151 IMPACT OF FIRM SIZE SUSTAINABILITY ON RETAINED ...

GLOBAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT & SOCIAL SCIENCES

Vol.4 No.1 December, 2021. www.gjmss.org

151

IMPACT OF FIRM SIZE SUSTAINABILITY ON RETAINED EARNINGS OF

QUOTED MANUFACTURING FIRMS IN NIGERIA: EVIDENCE FROM

SELECTED MANUFACTURING FIRMS IN NIGERIA (2010 – 2020)

IBECHEOZOR EJIKE1 , PATRICK L. AKPAN2

[email protected] [email protected] 2

Department Of Business Administration, Nnamdi Azikiwe University Awka

Abstract

The study examines the implications of firm size (total assets) sustainability and quoted

manufacturing firms with evidence from selected firms in Nigeria for the period (2010 –

2020). Constraint associated with firm size and quoted manufacturing firms are

associated with resistance to change resulting in less efficient application of resources

amongst others. Thus, the objective of the study is to establish the effects of firm size on

retained earnings of quoted manufacturing firms in Nigeria with particular reference to

Nestle Nigeria Plc, Cadbury Nigeria Plc and PZ Nigeria Plc. In line with the objective, a

hypothesis was formulated and tested at 0.05 level of significance. The study was

anchored on legitimacy theory. The study adopted the panel survey and ex-post facto

research design. Secondary data was sourced from the financial statements of the three

selected firms. The simple regression analysis technique was used in the analysis of the

data with the help of E-views package. The results of the ordinary least square estimation

technique were reported and compared across firms. The study found from Nestle Nigeria

Plc and PZ Plc, that the coefficient revealed a statistical positive and insignificance

relationship between the two variables while in Cadbury Nigeria Plc the coefficient is

negative and insignificant. It therefore concluded that increased total assets base is key to

maintaining growth trajectories of quoted manufacturing firms in Nigeria. It is

recommended that corporate quoted manufacturing firms in Nigeria should intensify

efforts to increase their commitment towards sustainability in order to create good image

in the mind of their stakeholders as a responsible and legitimate entity thereby increasing

performance.

Keywords: Firm Size, Sustainability, Quoted, Manufacturing firms, Performance.



152

1. INTRODUCTION

The environment where businesses operate is a dynamic and complex one which

determines the goals and outlooks of the business organizations. The business

organization and the environment cannot exist in isolation without demands from each

other. Few years back, there was an experience of climate change and global warming

which were adverse effects of organizations` operations to the environment (Haanaes,

Arthur, Balagopal, Kong, Reeves, Velken, Hoppins & Kruschwitz, 2011). It is

conventional that the impacts of the activities and operations of businesses on the

environment be checked and regulated in order to secure and preserve the environment

and its resources for the future. Without such checks, business operators will continue to

act reckless on the environment. This is the concern and target of sustainability.

Sustainability involves satisfying present needs in such a way that it will not adversely

affect satisfying the needs of future generations. As well, environmental sustainability

involves protecting and maintaining environmental or natural resources for the needs of

future generations (Pettinger, 2018).

It is necessary for businesses to operate within environmental standards so as to maintain

continuous relationship with its society. Environmental sustainability can be ensured by

firms, by analyzing the input and output indicators in the course of the supply chains so

as to minimize environmental impacts. Firms consider inputs such as energy, material

and water as well as outputs such as wastes, emissions and effluents in their operations

(Gunathilaka & Gunawardana, 2015). Globally, there is increase in the pursuit for

sustainability and environmental awareness. Many companies are developing interests in

environmental sustainability to enjoy competitive advantage so as to enhance their

corporate performance (Acti, Lyndon & Bingilar, 2013).

However, the pursuit for environmental sustainability is a bit low within the developing

countries due to lack of organized pressure groups and weak government regulations to

regulate the behaviours of the companies (Vinayagamoorthi, Murugesan & Kasilingam,

2015). In the 1800s, the business environment in Nigeria was exploited by some firms

during the period of oil boom. The businesses used the environment to their own

advantages (Eruemegbe, 2015). In recent times, organizations realized that the natural



153

resources can be utilized in such a way that value will be created for its shareholders and

other stakeholders, and there will still be minimum impact on the environment. This is

because a reduction of the environmental hazard or impact will lead to an increase in a

firm`s profitability (Gunathilaka & Gunawardana, 2015).

