barker, R. C. (1995). Financial performance measurement: Not a total solution. Management Decision, 33(2), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1108/ 00251749510081700 Barney, J. B., Ketchen, D. J., Wright, M., Barney, J. B., Ketchen, D. J., & Wright, M. (2011). The future of resource-based theory: Revitalisation or decline? Journal of Management, 37(5), 1299–1315. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0149206310391805 Barraood, S. O. (2021). Test case quality factors. Turkish Journal of Computer & Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(3), 1683–1694. https://doi.org/10. 17762/turcomat.v12i3.990 Basco, R., Hernández-Perlines, F., & Rodríguez-García, M. (2020). The effect of entrepreneurial orientation on firm performance: A multigroup analysis comparing China, Mexico, and Spain. Journal of Business Research, 113(May 2019), 409–421. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.020 Belás, J., Amoah, J., Dvorský, J., & Šuleř, P. (2021). The importance of social media for management of SMEs. Economics & Sociology, 14(4), 118–132. https:// doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2021/14-4/7 Belas, J., Amoah, J., Petráková, Z., Kliuchnikava, Y., & Bilan, Y. (2020). Selected factors of SMEs Management in the service sector. Journal of Tourism and Services, 11(21), 129–146. https://doi.org/10. 29036/jots.v11i21.215 Bilgihan, A., Okumus, F., Nusair, K., & Bujisic, M. (2014). Online experiences: Flow theory, measuring online customer experience in e-commerce and managerial implications for the lodging industry. Information Technology & Tourism, 14(1), 49–71. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s40558-013-0003-3 Cabrera, D., Cabrera, L., & Cabrera, E. (2023). The steps to doing a Systems literature review (SLR). April, 0–3. https://doi.org/10.54120/jost.pr000019.v1 Cantele, S., & Zardini, A. (2018). Is sustainability a competitive advantage for small businesses? An empirical analysis of possible mediators in the sustainability–financial performance relationship. Journal of Cleaner Production, 182, 166–176. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.016 Cegarra-Navarro, J. G., Wensley, A. K. P., MartínezMartínez, A., & García-Pérez, A. (2020). Linking organisational commitment with continuous learning through peripheral vision and procedural memory. European Management Journal, 38(6), 874–883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2020.05.003 Chae, H.-C., Koh, C. E., & Park, K. O. (2018). Information technology capability and firm performance: Role of industry. Information & Management, 55(5), 525–546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2017.10.001 Challis, D., & Clarkson, P. (2020). Implementing performance measurement. Performance Indicators in Social Care for Older People, 5(1), 219–252. https:// doi.org/10.4324/9781315247151-13 Charoensukmongkol, P. (2022). Does entrepreneurs ’ improvisational behavior improve firm performance in time of crisis ?. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-12-20200738 Charoensukmongkol, P., & Phungsoonthorn, T. (2022). The interaction effect of crisis communication and social support on the emotional exhaustion of University employees during the COVID-19 crisis. International Journal of Business Communication, 59(2), 269–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488420953188 Chege, S. M., Wang, D., & Suntu, S. L. (2020). Impact of information technology innovation on firm performance in Kenya. Information Technology for Development, 26(2), 316–345. https://doi.org/10. 1080/02681102.2019.1573717 Chen, W. D., Chen, Y., & Huang, S. C. (2021). Liquidity risk and bank performance during financial crises. Journal of Financial Stability, 56(June), 100906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2021.100906 Cheung, S. O., Wong, P. S. P., & Lam, A. L. (2012). An investigation of the relationship between organisational culture and the performance of construction organisations. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 13(4), 688–704. https://doi.org/10. 3846/16111699.2011.620157 Chih, W. H., Huang, L. C., & Yang, T. J. (2016). Prior knowledge, transformative learning and performance. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 116(1), 103–121. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IMDS-09-2014-0273 Covin, J. G., & Wales, W. J. (2012). The measurement of entrepreneurial orientation. Entrepreneurship Theory Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 19 of 23 and Practice, 36(4), 677–702. