The global operations of European firms

This Policy Brief is part of the EU-EFIGE (European Firms in a Global Economy) project which aims to address policy questions on the casual link between firm characteristics and internationalisation. Authored by Giorgio Barba Navaretti, University of Milan; Matteo Bugamelli, Bank of Italy; Gianmarco Ottaviano, Bruegel Senior Fellow; and Fabiano Schivardi, University of Cagliari, this paper is based on a comprehensive survey of 15,000 firms across seven EU countries. The findings of this paper set the foundation for deeper investigation into key policy challenges affecting European firms on the global stage.

Small Firms, Employment, and Federal Policy

[Excerpt] It is widely believed that small firms promote job growth. In fact, small firms both create and eliminate far more jobs than large firms do. On balance, they account for a disproportionate share of net job growth—however, that greater net growth is driven primarily by the creation of new small firms, frequently referred to as start-ups, rather than by the expansion of mature small firms. The greater net job-creation rates associated with new small firms could motivate lawmakers to consider supporting such firms through various policy initiatives. However, policies specifically favoring small firms have both advantages and disadvantages. For instance, policies designed to prevent discrimination or reduce pollution would probably have smaller adverse effects on employment if they exempted small firms in those cases where compliance was particularly costly for small firms. Conversely, some policies CBO has examined that would increase employment, such as reducing payroll taxes for firms that hire additional workers, would be less cost-effective if they were restricted to small firms. Under current federal laws and regulations, small firms already receive more favorable treatment than large firms do in many areas. For example, certain provisions of the tax code relating to capital gains and the expensing of capital investments favor small firms. The Small Business Administration (SBA) helps small firms obtain loans. And many regulatory policies, such as those prescribed by the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, include exemptions for small firms. Because further efforts to favor small firms may shift employment away from large firms in an inefficient manner, broadly targeted policies may spur total employment more effectively

Firms’ Contribution to Regional Economic Development: Unravelling Some Explanatory and Moderating Variables

Drawing on entrepreneurial orientation (EO), family business, strategic decision-making (SDM) and social capital (SC) theories, we investigated whether the family and non-family firms contribute differently to regional economic development (RED) and the moderating role of family involvement in firms. Using survey research design and data from 307 Kenyan firms, the findings of the study showed that: a) Firms’ EO positively influences RED, but the effect of family firms’ EO on RED is twice that of nonfamily firms; b) the relationship between strategic decision-making and RED is negative and this is more pronounced in family firms than nonfamily firms; c) Bridging social capital’s (BSC) influence on firms’ contributions to RED is positive, but nonfamily firms’ BSC effect is twice that of family firms; d) family involvement moderates the effects of firms’ contribution to RED. The overall conclusion of this study is that better understanding of firms’ effect on RED can be achieved by using a range of theories in combination, as such use would help to unpack the underlying mechanisms through which firms influence RED. Finally, theoretical and practical implications are discussed

The happy few: the internationalisation of European firms

The 2007 report from the research network European Firms and International Markets (EFIM) is the first systematic, cross-country, firm-level research of the features of European firms that compete in international markets.

Why Can’t a Family Business Be More Like a Nonfamily Business? Modes of Professionalization in Family Firms

The authors survey arguments that family firms should behave more like nonfamily firms and “professionalize.” Despite the apparent advantages of this transition, many family firms fail to do so or do so only partially. The authors reflect on why this might be so, and the range of possible modes of professionalization. They derive six ideal types: (a) minimally professional family firms; (b) wealth dispensing, private family firms; (c) entrepreneurially operated family firms; (d) entrepreneurial family business groups; (e) pseudoprofessional, public family firms; and (f) hybrid professional family firms. The authors conclude with suggestions for further research that is attentive to such variation

Small firms, borrowing constraints, and reputation

This paper presents a simple model relating firm age with firm size and access to credit markets. Lending to new firms is risky because lenders have had no time to accumulate observations about them. As a result, interest rates are high and loans are small for entering firms. As firms need credit to operate, credit markets impose a limit on the scale of operation of new firms. Reputation building by the firms allows markets to overcome these difficulties over time. Large firms face lower interest rates than small firms, and credit markets fluctuations are shown to have different effects on firms of different size

