The purpose of this paper is to answer whether or not entrepreneurial teams and management teams are a common phenomenon in small firms and to identify differences in the…
The purpose of this paper is to answer whether or not entrepreneurial teams and management teams are a common phenomenon in small firms and to identify differences in the reasons for the formation of these different kinds of joint management. Additionally the impact of joint management on the performance of small businesses is tested.
To answer the research question a questionnaire survey (n = 119, response rate = 48 per cent) of small firms (20‐49 employees) in Eastern Finland was supplemented by a secondary data collection on financial issues.
The results show that in nearly four‐fifths of the firms a team was involved in the management. The logistic regression model revealed statistically significant differences between firms with entrepreneurial teams and such with management teams regarding the formation motives turnover, liability distribution and efficiency. Even though secondary data suggested that the firms managed by management teams were bigger, more profitable and faster growing, the differences were not statistically significant.
This study suggests that teams are common in the management of small firms, and that the future research in this field should focus more on the small firm context.
The importance of teams in the management of small firms has to be realized by entrepreneurs, their employees, the consultants as well as by those who create the legal and institutional condition for the creation and development of businesses.
Although the impact of management teams and entrepreneurial teams has been widely studied in large‐firm settings, the studies in the field of small business are rare. With its multi‐perspective approach and its focus on small firms this study breaks new ground in this research field.
Previous research has predominantly focused on the meaning of prior entrepreneurial experience in the context of habitual entrepreneurship. To date, however, little is…
Previous research has predominantly focused on the meaning of prior entrepreneurial experience in the context of habitual entrepreneurship. To date, however, little is known about how previous experience affects the way in which several firms can be managed simultaneously. The purpose of this study is to examine entrepreneurial learning in the context of portfolio entrepreneurship and clarify how it is possible to manage several firms at the same time.
An exploratory study using a case method was conducted (Eisenhardt; Yin) by focusing on one portfolio entrepreneur. In this study, the case can be considered as unusual thus being suitable for a single‐case study. Data were collected through interviews and the entrepreneur also provided the researchers with a written description of the development and present situation of his entrepreneurial career.
This study proposes that failures may develop entrepreneurial knowledge as well as founding experiences. Development of entrepreneurial knowledge is viewed as leading to new ways of organizing and managing start‐up firms. Learning through previous experiences has strengthened entrepreneurial knowledge and contributed to the formation of the management team (MT). Without cooperation, delegation and sharing responsibilities, successful portfolio entrepreneurship would not have been realized. However, the results suggest that learning from failure is dependent on the entrepreneur's personal background.
This study seeks to bring new insight to portfolio entrepreneurship by concentrating on the entrepreneurial career of a well‐known Finnish entrepreneur by following the framework of Politis. In this case, a MT in each firm enabled effective control and management of the current firm portfolio. The study shows that in addition to the entrepreneurial team, the management teams can also have a significant role in the context of portfolio entrepreneurship although they have largely been ignored.