The relationships of structure and structural factors at a general level are examined on the basis of data from a Finnish sample of mostly small and medium-sized industrial organizations. The sample, which consists of shoe and clothing firms, is homogeneous in terms of basic technology and industrial environment. The structural relationships are analysed from the point of view of size so that the interaction or concurrence of size and specialization is seen as a primary determinant of the systems of structural relationships. Some additional contextual variables are included in the analysis. Further, the factors or dimensions of structure reported are built on the basic variables of coordination and control. The factors are managerial supervision, the administrative component in general, including the clerical component, which is of particular importance, and impersonal mechanisms.

Vesa Routamaa and Jukka Vesalainen are with the University of Vaasa, Finland. Their paper reports on the findings of an empirical study which aimed to find out what kind of entrepreneurs are best able to react to the management problems caused by the growth of firms. It was found that the manager type of entrepreneur was growth oriented but risk avoiding in comparison with the classical entrepreneur. Differences were found in goal setting which, against the background of the growth orientation of the entrepreneurs, could be interpreted to lead either to controlled or uncontrolled growth. The results indicated that even the manager type of entrepreneur at his best could not attain such a firm hold as a professional manager. To be an entrepreneur and a managing director did not always go together.

No abstract

The objective of this paper is to discuss the prerequisites and outcomes of interfirm cooperation of SMEs. Four sub-themes are involved in this discussion. First, different types of SME cooperation are defined. Second, the a priori outcomes of each type are presented. Third, the prerequisities of each type are listed, and fourth, short case histories are presented as manifestations of reality. The discussion, which is based on a longitudinal research project, stresses the importance of distinguishing between various types of SME cooperation. The types differ from each other in strategic intensity and in degree of formality. Five different types are identified: development circle, a loose cooperative circle, a project group, a joint venture, and a joint unit. We consider that as the prerequisities as well as the possible outcomes of different types of cooperation vary, those who are involved in promoting SME cooperation should be aware of these alternatives and the varying conditions of each of them.

No abstract