Preprint
Article

This version is not peer-reviewed.

Marketing Infrastructure, Digital Marketing Strategies and Marketing Performance of SMEs in Nigeria: The Mediating Role of Digital Transformation

Submitted:

03 May 2026

Posted:

05 May 2026

You are already at the latest version

Abstract
This study investigated the influence of marketing infrastructure and digital marketing strategies on the performance of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Nigeria, emphasizing the mediating role of digital transformation. While prior research has established the importance of digital marketing strategies in driving performance, much of the focus has been on large firms, with limited attention to SMEs and the transformative effects of digital transformation. To address this gap, data were collected from 400 SME managers and owners registered with the Small and Medium Enterprises Development Agency of Nigeria (SMEDAN) through an online survey. The data were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM). Findings revealed that marketing infrastructure and digital marketing strategies do not directly improve marketing performance; rather, digital transformation serves as a critical mediator that enables this relationship. The study concludes that SMEs that embrace digital transformation, by integrating digital technologies across operations, achieve superior marketing outcomes, including enhanced brand awareness, customer acquisition, conversion rates, and customer satisfaction, ultimately leading to higher sales, profitability and and business sustainability.
Keywords: 
;  ;  ;  ;  

1. Introduction

The increasing complexity of the business environment, driven by intense competition and rapid digital innovations that change consumer behaviour, makes digital transformation crucial for enhancing performance. Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are vital to economies, contributing significantly to employment and economic growth, yet they face challenges in adopting digital transformation. SMEs represent at least 60 per cent of employment globally, highlighting their importance for economic development.
To thrive in a competitive market, SMEs must attract and retain customers. Digital marketing enables quicker and broader engagement, allowing businesses to personalize their marketing efforts. However, unlike larger companies that can afford multichannel strategies, SMEs often rely on word-of-mouth and limited marketing avenues due to budget constraints. SMEs typically have restricted resources, underscoring the need for greater support to foster their growth. Although digital marketing presents cost-effective ways for SMEs to connect with customers, they remain at the lower end of the adoption cycle. Larger firms are better positioned to leverage digital channels effectively, prompting SMEs to seek economical ways to harness digital marketing potential. Digital marketing includes strategies like content marketing, email marketing, social networking, SEO, and online advertising, enabling organizations to engage with consumers and track campaign effectiveness in real time [1]. It involves any marketing tactics utilizing electronic devices, necessitating investment in IT infrastructure for improved performance.
For SMEs, embracing digital transformation—integrating digital technologies into all company operations—enhances productivity, innovation, and marketing performance. Key metrics such as customer acquisition, conversion rates, and brand awareness help businesses assess the impact of their marketing efforts and make informed decisions [2,3]. Thus, understanding the interplay between digital marketing strategies, marketing infrastructure, and digital transformation is crucial for SMEs to enhance their marketing performance.
The unit of analysis in this paper is small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Nigeria. They contribute about 48.47% of the country's GDP and employ approximately 59.7 million people, which accounts for 84.02% of the labour force [4]. SMEs play a crucial role in economic growth, employment creation, and innovation in developing and developed nations. However, they face significant challenges in adopting digital marketing strategies due to limited funding, human resources, and expertise [5]. Despite the importance of digital marketing to businesses, most research has focused on large corporations, leaving a gap in understanding how these strategies impact SMEs [6]. Additionally, previous studies often overlook the mediating role of digital transformation in enhancing marketing performance. The limited research on SMEs predominantly comes from industrialised countries, neglecting the unique challenges facing SMEs in developing nations like Nigeria.
This study addresses these gaps by examining the impact of marketing infrastructure and digital marketing strategies on SMEs’ marketing performance in Nigeria, with a focus on the mediating role of digital transformation. The findings will provide valuable guidance to policymakers, owners, and managers of SMEs, supporting decisions on investments in digital infrastructure and strategies. Furthermore, the study offers insights for policymakers on fostering SME growth through collaboration with the private sector and regulations that encourage digital transformation.

3. Research Methodology

This study investigates the mediating role of digital transformation in the relationship between marketing infrastructure, digital marketing strategies, and marketing performance of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Nigeria. The research targeted 39.7 million micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) in various sectors registered with the Small and Medium Enterprises Development Agency of Nigeria [4]. Using Yamane’s formular, n = N/[1+N(e)2], a sample size of 400 was determined. The sample was selected through probability sampling using stratified random sampling. A survey research design was adopted, and data was collected from 400 owners or managers of the SMEs through online surveys. Measurement scales were adapted from previous studies, covering digital marketing strategies (Sharabati, et al., 2024 [40]), marketing infrastructure (Teng, et al., 2022 [46]; Jia &Li, 2024 [54]), digital transformation (Bley, et al., 2016 [55]), and marketing performance (Verma, 2024 [56]). A confirmatory factor analysis using structural equation modelling (Hair & Alamer, 2022) [57] confirmed strong instrument validity and reliability.

