Search results

This article focuses on the relevant demographics, attitudes, behaviours, and concerns of small‐medium sized exporting and non‐exporting firms in Singapore in an attempt to determine whether measures can be developed to nurture non‐exporters into exporters. The findings suggest that while basic differences in demographics exist between the two groups, the attitudinal and behavioural differences are acquired. Therefore, programmes may be developed to nurture non‐exporting firms to be export‐oriented.

Makes a contribution to the debate surrounding the characteristics of “non‐exporting” (n = 203 firms) and “exporting” (n = 64 firms) new manufacturing and “producer services” small firms in Great Britain. It was appreciated that sample differences may overwhelm the exploratory analysis. Consequently, in order to overcome this potentially distorting influence a “matched pairs” methodology was also utilized. Forty‐two matched pairs of non‐exporting and exporting firms were identified (by age of the business, industry and location type). In total, data were collected on 146 variables covering the firm, the founder and the environment. Dichotomizing between the two types of firms the univariate analysis of the “matched samples” identified statistically significant differences with regard to only 14 variables (10 per cent). Additional multivariate analysis was conducted. Results from a logit regression model of the “matched samples” suggests new firms are “pushed” into “exporting” their sales abroad due to perceived shortages of local resources as well as intense local competition. Discusses the policy implications of the survey findings.

This study aims to develop a new internationalisation model to describe the exporting and non-exporting behaviours of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and then applying it to a sample of UK SMEs. The conceptual model consists of four forces leading to a successful business.

The sample is a stratified one taken from KOMPASS directory and focussing on the Greater Manchester area. In total, 250 firms were chosen to be the population of this survey. In total, 110 surveys were received by email i.e. 24 non-exporters and 86 exporters that were fully completed.

The four forces of the model include the non-exporting activity, the activity before and after the first export order, differences and similarities between non-exporters and exporters and the regular exporting activity. This model’s findings demonstrate important empirical determinants related to four forces, which, in turn, shape the successful exporting activity.

The empirical evidence from the study suggests that the major differences between non-exporters and exporters, which include the differences in management perceptions towards exporting, and the differences and similarities of firm and management characteristics, explain only to some degree what constitutes successful exporting behaviour. The model is considered useful for smaller businesses located in the UK. The study highlights the importance of firms before and after the first export order, which provides insights for managers of firms about going through with the first export order rather than withdrawing from this effort. The study reveals the motivations for exporting, the timing, the modes through which firms export, firms’ management characteristics and attitudinal differences between exporters and non-exporters, which are essential for practitioners.

Introduction Perhaps the most significant economic transformation within the last three decades has been the internationalization of business. From the modest levels of the 1950s, the volume of world trade has exploded to over $2 trillion, and the sales of foreign affiliates of US firms have reached $500 billion by 1983 (Terpstra 1983). Yet, even in the light of accelerated efforts to further stimulate US exporters (e.g., the Export Trading Company Act of 1982), a recent Dunn and Bradstreet survey showed that less than 1% of the US firms had engaged in exporting in 1982 (Trade Marks, 1983). Similarly, the International Trade Administration of the US Department of Commerce has lamented that only 5% of all US manufacturers will have engaged in export marketing in 1984.

The paper's purpose is to identify the differences in organizational culture between exporting and non‐exporting firms.

A binary logit model is used to test organizational cultural differences in four different types; market culture, ad hocracy culture, clan culture, and hierarchy cultures. A univariate t‐test is also used to determine mean differences in organizational culture of exporting and non‐exporting firms.

Non‐exporting firms tend to be more customer‐driven and competitively oriented (market culture) than exporting firms. However, they are found to be more internally oriented (clan culture) than exporters. There are no significant differences for ad hocracy and hierarchy cultures.

