MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4378620102 · doi:10.52403/ijrr.20230550

Influence of Grand Strategies on Performance of Manufacturing Firms in Nairobi County, Kenya

2023· article· en· W4378620102 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gerald Okoth, Julius Miroga

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal of Research and Review · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueCorporate Insolvency and Governance
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDescriptive statisticsBusinessMarketingQuarter (Canadian coin)Sampling frameCredenceDescriptive researchManufacturingProduct (mathematics)Operations managementEconomicsPopulationGeographyStatistics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Relationship between grand strategies and performance of manufacturing firms has gained credence globally. Manufacturing firms in Japan have recorded greater success in manufacturing sector globally due to their ability to adopt various grand strategies that have aided them to achieve sustained competitive advantage. However, manufacturing industry in Kenya has experienced decline over the last five years. Manufacturing sector GDP contribution in Kenya has reduced in 2022 first quarter to KES 118,134 from KES 113,460 million 2022 second quarter. Therefore, this study sought to examine the influence of grand strategies on performance of manufacturing firms in Nairobi County, Kenya. The specific objectives were to examine the influence of product development strategy on performance of manufacturing firms and to establish the influence of turnaround strategy on performance of manufacturing firms in Nairobi County, Kenya. The study was guided by Igor Ansoff’s theory, and Stage theory of successful turnaround. Descriptive research design was used in this study. One hundred (100) respondents from 20 large manufacturing firms in Nairobi County were targeted. The sampling frame comprised of marketing/sales managers, finance managers, human resource managers, operational managers, Strategy & Business Development Managers. The study sampled 100 using census sampling technique. Primary data was collected using a well-designed questionnaire. Quantitative data was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Descriptive analysis was summarized data in form of central tendency as well as dispersion and inferential analysis was used to test hypothesis at a significance level of 0.05. Descriptive analysis included; frequencies, Mean, Standard deviation and percentage while inferential analysis involved correlation analysis and multiple linear regression analysis. Prior to conducting multiple linear regressions, the study ensured that the assumptions of linear regression are met. The data was presented in form of tables and models. The results indicated that product development strategy had positive and significant effect on organizational performance. Turnaround strategy had a positive and significant effect on performance. On the other hand, the regression analysis revealed that the grand strategies explained up to 64.5% change in organizational performance of manufacturing firms in Nairobi County. The study concluded that grand strategies significantly influence organizational performance of manufacturing firms in Nairobi County. This study recommends that management of manufacturing firms pursuing product development strategies so as to come up with products that meet the changing needs of their customers. It is recommended that the companies should open new branches in new geographical areas to reach new customers not only beyond Nairobi County, but also beyond East Africa. The companies can expand their product lines by developing new products that may or may not be related to the current products to target current customers. The study recommends that management of manufacturing firms should create an organizational culture that is in line with their turnaround strategy. Keywords: [Organizational Performance, Product Development Strategy, Turnaround Strategy]

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,361
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,184

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,049
Tête enseignante GPT0,340
Écart entre enseignants0,291 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal of Research and ReviewMême sujetCorporate Insolvency and GovernanceTravaux en français237 207