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1540-6520.2010.00432.x Daft, R. L. (2007). Essential organization theory and design. Issue January. David Tranfield, D. D., & S, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing Evidence-informed Management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-928360_28 Davis, J. P., & Aggarwal, V. A. (2020). Knowledge mobilisation in the face of imitation: Microfoundations of knowledge aggregation and firm-level innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 41(11), 1983–2014. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3187 Dekel-Dachs, O., Najda-Janoszka, M., Stokes, P., Simba, A., & Tarba, S. (2021). Searching for a new perspective on institutional voids, networks and the internationalisation of SMEs in emerging economies: A systematic literature review. International Marketing Review, 38(5), 879–899. https://doi.org/10. 1108/IMR-12-2020-0303 Dirgiatmo, Y. (2015). Analysis of the potential use of social networking for the success of strategic business planning in small and medium-sized enterprises. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2S2), 233–245. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015. v6n2s2p233 Dombrowski, U., Krenkel, P., & Wullbrandt, J. (2018). Strategic positioning of Production within the generic competitive strategies. Procedia CIRP, 72, 1196–1201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.03.007 Donkor, J., Donkor, G. N. A., & Kwarteng, C. K. (2018). Strategic planning and performance of SMEs in Ghana. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 12(1), 62–76. https://doi.org/10. 1108/apjie-10-2017-0035 Duong, P. A. N., Voordeckers, W., Huybrechts, J., & Lambrechts, F. (2022). On external knowledge sources and innovation performance: Family versus non-family firms. Technovation, 114, 102448. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102448 Fakhreddin, F., & Foroudi, P. (2022). The impact of market orientation on new product performance through product launch quality: A resource-based view. Cogent Business & Management, 9(1). https://doi.org/ 10.1080/23311975.2022.2108220 Fallah, H., Jafariyan, H., & Savabieh, S. (2018). Investigation of market orientation and self-efficacy effects on sale force performance: Mediator role of sales force creativity and innovation implementation. Journal of Relationship Marketing, 17(3), 188–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332667.2018.1440147 Fatoki, O. (2018). The impact of entrepreneurial resilience on the success of small and medium enterprises in South Africa. Sustainability, 10(7), 2527. https://doi. org/10.3390/su10072527 Flamini, G., Pittino, D., & Visintin, F. (2021). Family leadership, family involvement and mutuality HRM practices in family SMEs. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 13(2), 100468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs. 2021.100468 Geidam, M. M., Yahaya, H. D., & Gasamu, A. (2021). The effect of covid 19 on the financial performance of micro small and medium enterprises in Yobe State: Way forward for sustainable development. International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Management, 3(5), 588–593. https://doi.org/10. 35629/5252-0305588593 Gilaninia, S., & Liu, S. (2017). Competitive support of governments for research, development and innovation and its interaction with knowledge production criteria. Cogent Business & Management, 4(1), 1315861. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2017.1315861 González-Benito, Ó., González-Benito, J., & MuñozGallego, P. A. (2009). Role of entrepreneurship and market orientation in firms' success. European Journal of Marketing, 43(3/4), 500–522. https://doi. org/10.1108/03090560910935550 Guo, C., & Wang, Y. (2016). Market orientation, distributor relationship, and return on assets: Optimising distribution performance for industrial firms. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Logistics, 28(1), 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-01-2015-0014 Gwadabe, U. M. (2017). Entrepreneurial competencies : SMEs performance factor in the challenging entrepreneurial competencies : SMEs performance factor in the challenging Nigerian economy (pp. 55–61). Academic Journal of Economic Studies. Habib, M. A., Bao, Y., Ilmudeen, A., & Soobaroyen, T. (2020). The impact of green entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation and green supply chain management practices on sustainable firm performance. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1), 1743616. https://doi. org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1743616 Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Thiele, K. O. (2017). Mirror, mirror on the wall: A comparative evaluation of composite-based structural equation modeling methods. