No abstract

ABSTRACT. The relationship between organizational structure and performance in small firms has received relatively limited attention over the last few decades. In understanding small firm performance this seems to be a serious omission. In this paper, we first present the rationale for including organizational structure in the analysis of small firm performance. Then, from the literature on organizational theory, we retrieve several dimensions that may be postulated to describe organizational structures of small firms. Based on the study of a stratified sample of 1411 Dutch small firms we show that nine structure stereotypes can be delineated. We further investigate the relevance of the empirical taxonomy by looking at the relationship with firm performance in terms of sales growth, profitability and innovativeness. Eventually, we conclude that organizational structure indeed matters and that it deserves to be taken into account in models and future analysis of small firm performance.KEY WORDS: innovativeness, organizational structure, small firm performance.JEL CODE: M21, D21.

Why should individuals who have exited their firm consider re-entering into entrepreneurship, i.e. become renascent entrepreneurs? According to the logic of economic models of firm dynamics there is no reason to re-enter into entrepreneurship following firm failure. In contrast, research on nascent entrepreneurship has shown the positive effect of entrepreneurial experience on planning a new firm start. Based on empirical evidence from a database consisting of ex-entrepreneurs, this study shows that renascent entrepreneurship is a pervasive phenomenon. Next to passive learning, active learning plays an important role in the explanation of entrepreneurial preferences subsequent to firm exit. This study provides new insights into the role of prior knowledge and firm exit in the entrepreneurial process.

This paper deals with two issues. By linking culture and political systems, we develop alternatives to the "Developmental State" approach and propose, among other types, the "Bureaucratic State" for explaining the case of Japan. We extend the Laffont-Tirole (L-T) model of regulatory capture and propose a "bureaucratic capture" model. Variations of capture are shown to apply, given particular cultural predispositions. The case of atomic energy in Japan and the United States is then studied to assess the predictive efficacy of the extended L-T model. We conclude that cultural predispositions and the corresponding state types affect the degree to which capture takes place.

No abstract