The principal theory underpinning this study is the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) framework developed by John Elkington in the 1990s, which informs the sustainable performance variable by conceptualizing organizational success across economic, social, and environmental dimensions ([16]; [49]). [16] argues that businesses implemented the TBL model as standard operating practice. Elkington’s 1998 ([16]) TBL model broke away from the singular focus on the economic dimension of the performing organization, and instead, shifted the focus of the inquiry onto the E, S, and G dimensions of performance. Recently, a number of researchers have empirically supported the assertion that the performance of corporate sustainability is predicated not only on the performance of the financial dimension, but is also dependent on the performance of the dimension(s) of society (the social dimension) and the dimension(s) of the natural world (the environmental dimension) ([7]; [57]). The years 2020 through 2025 have seen a number of empirical studies operationalizing the TBL of economic, social, and environmental dimensions of corporate sustainability and its relation to the competitive sustainability of corporate in the long run ([6]; [49]). [27] and [55] have reported the use of survey instruments, archival financial data, and indices of sustainability disclosure to evaluate the dimensions of the impact of TBL on firm performance in corporate sustainability.

Economic sustainability within the TBL framework means the organization practices sustainable profitability and adds long-term sustainable value to society ([16]). Companies are encouraged to design an economically sustainable future that is better than quick profit through strategy that is resilient, innovative, and responsible in the use of resources in economically uncertain situations ([40]). Economic sustainability has been economically linked in recent studies to the shared value concept, where companies economically outperform competitors by solving societal problems and doing so through their business ([43]; [49]). Worker equality, stakeholder involvement, workforce equitable treatment, and community social development are positive influencers of long-term organizational legitimacy ([29]). Social sustainability, the second TBL component, when implemented by organizations in the governance and HR levels, it produces greater employee engagement, innovation, and goodwill ([15]; [22]). The third dimension of sustainability is environmental. This is where organizations have an obligation to lower their negative environmental impacts by being energy efficient, reducing carbon footprints, and being sustainable, and use lifecycle-based environmental management to control their impacts ([56]; [43]). [49] and [60] show that it is lucrative for organizations to meet the sustainability goals set by the United Nations.

This strategy {TBL} will work best when sustainability, along with its competing values across all its trade-offs, is engrained into product, supply, governance, and performance decision systems ([15]; [27]). The GRI and [57] reporting framework and disclosure, along with measurement, systems provide guidance when reporting any of the economic, social, and environmental indicators to improve accountability and transparency ([53]). Measurement and communication of TBL performance have social responsibility investors with an increased trust from stakeholders, and better performance in the long run ([7]; [6]). The TBL theory captures all the elements of modern enterprise and sustainable performance by integrating profitability, social justice, and the environment ([16]; [49]).

The Mediating Effect of Strategic Agility

A study done by [42] in Indonesia on the Impact of Creative Leadership on Strategic Agility in Startups: Mediating Roles of Resource Management and Innovative Work Behavior. This study surveyed 219 mid- to senior-level managers from various startups in Jakarta. Data were analyzed using Smart PLS 4 to examine the relationships among creative leadership, Innovative Work Behavior (IWB), Creative Resource Management (CRM), and strategic agility. The findings revealed that creative leadership positively influences both IWB and CRM. Furthermore, IWB and CRM significantly mediate the relationship between creative leadership and strategic agility, indicating that fostering innovation and effective resource management enhances organizational adaptability.

Another study done by [69] in Türkiye on The Mediating Role of Organizational Innovation on the Impact of Strategic Agility on Firm Performance. An online questionnaire was administered to 216 firms operating in the Sakarya Organized Industrial Zone. Structural equation modeling was used to test the hypotheses. The study found that strategic agility positively impacts both firm performance and organizational innovation. Organizational innovation partially mediates the relationship between strategic agility and firm performance, suggesting that agile firms enhance performance through innovative practices.

