About the Author(s)

Michael Kwamega Email symbol
College of Management, Sichuan Agricultural University, China

Dongmei Li
College of Management, Sichuan Agricultural University, China

Eugene Abrokwah
School of Business, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, China


Kwamega, M., Li, D. & Abrokwah, E., 2018, ‘Supply chain management practices and agribusiness firms’ performance: Mediating role of supply chain integration’, South African Journal of Business Management 49(1), a317. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajbm.v49i1.317

Original Research

Supply chain management practices and agribusiness firms’ performance: Mediating role of supply chain integration

Michael Kwamega, Dongmei Li, Eugene Abrokwah

Received: 29 Dec. 2017; Accepted: 01 June 2018; Published: 30 Oct. 2018

Copyright: © 2018. The Author(s). Licensee: AOSIS.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


Background: Globally, there have been a dramatic upward surge in the total number of agribusiness firms serving as a chain in strengthening of their activities. Interestingly, the impact of supply chain integration (SCI) on agribusiness firms is deficient in a developing country like Ghana.

Aim: The study looks into the nexus between supply chain management practices (SCMP) and agribusiness firms’ performance. The study further examines the mediating role of SCI on the relationship between SCMP and agribusiness firms’ performance in Ghana.

Methods: A research framework was proposed and subjected to tentative assessment using data amassed from selected agribusiness firms from the Northern Region of Ghana. Statistical Package for Social Sciences 22.0 version and LISREL 8.0 were used to test hypotheses on the nexus between supply chain management practices and agribusiness firms’ performance, as well as the role of SCI.

Results: The findings revealed that SCMP relates positively to both financial and internal process performance. Also, it was discovered that SCI completely or partially mediates the effects of SCMP on the two variables of the firms performance, and this difference could be attributed to the different cultural settings.

Conclusion: In support of management theories, this study justifies that using SCI as an organisational core strategic tool will help boost agribusiness performances to remain and sustain competitive edge over rivals. Therefore, agribusiness managers, policymakers, governments and other interested bodies are encouraged to broaden the scope of advocacy in streamlining SCI culture to ensure effectiveness and speedy attainments of organisational objectives.


Agribusiness plays a crucial function in the economic transformation through the development of agro-based industries and provision of employment and income(s) (Katua 2014; Olaoye 2014). Agribusiness investments accelerate agricultural expansion through the establishment of new markets and the development of a vibrant input supply sector. Comparatively, Sub-Saharan Africa investments in agribusiness and agriculture production is expected to rise to US$ 1 trillion by the year 2030 as against US$ 313 billion it had in 2010 (Byerlee et al. 2013) which would be a powerful catalyst for economic transformation and development (Abrokwah et al. 2015; Avgerou et al. 2016).

With respect to this, both local and international markets are facing robust demand which would continue as domestic demand increases. Food markets are set to spur by 2030, exceeding US$ 400 billion (Byerlee et al. 2013) because of urbanisation, thereby necessitating agribusinesses investment in operational activities such as processing, logistics and market infrastructure. Growing demand from both local and international markets, fierce competition and dynamics at the market in today’s business environments are influencing organisations and businesses to engage in connected activities. Tarafdar and Qrunfleh (2017) stated that adopting an integrated move towards supply chain management (SCM) relationship is a great path to conforming to the changing needs of the customer. For firms to remain focused and sustain competitive advantage and performance goals at both local and international markets, the most successful approach is through SCM (Li et al. 2006). The study on SCM depicts the way of using and utilising resources over the entire firm, thereby optimising the value of the firm. Agribusiness firms adopt SCM strategies to minimise cost by leveraging production and distribution activities to the enterprise suppliers and to fulfil customer request by delivering standardised products that meet customer’s satisfaction (Ince et al. 2013; Sukati et al. 2012). A supply chain consists of manufacturers, suppliers, transporters, warehouses, wholesalers, retailers and finally the customers. This entire supply chain of each of the organisations within the network of companies contributes to delivering value to the customer. These also include new product development, marketing, operations, distribution, finance and customer service (Chopra & Meindl 2015); thus, the effectual management of a supply chain is imperative to establish and withstand competitive advantage in products and services of the firms.

In addition, researchers Alfalla-Luque et al. (2013), and Prajogo and Olhager (2012) detailed that integrating and handling the main components of information was paramount to the successful performance of supply chain and the firm. Hence, to attain valuable integration within the supply chain, the applicability of information technology needs to be acknowledged (Prajogo & Olhager 2012; Yang & Maxwell 2011). Furthermore, Singh et al. (2014) and Li et al. (2006) probed the nexus existing between the performance of the firm and supply chain practices, and the outcome stated that SCM practices have affirmative control on the performance of the organisation and its sustainability. This confirms the need to enforce SCM strategies among agribusiness firms.

Similarly, Ince et al. (2013) worked on the impact of enterprise resource planning systems and SCMP on firm performance, and their finding supports that effective SCM practices have an appreciable effect on the competitive advantage and firm performance. However, SCMP and the ERP systems could perhaps be influenced by contextual factors such as the type of the industry and size of the firm.

With the growing interest of scholars and experts over the last decades on SCM, Bechtel and Jayaram (1997), and Burgess, Singh and Koroglu (2006) regarded it as a vital constituent for operational success and the integration of numerous business procedures including demand scheduling and predicting, purchasing, engineering and assembly, delivery, resource management and customer management (Lummus et al. 1997; Mentzer et al. 2001). However, organisations must have blueprints to integrate and connect cross-functional activities internally and externally with the procedures of suppliers and customers so as to enhance firms’ performance in the supply chain (Bechtel & Jayaram 1997; Lambert et al. 1998; Woo et al. 2016). The supply chain integration (SCI) approach builds worth for a firm’s customers and lures suppliers and customers into the value creation process (Droge, Jayaram & Vickery 2004; Vickery et al. 2003). Despite the pivotal function of supply chain practices on firms’ performance in SCM occurrences, many scholarly articles on SCM were conducted in developed countries. Moreover, previous research focused on the correlation between SCMP and organisational performance (Gunasekaran, Subramanian & Rahman 2017; Kurien & Qureshi 2011; Li et al. 2006; Yap & Tan 2012).

However, empirical research on SCMP and firm performance focusing on SCI as a mediator in Ghana are almost lacking in the literature (Hillenbrand, Money & Pavelin 2012); as such, there still exists a gap in the literature (Vicente et al. 2015) for further research. To bridge the gap, the researchers seek to probe in the nexus existing between SCMP and firm performance by testing various variables such as leadership, stakeholders’ involvement and commitment, continuous improvement and innovation, and, lastly, management and strategic planning in the financial and internal process performance of selected agribusiness firms in the Northern Region of Ghana.