4. Data Analysis

4.1. Demographic Profile of Respondents

The online survey received 421 responses, with 400 examined. Of these, 196 (49%) were male and 204 (51%) were female. Age distribution showed that 186 (47%) were 16-35 years old, 122 (30%) were 36-55, and 92 (23%) were over 55. Educationally, 112 (28%) had an ordinary diploma or less, 214 (53%) held a higher diploma or first degree, and 74 (18.5%) had postgraduate degrees. In terms of experience, 186 (47%) had been in their SMEs for less than five years, 125 (31%) for five to ten years, and 89 (22%) for over ten years. By company type, 214 (53%) were sole proprietors, 112 (28%) were partnerships, and 74 (18.5%) were limited companies. Most respondents (309, or 77%) operated with working capital of N5–10 million, while 91 (23%) had more than N10 million. Notably, all respondents faced challenges, including poor internet connectivity and electrical supply 400 (100%), lack of skilled workers 204 951%), and inadequate digital marketing infrastructure 310 978%).
Inferential Statistics
Data analysis utilized Smart PLS 3.0 software for the two-stage Partial Least Square Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) method [58]. The first step focused on measuring model validity and reliability, while the second assessed proposed relationships within the structural model, leveraging PLS-SEM for its effectiveness in testing prediction models and exploring connections between constructs [59].

4.2. Validity and Reliability

The two-step method established by Hair et al. [59] was employed to assess the validity and reliability of the reflective indicators. Before determining the validity of the constructs, factor analysis was conducted to evaluate the instrument's reliability. Two types of assessments—Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability—were utilized to measure the dependability of the instrument. Consequently, as shown in Table 1, the 16 scale items of the latent constructs were concurrently factor-analyzed using SEM-Smart PLS software.
With a significant level of P < 0.05, the factor loadings ranged from 0.516 to 0.865, exceeding the 0.5 cut-off [59]. As per Table 1, composite reliability scores surpassed the minimum of 0.7 [60], and Cronbach's alpha values indicated moderate reliability. This confirms the internal consistency of the latent constructs' indicators.

Constructs Validity Test

Construct validity is confirmed when both convergent and discriminant validity are satisfied [57]. Convergent validity is achieved if reflective indicators load strongly and the average variance extracted (AVE) is over 50% [61]. All constructs displayed loadings above 50%, with AVE values between 0.552 and 0.613, validating convergent validity [62].
For discriminant validity, each construct must have more variance with its indicators than with other constructs [62]. The square roots of the AVEs should exceed the correlations with other constructs [59]. Table 1 displays AVE values of 0.552 to 0.613, and Table 2 shows that the MAIN value (0.758) is greater than the correlations for the DMAS, DTRA, and MPERF constructs. All values are significant at P < 0.05, indicating that discriminant validity is met. Overall, the measurement model provides a solid basis for exploring structural linkages and demonstrates evidence of convergent and discriminant validity.