A study done by [44] in Pakistan on HRM Strategies and Sustainable Competitive Advantage: Assessing Strategic Agility Mediating Impact. Data were collected from various organizations in Pakistan through online platforms. The study employed Covariance-Based Structural Equation Modeling (CB-SEM) to assess the proposed model. The research concluded that strategic agility serves as a crucial mediator between Human Resource Management (HRM) strategies and sustainable competitive advantage. Effective HRM practices enhance strategic agility, which in turn leads to a sustainable competitive edge.

Another study done by ([28]) in Kenya on (Is There a Moderated Mediation Model That Explains the Relationship between Strategic Agility, Organizational Culture, Environmental Turbulence, and Organizational Performance?) Evidence from Accredited Universities in Kenya. A descriptive cross-sectional survey was conducted among 78 accredited universities in Kenya. Data were analyzed using ordinary least squares regression to test for moderated mediation effects. The study found that organizational culture mediates the relationship between strategic agility and organizational performance. Additionally, environmental turbulence moderates this mediation, enhancing the positive impact of strategic agility on performance through a strong organizational culture in turbulent environments.

A study done by [37] in Indonesia on Determinants of Sustainable Performance: The Mediating Role of Strategic Agility and the Moderating Role of Leadership. The research involved 198 respondents from 66 private universities in Indonesia. Path analysis using Partial Least Squares (Smart-PLS) was employed to examine the relationships among competitive advantage, digital transformation, resource advantage, strategic agility, leadership, and sustainable performance. The findings indicated that strategic agility mediates the effects of competitive advantage, digital transformation, and resource advantage on sustainable performance. Leadership was found to moderate the relationship between strategic agility and sustainable performance, emphasizing the importance of agile leadership in achieving sustainability goals.

H1: Strategic agility has no mediating effect on the relationshipbetween entrepreneurial orientation and sustainability performance.

This will illustrate the relationship between the study variables:

Source: Researcher (2026).

This study was grounded in the positivist philosophy, which assumes that reality exists objectively and independently of the researcher. Knowledge is generated through observation, measurement, and empirical testing. Under this stance, the researcher remains detached to ensure neutrality and minimize bias. The study assumed that sustainability performance among youth enterprises can be objectively measured using validated instruments. Existing theories were reviewed, hypotheses were developed, and relationships among variables were tested statistically. By relying on quantifiable data and structured questionnaires, the research aimed to produce reliable, generalizable findings applicable to youth enterprises in Taita Taveta County.

Aligned with positivism, the study adopted a quantitative research approach based on deductive reasoning. The process moved from established theories to hypothesis formulation and empirical testing. Numerical data were collected using structured questionnaires adapted from prior studies to measure entrepreneurial orientation, strategic agility, and sustainability performance. Statistical techniques were employed to analyze relationships among the variables and assess the proposed model. This approach ensured objectivity, precision, and replicability. The findings were used to confirm or refute the hypotheses and provide evidence-based conclusions regarding the determinants of sustainability performance among youth enterprises.

Research design was a guide for organizing and analyzing data as per the set study purpose and objectives. As such, in order to measure and estimate the effect of entrepreneurial orientation and strategic agility on sustainability performance among youth enterprises in Taita Taveta County, explanatory research design was followed. The researcher established the cause-and-effect relationships among the variables ([58]). This design was used because both the predictive and the outcome variables were measured and analysis performed at a particular point in time ([10]). In addition, to enhance the breadth of the data collection process, quantitative questionnaires were used to test the research hypotheses. Thus, this design enabled the researcher to target all the population elements and access data in a timely and cost-effective manner ([10]).

The target population refers to the entire group of units to which a study intends to generalize its findings. It includes all individuals or elements that meet the predefined criteria for inclusion and share specific characteristics relevant to the research objectives. In this study, the target population comprised all government-funded youth enterprises registered under the Youth Enterprise Development Fund in Taita Taveta County. The sampling frame consisted of 262 officially registered youth enterprise groups as of April 2019. To obtain individual-level data, two members were selected from each group, resulting in a total target population of 524 youths. This population formed the basis for drawing inferences regarding sustainability performance among youth enterprises in the county, ensuring that the findings would accurately reflect the characteristics and dynamics of registered youth-led enterprises.

