HOW DO COMPETITIVE AGGRESSIVENESS AND AUTONOMY OF SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES (SMES) DIFFER REGARDING THEIR SIZE AND AGE?

Yıl 2022, , 293 - 306, 30.07.2022

Mehmet Civelek

https://doi.org/10.31671/doujournal.1007592

Öz

SMEs play a vital role in the development of national economies. But these businesses encounter with several barriers when performing this role. To cope with these impediments, some entrepreneurial attitudes that are dimensions of Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO), namely, competitive aggressiveness and autonomy enable SMEs to achieve better performance levels by increasing their revenues and income. However, depending on the characteristics of SMEs these behaviors might differ. In this regard, the purpose of this paper is to determine and examine whether competitive aggressiveness and autonomy of SMEs differ depending on their age and size or not. To fulfil this aim, the researcher has collected data from 479 SMEs in Turkey by employing a questionnaire survey. To find differences between characteristics of firms regarding selected entrepreneurial attitudes, Independent sample T-test is applied. According to the results, competitive aggressiveness of SMEs does not differ depending on their age and size. But while autonomy of smaller and larger SMEs does not differ, older SMEs have more autonomy comparing to their younger counterparts. The reasons of those result might stem from firm-entrepreneurial level characteristics of SMEs.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Competitive Aggressiveness, Autonomy, Entrepreneurial Orientation, SMEs, Age-size of SMEs

Destekleyen Kurum

Doğuş Üniversitesi

Proje Numarası

2019-20-D2-B05 'KOBİ’lerin Girişimci Davranışlarının ve Bankalarla Karşılıklı İlişkilerinin Krediye Erişimdeki Rolü

Teşekkür

The article came into being within the project no. 2019-20-D2-B05 entitled 'KOBİ’lerin Girişimci Davranışlarının ve Bankalarla Karşılıklı İlişkilerinin Krediye Erişimdeki Rolü ' financed by Doğuş University conducted by Mehmet Civelek in the years of 2020 and 2022.

KOBİ’LERİN AGRESİF REKABETÇİLİKLERİ VE ÖZERKLİKLERİ ONLARIN BÜYÜKLÜKLERİNE VE FAALİYET SÜRELERİNE GÖRE NASIL FARKLILAŞIR?

Öz

KOBİ’ler ülke ekonomilerinin kalkınmasında çok önemli bir rol oynamaktadırlar. Fakat, bu rolü oynarken birçok engelle karşılaşmaktadırlar. Bu engellerin üstesinden gelmek için girişimcilik yöneliminin ölçütleri olan agresif rekabetçilik ve özerklik gibi girişimci davranışlar KOBİ’lerin karlılık ve gelirlerini arttırarak onların daha yüksek performans seviyelerine erişmelerini sağlayabilirler. Fakat bu davranışlar, KOBİ’lerin özelliklerine göre farklılık gösterebilir. Bu bağlamda, bu çalışma ile KOBİ’lerin agresif rekabetçilik ve özerkliklerinin onların faaliyet sürelerine ve büyüklüklerine göre değişip değişmediğinin belirlenmesi ve analiz edilmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Bu amacı gerçekleştirmek için araştırmacı bir anket çalışmasına başvururak Türkiye’de bulunan 479 KOBİ’den veri toplamıştır. KOBİ’ler arasındaki bu farklılıkların bulunması amacıyla Bağımsız örneklem T testine başvurulmuştur. Analiz sonuçlarına göre, KOBİ’lerin agresif rekabetçilikleri onların faaliyet süreleri ve büyüklüklerine göre değişmemektedir. Fakat KOBİ’lerin özerklikleri onların büyüklüklerine göre değişmezken, daha uzun süre faaliyet gösteren KOBİ’ler daha az süre faaliyet gösterenlere kıyasla daha fazla özerkliğe sahiptirler. Bulunan bu sonuçların sebepleri İşletmelerin kendi ve girişimcilikleriyle ilgili özelliklerinden kaynaklanıyor olabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Agresif Rekabetçilik, Özerklik, Girişimcilik Yönelimi, KOBİ, KOBİ’lerin faaliyet süreleri ve büyüklükleri

Proje Numarası

2019-20-D2-B05 'KOBİ’lerin Girişimci Davranışlarının ve Bankalarla Karşılıklı İlişkilerinin Krediye Erişimdeki Rolü

