Impact of advanced analytics on business decision-making and organisational performance evaluation: An empirical assessment using regression and PLS-SEM analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.64497/jssci.211Keywords:
bibliometricsAbstract
The increasing complexity of business environments has intensified organisational reliance on advanced analytics to enhance decision-making and performance evaluation. This study empirically examines the impact of advanced analytics on business decision-making and organisational performance evaluation among selected Nigerian Exchange Group (NGX) listed firms. Using an ex-post facto design, secondary data were obtained from five purposively selected firms with demonstrable analytics adoption and strong regulatory compliance. Advanced analytics was operationalized through predictive, prescriptive, and diagnostic analytics, while organisational performance evaluation was measured using financial and non-financial indicators. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, correlation, multiple regression, and Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM), supported by robustness and diagnostic tests. Results reveal that advanced analytics significantly improves business decision-making and organisational performance evaluation. Decision-making partially mediates the relationship between analytics capability and performance outcomes. The findings suggest that advanced analytics enhances decision quality, strategic alignment, transparency, and overall organisational effectiveness. The study concludes that advanced analytics represents a strategic capability that strengthens performance evaluation systems and competitiveness. It recommends deeper institutionalisation of analytics-driven decision and governance frameworks, particularly in financial and tax management contexts.
Downloads
References
[1] American Psychological Association, Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 7th ed. Washington, DC, USA: APA, 2020.
[2] S. Ayaz and N. Masood, “Comparison of researchers’ impact indices,” PLoS One, vol. 15, no. 5, Art. no. e0233765, 2020, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233765. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233765
[3] L. Bornmann and H. D. Daniel, “What do we know about the h index?” J. Amer. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol., vol. 58, no. 9, pp. 1381–1385, 2007, doi: 10.1002/asi.20609. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20609
[4] N. S. Butt, A. A. Malik, and M. Q. Shahbaz, “Bibliometric analysis of statistics journals indexed in Web of Science under the Emerging Source Citation Index (2015–2019),” SAGE Open, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 2021, doi: 10.1177/2158244020988871. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020988870
[5] H. G. Ceballos, “A scientometric case study of knowledge management: Research productivity and impact through collaboration,” J. Knowl. Manage., vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 1506–1521, 2017, doi: 10.1108/JKM-03-2017-0131.
[6] L. D. Davis, J. R. Patel, and Y. S. Kim, “Comparison of h-index and other bibliometrics in Google Scholar and Scopus among translational science trainees,” Humanities Social Sci. Commun., vol. 12, no. 1, Art. no. 44, 2025, doi: 10.1057/s41599-025-04462-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04462-2
[7] W. Glänzel and A. Schubert, “Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship,” Scientometrics, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 415–422, 2004, doi: 10.1023/B:SCIE.0000045116.46067.60.
[8] J. E. Hirsch, “An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 102, no. 46, pp. 16569–16572, 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
[9] Y. Kim, H. J. Lim, and S. J. Lee, “Applying research collaboration as a new way of measuring research performance in Korean universities,” Scientometrics, vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 97–115, 2014, doi: 10.1007/s11192-013-1095-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1095-4
[10] H. F. Moed, “Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals,” J. Informetrics, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 265–277, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2010.01.002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.01.002
[11] F. Momeni, H. Alvari, and M. Jalili, “Author, paper, and collaboration network features in predicting the future h-index,” EPJ Data Sci., vol. 12, no. 1, Art. no. 8, 2023, doi: 10.1140/epjds/s13688-023-00421-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-023-00421-6
[12] H. Mondal, “The h-index: Understanding its predictors, significance, and growth,” Perspect. Clin. Res., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 201–207, 2023, doi: 10.4103/picr.picr_239_22.
[13] E. A. Obuku, J. N. Lavis, A. Kinengyere, et al., “Academic research productivity of postgraduate students in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review,” Health Res. Policy Syst., vol. 16, Art. no. 86, pp. 1–13, 2018, doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0360-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-018-0360-7
[14] J. Stallings, E. Vance, J. Yang, et al., “Determining scientific impact using a collaboration index,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., vol. 110, no. 49, pp. 19785–19790, 2013, doi:10.1073/pnas.1312041110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1220184110
[15] L. Waltman, “A review of the literature on citation impact indicators,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1507.02099, 2015.
[16] L. Waltman, “A review of the literature on citation impact indicators,” J. Informetrics, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 365–391, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007
[17] L. Egghe, “Theory and practise of the g-index,” Scientometrics, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 131–152, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7
[18] A. Butt, Q. Malik, and M. Shahbaz, “Disciplinary bias in bibliometric indicators,” Scientometrics, vol. 126, no. 4, pp. 3211–3230, 2021.
[19] J. Obuku, E. Lavis, and J. Kinengyere, “Collaboration patterns and research visibility,” Res. Eval., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 234–246, 2018.
[20] L. Leydesdorff, L. Bornmann, and R. Mutz, “Normalization of citation impact: An overview of current methods,” Journal of Informetrics, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–13, 2011.
[21] G. Abramo and C. A. D’Angelo, “How do you define and measure research productivity?,” Scientometrics, vol. 101, no. 2, pp. 1129–1144, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1269-8
[22] C. R. Sugimoto, S. Milojević, and V. Larivière, “Scholarly communication,” in Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators, R. R. Rousseau, Ed. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2017, pp. 23–45.
[23] H. F. Moed, Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, 2005.
[24] L. Bornmann and H.-D. Daniel, “What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behaviour,” Journal of Documentation, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 45–80, 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410810844150
[25] A. Pritchard, “Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics?” Journal of Documentation, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 348–349, 1969. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb026482
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Bright Emmanuel Udomette, Bassey, Glory Daniel
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Abstract 418
- PDF 186