Studies such as Gunathilaka and Gunawardana (2015) suggested that companies that

engage in environmental protection should be recognized and additional significant value

should be added to them. Sustaining the environment where businesses operate create

value for the stakeholders. The recycling of waste, treatment of liquid effluents, reuse of

materials, production of sustained quality goods and controlling emissions through

reduction in furnace oil consumption, all lead to innovation and cost savings for the

companies. Nowadays, organizations try to differentiate themselves by being

environmentally concern which adds values to their products. Theoretically, shareholders

are concern about returns on the short term while environmental sustainability is concern

about meeting future needs of the stakeholders based on present use of the ecosystem.

In evaluating the company's financial performance, it can be assisted with certain

measurement tools, one of which is by using profitability ratios and market ratios.

Profitability ratios are ratios used to determine a company's ability to manage its assets.

An assessment of a company's profitability can be measured through Return-on-Asset

(ROA). Return-on-assets are used to measure the effectiveness of a company in

generating profits by utilizing its assets. The company's ability to utilize assets effectively

and productively can generate net profit which is the result of the capital that has been

invested in an asset. Return-on-assets as a form of company effectiveness in managing its

assets and capital. The return-on-asset measurement avoids direct comparisons with

market value but relates to several factors used by market makers in their valuation of the

company. Return-on-assets are able to measure the company's ability to generate profits

in the past and then projected in the future. Company performance through profitability is

one of the most important areas that is focused by shareholders and also debt holders if

the company uses debt to operate (Meiryani, Bina and Olivia, 2020).

Firm size is a major factor in determining company profitability because of a concept

known as economies of scale that can be found in the traditional view of the company. It

can be interpreted that companies can produce goods at a much lower cost by large

companies. The size of the company is an increase in the company's employees who have

a large market capitalization, and describes the size of a company. The higher the total



154

assets that indicate the assets or assets owned by the company. Company size can be

measured using total assets, sales or company capital. Companies that have large total

assets are considered to have good prospects in a relatively stable period and are able to

generate profits compared to companies that have small total assets. Large-scale

companies have a higher competitiveness than small companies, because large companies

have a large market so they have a great opportunity to obtain large profit

(Abeywardhana, 2016).

There have been concerns about environmental sustainability in the present corporate

environment, where Companies are facing pressures to demonstrate responsibly towards

the environment. The effect of environmental sustainability on survival of firms has

recently received attention from researchers both in developed and developing economy.

As businesses engage with the manufacturing/production of goods, they bring pressure

and burden on the environment. Such pressures or impacts which are often times

detrimental to the environment requires bold and coordinated efforts on the part of the

manufacturing firms to douse. Environmental sustainability relates to reduction of the

impact of an organization’s operation on the natural systems (both living and non-living)

and the eco-system (land, air, and water). Environmental sustainability suffers many

constraints from manufacturing firms such as pollution, gas emissions, effluence, leakage

of chemicals that destroy the eco-systems, poor and irregular water treatment, wastes

hazards, low culture of material reuse, and substandard/low grade products. These

constrains are responsible for the numerous health challenges that the environmental

occupants suffer. Manufacturing firms take inputs such as materials, energy and water

from the environment to carry out their daily production operations while returning the

environment outputs such as gas emissions, pollution, effluents (a flow of any partially

treated liquid waste into the natural water), waste/refuse dumps.

It is expected that firms should engage in proactive measures to ensure environmental

management. Such measures include taking formal steps to guarantee reduction of

emission during operations, waste management/treatment, reduction of pollution,

production of quality goods/products, energy conservation, reuse of materials and

treatment of water. It is important to note that disposal of waste by manufacturing firms

without treatment can cause air pollution and contamination of ground water.

The inability of manufacturing firms in Nigeria to engage actively in protecting and

maintaining environmental or natural resources for the needs and benefits of the society

today and for future generations is the challenge that this study is proposing to tackle.

Objective of the Study



155

The major objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of firm size sustainability on the

retained earnings of quoted manufacturing firms in Nigeria. The value of total assets will

be the proxy for and measure of the firm size.

