Page 1 of 22

Archives of Business Research – Vol. 9, No. 7

Publication Date: July 25, 2021

DOI:10.14738/abr.97.10533. Asiedu, M. (2021). Firm Characteristics, Financing and Firm Innovation in Africa. Archives of Business Research, 9(7). 177-198.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Firm Characteristics, Financing and Firm Innovation in Africa

Michael Asiedu

School of Accounting

Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, Wuhan - China.

Gabriel Kyeremeh

School of Finance

Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, Wuhan – China

ABSTRACT

The study employed firm level data from the World Bank’s Enterprise Survey

Indicator Database to investigate firm characteristics associated with firm

innovation in 32 African countries, for the period 2009 to 2018. We find that firm

level innovation, including the introduction of significantly new products (H1), new

or significantly improved methods of manufacturing products (New Technology)

are strongly associated with external funding sources (funds from Banks and non- banking institutions). In addition, firm level characteristics such as firm age, female

ownership, capacity utilization, educated labor force, exposure to competition is

strongly associated with firm innovation. These findings are very important for

countries in Africa (and other less-developed countries) who spend less on research

and development due financing and structural constraints but want to accelerate

economic growth and increased productivity.

Keywords: Firm Innovation, Firm Financing, New Technology, New Product, Internal

Funding

INTRODUCTION

While most economist including (Baumol 2002; Carpenter 1943; Aghion and Durlauf 2005)

have built consensus that innovation is a key catalyst for sustained economic growth and

development through the mediating roles of finance (mostly external funding) There is

however, scanty evidence from less-developed countries on the adverse effects of obstacles to

access to finance and corporate governance on productivity through innovation.

Recent studies by (Ayyagari and Maksimovic 2007; Ayyagari, Demirgüç-Kunt, and Maksimovic

2011;Fernandez 2017; Beck, Demirgüç-Kunt, and Maksimovic 2005) have provided important

guide and support for firm innovation and financing for small and medium size firms in less- developed and emerging markets. We align with (Ayyagari, Demirgüç-Kunt, and Maksimovic

2011) that the limited studies on innovative practices of small and medium firms in Africa is

largely due to data constraints. Even though majority of small, medium and large firms in Africa

face mounting challenges few studies have been conducted to understand their unique and

underling feature and operating environment.

This study adds to firm innovation’s literature in Africa using firm level date from the World

Banks Enterprise Survey Database to examine the determinants of the rate at with firms

Page 2 of 22

178

Archives of Business Research (ABR) Vol. 9, Issue 7, July-2021

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

innovate and their adaptation within the market space. We examine the relationship between

firm innovation activities, firm characteristics (age, legal status and firm location) and business

environment constraints such as obstacle to finance, activities of market competitors and

ownership structure, among others. Our sample consist of 18,335 manufacturing firms from 32

countries in Africa.

According to the Enterprise Survey Database, firm innovation activities cover as set actions

including introduction of a New Product, new or significantly improved methods of

manufacturing products (New Technology), new or significantly improved logistical or

business support processes, new or significantly improved structures or management

practices, introduction to new or significantly improved marketing methods, did this

establishment spend on formal research and development activities by the firm, either in-house

or contracted with other companies, did this establishment give its employees some time to try

out or to develop a new idea or new approach about products or services, firm management,

business process, or marketing, and other related innovation questions such as whether the

firm has ISO certification and using technology licensed from a foreign-owned company. We

find from the regression result between firm characteristics (age, ownership type, legal status,

capacity utilization) and innovation activities. We find evidence of a strong and positive

relationship between firm age, capacity utilization, typical working hours per week of the firm

and innovation after controlling for firm location, location size, and industry. In contrast we

find the legal status of firm (listed companies, companies with non-traded shares, and sole

proprietorship firms) have significant and negative association with firm innovation against

the limited partnership firms.

We also find from the regression results between firm innovation, sources of working capital

and obstacle to access to finance dummies. We find that firms faced with severe obstacles to

access finance are less innovative. These firms are less likely to meet the outlay for innovation.

We record that internal working capital source in weakly and negatively associated with firm

innovation. However, firms that use external sources of funding as working capital such as

borrowing from banking and non-banking institutions are more innovative.

Further analysis show that firms with female ownership are more innovative than firms

without female ownership. We also find a negative and very weak relationship between firm

private domestic firms, foreign domestic firms and firm innovation. Top manager experience

and top female manager variables are found not to positively affect firm innovation within the

sample.

