High-growth firms have recently received considerable attention in the firm growth literature. These firms might have grown despite the existence of growth barriers, and…
High-growth firms have recently received considerable attention in the firm growth literature. These firms might have grown despite the existence of growth barriers, and evidence also suggests that, having already grown exponentially, they may not be in the best position to grow further. Policies targeting high-growth firms may therefore be misdirected. We argue that entrepreneurship researchers should concentrate more on firms that are not hiring, despite having high profits. We call these firms “sleeping gazelles,” and demonstrate that they represented almost 10% of all limited liability firms in Sweden from 1997 to 2010. Nearly half of these firms continued to earn high or moderate profits in subsequent three-year periods, while still displaying no growth. Regression analyses indicate that these firms were significantly smaller, older, more likely to be active in industries with high profit uncertainty, and more likely to be located in less densely populated municipalities than were corresponding growing firms.
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the importance of the entrepreneur’s quest for independence and control over the firm for governance and financing strategies…
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the importance of the entrepreneur’s quest for independence and control over the firm for governance and financing strategies with a special focus on family firms and how they differ from nonfamily firms.
The analysis is based on 1,000 telephone interviews with Swedish micro and small firms. The survey data are matched with firm-level data from the Bureau van Dijks database ORBIS.
The analysis shows that independence is a prime motive for enterprises, statistically significantly more so for family owners. Family owners are more prone to use either their own savings or loans from family and are more reluctant to resort to external equity capital. Our results indicate a potential “capital constraint paradox”; there might be an abundance of external capital while firm growth is simultaneously constrained by a lack of internal funds.
The main limitation is that the study is based on cross-section data. Future studies could thus be based on longitudinal data.
The authors argue that policy makers must recognize independence and control aversion as strong norms that guide entrepreneurial action and that micro- and small-firm growth would profit more from lower personal and corporate income taxes compared to policy schemes intended to increase the supply of external capital.
The paper offers new insights regarding the value of independence and how it affects strategic decisions within the firm.
The current work reviews all retailing articles published in four prominent retailing journals – Journal of Retailing, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, and International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research – in the 2009-2015 period, picking up where Runyan and Hyun (2009) left off. The purpose of this paper is to identify leading authors and institutions in retailing research based on overall impact.
Content analysis/literature review/descriptive research.
In total, 1,392 articles were published during this time period, and through a procedure of weights and adjustments for author count, journal impact, journal quality, and journal publishing opportunity, the findings reveal that research collaboration is highly prevalent, as evidenced by the high number of multi-authored papers and cross-university/international partnerships. Additionally, some authors and institutions remain influential, while others have emerged as highly influential in the last seven years. This shows the dynamic nature of the field and the need to remain active in quality publishing.
Scholars must understand that several factors influence impact judgments, which cannot be assessed using raw counts alone. Journal quality, impact, and publishing opportunity as well as author counts are important elements to consider.
These reviews are vital to the field in that they provide status updates on scholarship, so these reviews should be done periodically. Additionally, the findings in this paper provide a more holistic understanding of research impact and permit better assessment for scholars and administrators.