4.3. Structural Model

The PLS-SEM approach was employed to evaluate the hypothesized correlations within the proposed study model. At a significance level of 0.05, all alternate hypothesized associations were confirmed. In other words, the study found that marketing infrastructure has a significant and positive influence on digital marketing strategies, and both have a notable positive effect on digital transformation. Additionally, digital transformation has been shown to have a significant positive relationship with marketing performance. The strongest predictive power within the model lies in the path from marketing infrastructure → digital marketing strategies, as revealed in the following impacts: the influence of marketing infrastructure on digital marketing strategies (b = 0.285, t = 3.541, p < 0.001), the effect of marketing infrastructure on digital transformation (b = 0.239, t = 8.396; p < 0.001), and the impact of digital marketing strategies on digital transformation (b = 0.220, t = 3.199; p < 0.001). The relationship between digital transformation and marketing performance was examined, yielding (b = 0.195, t = 4.149, p < 0.001). Lastly, the results of the bootstrapping test with Smart-PLS 3.0 show significant positive indirect effects: the indirect effect of marketing infrastructure on marketing performance, mediated by digital transformation, has a positive effect (b = 0.186, t = 3.586, P-value < 0.001). Also, the indirect effect of digital marketing strategies on marketing performance, mediated by digital transformation, has a positive effect (b = 0.198, t = 4.632, P-value < 0.001). These imply that digital transformation can enhance the positive effects of marketing infrastructure and digital marketing strategies on marketing performance. Therefore, through effective digital transformation, SMEs can improve marketing performance.
Table 3. Estimated results of the structural model and hypotheses test outputs. 
Table 3. Estimated results of the structural model and hypotheses test outputs. 
Hypothesised
Relationships
Path
coefficient
Standard
Error
t-value Result
Direct effects
H1+ MAIN → DMAS 0.285 0.022 3.457*** Supported
H2+ MAIN → DTRA 0.239 0.041 4.149*** Supported
H3+ DMAS → DTRA 0.220 0.012 3.199*** Supported
H4+ DTRA → MPERF 0.195 0.033 5.396*** Supported
H5+ MAIN → DTRA → MPERF 0.186 0.042 3.586*** Supported
H6+ DMAS → DTRA → MPERF 0.198 0.036 4.632*** Supported
Note: Significant level is denoted as *** p<0.001
Source: PLS-SEM Algorithm Output, 2025.
Figure 2 shows the amount of variance explained. The R-Square value measures the variance explained in each endogenous construct. The numbers in the inside circles within the model figure 2 represent the amount of variance explained (R2). R-square (R2), also called the coefficient of determination, is the overall effect size measure for the structural model as in regression. Thus, the (R2) shown in the inner circles, DMAS = 0.349, DTRA = 0.257, and MPERF = 0.364 indicate that 34.9% of the variance in digital marketing strategies is explained by marketing infrastructure, 25.7% of the variance in digital transformation is explained by both marketing infrastructure and digital marketing strategies, while 36.4% of the variance in marketing performance is explained by digital transformation. This literally means that 36.4% of the change in marketing performance is as a result of digital transformation. No number is shown in the inner circle MAIN because it is an exogenous latent factor. R-Square values of 0.75 are considered substantial, 0.50 moderate, and 0.25 weak [63]. The model highlights gaps in explanatory power—meaning future research should consider adding more constructs or refining measurement indicators. The R2 in this model would be interpreted to be of weak strength or effect. These results indicate that marketing infrastructure, digital marketing strategies, and digital transformation have weak effects, and result in poor marketing performance. Weak effects do not mean these constructs are irrelevant, they may be necessary but not sufficient for strong marketing outcomes.

5. Discussions, Conclusion and Recommendations

5.1. Discussions of Findings

This study examined how marketing infrastructure, digital marketing strategies, and the marketing performance of SMEs in Nigeria are mediated by digital transformation. It provides valuable insights into the mediating role of digital transformation in the application of digital marketing strategies within Nigerian SMEs. By contextualizing theory within an underrepresented empirical setting, the study contributes to academic, practical, and policy-oriented discussions on digital transformation in the SME sector.
The first hypothesis tested whether marketing infrastructure positively influences digital marketing strategies. Results revealed a significant positive impact, indicating that investments in ICT tools—such as cloud computing, artificial intelligence, data analytics, digital marketing platforms, reliable internet, and marketing training—enhance the effectiveness of digital marketing strategies. This finding aligns with Sharabati et al. [40], who reported a positive correlation between IT infrastructure and digital marketing strategies.
The second hypothesis explored whether marketing infrastructure positively affects digital transformation. Results confirmed a significant positive relationship, suggesting that ICT investments in areas such as cloud computing, AI, data analytics, distribution channels, internet connectivity, and staff training strengthen digital transformation. This finding corroborates Mthwazi (2022) [64], who emphasized the essential role of IT infrastructure in enabling business operations, customer service, and the deployment of applications and systems across stakeholders. Similarly, Sharabati et al. [40] found that IT infrastructure significantly impacts digital transformation, supporting the present study’s results.
The third hypothesis assessed the impact of digital marketing strategies on digital transformation. Results indicated a significant positive effect, implying that effective use of digital tools fosters transformation. Specifically, the adoption of email marketing, social media, SEO, and content marketing accelerates digital transformation. This finding is consistent with Oubrahim, Sefiani, and Happonen [65], who highlighted customer engagement as a critical driver of digital transformation, facilitated by social media, mobile apps, and online stores. Sharabati et al. [40] also concluded that digital marketing strategies significantly enhance digital transformation, reinforcing the present study’s findings.
The fourth hypothesis examined the effect of digital transformation on marketing performance. Results showed a significant positive impact, suggesting that SMEs improve marketing performance as they embrace digital technologies, digitize information, and develop new business models. Enhanced customer engagement, brand awareness, acquisition, satisfaction, loyalty, and retention were observed as outcomes of digital transformation. These findings are consistent with Sharabati et al. [40] and Oubrahim, Sefiani, and Happonen [65], who demonstrated that digital transformation acts as a catalyst linking digital marketing strategies to improved business performance. The study’s results also corroborate Dos Santos Barbosa and de Moraes (2021) [18], who found that SMEs’ competitiveness and performance improve when digital technologies are integrated into daily operations.
The fifth hypothesis examined whether digital transformation mediates the relationship between marketing infrastructure and marketing performance. Results revealed a significant positive indirect effect, indicating that investments in digital transformation can enhance the positive effects of marketing infrastructure on marketing performance. This finding contrasts Teng, Wu & Yang (2022) [46] finding that digital transformation did not significantly mediate the relationship between digital technology, employee digital skills, and performance.
The sixth hypothesis ascertained whether digital transformation mediates the relationship between digital marketing strategies and marketing performance. Results revealed a significant positive indirect effect, indicating that investments in digital transformation can enhance the positive effects of digital marketing strategies on marketing performance.
The test results of the fifth and sixth hypotheses imply that digital transformation can enhance the positive effects of marketing infrastructure and digital marketing strategies on marketing performance, although weak indirect effects were found due to SMEs’ challenges in investments in digital transformation which affirms Zhang [66] finding that SMEs face many difficulties in digital transformation. Therefore, through effective digital transformation, SMEs can improve marketing performance.