The relationship between firm competition and firm innovation we find that firms with high

sales volume, market shares, number of competitors, average number of days to clear goods at

customs post, and compete against unregistered or informal firms significantly and positively

affects firm innovation among the sampled firms in Africa. This finding means that innovative

firms can achieve higher sales volumes and also able to capture larger fraction of the market.

We confirm that firms with high-capacity utilization, the typical hours of operation in a week of

a firm, education of employees and firms with more productive workers are significantly more

innovative.

Page 3 of 22

179

Asiedu, M. (2021). Firm Characteristics, Financing and Firm Innovation in Africa. Archives of Business Research, 9(7). 177-198.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/abr.97.10533

In summary, our results add to the limited extent literature on firm innovation and firm

characteristics in Africa by providing supporting evidence on the possible avenues through

which firm characteristics and access to firm finance (especially external funding such as

banking and non-banking financial institutions) accelerate innovation and stimulates growth.

Earlier studies including (Fernandez 2017); (Verdier et al. 2010); (Ayyagari and Maksimovic

2007); (Aghion, Howitt, and Mayer-Foulkes 2005) and (King and Levine 1993) have all

highlight the mediating roles of developed financial institution and the effects of absence or

inadequate funding for innovation activities. The availability of funding sources and efficient

capacity utilization are catalyst for poor countries (in this case Africa countries) to initiate

innovation activities through research and development for growth.

The study is significantly different from previous research in that it focuses mainly on Africa

(32 African countries) and the use of firm level data to examine the interrelationship between

firm innovation and firm characteristics. The remainder of the study follows this pattern:

section two discusses the relevant literature review of existing theoretical and empirical work,

section three focuses on the data description and data sources, section four presents the

methodology. The results and discussion are showed in section five and section six is the

conclusion.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Several studies have been conducted on the relevant interrelationship between firm

innovation, access to firm finance and critical firm characteristics. For instance (Aliyu, Ahmad,

and Nordin 2019) identified firm innovation to mediate on Access to firm Finance and Business

Performance of Women Entrepreneurs in Nigeria. (Lee, Sameen, and Cowling 2015) reported

that in a study containing 10,000 UK firms that innovative firms are more likely to be denied

access to finance than non-innovative firms. This phenomenon they observed get worse during

financial crises. However, after controlling for a host of firm characteristics, they found

pronounced evidence of worsening conditions for non-innovative firms. This finding critically

highlights setbacks with the financial sector. One is the structural problem which limits access

to financial for innovative firs and the other is the severe impact on non-innovative firms of the

cyclical problem caused by the financial crisis. (Camisón and Villar López 2010) also identified

that firm productivity is associated with the complementary of organizational and

technological innovations among 159 Spanish firms. They argue that the effect of adapting a

flexible productive system is mediated by incorporating process, organizational innovation and

product.

In a sample of 1,356 food brands (Sharma, Davcik, and Pillai 2016) examined the influence of

product innovation as a mediating role on research and development spending and brand

equity on marketing performance. They find show that multinational companies (MNCs) are

able to advance their market shares and product innovation to a larger extent than small and

medium enterprises (SMEs) and retailer firms. (Fernandez 2017) concluded that firm age, firm

size, financial constraints and funding sources are the key drivers of firm innovation in

Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru.

All these recent studies discussed above provide significant support to earlier studies including

(Demirg-Kunt and Maksimovic 1998) (Rajan and Zingales 1996) that constrained access to

finance (mostly external finance) slows growth. Rather a robust, not necessarily large, stock

Page 4 of 22

180

Archives of Business Research (ABR) Vol. 9, Issue 7, July-2021

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

market and banking sector links externally financed firm growth. However, the mediating

channels through which access to firm finance stimulates firm productivity remains

challenging. Meanwhile it is technological advancement and skill acquisition rather than capital

accumulation that accounts for the difference in output around the world (Solow 1957). He

further argues that nearly 80% of the growth in labor productivity across the US from 1909 to

1949 was accounted for by a more productive use of capital and acceleration in the skills of

labor through technological advancement.

The effect of firm governance and ownership structure on firm innovation is also highlighted

by both earlier and recent studies (Shleifer 1998) (Porta, Lopez-De-Silanes, and Shleifer 2002);

(Dewenter and Malatesta 2001); (Ayyagari et al. 2011), (Fernandez 2017) and (Aliyu et al.

2019) on how firm performances and firm innovation is influenced by governance and

ownership structure.