Hypothesis

In line with the objective of the study, the following hypothesis is formulated and tested:

H01: Firm size (total assets) does not have a significant effect on retained earnings of

quoted manufacturing firms in Nigeria.

2. THEORETICAL DISCOURSE AND RELATED LITERATURE

Firm Size

Firm size is defined as the value of the asset which the company has at any particular

time. According to Frank (2013) the proxy for firm size is total asset. Firm size is one of

the most influential characteristics in organizational studies, Chen and Hambrick (2002).

Mintzberg (2003) provide a summary and overview of the importance of firm size. Firm

size has also been shown to be related to industry- sunk costs, concentration, vertical

integration and overall industry profitability (Dean et al., 2010). Larger life insurance

companies are more likely to have more layers of management, greater number of

departments, increased specialization of skills and functions, greater centralization and

greater bureaucracy than smaller life insurance companies (Daft, 2011).

Firm size has been variously defined in the literature to refer to the total assets, scale of

operations and number of employees among others. Larger firms are assumed to have

more resources at their disposal and therefore have the wherewithal to commit them to

several investment opportunities. Athanasoglou, Brissimis and Delis (2005) assert that

increase in company size increases the performance of the bank. Almajali et al (2012)

argued that the size of the firm can affect its financial performance. However, for firms

that become exceptionally large, the effect of size could be negative due to bureaucratic

and other reasons (Yuqi, 2007).

The size of a firm cannot be overruled in determining the value of the firm. Larger firms

are prone to having a maximized value than smaller firms. This is obvious in their level

of operation, which is expected to be larger than smaller firms. If the value of the firm is

measured by performance, then this large volume of operation will translate into better

performance than smaller firms. Most companies are intent to expand the size of their

business operation for them to grow either in revenue, number of employees, or size of



156

facilities (Pervan & Visic, 2012). Large firms may generate superior performance as they

are able to use economics of scale and scope, and they may organize their activities more

efficiently.

Many companies compete in rapidly changing industries, expansion of manufacturing

capacity, geographical presence, market shares and so on which may be imperative for

survival (Dogan, 2013). Fortune, and Shelton (2014), noted that one of the factors

influencing firm size is the availability of workers and other resources in the surrounding

community where the business is operating. He further suggested that it is possible for

the company to outgrow the communities in which they operate, particularly when they

are located in a remote area. Some factors that may indicate that a company has outgrown

its operating community in size include; growing at a faster rate than the community

labor force, providing more than one-third of the local government’s funding through

taxes, and being responsible for the death of the community, if the company should shut

down.

Firms’ size is measured in different ways such as asset, retained earnings, employment,

sales, and market capitalization. This study measured firm size as natural logarithms of

firm’s total assets brought about by retained earnings, which can be easily regressed in

order to determine the influence of the firm’s total assets on its performance.

Theoretical Review: Legitimacy Theory

The legitimacy theory asserts that organizations’ are continually trying to influence

society’s perception about them by creating the impression that would make the society

see them as legitimate. Legitimacy Theory as presented by Lindblom (1993) is defined

as- “a condition which exists when an entity’s value system is in harmony with the value

system of society.” This theory, maintains that it is of great importance for firms to meet

up with the societal expectations to ensure the survival of firm in long-term. Deegan

(2000) argue that sustainability reporting tends to low the risk of regulatory actions and

boycotts by stakeholders, and it strengthens the firm’s license to function. According to

legitimacy theory, it is necessary to achieve society’s approval for the company to

survive (Campblell, Craven, & Shrives, 2002). Corporations that consider sustainability

crucial to their success might be interested to show their sustainability commitment to

stakeholders (internal and external) by providing an extensive sustainability report.

O’Donovan (2002) suggested that companies need to behave as what is expected from

society to maintain its business activities. This need of behaving as expected from society

stimulates companies to disclose information as a legitimizing tool (Cho & Patten, 2007)

and use documents to change society’s perception toward them (Deegan, 2002). Konar



157

and Cohen (2001) opined that companies tend to comply with environmental regulations

and portray an image of environmental responsibility, which in turn is rewarded by the

market. According to Ching (2017) sustainability report can be seen as one of those

documents that legitimize the behavior of a company, enforcing the legitimacy theory.