Theoretical foundations and research hypotheses

Supply chain management practices are imperative to the firm as such, setting an explanatory examination to entail a robust theoretical attention and contributory literature review to bolster the liaison existing among the component under consideration is relevant. The conceptual framework of the research is relying on the earlier work of Fernandes, Truong and Sampaio (2017) which principally focuses on proportion taxonomy and instrument of measurement. The theory footing the conceptual framework of this research was settled on the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm (Barney 1991; Penrose 1959; Wernerfelt 1984), posited that competitive advantage is sustainable and attainable when the firms’ resources such as human capital cannot be copied or replaced by competitors, thereby placing the firm above its competitors inside and outside the supply chain.

According to the RBV, firms should continually appraise the network of companies involved in the activities of the chain to assess whether they have the correct people in place with the requisite skills to deliver value to the firm and customer to maintain a nonstop competitive edge (Wernerfelt 2007). The key factor to a firm’s strength and weakness roots from the kind of suppliers, manufacturers and distributors integrated either internally or externally within the supply chain and their quality of relationship to the host firm such as financial and internal process performance; thus focusing extensively on the skills and procedure enrichment of the organisation offering unique products and services to the end user (Barratt & Oke 2007; Fawcett, Ellram & Ogden 2007).

This study focused specifically on the RBV theory to ascertain the nexus existing between SCMP and firms’ performance with emphasis on agribusiness. The theory of the firm posits the unique function core competencies play in the financial and internal process performance of the firm. The theory of the firm also pinpoints unique characteristics of resources the organisation owns (Conner 1991; Nonaka et al. 2014) which differs across firms (Penrose 1959; Wernerfelt 2007). As a result of the assorted types of resources owned by the firm, performance can be ascribed to the dissimilar resources owned. According to Tzokas et al. (2015), knowledge, technological resource, capabilities, skills and experience of workers, management and organisational competency are mostly noted as intangible assets to the firm. However, the dynamics of the business environment turned other scholars like Teece, Pisano and Shuen (1997) to focus on the dynamic effect of capabilities and resources on the performance of the firm, while synchronising dissimilar parts of production cognition and the elementary competency, and skills of integrating dual technology effusion (Danilovic & Leisner 2007; Prahalad & Hamid 1990). Furthermore, the uniqueness a firm adds to performance influenced the works of these researchers (Barney 1991; Conner 1991; Nonaka et al. 2014; Penrose 1959; Teece et al. 1997). As a result, the dynamics of the business setting, internal factors, firm scheme, organogram, arrangement and labour, capabilities and competences, property size and financial capacity serves as informative in explicating performance.

In all, the tangible and intangible assets of the firm serve as a competitive gain and bolster performance. Accordingly having SCM capability as a firm, is an essential asset for the focal firm or organisation (Bhakoo, Singh & Sohal 2012; Gandhi et al. 2016; Trkman et al. 2007). Consequently, to try to fathom dissimilar opinions of academicians within the RBV could help in improving the topic under consideration such as SCMP and agribusiness firms’ performance with integration as the mediator.

Supply chain integration (leadership and integration)

SCI is explained as the extent to which an organisation cooperates with partners of the supply chain and supportively regulates internal and external organisational practices to accomplish proficient movements of products, services, data, finance and decisions with the aspiration of rendering paramount value to its customer (Flynn, Huo & Zhao 2010). The aptitudes of the firm in making strategic alliances, sharing information, coordinating processes and integrating resources are deemed as SCI. It thus shields three scopes: internal integration, integration of suppliers and, finally, integration of customers (Flynn et al. 2010; Zhao et al. 2011). According to Zhao et al. (2011; 2013), the extent to which an organisation or firm arranges its operational strategies, systems and procedures into synergetic mixed processes is termed as internal integration. Thus, the ability of leadership to cooperate and share information among internal arms, strategically creating partnerships among cross-functional units and working as one beyond functions (Zhao et al. 2011). Leadership is a management philosophy in SCM, aimed at crafting and preserving, enabling surrounding where employees are wholly engaged and dedicated to accomplishing the imperative objective of the firm. Thus, leadership engaged in SCM is accountable for promoting and sustaining consistency within the supply chain through integration and, as a result, leading to improvement in performance (Gosling et al. 2017). Based on the previous discussion, we formulate that:

H1a: Supply chain integration mediates the effect of leadership on agribusiness’ financial performance.

H1b: Supply chain integration mediates the effect of leadership on agribusiness firms’ internal process performance.

Stakeholders’ commitment and integration

According to the RBV, integration of supply chain could be remarked as a resource that is prime to competitive advantage (Barney 2012), and the integration of internal and external functions need sophisticated systems and skills that are hard to copy and replace (Chen, Daugherty & Landry 2009). Therefore, supplier integration, customer integration and process integration are deemed as stakeholders in the supply chain, performing specific functions within and outside the boundaries of the organisation and integrating their unique functions that are essential to the success of the business. In addition, the commitment of workers and their engagement at all positions of the firm is critical, and the usage of the capabilities and competencies they possess for the benefit of the organisation (Salanova et al. 2013). Also, the commitment of stakeholders helps internal and external processes to move on smoothly, because resources and capabilities acquired externally also produce competitive advantage (Das & Teng 2000). On the other hand, stakeholders’ commitment plays a significant function in skill development of activities that contribute to SCM success (Waller & Fawcett 2013). Hence, stakeholder’s commitment paves the path for the utilisation of integration within and outside the supply chain (Alfalla-Luque et al. 2015). Additionally, stakeholders’ commitment and understanding to the norms and values of the firm creates the avenue to uphold and formalise the strategic plan of the firm, and as employees in other departments are committed to the organisation and would be energised to also take responsibilities beyond their specialised domain (Abbott, White & Charles 2005; Kehoe & Wright 2013), thereby leading to higher levels of internal performance of the firm. In line with the foregoing argument, we propose that:

H2a: Supply chain integration mediates the effect of stakeholders’ commitment on agribusiness financial performance.

H2b: Supply chain integration mediates the effect of stakeholders’ commitment to agribusiness internal process performance.

Continuous improvement, innovation and integration

According to the focus of management literature, the sustainability of the firm relies on the ability to have the requisite skills and competence to continually innovate and improve on procedures, systems, products and services. This aims to boost growth in revenue and enhance profit margin (Crossan & Apaydin 2010; Wales, Gupta & Mousa 2013). On the other hand, changes and dislocation of many markets decrease cycle of products, and dynamic changes around the globe and taste of the customer call for continuous innovation and improvement (Tewari 2006). For example, the culture of continuous improvement and innovation placed Apple Company at the edge of its competitors at the market and provided wider market and revenue growth (Lindgardt et al. 2009).

Continuous improvement and innovation give a new way of brainstorming about how the core competencies such as capabilities and resources of the firm could be utilised well to continuously have an advantage ahead of its competitors, as way of lighting growth and increasing profitability of the supply chain thus enhancing the financial and internal process of the firm (Lindgardt et al. 2009). The aptitude of the focal firm to connect with all the partners within the supply chain to create and deliver sustainable products and services to the customer, at the right place and at the right time and in the right quantity in modernised fashion is deemed as continuous improvement and innovation (Bessant & Francis 1999; Scott, Wilcock & Kanetkar 2009; Teeratansirikool et al. 2013).

