Search results

The purpose of this study is to examine what makes some firms, but not others, see a crisis as an opportunity to become entrepreneurial. Specifically, it examines how two key capabilities for durability—(unabsorbed) slack resources and external market networks—influence small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)’ “opportunity confidence”, a term recently coined to denote the subjective assessment of the extent to which a crisis is a good (bad) basis for entrepreneurial activities, such as the introduction of new products/services and new market entry.

Analysis of hand-collected survey data from 138 SMEs in Greece — a country hit hard by the 2008 economic crisis.

The findings reveal that an SME's number of network contacts has a positive effect on opportunity confidence, whereas firm slack resources lack a direct effect. It is, in fact, at low levels of firm slack resources that network returns are higher, especially for older firms. An extension to the main analysis also shows that opportunity confidence is linked to firm sales growth.

Understanding what makes some firms, but not others, see a crisis as an opportunity will help build an extensive and solid knowledge base and get ready for the next big (or small) crisis, which is inevitable to occur. Besides the grants and subsidies that policymakers often provide to SMEs in times of crisis, they may also need to consider organizing actions that support the extraversion and networking of SMEs—that can be done in a variety of ways due to the rise of teleworking and online collaboration platforms since the onset of the recent COVID-19 pandemic.

This paper draws linkages between the “external enabler perspective” and the burgeoning resilience literature and illustrates empirically what makes some SMEs, but not others, view an economic crisis as a good basis for entrepreneurial activities—that is a manifestation of early-stage entrepreneurial behavior and a necessary condition before taking entrepreneurial action in times of crisis. By so doing, this study extends research on resilience that has explained the role of “capabilities for durability” as a means of surviving through a crisis by revealing that these capabilities do not necessarily translate into capabilities for renewal that will help firms to bounce forward in response to the crisis. It also points to the “dark side” of capabilities for durability and, by implication, of resilience.

The purpose of this paper is to explore both the strategy types and strategic growth trajectories of new ventures and examine the relationship between these trajectories and new venture performance.

The paper uses evidence from six case studies of Greek high technology new ventures over a lengthy time frame. The longitudinal research design of the study allowed for the complexities of the growth phenomenon to be captured in an effective and efficient manner.

Based on an integrative three‐dimensional framework of new venture strategies, four strategy types are identified. At a static level, evidence suggests that the more strategic dimensions are emphasised in a venture strategy, the more balanced the venture's strategic position and thus, the higher its performance. With respect to the venture's dynamic trajectories, among all possible alternatives, it was found that two are the most successful. The first secures growth through focusing first on a specific innovative product/service in the domestic market and then expanding in the global market. The second secures growth through focusing first on a specific innovative product/service in the global market and then expanding the venture product scope.

The findings imply that the product and geographic dimensions of new venture strategies are the main performance differentiators, while the innovativeness dimension is a sine qua non of new ventures growth and performance. Implications for theory, business practice and policy making are discussed.

The paper contributes to knowledge in the area of new venture growth by developing a strategic typology in a catching‐up economy, where little research can be found.