Legitimate theory stands out as the tool that manages the stakeholders’ perception of the

needs for attaining the organizational legitimacy. Thus, legitimacy offers to an

organization the right to perform its activities in consensus with stakeholders’ interest

(Suchman, 1995). However, one can understand that for a firm to remain in business and

pursue its long-term goal, it must perform its legitimate responsibility to the society.

Therefore, a firm cannot survive if its value system is not in harmony with that of the

society. Recall that the essence of having business firm is to enhance the quality of life in

the society. More so, it is through sustainability reporting that the society can understand

whether firms are actually discharging their legitimate responsibility.

Review of Empirical Studies

A lot of empirical studies have been conducted using firm size. Some of them used firm

size as a control variable while others used it as a predictor variable in their studies

(Driffield, Mahambare & Pal, 2005). Firm size is used in this study as independent

variable, because the study is on firm characteristics and size, is among the proxies of

firm attributes.

Ucheagwu, Akintoye & Adegbie. (2019) examined the effect of environmental

sustainability practices on financial performance of listed companies in Nigeria. The

study found that that environmental sustainability practices, controlled by firm size,

liquidity and leverage exerted significant effect on the overall financial performance.

Corporate retention ratio depends upon many factors like the type, size, and nature of

business and the industry characteristics. Large companies have higher saving ratio than

small companies. Bhole (1980) who studied the retention behavior of Indian companies

concludes that the single and most important determinant of the saving ratio for medium

and large public limited companies is the net profile after tax, while the variables which

determine this ratio in the case of medium and large private limited companies are the

cash flow, the availability and cost of external funds and price level. The amount of

retained earnings has now become an important issue to investors and other stakeholders

because it is another way to evaluate the effectiveness of management to bring

improvement in market value of their firms. That is, shareholders now consider as part of



158

their investment criteria the extent to which firms use retained capital and they also

consider this in measuring how much value in terms of capital gain, business growth and

asset net worth have been added by the company's retention of capital overtime.

Ravi (2014) in a study examines the effectiveness with which retained earnings are put to

use by the 149 Indian companies that were studied between 1996 - 2010. The study found

that the Indian firms have not used their retained earnings which are free from the

financial discipline as efficient as the external funds mobilized through the stock market

and concluded that due to the fact that retained earnings are the cheapest sources of

finance for long-term growth, firms tend to retain more when they have good future

prospects and should however distribute the earnings to shareholders when they do not

find prosperous investment options where they can increase shareholders’ wealth. He

further stated that if retained earnings are invested in such projects where firms are not

able to increase the market value of shares, retained earnings are said to be inefficiently

invested. When firms issue shares of common stock or bonds for such new projects, these

funds should be effectively used to generate a high return as the stock market discipline

(Financial Discipline) forces firms to use such funds more profitably and whereas such

financial discipline is not in force for earnings retained, retention becomes a source of

inefficiency, if not invested with due care.

Retained earnings is part of profit that firms set aside for later use, especially for growth,

business expansion, bringing innovative ideas to reality, assets acquisition, etc. is a

yardstick for measuring the liquidity, market performance, competitiveness, size and

capacity of firms.

3. METHODOLOGY

The selected firms are Nestle Nigeria Plc, Cadbury Nigeria Plc and PZ Nigeria Plc. The

nature of the topic required the use of secondary data which were gotten from the audited

financial statements of the three firms for the period and NSE Fact book. Panel survey

design was used bearing in mind that events that were being observed had taken place.

Ex-post facto design was employed because the study involved independent and

dependent variables but had no control variable. Simple regression model was used while

Ordinary Least Square estimation was reported and compared across firms. The data

were analyzed using the E-views 10 statistical package. The hypothesis was tested at 0.05

level of significance. The variables in the objective of the study was captured in the

model below which shows the effect of social sustainability and value added of the firms

in a linear relationship. The firm size Sustainability variables will be measured using the



159

values on revenue (total assets) in the financial reports. The model assumes that firm size

sustainability variables have positive effect on retained earnings. This relationship is

represented as

RER = f(VTA) …………………………………………………… Equation (1)

The relationship can be explicitly formulated into a model equation thus:

RER = a0 + a1 VTA + p …………………………………. Equation (2)

Where a0 is a constant or intercept, a1, a2 and a3 are the coefficients of the explanatory

variable, p is stochastic error term.