Additionally, integrating different modes of reaching employees, suppliers and manufacturers requires enhanced and systematic approaches such as sharing information, training of employees and suppliers on standard products development with partners in the supply chain to be in place (Cao & Zhang 2011; Finney & Corbett 2007; Koçog˘lu et al. 2011). Similarly, integrating the culture of continuous improvement and innovation internally adds a significant contribution to the internal process of the firm. Thus, agribusiness’ internal process performance is a footing to sustain competitive advantage outside the firm (Hamidianpour et al. 2015; Santamaría et al. 2012). Because poor internal process operations could result in failure in integrating with external partners (Danese & Romano 2011), the authors suggest that:

H3a: Supply chain integration mediates the effect of continuous improvement and innovation on agribusiness firms’ financial performance.

H3b: Supply chain integration mediates the effect of continuous improvement and innovation on agribusiness firms’ internal process performance.

Management and strategic planning and integration

According to Lummus et al. (1997) and Mentzer et al. (2001), SCM is the management of various business processes such as information management, demand planning, suppliers’ management, warehousing, transportation and distribution, inventory management, production planning and resource management. Because SCM is a complex system, the firm has to strategically plan to deal with uncertainties which come up with the supply chain. Strategically partnering suppliers is seen as the long-term relationship between the organisation and its suppliers which influences the strategic and functioning proficiencies of the participating firms or company to attain momentous continuing welfares (Li et al. 2005; 2006; Monczka et al. 1998). Strategic planning, management and integration affect financial improvement on the firm when suppliers in the supply chain respond to quick demand orders (Bhagwat & Sharma 2007; Hassini, Surti & Searcy 2012).

In addition, customer relationship was validated by Li et al. (2006) as a key function of strategic planning and management. They stated that customer relationship is a series of actions exercised for the reason of dealing with customer complaints, creating lasting relationships with customers and enhancing customer satisfaction. Establishing a closer relationship with customers is of importance to SCI, as this practice empowers the organisation or firm to respond quickly to the needs of the customers (Droge et al. 2004; Vickery et al. 2003). Furthermore, the focus of SCM is the sharing of information within internal and external supply chains (Koçog˘lu et al. 2011; Li et al. 2005); thus affirming the essence of the information sharing to SCM integration. An organisation can act more efficiently to the changing needs of the customers by sharing information across functions of the supply chain (Yang & Maxwell 2011).

On the other hand, internal operations, referred to as internal processes, are defined as the activities connected to the production systems and logistics flows. According to Gunasekaran et al. (2017), in order to respond to market demands, SCM requires flexibility in the production system. Thus, the system must be able to execute frequent modifications in demand configurations. Therefore, the integration of these strategic practices and management amounts to efficiency in agribusiness firms’ performance and augmenting financial and internal process performance. Therefore, we propose that:

H4a: Supply chain integration mediates the effect of MSP on agribusiness’ financial performance.

H4b: Supply chain integration mediates the effect of MSP on agribusiness’ internal process performance.

Overview of agribusiness in Ghana

The economy of Ghana is recognised as agrarian. Agriculture contributes to the economy of Ghana by recruiting more than 55% of the population, while contributing approximately 25% to gross domestic products (GDPs) and export earnings (Christiaensen, Demery & Kuhl, 2011; Killen 2011). The agricultural sector in Ghana comprises five core subdivisions, namely livestock, crops, fisheries, forestry and cocoa. The crop sector is rising at about 66.2% by GDP, the forestry, cocoa, fisheries and livestock sectors are growing at 12.2%, 8.2%, 7.3% and 6.1%, respectively, to GDP (Benin et al. 2013). The crop subsector includes yam, fruits (bananas, pineapples, onions and shallots), shea nuts, cashew nuts and kola nuts. For Ghana to develop a sustainable local food industry, more consideration is prerequisite to resolve the food security of the country. Ghana’s agriculture is principally on a smallholder with farmers having not more than two hectares in size (World Bank 2012). The farming system in Ghana is also still in the traditional way, where hoe and cutlass are the key farming tools (World Bank 2012).

According to Ghana Statistical Service (2015), the contribution of the agriculture sector to GDP is unceasingly declining and the service sector is rising yearly. Some measures to tackle the continuous poor performance of the agricultural sector have acknowledged the deficiency of vast share to the sector by both government and private firms. Therefore, the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, realising the importance of agribusiness, set up an agribusiness unit inside the Ministry of Food Agriculture to expedite the investment and assist small- and medium-scale local agribusinesses. Programmes such as Youth in Agriculture and the West Africa Agricultural Productivity were also implemented to boost and entice businesses and those inclined into agriculture.

Agribusiness indicates the agricultural associated business activities that are executed from agricultural inputs production and delivery through the fork by covering the supply of agricultural inputs, the production and transformation of agricultural products and their distribution to the final consumer (FAO 2017). The agribusiness firms offer the inputs, expertise and services needed for production on the farm as well as processing and the markets for the farm products. The tenacity of agribusiness firms is to convert the agricultural sector from a way of living to business, to hasten growth in productivity, upsurge revenue and creation of jobs, improve food security and upsurge competitiveness in the domestic and international market. Agribusiness atmosphere continues some level of growth and development. Although agribusiness is seen as an authentic weapon for economic development of the country, the industry is at the crucial level where the industry lacks modernised technology and no connection between the agricultural sector and the market. The agribusiness sector has experienced some development from within the sector. A World Bank (2012) report captured the interventions going on, consisting of a collaboration between the public and private sector. The financing by Ghanaian Agriculture Project (FinGAP), supported by USAID, helped in expediting funding and savings in the soy, rice and maize supply and value chain. Various impediments hinder the growth and performance of agribusiness, numbering from operations, managerial, marketing, human resource, accounting and finance issues. The absence of transport and storing facilities contribute to the poor performance of the agribusiness firms, because storage plays a critical factor in the post-harvest of agricultural produce. On the other hand, agribusiness firms face countless issues which include operational, information technology, managerial and governance, marketing and corporate social responsibility, human resource management and accounting, and finance issues.

Lack of mechanised and technology utilisation limits production units and forbids economies of scale and suboptimal yield (Killen 2011).

Framework of the research

Figure 1 demonstrates the SCM practices adopted for this research. The framework propositions that SCM practices will have an influence on firm performance both completely and also partially through SCI. The conceptual model of SCM practices and firm performance are identified and classified into four (4) and two (2) measurements, respectively. The four SCM measurements are leadership, stakeholders’ commitment and involvement, management and strategic planning, and continuous improvement and innovation. Also, the two (2) firm performance measurements consist of financial and internal process. SCI is the mediating variable between SCM practices and performance variables.

Figure 1: Framework of the research.