Implications

The results of this study carry several implications for both theory and practice. From a theoretical standpoint, the weak explanatory power of marketing infrastructure, digital marketing strategies, and digital transformation underscores the need to broaden the research model.
However, the weak effects on marketing performance may be attributed to challenges such as high infrastructure costs, limited internet access, unreliable power supply, lack of digital marketing expertise, and the relatively low degree of digital transformation among Nigerian SMEs. These findings echo Taiminen and Heikki [37], who observed that many SMEs in Finland had not fully leveraged digital tools, thereby missing potential opportunities. From a managerial perspective, the findings suggest that investments in infrastructure and digital marketing strategies alone are insufficient to generate substantial improvements in performance. Managers should complement these initiatives with organizational change programs. By adopting a more holistic approach, firms can enhance the impact of digital transformation and achieve stronger, more sustainable marketing outcomes. Thus, this research offers useful practical and theoretical contributions to managers, scholars, and policy-makers to enhance the comprehension of the relationships among marketing infrastructure expenditure, digital marketing strategies, digital transformation, and SME marketing performance.

5.2. Conclusion

The study concludes that small and medium enterprises (SMEs) can substantially improve marketing outcomes—including customer acquisition, engagement, brand recognition, trust, satisfaction, and retention—through the integration of marketing infrastructure and digital marketing strategies within digital transformation initiatives. While the positive relationships are clear, the weak effects on performance highlight the need for supportive policies, capacity-building initiatives, and infrastructural improvements to enable SMEs to fully capitalize on digital transformation.

5.3. Recommendations

To address these constraints, the study recommends investment in marketing infrastructure, such as staff training, ICT tools, and distribution channels. It further highlights the importance of public–private collaboration to strengthen electricity supply and internet connectivity, as well as partnerships with government agencies, digital marketing experts, and ICT providers to maximize digital transformation benefits. The adoption of cloud services and Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) is emphasized as a cost-effective means of enhancing operational flexibility.