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

The results are presented according to the firms selected for the study. The firms are,

Nestle Nigeria Plc, Cadbury Nigeria Plc and PZ Nigeria Plc.

Nestle Nigeria Plc. Results

Table 1. Ordinary Least Squares result between retained earnings and total value of

assets

Dependent Variable: RER

Method: Least Squares

Date: 07/29/21 Time: 20:25

Sample: 2010 2020

Included observations: 11

Variable Coefficient Std. Error t-Statistic Prob.

C 24450718 8223571. 2.973248 0.0156

VTA 0.076394 0.056934 1.341789 0.2125

R-squared 0.166697 Mean dependent var 34724230

Adjusted R-squared 0.074108 S.D. dependent var 10342680

S.E. of regression 9952065. Akaike info criterion 35.22742

Sum squared resid 8.91E+14 Schwarz criterion 35.29977

Log likelihood -191.7508 Hannan-Quinn criter. 35.18182

F-statistic 1.800399 Durbin-Watson stat 1.170024

Prob(F-statistic) 0.212534

Source: E -Views 10 Output of the Study

Table 1 reveals that the total value of assets is a positive function of retained earnings /

reserves. It is not statistically significant in explaining the variations in retained earnings /



160

reserves in Nestle Plc. It has 0.2125 as its probability with 1.341789 as t- calculated. The

coefficient of total value of assets which is 0.076394 means that a unit increase in total

value of assets will lead to the dependent variable (market share) increasing marginally

by 0.076394. The R- Squared value is 0.166697 with the implication that the variation in

retained earnings / reserves is explained by total value of assets to the tune of only 17

percent in Nestle Plc Firm’s operation.

Cadbury Nigeria Plc. Results


assets



Date: 07/29/21 Time: 20:47

Sample: 2010 2020



C 10647470 4412907. 2.412802 0.0391

VTA -0.123891 0.133927 -0.925060 0.3791

R-squared 0.086826 Mean dependent var 6617975.

Adjusted R-squared -0.014638 S.D. dependent var 2327407.






Source: E -views 10 Output of the Study

Table 2 shows that the total value of assets is a negative function of retained earnings /

reserves. It is not also statistically significant in explaining the variations in retained

earnings / reserves in Cadbury Plc. It has 0.3791 as its probability with -0.925060 as t-

calculated. The coefficient of total value of assets which is -0.123891 means that a unit

increase in total value of assets will lead to the dependent variable (market share)

decreasing by 0.123891. The R- Squared value is 0.086826 with the implication that the

variation in retained earnings / reserves is explained by total value of assets to the tune of

only 9 percent in Cadbury Plc firm’s operation.



161

PZ Nigeria Plc Result


assets



Date: 07/29/21 Time: 20:57

Sample: 2010 2020



C 19335889 9041627. 2.138541 0.0612

VTA 0.070964 0.155004 0.457819 0.6579

R-squared 0.022759 Mean dependent var 23428836

Adjusted R-squared -0.085824 S.D. dependent var 4300680.






Source: E -views 10 Output of the study

Table 3 reveals that the total value of assets is also a positive function of retained

earnings / reserves. It is not statistically significant in explaining the variations in

retained earnings / reserves in PZ Plc. It has 0.6579 as its probability with 0.457819 as t-

calculated. The coefficient of total value of assets which is 0.070964 means that a unit

increase in total value of assets will lead to the dependent variable (market share)

increasing by 0.070964. The R- Squared value is 0.022759 with the implication that the

variation in retained earnings / reserves is explained by total value of assets to the tune of

only 2 percent in PZ Plc Firm’s operation.