Research methodology

In meeting the objectives of the study, a descriptive research design was adopted for the study alongside the cross-sectional survey. This research noted population as the total of all units that exist in the area of investigation. Thus, it relates to all possible observations of the Ghanaian agribusiness firms, and special and peculiar performance issues that relate to the agribusiness in Ghana. The study comprises a population of 64 selected agribusiness firms from the national Board for Small Scale Industries located in the northern region of Ghana. For the purposes of generality, a sample was drawn and studied. Then a descriptive sample was drawn and the researchers apportioned the questionnaires proportionately among the agribusiness firms. These include five managers - each from the sector; thus, CEO, HR manager, accounts and finance manager, and operation manager. There were 320 participants in the sample with a response rate of 50.62% (162) which was used for the final analysis. Data were structured and analysed, and figures, tables and descriptive statistics, which involve mean and standard deviation, were generated using the SPSS version 20.0 and LISREL 8.0. Additionally, inferential statistics involve multiple regression and correlation analysis were produced. To assure the validity and reliability of the measures utilised in the analysis and test, internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), composite reliability (CR) and discriminant validity, that is, confirmatory factor analysis was applied. Furthermore, to evaluate the existence of bias in the data, goodness-of-fit indicators (χ2(df), root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA], comparative fit index [CFI], non-normed fit index [NNFI] and standardised root mean square residual [SRMR]) were calculated. The approach of testing mediation was adopted from Baron and Kenny (1986) and Sobel (1982) to assure the validity of the technique.

Opinions regarding the SCMP were employed from Fernandes et al. (2017) and were sought and measured using eight Likert scale items. Instruments that measure firm performance (financial and internal process) were identified and adopted from Abrokwah (2017). The measure firm performance comprised 10 items each. The researchers adopted five Likert scale items on SCI measures as earlier proposed by Chatzoudes and Chatzoglou (2015). All the above items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 5 = strongly agree to 1 = strongly disagree.

Firm size and technological intensity were considered for control purposes. Firm size, based on the number of employees was measured and, as companies may possess its structure and deploy numerous resources according to their size (Gilman & Raby 2013), the technological intensity was adopted (Sánchez, Marín & Morales 2015).

Measures of validity and reliability of data

Table 1 exhibits the outcomes of the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) validity and reliability test. The values of Cronbach’s alpha, as a measure of internal consistency, ranged from 0.879 for SCMP to 0.928 for IPP. The cut-off point for ascertaining the reliability of instruments indicates the range of alpha coefficients that exceeded 0.70 which is acceptable reliability coefficient according to Tavakol & Dennick (2011). The reliability of a high alpha value depends on the scale of measurement employed. Therefore, the scales used to measure the objectives of the research are a good fit, as they are internally consistent and measure the underlying construct. Thus, the scales had an acceptable reliability coefficient and were appropriate for the study.

TABLE 1: Construct measures validity and reliability analysis.

The confirmatory factor analysis produced a satisfactory model fit (Table 1). The respective standardised loadings, t-values and R2 values are presented. Factor loadings were affirmative and significant at 1%, implying a validation of convergent validity of the measures. The model produced χ2(df) = 479.98; normal chi-square (χ2(df)) = 1.326; RMSEA = 0.044; normed chi-square (NNFI) = 0.959; CFI = 0.963; and SRMR = 0.044. The very large chi-square value indicates poor fit for the model. The RMSEA value produced an acceptable model fit in relation to the degrees of freedom consistent with the rule of thumb of 0.06 or less (Jarvis, Mackenzie & Podsakoff 2004). The SRMR value of 0.044 also suggests an acceptable model fit. The CFI value of 0.963 is indicative of better fit and is therefore an acceptable model fit (Jarvis et al. 2004). Finally, the NNFI was 0.959 and thus denotes a good model fit, because it is equal to the cut-off of 0.95 or greater indicating a good model fit (Jarvis et al. 2004). The results generally indicate satisfactory model fit suggesting that the data have no bias. The results further indicated the R and R2, CR and average variance extracted (AVE) results. The corresponding values of CR and AVE for every hypothesis showed satisfactory results, given the rule of thumb of 0.60 and 0.50, respectively. Also, all AVEs attained were greater than the shared variances between constructs; thus, satisfying satisfactory discriminant validity.

Statistical analysis of data

From Table 2, the descriptive statistics and the correlation coefficient show a normal distribution for both the mean and standard deviation. It also appeared that all the variables have a correlation coefficient of between 0.75 and 0.90 which indicates that the differentiation index is great (Fang et al. 2016; Henseler, Ringle & Sarstedt 2015). Based on the previous discussion, the regression analysis was conducted and a further test was carried out to determine the mediate effect of SCI on the bond amid SCMP and firm performance variables (financial and internal process).

TABLE 2: Descriptive statistics and correlation of supply chain management practices, supply chain integration and firm performance.

Table 3 highlights the mediating effect of SCI on the relationship between SCMP and FP. Firstly, the control variables (firm size and technological intensity) were used to test the mediating effect of SCI on SCMP variables (LD, SC, MSP and CII) and FP. From the regression table, it can be observed from model 1b through model 4b that SCI has a strong positive effect on FP at 0.691 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed), LD is positively related to SCI at 0.711 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed), LD is significant with FP at 0.474 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed) and SCI has a significant positive relationship with FP at 0.691 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed). Also, it can be observed from model 5a, 6b and 7b that SC has a significant relationship on SCI at 0.729 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed), SC is significant on FP at 0.531 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed) and SCI has a significant positive effect on FP at 0.691 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed). Again, in model 8a, 9b and 10b, MSP is significant on SCI at 0.783 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed), MSP is significant on FP at 0.578 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed) and SCI has a significant positive effect on FP at 0.691 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed). Furthermore, it could be observed from model 11a, 12b and 13b that CII is significant on SCI at 0.788 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed), CII is significant on FP at 0.570 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed) and SCI has a significant positive relationship on FP at 0.691 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed).

TABLE 3: Regression results for financial performance.

Finally, in line with previous studies, model 1’b endorses a significant positive effect of SCI on FP at 0.691 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed). Therefore, SCI has a positive effect on all the other variables. This confirms a complete mediation (Baron & Kenny 1986; Sánchez et al. 2015; Sobel 1982), thereby supporting all the hypotheses (Feng, Sun & Zhang 2010; Prajogo & Olhager 2012).