5.4. Limitations of the Study

The research is limited by its focus on Nigeria, a developing economy with infrastructural challenges, which restricts the generalizability of findings. Future studies should incorporate data from developed economies and larger enterprises to provide broader comparative insights.
Moreover, the model highlights gaps in explanatory power. Future research should incorporate additional constructs such as organizational culture, leadership orientation, and customer engagement to capture the multidimensional drivers of marketing performance more effectively.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: Cajetan Ewuzie, Jane Anene, Deborah Otei, Matthew Arum Obumneme. Data curation: Cajetan Ewuzie, Jane Anene, Deborah Otei, Ismail Amusat, Raphael Valentine Okonkwo. Formal analysis: Cajetan Ewuzie, Jane Anene, Deborah Otei. Funding acquisition: Cajetan Ewuzie, Jane Anene, Deborah Otei, Matthew Arum Obumneme, Ismail Amusat, Raphael Valentine Okonkwo. Investigation: Cajetan Ewuzie, Deborah Otei, Matthew Arum Obumneme. Methodology: Cajetan Ewuzie, Jane Anene, Deborah Otei, Matthew Arum Obumneme. Project administration: Cajetan Ewuzie, Jane Anene, Deborah Otei, Matthew Arum Obumneme, Raphael Valentine Okonkwo. Resources: Cajetan Ewuzie, Ismail Amusat, Jane Anene, Deborah Otei, Matthew Arum Obumneme. Validation: Cajetan Ewuzie, Jane Anene, Deborah Otei, Matthew Arum Obumneme. Visualization: Cajetan Ewuzie, Jane Anene, Deborah Otei, Matthew Arum Obumneme. Writing – original draft: Cajetan Ewuzie, Ismail Amusat, Jane Anene, Deborah Otei, Matthew Arum Obumneme. Writing – review & editing: Cajetan Ewuzie, Jane Anene, Deborah Otei, Matthew Arum Obumneme, Ismail Amusat.

Funding

The authors declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study is available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

We thank Professor Chuka Ifediora and Dr. Achi David Achi for their guidance in methodology and instrument refinement, and our respondents for their valuable participation.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no of conflict of interest to declare.

Ethical consideration

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Department of Marketing, University of Nigeria Nsukka, Enugu Campus (Protocol code: DM-2025-065; date of approval: 13 November 2024).