Nestle Nigeria Plc Hypothesis Testing


Nestle Nigeria Plc. OLS Regression was used to assess the predictive power of Firm size

(total assets) effect on retained earnings of Nestle Nigeria Plc. The variability explained

by the model was not significant p = 0.2125 at 5% levels (P > 0.05). The t calculated (-



162

1.341789) < t tabulated (1.96) reveals the statistical positive and insignificance

relationship between the two variables. Thus the null hypothesis therefore could not be

rejected and the conclusion that there is no significant relationship between Firm size

(total assets) effect on retained earnings of Nestle Nigeria Plc in Nigeria.

Cadbury Nigeria Plc Hypothesis Testing


Cadbury Nigeria Plc. OLS Regression was used to assess the predictive power of Firm

size (total assets) effect on retained earnings of Cadbury Nigeria Plc. The variability

explained by the model was not significant p = 0.3791 at 5% levels (P > 0.05). The t

calculated (-0.925060) < t tabulated (1.96). Thus the null hypothesis therefore could not

be rejected and the conclusion that there is no significant relationship between Firm size

(total assets) effect on retained earnings of Cadbury Nigeria Plc in Nigeria.

PZ Nigeria Plc Hypothesis Testing

H0: Firm size (total assets) does not have a significant effect on retained earnings of PZ

Nigeria Plc. OLS Regression was used to assess the predictive power of Firm size (total

assets) effect on retained earnings of PZ Nigeria Plc. The variability explained by the

model was not significant p = 0.6579 at 5% levels (P > 0.05). The t calculated (0.457819)

< t tabulated (1.96). Thus the null hypothesis therefore could not be rejected and the

conclusion that there is no significant relationship between Firm size (total assets) effect

on retained earnings of PZ Nigeria Plc in Nigeria.

DISCUSSION OF RESULT

On Firm size (total assets) effect on retained earnings of quoted manufacturing firms in

Nigeria, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected in all the three firms of Nestle, Cadbury

and PZ Nigeria Plc. The result further corroborates the apriori expectation of positive

statistical relationship between the dependent and independent variables for Nestle and

PZ Nigeria Plc while in divergent with Cadbury Nigeria Plc. These findings are in

contrast with the evidence of Inyiama and Ugwuanyi (2015) which explored whether firm

size determine corporate retention of Nigerian banking sector. The study used 2-step co-

integration and error correction model of Engle and Granger (1987) in a simple

regression framework and discovered that a strong relationship exists between firm size

and retained earnings of Nigerian banking sector. The result showed that firm size has a

long run, positive and significant effect on retained earnings. Similarly, Serrasqueiro and



163

Nunes (2008) investigated the relationship between firm size and performance of small

and medium sized Portuguese companies for the period 1999 to 2003. Their results

indicate that there is a positive and statistically significant relationship between size and

profitability of SMEs. In sum, Babalola (2013) studied, the effect of firm size on the

profitability of manufacturing companies listed in the Nigerian Stock Exchange. Using a

panel data set over the period 2000-2009. Profitability was measured by using Return on

Assets, while both total assets and total sales were used as the proxies of firm size. The

results of the study reveals that, firm size, both in terms of total assets and in terms of

total sales, has a positive impact on the profitability of manufacturing companies in

Nigeria. This corroborates the evidence found in Nestle and PZ Nigeria Plc. It is our view

that retained earnings and reserves should leverage total assets and working capital to

maintain seamless transition.

CONCLUSION

From our study on the firm size sustainability and survival of quoted manufacturing firms

in Nigeria, we conclude that, increased total assets base is key to maintaining growth

trajectories of quoted manufacturing firms in Nigeria. The result further corroborates the

apriori expectation of positive statistical relationship between the dependent and

independent variables for Nestle and PZ Nigeria Plc while in divergent with Cadbury

Nigeria Plc.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that corporate quoted manufacturing firms in Nigeria should intensify

efforts to increase their commitment to sustainability in order to create good image in the

mind of their stakeholders as a responsible and legitimate entity thereby increasing

performance.

REFERENCES

Abeywardhana, D. K. Y. (2016). Impact of capital structure on firm performance:

evidence from the Manufacturing Sector of SMEs in the UK. SSRN Electronic Journal.