Again in Table 4, we tested the mediating effect of SCI on the relationship between SCMP and IPP. As with Table 2, the control variables (firm size and technological intensity) was used to test the mediating effect of SCI on SCMP variables (LD, SC, MSP and CII) on IPP. Models 2a, 3b and 4b indicate SCI is positively related to IPP at 0.624 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed); LD has a significant positive effect on SCI at 0.711 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed); LD is significant on IPP at 0.421 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed); and SCI has a positive effect on IPP at 0.624 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed). Similarly, it can be observed from model 5a, 6b and 7b that SC has a significant relationship on SCI at 0.729 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed), SC is significant on IPP at 0.518 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed) and SCI has a significant positive effect on IPP at 0.624 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed). Also, in model 8a, 9b and 10b, MSP is significant on SCI at 0.783 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed); MSP is significant on IPP at 0.574 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed) and SCI has a significant positive effect on IPP at 0.451 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed). Furthermore, it could be observed from model 11a, 12b and 13b that CII is significant on SCI at 0.788 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed); CII is significant on IPP at 0.540 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed) and SCI has a significant positive relationship on IPP at 0.624 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed). Finally, in connection with erstwhile studies, model 1’b confirms a significant positive effect of SCI on FP at 0.624 at p < 0.01 (two-tailed). Thus, SCI has a positive effect on all the other variables. This confirms a complete mediation (Baron & Kenny 1986; Sánchez et al. 2015; Sobel 1982), and thereby supporting all the hypotheses (Chen et al. 2009; Hosseini Baharanchi 2009; Wong, Wong & Boon-Itt 2013).

TABLE 4: Regression results for internal process performance.


Even though agribusiness firms have grasped the significance of implementing SCM, exactly what to implement is not often known because of the lack of understanding of what comprises an inclusive set of SCM practices. By recommending, developing and authenticating multiple-dimensional, operational measures of the paradigm of SCM practices and exhibiting its effectiveness in enhancing firm performance, the contemporary study provides agribusiness firms with expedient apparatus for appraising the inclusiveness of their SCM practices.

Therefore, building on management theories, the current study was set to explore the relationship between SCMP and two dimensions of firm performance (financial and internal process) among agribusinesses in Ghana. The study further placed prominence on the influence of SCI on SCMP regarding financial performance and internal process performance among agribusinesses in Ghana.

The findings put forward that SCMP relate positively to both financial and internal process performance (Chen et al. 2009; Hosseini Baharanchi 2009; Wong et al. 2013) and therefore validating the hypothesis proposed by the researchers. On the other hand, to the best interest of firms and organisations, the study correspondingly disclosed that SCI entirely or moderately mediates the effects of SCMP on FP and IPP (He et al. 2014; Prajogo & Olhager 2012). Thus, in backing previous and existing discoveries, the study indicates that SCMP can improve firms’ performance (Ince et al. 2013; Macedo, Pinho & Silva 2016; Moneva et al. 2007; Prajogo & Olhager 2012) if firms SCI is enhanced, because today’s competition is not between firms, but how interconnected their supply chain activities remain. Likewise, SCI serves as a key factor in influencing firms’ effectiveness, because it serves as a pivotal advocate in making a decision concerning firm’s sustainability and success; thus securing competitive advantage (Li et al. 2006).

The study also exonerates preceding affirmations on SCMP which state that SCMP is positively related to SCI and organisational outcomes (Albdour & Altarawneh 2014; Casper et al. 2011; Wiengarten et al. 2015). It is therefore discernible that effective execution of SCMP within an organisation will ensure growth, stability, performance and competitive advantage for agribusiness firms in Ghana (Li et al. 2006; Nyamah et al. 2017). SCM practices might be influenced by background issues such as the type of industry, firm size, technological intensity and the position of the firm in the supply chain.

Finally, in line with the RBV and human capital theory, the study indicates that management is up to the task of gaining and maintaining competitive advantages by sharing of information within its internal and external supply chains (Li et al. 2005; Teeratansirikool et al. 2013; Wong, Lai & Bernroider 2015) which affirms the core of the information sharing to SCM integration. Thus, management is effective and efficient in meeting the changing needs of the customers by sharing information across functions of the supply chain (Li & Lin 2006; Marinagi, Trivellas & Reklitis 2015), and thereby meeting internal and financial performance targets (Hosseini Baharanchi 2009; Wong et al. 2013; 2015).


With the increasing importance of SCMP, SCI and acknowledgement of different dimensions of firm performance over the preceding decade, it is essential to improve our understanding of these concepts and their associations. The research contributes to the literature by developing and empirically testing the connection concerning SCMP and firm performance, and the mediating effect of SCI on SCMP towards firm performance based on a sample of selected agribusiness firms in the Northern Region of Ghana.

Empirical proof is presented for the accelerating influence of SCI on supply chain management practices towards firm performance and SCMP on firm performance. The study verified that SCI mediates the effects of SCMP and firm performance (financial and internal process). Findings from this study also provide some recommendations for managers to direct their management actions for achieving better SCI. Enhanced performance may be achieved by paying more attention to SCMP (Di Zhang & Swanson 2013). Thus, management should embrace SCI as an effective tool or a performance driver (Kaplan 2001) among agribusinesses. For the Ghanaian agribusiness to be more efficient and effective (Kondrasuk 2011), it would be appropriate by empowering SCI as a strategic investment to boost the performances.

Although we tested the mediating effect of SCI on SCMP towards financial and internal process performance, it is without limitation which paves the way for future studies. It would be more appropriate to broaden the span of the research to avoid biases in landing a general conclusion.

Also, it would have been better if this research was designed to measure individual organisational performances by extending it to other parts of Ghana for generality purposes.


We would like to express our profound gratitude to Sichuan Agricultural University for providing grant to support this research. Secondly, we are thankful for all agribusiness firms in the Northern Region of Ghana for their participation and input.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships which may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.

Authors’ contributions

M.K. did the introduction, literature review, data collection and conclusion. E.A. worked on the data analysis and the discussion, while D.L. supervised and revised the final manuscript.


Abbott, G.N., White, F.A. & Charles, M.A., 2005, ‘Linking values and organizational commitment: A correlational and experimental investigation in two organizations’, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 78(4), 531–551. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317905X26174

Abrokwah, E., Quaye, I., Omondi, C., Osei, J. & Sarbah, A., 2015, ‘The use of Information Technology (IT) among small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in financial reporting: Evidence from Ghana’, British Journal of Economics, Management & Trade 8(4), 258–269. http://www.sciencedomain.org/abstract.php?iid=1064&id=20&aid=9709

Abrokwah, E.G.Y., 2017, ‘Mediating role of work motivation: Does organizational commitment impact on NonGovernmental Organizations (NGOs) performances?’, Transylvanian Review 25(17), 1069. http://transylvanianreviewjournal.org/index.php/TR/article/view/1069

Albdour, A.A. & Altarawneh, I.I., 2014, ‘Employee engagement and organizational commitment: Evidence from Jordan’, International Journal of Business 19(2), 192–212.