References

  1. Oden, L. Optimize: How to Attract and Engage More Customers by Integrating SEO, Social Media, and Content Marketing; Wiley: Somerset, NJ, USA, 2012. Available online: ProQuest ebrary (accessed on 2 September 2025).
  2. Gotteland, D.; Shock, J.; Sarin, S. Strategic orientations, marketing proactivity and firm market performance. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2020, 91, 610–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.09.008. [CrossRef]
  3. Salindal, N.A. Halal certification compliance and its effects on companies’ innovative and market performance. J. Islam. Mark. 2019, 10(2), 589–605. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-05-2018-0096. [CrossRef]
  4. SMEDAN (2020) National Policy on Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises, Retrieved from https//www.smedan.gov.ng.
  5. Ellis-Chadwick, F.; Chaffey, D. Digital Marketing: Strategy, Implementation, and Practice; Pearson: London, UK, 2012; ISBN 0273746103.
  6. Awa, H.O.; Ojiabo, O.U.; Emecheta, B.C. Integrating TAM, TPB, and TOE frameworks and expanding their characteristic constructs for e-commerce adoption by SMEs. J. Sci. Technol. Policy Manag. 2015, 6, 76–94. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-04-2014-0012. [CrossRef]
  7. Saura, J.R. Using data sciences in digital marketing: Framework, methods, and performance metrics. J. Innov. Knowl. 2021, 6(2), 92–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2020.08.001. [CrossRef]
  8. Desai, V.; Vidyapeeth, B. Digital marketing: A review. Int. J. Trend Sci. Res. Dev. 2019, 5(5), 196–200. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3381797. [CrossRef]
  9. Saura, J.R.; Palacios-Marqués, D.; Ribeiro-Soriano, D. Digital marketing in SMEs via data driven strategies: Reviewing the current state of research. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2021, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.1883034. [CrossRef]
  10. Sathya, P. A study on digital marketing and its impact. Int. J. Sci. Res. 2017, 6(2), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.21275/ART20164255. [CrossRef]
  11. Chaffey, D.; Smith, P.R. eMarketing eXcellence: Planning and Optimizing Your Digital Marketing, 4th ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2016. Available online: http://charsoomarketing.com/wpcontent/uploads/downloads/2023/04/Dave_Chaffey_PR_Smith_Emarketing_Excellence_Pl.pdf (accessed on 2 September 2025).
  12. Wulan, R.; Ariyani, N. Digital marketing communication strategy for Sesek woven fabrics on a digital platform with a marketing approach mix’s 8P Sade Village Sasak Tribe Lombok. Int. J. Econ. Manag. 2024, 4, 135–145. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijem.v4n2p135. [CrossRef]
  13. Kotler, P.; Armstrong, G. Principles of Marketing; Pearson Education: London, UK, 2018.
  14. Sittig, D.F.; Singh, H. COVID-19 and the need for a national health information technology infrastructure. JAMA 2020, 323(23), 2373–2374. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.7239. [CrossRef]
  15. Gunawan, H. Strategic management for IT services using the information technology infrastructure library (ITIL) framework. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Information Management and Technology (ICIMTech), Jakarta/Bali, Indonesia, 19–20 August 2019; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2019; Volume 1, pp. 362–366. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIMTech.2019.8843750. [CrossRef]
  16. Hangl, J.; Behrens, V.J.; Krause, S. Barriers, drivers, and social considerations for AI adoption in supply chain management: A tertiary study. Logistics 2022, 6, 63. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics6030063. [CrossRef]
  17. Vassakis, K.; Petrakis, E.; Kopanakis, I. Big Data Analytics: Applications, Prospects, and Challenges. Lect. Notes Data Eng. Commun. Technol. 2018, 10, 3–20. [CrossRef].
  18. Dos Santos Barbosa, E.H.; de Moraes, C.R. Social media and information management for the process of social engagement in organizations. Inf. Inf. 2021, 26, 526–549. https://doi.org/10.5433/1981-8920.2021v26n2p526. [CrossRef]
  19. Verhoef, P.C.; Broekhuizen, T.; Bart, Y.; Bhattacharya, A.; Dong, J.Q.; Fabian, N.; Haenlein, M. Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 122, 889–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022. [CrossRef]
  20. Gong, C.; Ribiere, V. Developing a Unified Definition of Digital Transformation. Technovation 2021, 102, 102217.
  21. Checchinato, F.; Hinterhuber, A.; Vescovi, T. Our roadmap to digital transformation. In Managing Digital Transformation: Understanding the Strategic Process; Hinterhuber, A., Vescovi, T., Checchinato, F., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2021; pp. 1–15.
  22. Ahmadi, A.; Fakhimi, S.; Ahmadi, Y. Instagram celebrities and positive user responses: The mediating role of user “like”. J. Contemp. Mark. Sci. 2022, 5, 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCMARS-11-2021-0047. [CrossRef]
  23. Barney, J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 1991, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108. [CrossRef]
  24. Meyer, J.W.; Rowan, B. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. Am. J. Sociol. 1977, 83(2), 340–363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550. [CrossRef]
  25. Muhamad, M.K.A.B.; Shahrom, M. The effects of the elements in social media content on social media engagement behaviour among youth. Rev. Rom. Inf. Autom. 2020, 30, 63–72. https://doi.org/10.33436/rria.v30i3.200. [CrossRef]