Due to time and budget constraints associated with survey research, it was impractical to collect data from the entire target population. Therefore, a scientifically determined sample size was calculated to ensure adequate representation while maintaining feasibility. Using [68] formula, the required sample size was computed based on a population (N) of 524 and a margin of error (e) of 0.03 (3%). The formula, n = N / [ 1 + N ( e 2 ) ] , produced a sample size of 356 respondents. A 3% margin of error was selected to achieve a high level of precision and reliability in the findings while controlling survey costs. This margin falls within the acceptable range of 3% - 5% commonly used in social science research, ensuring statistical adequacy and representativeness.

This research tests the hypotheses against data from primary sources, data that the researcher collected first-hand. Standardized questionnaires are employed in the study so that respondents may express their views on the constructs. The questionnaire method was justified in this study as it promoted the study’s objectives by providing a reusable method of collecting data from a greater number of participants, an economically smart way of collecting data, and a means of providing a structured and measurable instrument that can be subjected to a set of statistical tests to focus the research analysis. The instrument was constructed to meet the research objectives and the research questions, using measurement scales that had been previously tested empirically. The study instrument was composed of sections of structured questions to obtain demographic data and data relating to the key constructs of the study. Closed questions were employed to capture data on all variables, and respondents were subjected to a 5-point Likert Scale that measured the Level of Agreement from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. The researcher employed the drop-and-pick method as well as face-to-face data collection in an effort to improve the rate of return of questionnaires and to minimize data incompleteness.

The researcher conceptualized sustainability performance as the interaction of the three components of organizational performance, as categorized into economic, social, and environmental components of performance, which were operationalized through multiple items. These items were subdivided into three components of economic sustainability (financial viability and growth), social sustainability (community and employee engagement and social responsibility), and environmental sustainability (practices of resource conservation and protection of the environment). The strategic posture reflecting entrepreneurial thinking and behavioral styles within the enterprise is referred to as entrepreneurial orientation. It was assessed by incorporating the following five components: innovativeness, proactiveness, risk-taking, autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness. Strategic agility is the organization’s ability to respond quickly and effectively to changes within the environment. It was assessed by utilizing the following three components: strategic sensitivity, leadership unity, and fluidity of resources.

The precision, completeness, and appropriateness of the collected data were ensured before any analysis and statistical procedure were carried out on the data set. Data preparation involved the identification of outliers, cleaning of the data set, and recoding and transforming of variables, reducing mistakes that could potentially undermine validity and generalizability ([54]; [51]). Questionnaires were discarded when there was a lack of response or when the response provided was imprecise. The responses that were deemed valid were recorded and analyzed in an… The rest of the data was scrutinized and any outliers identified were avoided in the analysis. Outliers were identified with the use of a set of identified tools, which included the frequency distribution and the scatter plots. The analysis of the multivariate outliers used Mahalanobis Distance (D²) to avoid biased analysis ([31]). The analysis was carried out using the Stepwise method available in SPSS version 23. The analysis of the data involved both the descriptive and the inferential analysis. The descriptive analysis was done using the mean, frequency, percentage and the standard deviation. The inferential analysis carried out was multiple regressions and the PROCESS macro. Tables 1-3 and charts were used in the representation of the analyzed data to enhance clarity and ease of interpretation.

The study collected 306 surveys from a sample of 356 youth enterprises (respondents) in Taita Taveta County. 303 responses met the established criteria, providing an above the mean 85% response rate common in Entrepreneurial studies ([5]). This response rate gave adequate data to establish the relationship between Entrepreneurial Orientation, Strategic Agility, Institutional Pressures and Sustainable Performance of the Youth Enterprises in Taita Taveta ([47]; [64]).

Table 1. Response rate of youths in Taita Taveta.

Source: Authors (2026).

[24] states that reliability is used in statistical research to assess the internal consistency or stability of an instrument while measuring particular concepts. According to [39], reliability refers to how well results hold up over time and accurately represent the entire population. The coefficient is used to examine the internal consistency of the measuring scales’ items and determine whether they are statistically acceptable. The findings shown in Table 2 demonstrated that all coefficients were within the generally recognized limits of 0.7 proposed by [21], and therefore all the research instruments met the criteria to be used in the study. Reliability firm’s sustainability performance was 0.897. Entrepreneurial Orientation had a reliability of 0.705, while Strategic Agility had reliability of 0.884.