Alfalla-Luque, R., Marin-Garcia, J.A. & Medina-Lopez, C., 2015, ‘An analysis of the direct and mediated effects of employee commitment and supply chain integration on organisational performance’, International Journal of Production Economics 162, 242–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.07.004

Alfalla-Luque, R., Medina-Lopez, C. & Dey, P.K., 2013, ‘Supply chain integration framework using literature review’, Production Planning & Control 24(8–9), 800–817. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2012.666870

Avgerou, C., Hayes, N. & La Rovere, R.L., 2016, ‘Growth in ICT uptake in developing countries: New users, new uses, new challenges’, Journal of Information Technology 31(4), 329–333. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41265-016-0022-6

Barney, J., 1991, ‘Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage’, Journal of Management 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108

Barney, J.B., 2012, ‘Purchasing, supply chain management and sustained competitive advantage: The relevance of resource-based theory’, Journal of Supply Chain Management 48(2), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493X.2012.03265.x

Baron, R.M. & Kenny, D.A., 1986, ‘The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social the moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

Barratt, M. & Oke, A., 2007, ‘Antecedents of supply chain visibility in retail supply chains: A resource-based theory perspective’, Journal of Operations Management 25(6), 1217–1233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2007.01.003

Bechtel, C. & Jayaram, J., 1997, ‘Supply chain management: A strategic perspective’, International Journal of Logistics Management 8(1), 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1108/09574099710805565

Benin, S., Johnson, M., Abokyi, E., Ahorbo, G., Jimah, K., Nasser, G. et al., 2013, Revisiting agricultural input and farm support subsidies in Africa: The case of Ghana’s mechanization, fertilizer, block farms, and marketing programs, IFPRI Discussion Paper 01300 (November), International Food Policy and Research Institute, Washington, D.C.

Bessant, J. & Francis, D., 1999, ‘Developing strategic continuous improvement capability’, International Journal of Operations & Production Management 19(11), 1106–1119. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579910291032

Bhagwat, R. & Sharma, M.K., 2007, ‘Performance measurement of supply chain management: A balanced scorecard approach’, Computers & Industrial Engineering 53(1), 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2007.04.001

Bhakoo, V., Singh, P. & Sohal, A., 2012, ‘Collaborative management of inventory in Australian hospital supply chains: Practices and issues’, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 17(2), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598541211212933

Burgess, K., Singh, P.J. & Koroglu, R., 2006, ‘Supply chain management: A structured literature review and implications for future research’, International Journal of Operations & Production Management 26(7), 703–729. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570610672202

Byerlee, D., Garcia, A., Giertz, A., Palmade, V. & Gurcanlar, T., 2013, Growing Africa: Unlocking the potential of agribusiness, The World Bank, Washington, DC, viewed 15 July 2017, from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTAFRICA/Resources/africa-agribusiness-report-2013.pdf

Cao, M. & Zhang, Q., 2011, ‘Supply chain collaboration: Impact on collaborative advantage and firm performance’, Journal of Operations Management 29(3), 163–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2010.12.008

Casper, W.J., Harris, C., Taylor-Bianco, A. & Wayne, J.H., 2011, ‘Work-family conflict, perceived supervisor support and organizational commitment among Brazilian professionals’, Journal of Vocational Behavior 79(3), 640–652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.04.011

Chatzoudes, D. & Chatzoglou, P., 2015, ‘Supply Chain Integration (SCI) measured from an information sharing perspective: Examining its impact on business success’, 2015 IEEE 9th International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS), viewed 15 July 2017, from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7128863/

Chen, H., Daugherty, P.J. & Landry, T.D., 2009, ‘Supply chain process integration: A theoretical framework’, Journal of Business Logistics 30(2), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2158-1592.2009.tb00110.x

Chopra, S. & Meindl, P., 2015, ‘Supply chain management: Strategy, planning, and operation’, Supply Chain Management: Strategy, Planning, and Operation, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Christiaensen, L., Demery, L. & Kuhl, J., 2010, ‘The (evolving) role of agriculture in poverty reduction an empirical perspective’, Journal of Development Economics 96(2), 239–254.

Conner, K.R., 1991, ‘A historical comparison of resource-based theory and five schools of thought within industrial organization economics: Do we have a new theory of the firm?’, Journal of Management 17(1), 121–154.

Crossan, M.M. & Apaydin, M., 2010, ‘A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature’, Journal of Management Studies 47(6), 1154–1191.

Danese, P. & Romano, P., 2011, ‘Supply chain integration and efficiency performance: A study on the interactions between customer and supplier integration’, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 16(4), 220–230. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598541111139044

Danilovic, M. & Leisner, P., 2007, ‘Analyzing core competence and core products for developing agile and adaptable corporation’, DSM 2007: Proceedings of the 9th International Design Structure Matrix Conference (October), viewed 04 January 2017, from http://www.designsociety.org/download-publication/27692/analyzing_core_competence_and_core_products_for_developing_agile_and_adaptable_corporation

Das, T.K. & Teng, B.-S., 2000, ‘A resource-based theory of strategic alliances’, Journal of Management 26(1), 31–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600105

Di Zhang, D. & Swanson, L.A., 2013, ‘Social entrepreneurship in nonprofit organizations: An empirical investigation of the synergy between social and business objectives’, Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing 25(1), 105–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2013.759822

Droge, C., Jayaram, J. & Vickery, S.K., 2004, ‘The effects of internal versus external integration practices on time-based performance and overall firm performance’, Journal of Operations Management 22(6), 557–573.

Fang, J., Wen, C., George, B. & Prybutok, V.R., 2016, ‘Consumer heterogeneity, perceived value, and repurchase decision-making in online shopping: The role of gender, age, and shopping motives’, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research 17(2), 116.

FAO, 2017, Food and agriculture driving action across the 2030 agenda for sustainable development, viewed 20 Nov 2017, from http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7454e.pdf

Fawcett, S.E., Ellram, L.M. & Ogden, J.A., 2007, Supply chain management. From vision to implementation, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Feng, T., Sun, L. & Zhang, Y., 2010, ‘Industrial marketing management the effects of customer and supplier involvement on competitive advantage: An empirical study in China’, Industrial Marketing Management 39(8), 1384–1394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.04.006

Fernandes, A.C., Sampaio, P., Sameiro, M. & Truong, H.Q., 2017, ‘Supply chain management and quality management integration: A conceptual model proposal’, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 34(1), 53–67. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-03-2015-0041

Finney, S. & Corbett, M., 2007, ‘ERP implementation: A compilation and analysis of critical success factors’, Business Process Management Journal 13(3), 329–347. https://doi.org/10.1108/14637150710752272

Flynn, B.B., Huo, B. & Zhao, X., 2010, ‘The impact of supply chain integration on performance: A contingency and configuration approach’, Journal of Operations Management 28(1), 58–71.

Gandhi, S., Mangla, S.K., Kumar, P. & Kumar, D., 2016, ‘A combined approach using AHP and DEMATEL for evaluating success factors in implementation of green supply chain management in Indian manufacturing industries’, International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 19(6), 537–561.

Ghana Statistical Service, 2015, Statistics for development and progress revised 2014 annual gross domestic product, June, pp. 3–8.