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(5), 616–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0517-x Hamzah, M. I., Othman, A. K., & Hassan, F. (2020). Mediating effects of individual market orientation on the link between learning orientation and job performance. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 35(4), 655–668. https://doi.org/10.1108/ JBIM-08-2018-0239 Harvey, J. F., Johnson, K. J., Roloff, K. S., & Edmondson, A. C. (2019). From orientation to behavior: The interplay between learning orientation, open-mindedness, and psychological safety in team learning. Human Relations, 72(11), 1726–1751. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718817812 Hatch, M. J., & Zilber, T. (2012). Conversation at the border between organisational culture theory and institutional theory. Journal of Management Inquiry, 21(1), 94–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492611419793 Herhausen, D., Schögel, M., & Fernando Robles, P. (2013). Profiting from customer relationship management: The overlooked role of generative learning orientation. Management Decision, 51(8), 1678–1700. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-08-2012-0582 Hinderks, A., Jose, F., Mayo, D., Thomaschewski, J., & Escalona, M. J. (2020). An SLR-Tool: Search process in Practice: To conduct and manage systematic literature review (SLR). Proceedings - 2020 ACM/IEEE 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion, ICSE-Companion 2020, 81–84. https:// doi.org/10.1145/3377812.3382137 Hironaka, C., Zariyawati, M. A., & F, D.-R. (2017). A comparative study on development of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Japan and Malaysia. Saudi Journal of Business and Management Studies, 357–374. https://doi.org/10.21276/sjbms Hiu Kan Wong, A., Xinru Wu, C., Whitla, P., & Stanley Snell, R. (2022). How LMX and marketing capabilities guide and motivate customer-facing employees’ learning. Journal of Business Research, 138, 161–169. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.09.002 Hoang, C. L., Bui Thanh, T., & Palazzo, M. (2021). Market orientation, corporate social responsibility, and firm performance: The moderating role of relationship Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 20 of 23 marketing orientation. Cogent Business & Management, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/ 23311975.2021.1926212 Holmes, A. F., Webb, K. J., & Albritton, B. R. (2022). Connecting students to community: Engaging students through course embedded service-learning activities. The International Journal of Management Education, 20(1), 100610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100610 Hooi, L. W. (2019). Firm performance: Is organisational learning capability the magic wand? International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 68(8), 1411–1433. https://doi.org/10. 1108/IJPPM-01-2019-0023 Hooley, G., Cox, T., Fahy, J., Shipley, D., Beracs, J., Fonfara, K., & Snoj, B. (2000). Market orientation in the transition economies of Central Europe: Tests of the narver and Slater market orientation scales. Journal of Business Research, 50(3), 273–285. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(99)00105-8 Hossain, M. S., Kannan, S. N., & Raman Nair, S. K. K. (2021). Factors influencing sustainable competitive advantage in the hospitality industry. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 22(6), 679–710. https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008X.2020.1837049 Huikkola, T., & Kohtamäki, M. (2019). Interplay of strategic orientations in the development of smart solutions. Procedia CIRP, 83, 89–94. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.procir.2019.02.145 Hwang, J., & Lim, Y. (2021). An effect of educational quality on learning outcomes and organisational performance: Focused on Korean small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Journal of Education & Work, 34(2), 158–169. https://doi.org/10. 1080/13639080.2021.1897546 Ibidunni, A. S., Kolawole, A. I., Olokundun, M. A., & Ogbari, M. E. (2020). Knowledge transfer and innovation performance of small and medium enterprises (SMEs): An informal economy analysis. Heliyon, 6(8), e04740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020. e04740 Imani, S., Foroudi, P., Seyyedamiri, N., Dehghani, N., & Wright, L. T. (2020). Improving employees’ performance through internal marketing and organizational learning: Mediating role of organizational innovation in an emerging market. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1), 1762963. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 23311975.2020.1762963 Iqbal, S., Nawaz, A., & Ehsan, S. (2019). Financial performance and corporate governance in microfinance: Evidence from Asia. Journal of Asian Economics, 60, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asieco.2018.10.002 Ismail, A. R., & Mohamad, B. (2022). Determinants of SMEs’ performance: Amalgamation of entrepreneurial, market and brand orientations. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-02-2022-0167 Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. (1996). Market orientation: Review, refinement, and roadmap. J Market-Focused Manage, 1(2), 119–135. http://doi.org/10.1007/ BF00128686. Jiang, G., Liu, F., Liu, W., Liu, S., Chen, Y., & Xu, D. (2021). Effects of information quality on information adoption on social media review platforms: Moderating role of perceived risk. Data Science and Management, 1(1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsm.2021.02. 004 Johnson, R., & Morgan, G. (2016). SURVEY SCALES, a guide to development, analysis, and reporting. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part I. Accounting Horizons, 15(1), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch. 2001.15.1.87 Khadim, R. A., Hanan, M. A., Arshad, A., Saleem, N., & Khadim, N. A. (2018). Revisiting antecedents of brand loyalty: Impact of perceived social media communication with brand trust and brand equity as mediators. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 17(1), 1–13. Krasnikov, A., & Jayachandran, S. (2008). The relative impact of marketing, research-and-development, and Operations Capabilities on firm performance. Journal of Marketing, 72(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10. 1509/jmkg.72.4.001 Kurniawan, M. A., & Iskandar, Y. (2023). The effect of technology adaptation and government financial support on sustainable performance of MSMEs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Cogent Business & Management, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/ 23311975.2023.2177400 Laukkanen, T., Nagy, G., Hirvonen, S., Reijonen, H., & Pasanen, M. (2013). The effect of strategic orientations on business performance in SMEs: A multigroup analysis comparing Hungary and Finland. International Marketing Review, 30(6), 510–535. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2011-0230 Lau, C. M., & Ngo, H. Y. (2004). The HR system, organisational culture, and product innovation. International Business Review, 13(6), 685–703. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.ibusrev.2004.08.001 Leal Junior, I. C., de Oliveira, U. R., Guimarães, V. D. A., Ribeiro, L. G., & Aprigliano Fernandes, V. (2021). Probabilistic analysis of the sustainable performance of container terminals. Research in Transportation Business & Management 43, 100725. May 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2021.100725 Le, T. T., & Ikram, M. (2022). Do sustainability innovation and firm competitiveness help improve firm performance? Evidence from the SME sector in vietnam. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 29, 588–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.11. 008 Li, H., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2001). Product innovation strategy and the performance of new technology ventures in china. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6), 1123–1134. h t t p://d o i.org//1 0.2307/ 3069392 Lin, H. F. (2015). Linking knowledge management orientation to balanced scorecard outcomes. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(6), 1224–1249. https:// doi.org/10.1108/JKM-04-2015-0132 Liu, W., Shao, X., De Sisto, M., & Li, W. H. (2021). A new approach for addressing endogeneity issues in the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance. Finance Research Letters, 39(October 2019), 101623. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101623 Lückenbach, F., Baumgarth, C., Schmidt, H. J., Henseler, J., & Wright, L. T. (2019). To perform or not to perform? How strategic orientations influence the performance of social Entrepreneurship Organizations. Cogent Business & Management, 6(1). https://doi.org/ 10.1080/23311975.2019.1647820 Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21 (1), 135–172. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1996. 9602161568 Ma, H. (2006). COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE competitive advantage is not performance. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 10(2), 15–33. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb046396 Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 21 of 23 Mahdi, O. R., Nassar, I. A., & Almsafir, M. K. (2019). Knowledge management processes and sustainable competitive advantage: An empirical examination in private universities. Journal of Business Research, 94(May 2017), 320–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.02.013 Malami SarkinTudu, S., Abd Wahab, A., & Ibrahim, H. (2022). Predicting key predictors of project desertion in blockchain: Experts’ verification using one-sample T-Test. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 17, 497–521. https:// doi.org/10.28945/5022 Manuele, F. A. (2009). Definitions from the Economics field. Professional Safety, (December), 28–33. https:// aeasseincludes.assp.org/professionalsafety/pastis sues/054/12/F2Manuele_1209.pdf Marcos-Pablos, S., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2018). Decision support tools for SLR search string construction. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 660–667. https://doi.org/10.1145/3284179.3284292 Margarida Vicente, J. L. A., & T, M. S. (2015). Measuring innovation capability in exporting firms: The INNOVSCALE. The Electronic Library, 34(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2013-0208 Matekenya, W., & Moyo, C. (2022). Innovation as a driver of SMME performance in South Africa: A quantile regression approach. African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, 13(3), 452–467. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/AJEMS-06-2021-0306 Migdadi, M. M. (2021). Organisational learning capability, innovation and organisational performance. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(1), 151–172. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-11-2018-0246 Miller, R. L., Rycek, R. F., & Fritson, K. (2011). The effects of high impact learning experiences on student engagement. Procedia - Social & Behavioral Sciences, 15, 53–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.050 Monteiro, A. P., Soares, A. M., & Rua, O. L. (2019). Linking intangible resources and entrepreneurial orientation to export performance: The mediating effect of dynamic capabilities. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 4(3), 179–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2019.04.001 Moreira, A., Navaia, E., & Ribau, C. (2022). Moderation effects of government institutional support, active and reactive internationalization behavior on innovation capability and export performance. Economies, 10(8), 177. https://doi.org/10.3390/ economies10080177 Morgan, N. A. (2012). Marketing and business performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(1), 102–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0279-9 Nakku, V. B., Agbola, F. W., Miles, M. P., & Mahmood, A. (2019). The interrelationship between SME government support programs, entrepreneurial orientation, and performance: A developing economy perspective. Journal of Small Business Management, 58(1), 2–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2019.1659671 Nayak, B., Bhattacharyya, S. S., & Krishnamoorthy, B. (2019). Integrating wearable technology products and big data analytics in business strategy: A study of health insurance firms. Journal of Systems & Information Technology, 21(2), 255–275. https://doi. org/10.1108/JSIT-08-2018-0109 North D, C. (1990). Institutional change: A framework of analysis. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 1–23. Nurfarida, I. N., Sarwoko, E., & Arief, M. (2021). The impact of social media adoption on customer orientation and SME performance: An empirical study in Indonesia. Journal of Asian Finance, 8(6), 357–0365. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no6.0357 Obana, M., & Hanakawa, N. (2014). Process evaluation based on meeting quality of requirement analysis phase in Software development projects. Journal of Software Engineering and Applications, 07(10), 828–843. https://doi.org/10.4236/jsea.2014.710075 O’Dwyer, M., & Gilmore, A. (2019). Competitor orientation in successful SMEs: An exploration of the impact on innovation. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 27(1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2017.1384040 Okoli, C., & Schabram, K. (2010). Working papers on information Systems a guide to conducting a systematic literature review of information Systems research. Working Papers on Information Systems, 10(2010). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1954824 Omar, A. R. C., Hussin, M. Y. M., & Muhammad, F. (2019). Assessing strategic orientation and mosques performance. Research in World Economy, 10(5), 30–35. https://doi.org/10.5430/rwe.v10n5p30 Orzan, M. C., Burlacu, S., Florescu, M. S., Orzan, O. A., & MacOvei, O. I. (2020). The effects of online marketing on financial performance in the textile industry. Industria Textila, 71(3), 288–293. https://doi.org/10. 35530/IT.071.03.1826 Özşahin, M., Zehir, C., & Acar, A. Z. (2011). Linking leadership style to firm performance: The mediating effect of the learning orientation. Procedia - Social & Behavioral Sciences, 24, 1546–1559. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.09.089 Peng, M. W., Li, S. S., Pinkham, B., & Chen, H. (2009). The Institution-Based View as a third leg for a strategy tripod. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(3), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2009.43479264 Pham, L. T., & Hoang, H. V. (2019). The relationship between organisational learning capability and business performance. Journal of Economics and Development, 21(2), 259–269. https://doi.org/10. 1108/jed-10-2019-0041 Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116–145. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393988 Rajaram, H., Loane, J., MacMahon, S., & Caffery, F. (2021). Expert review of taxonomy based testing: A testing framework for medical device software. Proceedings of the International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering. https:// doi.org/10.5220/0010458503310339 Ravaonorohanta, N., & Sayumwe, M. (2020). Social media presence and organisational performance: An empirical study on companies’ presence on twitter. Contemporary Management Research, 16(2), 123–144. https://doi.org/10.7903/CMR.20095 Rehman, N., Razaq, S., Farooq, A., Zohaib, N. M., & Nazri, M. (2020). Information technology and firm performance: Mediation role of absorptive capacity and corporate entrepreneurship in manufacturing SMEs. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 32(9), 1049–1065. https://doi.org/10. 1080/09537325.2020.1740192 Rowinski, M. (2022). How small businesses drive the American economy. Forbes, 1–5. https://www.forbes. com/sites/forbesbusinesscouncil/2022/03/25/howsmall-businesses-drive-the-american-economy/?sh= 1e29deeb4169 Salisu, I., Bin Mohd Sappri, M., Bin Omar, M. F., & Tan, A. W. K. (2021). The adoption of business intelligence systems in small and medium enterprises in the healthcare sector: A systematic literature review. Cogent Business & Management, 8(1). https://doi.org/ 10.1080/23311975.2021.1935663 Salkind, N. J. (2012). Exploring Resrearch. In Pearson Education, Inc (8th ed.). http://dinus.ac.id/repository/ Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 22 of 23 docs/ajar/Neil_J._Salkind_2012_-_Exploring_ Research_.pdf Santos-Vijande, M. L., López-Sánchez, J. Á., Loredo, E., Rudd, J., & López-Mielgo, N. (2022). Role of innovation and architectural marketing capabilities in channelling entrepreneurship into performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 7(2), 100174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100174 Saruchera, F., & Mpunzi, S. (2023). Digital capital and food agricultural SMEs: Examining the effects on SME performance, inequalities and government role. Cogent Business & Management, 10(1). https://doi. org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2191304 Seran, T., & Bez, S. M. (2021). Open innovation’s “multiunit back-end problem”: How corporations can overcome Business unit rivalry. California Management Review, 63(2), 135–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0008125620968609 She, Q., Yu, Y., & Wu, K. (2020). Is “born global” a viable market entry mode for the internationalization of SMEs? Evidence from China before COVID-19. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 56(15), 3599–3612. https:// doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2020.1854720 Shu, C., De Clercq, D., Zhou, Y., & Liu, C. (2019). Government institutional support, entrepreneurial orientation, strategic renewal, and firm performance in transitional China. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 25(3), 433–456. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/IJEBR-07-2018-0465 Sim, J., Saunders, B., Waterfield, J., & Kingstone, T. (2018). Can sample size in qualitative research be determined a priori? International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21(5), 619–634. https://doi. org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1454643 Sinkula, J. M., Baker, W. E., & Noordewier, T. (1997). A framework for market-based organisational learning: Linking values, knowledge, and behavior. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(4), 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0092070397254003 Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1995). Market orientation and the learning organization. Journal of Marketing, 59(3), 63. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299505900306 Slevin, D. P., & Covin, J. G. (1998). Time, growth, complexity, and transitions: Entrepreneurial challenges for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 22(2), 53–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 104225879802200205 Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/ 10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331 Syahdan, R., Djaelani, Y., & Mahdi, S. A. R. (2020). Strategic orientation and the performance of SMEs in Indonesia: The mediating role of access to finance. Management Science Letters, 10(5), 1151–1160. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.10.026 Tajvidi, R., & Karami, A. (2021). The effect of social media on firm performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 115, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.09.026 Taşkiran, G., & İ yigün, N. O. (2019). The relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and entrepreneurial orientation: A research in the hospitality industry. Procedia Computer Science, 158, 672–679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.102 Tate, W. L., & Bals, L. (2018). Achieving shared triple bottom line (TBL) value creation: Toward a social resource-based view (SRBV) of the firm. Journal of Business Ethics, 152(3), 803–826. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s10551-016-3344-y Taticchi, P., Tonelli, F., & Cagnazzo, L. (2010). Performance measurement and management: A literature review and a research agenda. Measuring Business Excellence, 14(1), 4–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/ 13683041011027418 Tobi, H., & Kampen, J. K. (2018). Research design: The methodology for interdisciplinary research framework. Quality and Quantity, 52(3), 1209–1225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0513-8 Tourani, N. (2022). Thriving in a shifting landscape: Role of social media in support of business strategy. Asia Pacific Management Review, 27(4), 276–281. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2021.11.001 Vaitoonkiat, E., & Charoensukmongkol, P. (2020a). Interaction e ff ect of entrepreneurial orientation and stakeholder orientation on the business performance of fi rms in the steel fabrication industry in Thailand. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 12(4), 453–473. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-05-2019-0072 Vaitoonkiat, E., & Charoensukmongkol, P. (2020b). Stakeholder orientation ’ s contribution to fi rm performance. Management Research Review, 43(7), 863–883. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-07-2019-0296 Vicente, M., Abrantes, J. L., & Teixeira, M. S. (2015). Measuring innovation capability in exporting firms: The INNOVSCALE. International Marketing Review, 32(1), 29–51. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2013-0208. Wang, J., Li, J., & Zhang, Q. (2021). Does carbon efficiency improve financial performance? Evidence from Chinese firms. Energy Economics, 104(April), 105658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105658 Waruhiu, H. (2014). Rebalancing the balanced scorecard: A sequel to Kaplan and Norton. European Journal of Business and Management, 6(29). 2014. Wong, J. K. W., & Li, H. (2010). Construction, application and validation of selection evaluation model (SEM) for intelligent HVAC control system. Automation in Construction, 19(2), 261–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.autcon.2009.10.002 Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2019). Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(1), 93–112. https://doi. org/10.1177/0739456X17723971 Yeniaras, V., DiBenedetto, A., & Dayan, M. (2021). Effects of relational ties paradox on financial and non-financial consequences of servitisation: Roles of organisational flexibility and improvisation. Industrial Marketing Management, 99(September), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.09.006 Yuan, Y., Feng, B., Lai, F., & Collins, B. J. (2018). The role of trust, commitment, and learning orientation on logistic service effectiveness. Journal of Business Research, 93(March 2017), 37–50. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jbusres.2018.08.020 Yusriza. (2021). Department of statistics Malaysia small and medium enterprises (SMEs) performance 2019. July 2020 Zhang, F., & Zhu, L. (2021). Social media strategic capability, organisational unlearning, and disruptive innovation of SMEs: The moderating roles of TMT heterogeneity and environmental dynamism. Journal of Business Research, 133(April), 183–193. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.071 Zhu, X. M., Song, X. N., Leng, P., Zhou, F. C., Gao, L., & Guo, D. (2022). Performances of six reanalysis profile products in the atmospheric correction of passive microwave data for estimating land surface temperature under cloudy-sky conditions. International Journal of Digital Earth, 15(1), 296–322. https://doi. org/10.1080/17538947.2022.2025463 Yahaya & Nadarajah, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2251195 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2251195 Page 23 of 23