Table 2. Reliability results of the variables.

Source: Authors (2026).

Factor analysis was used to evaluate the dataset’s viability concerning the study’s constructs. Regarding sustainability performance, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy equals 0.684. This suggests that the sample is optimal for extract factor sample, and the items are suitable for assessing construct validity. For entrepreneurial orientation, the KMO value equals 0.682, meaning that sufficient level of adequacy is reached for factor analysis, and the items can construct the explained reliability. As for strategic agility, the KMO is 0.548, slightly lower, but is still above the acceptable level of threshold, meaning that sample is extracted for factor moderate suit ability of the sample. KMO value for Institutional pressures equals 0.701, which means that construct is available to investigate, and data is suitable so that factor analysis structure is highly relevant. KMO values of almost all variables were above 0.6, which means that sample had justified basis for factor analysis and the data collected from youth enterprises had justified the parameters of construct to measure. These assessments enabled later statistical analysis to be conducted on the valid sample items.

Hypothesis H₀₅ holds that strategic Agility has no significant mediating effect on the link between Entrepreneurial orientation and sustainability performance. Guided by PROCESS macro (4.2) and mediation model 4, H₀5 was tested on step-wise mediation procedures by [34]. To start, Path (a1) shows that entrepreneurial orientation has a positive influence on strategic agility (β = 0.6123, p < 0.001). Next, in Path (b1), strategic agility has a positive influence on sustainable performance (β = 0.0490, p< 0.001). Finally, in Path (C’), entrepreneurial orientation has a positive influence on sustainable performance (β = 0.0925, p < 0.05). These first three paths show that MacKinnon’s requirements for mediation have been met. With the inclusion of strategic agility as a mediator in the model, the effect of entrepreneurial orientation on sustainable performance was reduced from β = 0.1225 to β = 0.0925. This shows that strategic agility partially mediates the entrepreneurial orientation and sustainable performance relationship, demonstrating that a firm’s entrepreneurial orientation has a direct overt influence on sustainability performance, and, in addition to that direct influence, there is also an indirect effect that is elicited through the firm’s enhanced agility to adapt and reconfigure its resources in a way that drives sustainability performance ([36]).

Table 3. Results of the hypothesis testing.

The relevance of the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) theory has been reinforced, as demonstrated from an empirical standpoint, the sustainability performance of youth enterprises is economic, social, and environmental. Entrepreneurial orientation, as an antecedent, drives the performance of all the three dimensions of TBL, and is even more so, the case when performance is mediated via strategic agility. This empirical analysis of the theory posits the proposition of sustainable business value as encompassing social and environmental value, in addition to economic value. Therefore, the synthesis of TBL, strategic agility, and entrepreneurial orientation, enhances the theoretical base of how integrated TBL, strategic agility, and entrepreneurial orientation, from a developing country perspective, can help a firm achieve integrated sustainability. Furthermore, it demonstrates that the TBL is not exclusive to large corporations, but extends to youth-led enterprises. This is particularly important within the context of illustrating the fusion of entrepreneurial and organizational agility in the achievement of sustainability.

The research highlights youth enterprises’ potential for long-lasting impact by encouraging a sustainability-focused approach that integrates the three elements of the Triple Bottom Line (TBL). Managers should start implementing entrepreneurial behaviors and also proactively engage in other more flexible areas, such as environmental and market-oriented strategic agility, in addition to the environmental impacts of the community, to foster financial, community, and environmental positive impacts of the enterprises. Financial, community, and environmental positive impacts of the enterprises. Supporting youth enterprises to adjust to the principles of TBL is largely within the boundaries of policy-making and support agencies’ impacts by fostering entrepreneurial tendencies and flexible management skills. With a primary focus on TBL, youth enterprises can improve stakeholder confidence, meet sustainability requirements, and adjust to a fast-changing market, enhancing financial sustainability, social sustainability, and environmental sustainability.