Gilman, M. & Raby, S., 2013, ‘The International Journal of Human National context as a predictor of high- performance work system effectiveness in small-to-medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): A UK – French comparative analysis’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management (December 2014), 37–41.

Gosling, J., Jia, F., Gong, Y. & Brown, S., 2017, ‘The role of supply chain leadership in the learning of sustainable practice: Toward an integrated framework’, Journal of Cleaner Production 140, 239–250.

Gunasekaran, A., Subramanian, N. & Rahman, S., 2017, ‘Improving supply chain performance through management capabilities’, Production Planning & Control 28(6–8), 473–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2017.1309680

Hamidianpour, F., Esmaeilpour, M., Alizadeh, M.S. & Dorgoee, A., 2015, ‘The influence of emotional intelligence and organizational climate on creativity and entrepreneurial orientation of small to medium-sized enterprises’, European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences 4(1), 20–30.

Hassini, E., Surti, C. & Searcy, C., 2012, ‘A literature review and a case study of sustainable supply chains with a focus on metrics’, International Journal of Production Economics 140(1), 69–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.01.042

He, Y., Keung Lai, K., Sun, H. & Chen, Y., 2014, ‘The impact of supplier integration on customer integration and new product performance: The mediating role of manufacturing flexibility under trust theory’, International Journal of Production Economics 147(Part B), 260–270.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. & Sarstedt, M., 2015, ‘A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 43, 115–135.

Hillenbrand, C., Money, K. & Pavelin, S., 2012, ‘Stakeholder-defined corporate responsibility for a pre-credit-crunch financial service company: Lessons for how good reputations are won and lost’, Journal of Business Ethics 105(3), 337–356.

Hosseini Baharanchi, S.R., 2009, ‘Investigation of the impact of supply chain integration on product innovation and quality’, Industrial Engineering 16(1), 81–89.

Ince, H., Imamoglu, S.Z., Keskin, H., Akgun, A. & Efe, M.N., 2013, ‘The impact of ERP systems and supply chain management practices on firm performance: Case of Turkish companies’, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 99, 1124–1133, viewed 20 April 2017, from http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1877042813040317

Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M., 2003, ‘A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research’, Journal of consumer research, 30(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1086/376806

Kaplan, R.S., 2001, ‘Strategic performance measurement and management in nonprofit organizations’, Nonprofit Management & Leadership 11(3), 354, viewed 18 April 2017, from http://content.ebscohost.com/ContentServer.asp?T=P&P=AN&K=5006650&S=R&D=bth&EbscoContent=dGJyMMTo50Sep7c4v+bwOLCmr0uep69Ss6i4SbaWxWXS&ContentCustomer=dGJyMPGqtkqxra5Rue3sfefwuY3x2/AA%5Cnhttp://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=5006650&

Katua, N.T., 2014, ‘The role of SMEs in employment creation and economic growth in selected countries’, International Journal of Education and Research 2(12), 461–472.

Kehoe, R.R. & Wright, P.M., 2013, ‘The impact of high-performance human resource practices on employees’ attitudes and behaviors’, Journal of Management 39(2), 366–391.

Killen, B., 2011, ‘The Paris declaration: Five reasons why it is working’, OECD Journal: General Papers 2010(1), 15–26.

Koçoğlu, İ., İmamoğlu, S.Z., İnce, H. & Keskin, H., 2011, ‘The effect of supply chain integration on information sharing: Enhancing the supply chain performance’, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 24, 1630–1649, viewed 18 April 2017, from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042811015448

Kondrasuk, J., 2011, ‘So what would an ideal performance appraisal look like? Journal of Applied Business & Economics 12(1), 57–71, viewed 05 February 2018, from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=1499691X&AN=60795763&h=V2tpvT8micKZemkSGBqxFV1I8YTIIUE9sNC+x8SoLB0v2smkKZ8TRqNEwUZU7dkAqzAOLv9GuO0RWPXjnBtl1w==&crl=c

Kurien, G.P. & Qureshi, M.N., 2011, ‘Study of performance measurement practices in supply chain management’, MultiCraft International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences 2(4), 19–34.

Lambert, D.M., Cooper, M.C. & Pagh, J.D., 1998, ‘Supply chain management: Implementation issues and research opportunities’, International Journal of Logistics Management 9(2), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/09574099810805807

Li, S. & Lin, B., 2006, ‘Accessing information sharing and information quality in supply chain management’, Decision Support Systems 42(3), 1641–1656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2006.02.011

Li, S., Ragu-Nathan, B., Ragu-Nathan, T.S. & Subba Rao, S., 2006, ‘The impact of supply chain management practices on competitive advantage and organizational performance’, Omega 34(2), 107–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2004.08.002

Li, S., Rao, S.S., Ragu-Nathan, T.S. & Ragu-Nathan, B., 2005, ‘Development and validation of a measurement instrument for studying supply chain management practices’, Journal of Operations Management 23(6), 618–641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2005.01.002

Lindgardt, Z., Reeves, M., Stalk, G. & Deimler, M.S., 2009, ‘Business model innovation: When the game gets tough, change the game’, Boston Consulting Group (December), 9.

Lummus, R.R., Vokurka, R.J., Vokurka, R.J., Texas, A. & Station, C., 1997, ‘Defining supply chain management: A historical perspective and practical guidelines’, Industrial Management & Data Systems 99(1), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635579910243851

Macedo, I.M., Pinho, J.C. & Silva, A.M., 2016, ‘Revisiting the link between mission statements and organizational performance in the non-profit sector: The mediating effect of organizational commitment’, European Management Journal 34(1), 36–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2015.10.003

Marinagi, C., Trivellas, P. & Reklitis, P., 2015, ‘Information quality and supply chain performance: The mediating role of information sharing’, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 175, 473–479, viewed 10 February 2017, from http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1877042815012859

Mentzer, J. T., DeWitt, W., Keebler, J. S., Min, S., Nix, N. W., Smith, C. D., & Zacharia, Z. G. 2001, ‘Defining supply chain management’, Journal of Business logistics, 22(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2158-1592.2001.tb00001.x

Monczka, R.M., Petersen, K.J., Handfield, R.B. & Ragatz, G.L., 1998, ‘Success factors in strategic supplier alliances: The buying company perspective’, Decision Sciences 29(3), 553–577. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1998.tb01354.x

Moneva, J.M., Rivera-Lirio, J.M., Muñoz-Torres, M.J. & Muñoz, M.J., 2007, ‘Industrial management & data systems the corporate stakeholder commitment and social and financial performance’, Industrial Management & Data Systems 107(1), 84–102. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570710719070

Nonaka, I., Kodama, M., Hirose, A. & Kohlbacher, F., 2014, ‘Dynamic fractal organizations for promoting knowledge-based transformation - A new paradigm for organizational theory’, European Management Journal 32(1), 137–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2013.02.003

Nyamah, E.Y., Jiang, Y., Feng, Y. & Enchill, E., 2017, ‘Agri-food supply chain performance: An empirical impact of risk’, Management Decision 55(5), 872–891. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-01-2016-0049

Olaoye, O.A., 2014, ‘Potentials of the agro industry towards achieving food security in Nigeria and other Sub-Saharan African countries’, Journal of Food Security 2(1), 33–41, viewed 10 March 2017, from http://pubs.sciepub.com/jfs/2/1/5/

Penrose, E., 1959, Theory of the growth of the firm, John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Prahalad, C.K. & Hamel, G., 1990, ‘The core competence of the corporation’, Harvard Business Review 68(3), 79–91.