Kaynakça

• Acar, E., & Göç, Y. (2011). Prediction of risk perception by owners’ psychological traits in small building contractors. Construction Management and Economics, 29(8), 841-852. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2011.611521
• Altinay, L., & Wang, C. L. (2011). The influence of an entrepreneur's socio‐cultural characteristics on the entrepreneurial orientation of small firms. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 18(4), 673-694. https://doi.org/10.1108/14626001111179749
• Anderson, B. S., & Eshima, Y. (2013). The influence of firm age and intangible resources on the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and firm growth among Japanese SMEs. Journal of business venturing, 28(3), 413-429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2011.10.001
• Avlonitis, G. J., & Salavou, H. E. (2007). Entrepreneurial orientation of SMEs, product innovativeness, and performance. Journal of Business Research, 60(5), 566-575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.01.001
• Barney, J. B., Ketchen, D. J., & Wright, M. (2011). The future of resource-based theory: Revitalization or Decline? Journal of Management, 37(5), 1299–1315. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310391805
• Beltrame, F., Floreani, J., Grassetti, L., Mason, M. C., & Miani, S. (2019). Collateral, mutual guarantees and the entrepreneurial orientation of SMEs. Management Decision, https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-11-2017-1077
• Brouthers, K. D., Nakos, G., & Dimitratos, P. (2015). SME entrepreneurial orientation, international performance, and the moderating role of strategic alliances. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 39(5), 1161-1187. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12101
• Chakraborty, A. (2012). Credit gap in small businesses: Some new evidence. International Journal of Business, 65. Erişim adresi https://scholarworks.umb.edu/accounting_finance_faculty_pubs/1/
• Chen, M. J., & Miller, D. (2012). Competitive dynamics: Themes, trends, and a prospective research platform. Academy of management annals, 6(1), 135-210. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2012.660762
• Chen, J., Neubaum, D. O., Reilly, R. R., & Lynn, G. S. (2015). The relationship between team autonomy and new product development performance under different levels of technological turbulence. Journal of Operations Management, 33, 83-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.10.001
• Civelek, M., Rahman, A., & Kozubikova, L. (2016). Entrepreneurial orientation in the segment of Micro-Enterprises: evidence from Czech Republic. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Knowledge, 4(1), p. 72-89. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijek-2016-0006
• Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic management journal, 10(1), 75-87. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250100107
• Covin, J. G., & Wales, W. J. (2019). Crafting High-Impact Entrepreneurial Orientation Research: Some Suggested Guidelines. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258718773181
• Cowling, M., Liu, W., Ledger, A., & Zhang, N. (2015). What really happens to small and medium-sized enterprises in a global economic recession? UK evidence on sales and job dynamics. International Small Business Journal, 33(5), 488-513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242613512513
• De Clercq, D., Sapienza, H. J., & Crijns, H. (2005). The internationalization of small and medium-sized firms. Small business economics, 24(4), 409-419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-005-5333-x
• Dvouletý, O., & Blažková, I. (2020). Determinants of competitiveness of the Czech SMEs: findings from the global competitiveness project. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 31(3), 361-378. https://doi.org/10.1108/CR-01-2020-0007
• Edelman, L. F., Brush, C. G., Manolova, T. S., & Greene, P. G. (2010). Start‐up motivations and growth intentions of minority nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Small Business Management, 48(2), 174-196. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2010.00291.x
• European Commission (2003). Recommendation Of 6 May 2003. Concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. Erişim adresi: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32003H0361.
• European Commission, SBA fact sheet Turkey, (2019). Erişim adresi: https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/sba-fs-2019_turkey.pdf Family Business Institute (2019). Definition of young firm. Erişim adresi: https://www.familybusinessinstitute.com/
• Freitas, H., Martens, C. D. P., Boissin, J. P., & Behr, A. (2012). Guidance elements for the entrepreneurial orientation of software firms. Revista de Administração (São Paulo), 47(2), 163-179. https://doi.org/10.5700/rausp1032
• Hadryś-Nowak, A. (2018). Family entrepreneurship orientation in family owned SMEs: a key resource for internationalization?. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 6(2), 153-169.
• Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling: Rigorous applications, better results and higher acceptance. Long range planning, 46(1-2), 1-12. Erişim adresi https://ssrn.com/abstract=2233795
• Hughes-Morgan, M., Kolev, K., & Mcnamara, G. (2018). A meta-analytic review of competitive aggressiveness research. Journal of Business Research, 85, 73-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.10.053
• Ismail, V. Y. (2014). The comparison of entrepreneurial competency in woman micro-, small-, and medium-scale entrepreneurs. Procedia-Social and behavioral sciences, 115, 175-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.426
• Jantunen, A., Puumalainen, K., Saarenketo, S., & Kyläheiko, K. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, dynamic capabilities and international performance. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 3(3), 223-243. Erişim adresi https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10843-005-1133-2.pdf
• Kathuria, R., Joshi, M. P., & Dellande, S. (2008). International growth strategies of service and manufacturing firms: The case of banking and chemical industries. International Journal of Operations & Production Management., 28 (10), 968-990. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570810903113
• Kato, M., Okamuro, H., & Honjo, Y. (2015). Does Founders' Human Capital Matter for Innovation? Evidence from J apanese Start‐ups. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(1), 114-128. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12094
• Kemelgor, B. H. (2002). A comparative analysis of corporate eo between selected firms ın the Netherlands and the USA. Entreprneurship and Regional Development, 14(1), 67-87. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985620110087023
• Kontinen, T., & Ojala, A. (2012). Internationalization pathways among family‐owned SMEs. International Marketing Review, 29(5), 496-518. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651331211260359
• Kowalik, I., Danik, L., Král, P., & Řezanková, H. (2017). Antecedents of accelerated internationalisation of polish and czech small and medium-sized enterprises. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 5(3), 31-48. Erişim adresi: https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=569946
• Kozubikova, L., Vojtovič, S., Rahman, A., & Smrčka, L. (2016). The role of entrepreneur´ s gender, age and firm´ s age in autonomy. The case study from the Czech republic. Economics and Sociology. 9(2), p. 168-182. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071- 789X.2016/9-2/12
• Kraus, S. (2013). The role of entrepreneurial orientation in service firms: empirical evidence from Austria. The Service Industries Journal, 33(5), 427-444. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2011.622373
• Laforet, S. (2013). Organizational innovation outcomes in SMEs: Effects of age, size, and sector. Journal of World business, 48(4), 490-502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2012.09.005
• Lange, T. (2012). Job satisfaction and self-employment: autonomy or personality?. Small business economics, 38(2), 165-177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-009-9249-8
• Lechner, C., & Gudmundsson, S. V. (2014). Entrepreneurial orientation, firm strategy and small firm performance. International Small Business Journal, 32(1), 36-60. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242612455034