  26. Hangl, J.; Behrens, V.J.; Krause, S. Barriers, Drivers, and Social Considerations for AI Adoption in Supply Chain Management: A Tertiary Study. Logistics 2022, 6, 63. [CrossRef].
  27. Raji, M.A.; Olodo, H.B.; Oke, T.T.; Addy, W.A.; Ofodile, O.C.; Oyewole, A.T. Digital marketing in tourism: A review of practices in the USA and Africa. Int. J. Appl. Res. Soc. Sci. 2024, 6, 393–408. https://doi.org/10.51594/ijarss.v6i4.1234. [CrossRef]
  28. Rahman, M.S.; Gani, M.O.; Fatema, B.; Takahashi, Y. B2B firms’ supply chain resilience orientation in achieving sustainable supply chain performance. Sustain. Manuf. Serv. Econ. 2023, 2, 100011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smse.2023.100011. [CrossRef]
  29. Onyango, K. Influence of Digital Marketing Strategies on Performance of Cut Flowers Exporting Firms. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya, 2016. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/11295/98646.
  30. Srinivasan, R.; Bajaj, R.; Bhanot, S. Impact of Social Media Marketing Strategies Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) Use on Customer Acquisition and Retention. IOSR J. Bus. Manag. 2016, 18(1), 91–101.
  31. Yasmin, A.; Tasneem, S.; Fatema, K. Effectiveness of digital marketing in the challenging age: An empirical study. Int. J. Manag. Sci. Bus. Adm. 2015, 1(5), 69–80. https://doi.org/10.18775/ijmsba.1849-5664-5419.2014.15.1006. [CrossRef]
  32. Lee, J.; Lee, M.; Jin, Y. The impact of digital marketing on firm performance: A case of SMEs in South Korea. J. Glob. Scholars Mark. Sci. 2017, 27(4), 299–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/21639159.2017.1318666. [CrossRef]
  33. Chaffey, D.; Ellis-Chadwick, F. Digital Marketing: Strategy, Implementation, and Practice; Pearson: London, UK, 2012; ISBN 0273746103.
  34. Awa, H.O.; Ojiabo, O.U.; Emecheta, B.C. Integrating TAM, TPB, and TOE Frameworks and Expanding Their Characteristic Constructs for E-Commerce Adoption by SMEs. J. Sci. Technol. Policy Manag. 2015, 6, 76–94.
  35. Strauss, J.; Frost, R. E-Marketing, 8th ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2019.
  36. Nguyen, T.D.; Nguyen, T.T. The impact of digital marketing adoption on SMEs' performance: A case of Vietnam. J. Sci. Technol. Policy Manag. 2018, 9(3), 378–395. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-12-2017-0079. [CrossRef]
  37. Taiminen, H.; Heikki, K. The usage of digital marketing channels in SMEs. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2015, 22(4), 633–651. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-05-2013-0073. [CrossRef]
  38. Harmanen,J. Digital Online Strategy for B2B Internationalization a Multiple Case Study on Manufacturing SMEs. Master’s Thesis, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland, 2019.
  39. Aranyossy, M. Technology Adoption in the Digital Entertainment Industry during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Extended UTAUT2Modelfor Online Theater Streaming. Informatics 2022, 9, 71. [CrossRef].
  40. Sharabati, A.A.A.; Ali, A.A.A.; Allahham, M.I.; Hussein, A.A.; Alheet, A.F.; Mohammad, A.S. The impact of digital marketing on the performance of SMEs: An analytical study in light of modern digital transformations. Sustainability 2024, 16, 8667. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198667. [CrossRef]
  41. Ivanˇci´c, L.; Vukši´c, V.B.; Spremi´c, M. Mastering the digital transformation process: Business practices and lessons learned. Technol. Innov. Manag. Rev. 2019, 9, 36–51.
  42. Mirzaian, E.; Franson, K.L. Leading a digital transformation in pharmacy education with a pandemic as the accelerant. Pharmacy 2021, 9, 19.
  43. Sullivan, C.; Wong, I.; Adams, E.; Fahim, M.; Fraser, J.; Ranatunga, G.; Busato, M.; McNeil, K. Moving Faster than the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Rapid, Digital Transformation of a Public Health System. Appl. Clin. Inform. 2021, 12, 229–236.
  44. Mubarak, M.F.; Shaikh, F.A.; Mubarik, M.; Samo, K.A.; Mastoi, S. The impact of digital transformation on business performance: Astudy of Pakistani SMEs. Eng. Technol. Appl. Sci. Res. 2019, 9, 5056–5061.
  45. Hu,Q. The mechanism and performance of enterprise digital transformation. Zhejiang Acad. J. 2020, 2020, 146–154.
  46. Teng, X.; Wu, Z.; Yang, F. Research on the Relationship between Digital Transformation and Performance of SMEs. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6012. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su14106012. [CrossRef]
  47. Hai, N.T. Digital transformation barriers for small and medium enterprises in Vietnam today. LAPLAGE EM Rev. 2021, 7, 416–426.
  48. Li, Q.; Liu, L.G.; Shao, J.B. Digital transformation, supply chain integration and corporate performance: The moderating effect of entrepreneurship. Econ. Manag. 2021, 43, 5–23.
  49. Wang,H.;Feng,J.; Zhang, H.; Li, X. The effect of digital transformation strategy on performance: The moderating role of cognitive conflict. Int. J. Confl. Manag. 2020, 31, 441–462.
  50. Bhatti, A.; Malik, H.; Kamal, A.Z.; Aamir, A.; Alaali, L.A.; Ullah, Z. Much-needed business digital transformation through big data, internet of things and blockchain capabilities: Implications for strategic performance in telecommunication sector. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2021, 27, 1854–1873.
  51. Kim,S.S. Sustainable growth variables by industry sectors and their influence on changes in business models of smes in the era of digital transformation. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7114.
  52. Muhamad,M.K.A.B.; Shahrom, M. The Effects of the Elements in Social Media Content on Social Media Engagement Behaviour among Youth. Rev. Rom. Inform. Autom. 2020, 30, 63–72.