Prajogo, D. & Olhager, J., 2012, ‘Supply chain integration and performance: The effects of long-term relationships, information technology and sharing, and logistics integration’, International Journal of Production Economics 135(1), 514–522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.09.001

Salanova, M., Llorens, S., Acosta, H. & Torrente, P., 2013, ‘Positive interventions in organizations positive interventions in positive organizations intervenciones positivas en organizaciones positivas’, terapia psicolÓgica 31(1), 101–113. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-48082013000100010

Sánchez, A.A., Marín, G.S. & Morales, A.M., 2015, ‘The mediating effect of strategic human resource practices on knowledge management and firm performance’, Revista Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa 24(3), 138–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.redee.2015.03.003

Santamaría, L., Jesús Nieto, M. & Miles, I., 2012, ‘Service innovation in manufacturing firms: Evidence from Spain’, Technovation 32(2), 144–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2011.08.006

Scott, B.S., Wilcock, A.E. & Kanetkar, V., 2009, ‘A survey of structured continuous improvement programs in the Canadian food sector’, Food Control 20(3), 209–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2008.04.008

Singh, R., Sandhu, H.S., Metri, B.A. & Kaur, R., 2014, ‘Supply chain management practices, competitive advantage and organizational performance’, International Journal of Information Systems and Supply Chain Management 7(2), 22–46. http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/ijisscm.2014040102

Sobel, M.E., 1982, ‘Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models’, Sociological Methodology 13(1982), 290–312. https://doi.org/10.2307/270723

Sukati, I., Hamid, A.B., Baharun, R. & Yusoff, R.M., 2012, ‘The study of supply chain management strategy and practices on supply chain performance’, Asia Pacific Business Innovation and Technology Management Society 40(2011), 225–233.

Tarafdar, M. & Qrunfleh, S., 2017, ‘Agile supply chain strategy and supply chain performance: Complementary roles of supply chain practices and information systems capability for agility’, International Journal of Production Research 55(4), 925–938. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2016.1203079

Tavakol, M. & Dennick, R., 2011, ‘Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha’, International Journal of Medical Education 2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd

Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. & Shuen, A., 1997, ‘Dynamic capabilities and strategic management’, Strategic Management Journal 18(7), 509–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z

Teeratansirikool, L., Siengthai, S., Badir, Y. & Charoenngam, C., 2013, ‘Competitive strategies and firm performance: The mediating role of performance measurement’, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 62(2), 168–184. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410401311295722

Tewari, M., 2006, ‘Is price and cost competitivenes enough for apparel firms to gain market share in the world after quotas? A review’, Global Economy Journal 6(4), 1524–5861. https://doi.org/10.2202/1524-5861.1134

Trkman, P., Indihar Štemberger, M., Jaklič, J. & Groznik, A., 2007, ‘Process approach to supply chain integration’, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 12(2), 116–128. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598540710737307

Tzokas, N., Kim, Y.A., Akbar, H. & Al-Dajani, H., 2015, ‘Absorptive capacity and performance: The role of customer relationship and technological capabilities in high-tech SMEs’, Industrial Marketing Management 47, 134–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.02.033

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

Vickery, S.K., Jayaram, J., Droge, C. & Calantone, R., 2003, ‘The effects of an integrative supply chain strategy on customer service and financial performance: An analysis of direct versus indirect relationships’, Journal of Operations Management 21(5), 523–539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2003.02.002

Wales, W.J., Gupta, V.K. & Mousa, F.-T., 2013, ‘Empirical research on entrepreneurial orientation: An assessment and suggestions for future research’, International Small Business Journal 31(4), 357–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242611418261

Waller, M.A. & Fawcett, S.E., 2013, ‘Click here for a data scientist: Big data, predictive analytics, and theory development in the era of a maker movement supply chain’, Journal of Business Logistics 34(4), 249–252. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12024

Wernerfelt, B., 1984, ‘A resource based view of the firm’, Strategic Management Journal 5(2), 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050207

Wernerfelt, B., 2007, ‘The resource-based view of the firm: Ten years later’, Strategic Management Journal 16(3), 171–174. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250160303

Wiengarten, F., Humphreys, P., Gimenez, C. & McIvor, R., 2015, ‘Risk, risk management practices, and the success of supply chain integration’, International Journal of Production Economics 171, 361–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.03.020

Wong, C.W.Y., Lai, K.H. & Bernroider, E.W.N., 2015, ‘The performance of contingencies of supply chain information integration: The roles of product and market complexity’, International Journal of Production Economics 165, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.03.005

Wong, C.W., Wong, C.Y. & Boon-Itt, S., 2013, ‘The combined effects of internal and external supply chain integration on product innovation’, International Journal of Production Economics 146(2), 566–574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.08.004

Woo, C., Kim, M.G., Chung, Y. & Rho, J.J., 2016, ‘Suppliers’ communication capability and external green integration for green and financial performance in Korean construction industry’, Journal of Cleaner Production 112, 483–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.119

World Bank, 2012, Agribusiness indicators: Ghana economic and sector work, The World Bank, Agriculture and Rural Development, Report Number 68163-GH, 1–58.

Yang, T. & Maxwell, T.A., 2011, ‘Information-sharing in public organizations: A literature review of interpersonal, intra-organizational and inter-organizational success factors’, Government Information Quarterly 28(2), 164–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.06.008

Yap, L. & Tan, C., 2012, ‘The effect of service supply chain management practices on the public healthcare organizational performance’, International Journal of Business and Social Science 3(16), 216–224, viewed 02 March 2017, from http://ijbssnet.com/journals/Vol_3_No_16_Special_Issue_August_2012/23.pdf

Zhao, L., Huo, B., Sun, L. & Zhao, X., 2013, ‘The impact of supply chain risk on supply chain integration and company performance: A global investigation’, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 18(2), 115–131. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598541311318773

Zhao, X., Huo, B., Selen, W. & Yeung, J.H.Y., 2011, ‘The impact of internal integration and relationship commitment on external integration’, Journal of Operations Management 29(1–2), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2010.04.004


Crossref Citations

1. Empirical analysis of integration practices among agribusiness firms
Michael Kwamega, Dongmei Li, Eugene Abrokwah
Business Process Management Journal  year: 2019  
doi: 10.1108/BPMJ-08-2018-0220