In summary, the literature on firm innovation, ownership structure and access to finance

suggests that innovation and funding is critical to firm growth. We examine this hypothesis by

testing the relationship between firm innovation and sources of working capital, market

competition, and firm ownership and governance structure.

DATA SOURCE AND DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

The data sources and variable descriptions use in this empirical analysis are discussed in this

section. This study employs firm-level data for manufacturing firms in 32 African countries

from the World Bank’s Enterprise Survey Indicator Database,

https://www.enterprisesurveys.org conducted between 2009 and 2018. The country with the

largest share of firms in the dataset is Egypt (16.08 percent), followed by Nigeria (14.85

percent), and Tanzania (4.51 percent), as presented in table 1. Table 2 and 3 present the

pairwise correlation matrix and summary statistics of key variables of interest. We report that

even though most of the correlation coefficients are statistically significant at 5%, they are

mostly weakly correlated. The mean age of firms is 23.479 year whilst the oldest firm is 120

years old and the youngest is 2 years old. Top managers experience also averages at 16 years.

On the average firm utilize their total capacity at 69.152% and their active average working

hours per week is 64.756 hours.

A set of questions on firm innovation are posed to firm owners whether they engaged in specific

innovative activities. These questions include the number of resources invested in R&D. This

study, however, extends the questions on the firm's innovation activities to the (New Product,

new or significantly improved methods of manufacturing products (New Technology), new or

significantly improved logistical or business support processes (H3), new or significantly improved

organizational structures or management practices (H4a), introduced new or significantly

improved marketing methods (H4b), did this establishment spend on formal research and

development activities, either in-house or contracted with other companies (H5), did this

establishment give employees some time to innovate or try out a new approach or new idea about

the products or services (H6), business process, firm management, or marketing (H7), and other

related innovation questions such as whether the firm has ISO certification (B8) and using

technology licensed from a foreign-owned company (E6), excluding office software); following

(Ayyagari et al. 2011) who argued that innovation in countries located far inside their

production possibility frontier might mostly be imitating and adopting instead of inventing this

Page 5 of 22

181

Asiedu, M. (2021). Firm Characteristics, Financing and Firm Innovation in Africa. Archives of Business Research, 9(7). 177-198.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/abr.97.10533

study focuses more on the other set of questions asked which are directly link to output than

only R&D spending.

Most importantly, we acknowledge that our sample consists of only African countries that are

predominantly less developed economies and are most likely operating within their frontier.

Also, (Gorodnichenko, Svejnar, and Terrell 2010) argued that using R&D expenditure as a basis

of innovation may be inappropriate. Their reason being that R&D expenditures generate not all

innovations, and formal R&D measures are typically biased against small firms.

METHODOLOGY

The empirical analysis of this study is developed on the latent regression of the form:

�∗ = �#

� + � (1)

Where �∗ is an unobservable index variable, � is a vector of explanatory variables, � is a vector

of parameters, and � is an error term (see, for instance, (Liu 2015), chap. 3 and 11).

For the binary case (Section 4.1), � = 1 (i. e, innovative firm) if �∗ > 0 and � = 0 (i.e., non- innovative firm) if �∗ ≤ 0. For the ordered case where � denotes a firm innovation level,

which ranges from 1 �� �

� = 1if �∗ ≤ �$; � = 2 �� �$ < �∗ ≤ �& , ... . . , � = � �� �()$ ≤ �∗ such that �$ < �& <

⋯ < �()$ are the threshold parameters or cutoffs.

For binary data, the odds ratio of a logit model is given by

1 − � = 1 + �*/,

1 + �)*/, = �*/, (2)

The odds ratio represents the probability of success or having an event, �, to the probability of

failure or not having an event (1 − �).

By taking natural logarithm of both sides of Eq. (2), one obtains the logistic regression model

ln ? �

1 − �

@ = �#

� = �$ + �&�& + ⋯ + �-�- (3)

For the ordered model

��(� < �) ≡ �. = ��(�#

� + � < �. = ��(� < �. − �#

�) so that the odds of being at or below

category � is given by

1 − � = 1 + �/!)*",

1 + �)(/!)*",) = �/!)*#,,� = 1, ... . (� − 1) (4)

and the ordinal logistic regression can be represented by

ln( �.

1 − �.

) = �. − �#

� = �. − (�$ + �&�& + ⋯ + �-�- ) (5)

� = 1, ... . (� − 1)