Performance, Firm Size, and Management Problem Solving [*]
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Growth in small businesses is rare. This study expands on Penrose's (1957) concept of managerial capacity and links it to firm growth. Growth is hypothesized to occur when a threshold of administrative or managerial acumen is attained by the management team. Empirical analysis is based on a random survey of 1,004 small and medium-sized Canadian businesses. The study found that: fewer than one quarter of the sampled businesses reported two consecutive years of revenue increases; growing firms tended to be younger companies while firms in decline were comparatively older; and the presence of a business plan was highly correlated with performance (yet only one-third of the firms formally planned). The findings are consistent with the theory that small firm growth is neither linear nor described well by biological paradigms. This study also investigated the problems that confront owners and managers at different stages in business development. It found that the severity of managerial problems varies by firm attr ibutes, including size. Problems of domestic demand, the availability of alternative sources of finance, a lack of financial expertise, and lack of information about financing options were particular problems for smaller (micro) operations. Female business owners were more likely to report lack of access to capital as a problem. From the early work of Birch (1979) to more recent work by Mend et al. (1997), longitudinal employment data consistently suggest that the growth of SMEs accounts for a disproportionate share of job creation in North America. Moreover, research also demonstrates that much job creation is attributable to a minority of firms that grow very quickly --the so-called (see, for example, Picot and Dupuy 1995). As a result, governments have sought to encourage small business growth, and researchers have sought to understand better the processes by which businesses develop. However, a dilemma confronts both policy-makers and researchers--although as many as one-half of the owners of new firms seek growth (Blatt 1993; Rosa and Hamilton 1994), gazelles comprise less than five percent of businesses. Research has, as yet, been unable to explain why some growth-oriented businesses fail to grow; nor has research arrived at consensus about what leads to substantive growth performance. This study seeks to add to our understanding of the growth process in small business by attempting to identify the types of problems and impediments owners and managers confront at different times during business development. It investigates the association of management problems with firm size using a sample of 1,004 small and medium-sized Canadian enterprises (henceforth referred to as SMEs). Results of the study are presented in four sections. First, background information from selected theories of SME growth are presented. These lead to the discussion of specific study propositions. Empirical methods and findings are then presented. The article closes with a discussion of results in which recommendations pertaining to future research are offered. Explanations of Small Firm Growth: The Literature The research literature proposing theoretical explanations of small firm growth can be categorized into four approaches. In this section, each approach is described, and important contributions of each are identified. Biological Models of Growth Small firm growth has been described as a staged process, one akin to biological evolution (Gartner 1985; Reynolds and Miller 1988; Reynolds, Storey, and Westhead 1994). Kazanjian (1988) contends that the SME lifecycle model describes the process of product and market change and corresponding changes in management. [1] Kazanjian suggests that firm growth occurs in stages at the level of the firm Kazanjian identifies the following generic sequence: (1) conception and development during which resources are acquired and technology developed; (2) commercialization, which involves production related to start-up; (3) growth, during which sales and market share are developed, which influences organizational arrangements; and (4) stability, which is characterized by profitability, internal control, and establishment of a base for future growth. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,013 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».