First, the study omits the effects of industry conditions in the firm's cultural orientation. Hence, industry factors need to be studied in relation to exports and organizational culture. Second, organizational culture may play a facilitating rather than predictive role in international expansion since managerial attitudes and characteristics can shape the vision of organizations. It is recommended that future research examine the relationships between managerial characteristics and organizational culture and how this relationship affects the firm's export decisions. Finally, a further classification of non‐exporting companies into interested and not‐interested firms is suggested to further the current literature.

The paper may help interested non‐exporters undertake an organizational change to align their organizational culture with the dynamics of international business so that they can become exporters.

The purpose of this paper is to find out whether the financial predictors of failure differ for exporting and non-exporting firms.

The study is based on two samples of French manufacturing micro firms from Amadeus database. Samples of 468 exporting and 1,148 non-exporting firms were divided equally to survived and bankrupted firms. Logistic regression method was used with five financial ratios portraying liquidity, solidity, cash flow sufficiency, profitability and productivity.

The findings suggest that cash flow sufficiency and solidity were important predictors in both firm groups, although the latter was more important in case of exporters. Liquidity was important in case of non-exporters, while profitability in case of exporters. Productivity was not a significant predictor. With these variables, failure of exporters was predicted with a higher accuracy.

This paper contributes to an under-researched area in the failure prediction and international business literature, namely, it outlines whether failure predictors are the same for similar exporting and non-exporting firms. The results indicate that some predictors differ and similar ones can have different importance for exporters and non-exporters.

Focuses on the relationship between managerialattitudes towards exporting and exporting behaviour. A basic premiss is that the widely held assumption of a positive relationship between managerial attitudes and behaviour in exporting does not hold true in all circumstances, implying that in some cases a negative or no relationship between attitude and behaviour in exporting can be expected. Survey responses from a sample of manufacturing firms in Illinois support the basic premiss herein. Furthermore, the magnitude of attitude‐behaviour discrepancy among industrial firms was estimated to be sizeable among non‐exporting firms. Concludes with research, managerial, and policy implications of these findings.

Examines the adoption and strategic use of advanced manufacturing technologies (AMTs) by small manufacturing firms. Three major issues are explored: the differences between exporting and non‐exporting firms with regard to why they adopt AMT; the differences between exporting and non‐exporting firms with regard to how they adopt AMT; and the relationship between adopting AMT and exporting to global markets. Using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), multiple comparison tests, pair‐wise comparisons, regression, correlation, and partial correlation analysis, the authors found that: exporting and non‐exporting firms adopt AMT for different reasons; exporting and non‐exporting firms adopt AMT in different ways; and there is a significant positive relationship between adopting AMT and exporting to global markets.

The purpose of this paper is to study whether exporting firms outperform non‐exporting firms along a number of performance characteristics. It also examines whether the differences in performance characteristics are due to the self‐selection of better firms into exporting or because the firms that start exporting for some unknown reason experience productivity growth.

The dataset comprised a panel of Indian manufacturing firms for a period of 17 years from 1990 to 2006.

Exporters were found to systematically outperform non‐exporters over a number of characteristics. Also, evidence was found of “self‐selection”, that is, firms that are more productive enter the export market. There was some evidence of learning, that is exporting firms experience an increase in productivity.

This is the first paper to look at the issue of self‐selection vs learning for exporting firms using a dataset from India.

Services represent the fastest growing portion of the world economy, yet they are still vastly under‐represented in the export packages of most countries. Services present unique challenges that make exporting potentially more difficult and riskier than for goods industries, yet they also offer huge untapped potential with very little research done in this area. This study develops hypotheses regarding the exporting decisions of services companies using qualitative interviews and the exporting literature. These are then tested through a survey of nearly 700 consulting engineering firms. Nearly 90 per cent of the exporting firms in the sample are happy with the performance of their exporting programs, yet nearly three‐quarters of the firms are not exporting. Overcoming limitations in know‐how and resources, developing positive attitudes about exporting, recognizing foreign opportunities and fostering management commitment to exporting are found to be the most important determinants of exporting behavior for professional services firms.