Asuquo, A.I, Dada E. T. & Onyeogaziri U. R. (2018). The effect of sustainability

reporting on corporate performance of selected quoted brewery firms



164

in Nigeria. International Journal of Business & Law Research 6(3):1-

10,

Adenugba, A A, Ige, A. A & Kesinro, O. R. (2016). Financial leverage and firms’ value:

a study of selected firms in Nigeria. European Journal of

Research and Reflection in Management Sciences. 4 (1) 14-23

Ali, M (2020). Impact of leverage on financial performance (evidence from Pakistan food

and fertilizer sector) Journal of Critical Reviews, 7, (3), 202-

223

Agbo B.O., Ohaegbu O, K & Akubuilo F. (2017). Effect of environmental cost on

financial performance of Nigerian brewery. European Journal of

Business and Management 9(17) 59-78

Ahmed, M. Fashagba, P.F and Olamide, F.I. (2017). Effect of environmental, social and

governance on corporate performance of listed manufacturing firms in Nigeria

Akinleye, G.T & Adedayo T. F. (2017). corporate social responsibility on the

profitability of multinational companies in Nigeria. Global Journal of Management

and Business Research 17 (3) 34-49

Abidemi, Olumuyiwa, &. Iloc, (2018). Determinants of firm profitability in Nigeria:

evidence from dynamic panel models Ibrahim. Journal of

Economics and Business, 68 1, 43-58

Abdul J. & Badmus O. (2018) Effect of leverage on firm performance i n Nigeria: a case

of listed chemicals and paints firms in Nigeria. Global Journal of Management and

Business Research, 17 (2) 45-56

Babalola, Y. A. (2013) the effect of firm size on firms’ profitability in Nigeria. Journal of

Economics and Sustainable Development 4 (5) 90-115

Dey, R. K., Hossain, S. Z., & Rahman, R. A. (2018). Effect of Corporate Financial

Leverage on Financial Performance: A Study on Publicly Traded Manufacturing

Companies in Bangladesh, Asian Social Science,

Efuntade, A. O and Akinola, A, O. (2020). Firm characteristics and financial performance

in quoted manufacturing companies in Nigeria. IJBFMR 7

(2020) 25-32

Gweyi, M.O & Karanja, J (2014). Effect of financial leverage on financial performance

of deposit taking savings and credit co-operative in Kenya.

International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting,

Finance and Management Sciences 4 (2) 176–184



165

Iwoye, A, Soyemia, K.A & Olawalea,L.S (2019). Firm characteristics and financial

reporting quality: evidence from non-financial firms in Nigeria.

International Journal of Economics, Management and Accounting

27, (2) 445-472

Inyiama, O. I. & Ugwuanyi, U. B.(2015). Does firm size determine corporate retention?

Evidence from Nigeria Banking Sector (2002 – 2013) International Journal of

Managerial Studies and Research (IJMSR),3(6), 63-71.

Ilo, Bamidele M. and Lawal, Fatai K. (2017). The effect of firm size on performance of

firms in Nigeria. International Journal of Finance,15 (6) 2-21.

Meiryani, Bina, Olivia, Zaidi Jaja (2020). The Effect of Firm’s Size on Corporate

Performance. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,

((IJACSA) Vol. 11, No. 5, 2020

Madugba, J.U, & E. Ben-Caleb, E, Adedoyin I. L. & Agburuga, U.T (2019). Firm Size

and Tax Saving Behaviour of Listed Companies in Nigeria.

Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 6 (8) 56-77

Olawale, L. S. (2019) Firm size Firm’s performance Panel analysis. Asian Development

Policy Review. 9 (7) 1-9

Sarakiri J. A. (2020) Liquidity, Size and Firm Value: Evidence from Nigeria Economy.

World Journal of Finance and Investment Research 5 (1) 13-27

Serrasqueiro, Z.S. and P.M. Nunes, (2008) “Performance and size: empirical evidence

from

Portuguese SMEs”,Small Business Economics, 31 (2), pp. 195 – 217.

Ucheagwu C. J.1, Akintoye I.R. Adegbie F. F. (2019). Impact of environmental

sustainability practices on financial performance of listed firms in Nigeria.

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research 10, (3) 34-45

151 IMPACT OF FIRM SIZE SUSTAINABILITY ON RETAINED ...

Documents

Transcript of 151 IMPACT OF FIRM SIZE SUSTAINABILITY ON RETAINED ...