Stakeholder capitalism, corporate governance and firm value

We consider the advantages and disadvantages of stakeholder-oriented firms that are concerned with employees and suppliers as well as shareholders compared to shareholder-oriented firms. Societies with stakeholder-oriented firms have higher prices, lower output, and can have greater firm value than shareholder-oriented societies. In some circumstances, firms may voluntarily choose to be stakeholder-oriented because this increases their value. Consumers that prefer to buy from stakeholder firms can also enforce a stakeholder society. With globalization entry by stakeholder firms is relatively more attractive than entry by shareholder firms for all societies. JEL Classification: D02, D21, G34, L13, L2

Knowledge source preferences as determinants of strategic entrepreneurial orientation

In the knowledge intensive context, firms’ capacity to integrate external and internal sources of knowledge becomes an important competitive advantage and may distinguish entrepreneurial from conservative firms. This paper explores the proposition that differences in strategic entrepreneurial orientation (EO) across firms may be significantly determined by differences in firms’ preferences regarding knowledge sources. Our research is based on 208 firms operating in knowledge intensive industries in six Central and East European countries (CEEC). We identified three types of firms in terms of patterns of sources of knowledge: external R&D knowledge based firms, in-house knowledge based firms and value chain dependent firms. By using different proxies or different dimensions of EO, we have found that the EO is strongest in firms based on external knowledge. Firms with inhouse based knowledge have an intermediate strength of the EO, and firms dependent on value chains are the least entrepreneurially oriented. We have also found moderate support for grouping different proxies of EO into three dimensions identified in literature – innovativeness, pro-activeness and risk-taking. Value chain firms are not pro-active, have the lowest innovativeness, and are the most risk averse. External knowledge based firms are the most active in all three dimensions of EO, while inhouse knowledge based firms are in an intermediate position. Our results point to strong systemic features of entrepreneurial activities; i.e., EO is inherently different in different sub-populations of firms depending on their patterns of sources of knowledge. It seems that these patterns operate as a moderating factor between performance and the EO, which explains mixed results from the literature

In search of the drivers of high growth in manufacturing SMEs

Though considerable attention in the extant literature has been devoted to growth and performance of firms, there is a dearth of research on high growth firms. Furthermore, the majority of literature in this area focuses on large firms while research on high growth small firms is underdeveloped. This paper investigates the drivers of high growth in manufacturing SMEs. Following a number of focus group interviews with six managing directors of manufacturing firms, a number of drivers of high growth were identified and investigated in a sample of 207 manufacturing SMEs. The results of this study indicate that high growth firms place a greater emphasis on external drivers such as strategic orientation, their operating environment and the use of e-commerce compared with firms having static or declining sales. The analysis shows that high growth firms compete largely on the basis of price. While high growth firms have increased their sales by over 30% during the past three years or longer, it is questionable if manufacturing firms can sustain their competitive advantage without recourse to greater research and development, and innovation in the longer term

Evidence on the dynamics of investment-cash flow sensitivity

An important debate in the literature relates to the use of investment-cash flow sensitivity (ICFS) to measure finance constraint faced by firms. This debate is grounded on four prominent issues: a priori sorting of firms, treatment of distressed firms, use of cash flow to represent only internal liquidity of firms and restricting firms to a single regime. In this paper we investigate these issues using a sample of 2676 Indian manufacturing firms over the period 1994 to 2009. We use firm level estimates of ICFS to sort firms into positively cash flow sensitive (PCF-sensitive) group, cash flow insensitive (CF-insensitive) group and, negatively cash flow sensitive (NCF-sensitive) group. We find that all three group of firms start with high levels of investment. But, only the PCF-sensitive firms have high level of cash flows. With age, the investment of all three groups of firms remains stationary. But, for CF-insensitive firms only the cash flow rises with age. Further, we use a multinomial logistic regression to study the determinants of ICFS in the three groups. The results suggest that the interpretation of NCF-sensitive, PCF-sensitive and CF-insensitive as distressed, financially constrained and financially unconstrained, respectively, can be contested by the data