  53. Federal Republic of Nigeria National Policy on Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises in Nigeria, 2023. https://youngafricanpolicyresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/MSME-National-Policy.pdf.
  54. Jia, K.; Li, L. The Moderate Level of Digital Transformation: From the Perspective of Green Total Factor Productivity. Math. Biosci. Eng. 2024, 21, 2254–2281.
  55. Bley, K.; Leyh, C.; Schäffer, T. Digitization of German enterprises in the production sector-Do they know how “digitized” they are? In Proceedings of the Twenty second Americas Conference on Information Systems, San Diego, CA, USA, 11–14 August 2016; pp. 1–10.
  56. Verma, A. TheImpact of Digital Marketing Adoption on Firm Performance: A Case Study of Small and Medium Enterprises in India. Int. J. Strateg. Mark. Pract. 2024, 6, 1–11.
  57. Hair, J.; Alamer, A. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) in Second Language and Education Research: Guidelines Using an Applied Example; 2022.
  58. Ringle, C.M.; Wende, S.; Becker, J.M. SmartPLS 3; SmartPLS GmbH: Bönningstedt, Germany, 2015. Available online: http://www.smartpls.com (accessed on 2 September 2025).
  59. Hair, J.F., Jr.; Sarstedt, M.; Hopkins, L.; Kuppelwieser, V.G. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2014, 26(2), 106–121. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-10-2013-0128. [CrossRef]
  60. Bagozzi, R.P.; Yi, Y. On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 1988, 16(1), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/009207038801600107. [CrossRef]
  61. Gefen, D.; Karahanna, E.; Straub, D.W. Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Q. 2003, 27(1), 51–90. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036519. [CrossRef]
  62. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312. [CrossRef]
  63. Hair, J.F.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2011, 19(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202. [CrossRef]
  64. Mthwazi, G. Information technology infrastructure sharing effects on the environment and the delivery of equitable public services in Zimbabwe. In Digital Transformation for Sustainability: ICT-Supported Environmental Socio-Economic Development; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 15–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15420-1_2. [CrossRef]
  65. Oubrahim, I.; Sefiani, N.; Happonen, A. The influence of digital transformation and supply chain integration on overall sustainable supply chain performance: An empirical analysis from manufacturing companies in Morocco. Energies 2023, 16, 1004. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16021004. [CrossRef]
  66. Zhang, X.H. Obstacles, driving factors and path dependence of digital transformation of small and medium-sized enterprises: Based on a survey of 377 small and medium-sized enterprises in the tertiary industry. China Circ. Econ. 2020, 34, 72–82.
Figure 1. Research model for the hypothesized relationships between the variables.
Figure 1. Research model for the hypothesized relationships between the variables.
Preprints 211584 g001
Figure 2. PLS-SEM output of Hypothesized relationships and the structural model. 
Figure 2. PLS-SEM output of Hypothesized relationships and the structural model. 
Preprints 211584 g002
Table 1. Items’ factor loadings, reliability and validity (AVE). 
Table 1. Items’ factor loadings, reliability and validity (AVE). 
Indictors Items Factor Loading t-value
DMAS: Digital marketing strategies: a=.789, CR=.744, AVE =.574
DMAS1 My company uses email to follow up customers regularly. .777 19.445
DMAS2 My company uses social media to engage customers regularly. .755 17.561
DMAS3 My company uses SEO to enhance search visibility and traffics to its website. .773 13.962
DMAS4 My company distributes valuable and relevant contents to attract and retain customers. .585 6.615
MAIN: Marketing infrastructure: a=.730, CR=.758, AVE =.552
MAIN1 My company has invested in training and development of marketing staff. .865 6.772
MAIN2 My company has invested in ICT in areas of cloud computing, AI, data analytics tools and digital marketing platforms. .764 12.765
MAIN3 My company has efficient distribution channels. .727 9.728
MAIN4 My company has reliable internet connectivity. .652 15.726
DTRA: Digital transformation: a=.878, CR=.815, AVE =.613
DTRA1 My company has encoded its analogue information into digital format. .516 6.028
DTRA2 My company has adopted digital technologies to improve existing business processes. .562 2.608
DTRA3 My company has developed a new business model based on digital technologies. .675 10.685
DTRA4 My company has changed its organisational processes. .611 7.234
MPERF: Marketing performance: a=.846, CR=.793, AVE =.589
MPERF1 Awareness of my company and its products has increased. .706 2.228
MPERF2 My company has increased customer engagement. .730 2.662
MPERF3 My company has increased customer acquisitions. .667 11.608
MPERF4 My company has increased customer satisfaction and retention. .743 16.118
Table 2. Construct correlations and Discriminant Validity. 
Table 2. Construct correlations and Discriminant Validity. 
MAIN DMAS DTRA MPERF
MAIN 0.758
DMAS 0.232 0.743
DTRA .0463 .0930 0.783
MPERF 0.364 0.210 0.156 0.767
Source: PLS-SEM Algorithm Output, 2025. Note: Square roots AVE are in bold print in the diagonal; all correlations are significant at 0.05 levels.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

Privacy Settings

© 2026 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated