scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Virginia

Bio: Virginia is an academic researcher. The author has contributed to research in topics: Organizational structure & Firm offer. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 1 publications receiving 1710 citations.

Papers
More filters
Posted Content
TL;DR: In this paper, a model relevant to small and growing businesses that delineates five stages of firm development is presented. And eight factors prominent in determining firm success or failure are identified, including financial, personnel, systems and business resources.
Abstract: Develops a model relevant to small and growing businesses that delineates five stages of firm development. These stages are: (1) existence--concerned with garnering customers and delivering the product or service contracted for; (2) survival--firms have demonstrated that they are workable business entities, but the key question becomes whether there is enough money for the firm to break even and stay in business; (3) success--here the decision facing owners is whether to exploit the company's accomplishments and expand or keep the company stable and profitable, providing a base for alternative owner activities; (4) take-off--concerned with how to make the firm grow rapidly and how to finance this growth; and (5) resource maturity--companies have the advantages of size, financial resources, and managerial talent and will be a formidable force in the market if they retain their entrepreneurial spirit. Each stage is characterized by an index of size, diversity, and complexity and described by five management factors: managerial style, organizational structure, extent of formal systems, major strategic goals, and the owner's involvement in the business. In addition, this research identifies eight factors prominent in determining firm success or failure. They include: financial, personnel, systems and business resources and the owner's goals for him/herself, operational abilities in doing important jobs, managerial ability and willingness to delegate, and strategic ability for looking to the future. Knowing which development stage the firm is in will help managers, consultants, and investors make more informed choices and prepare the company for later challenges. (SFL)

1,748 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Entrepreneurial intentions as discussed by the authors are states of mind that direct attention, experience, and action toward a business concept, set the form and direction of organizations at their inception, and subsequent organizational outcomes such as survival, development (including written plans), growth, and change are based on these intentions.
Abstract: Entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurs' states of mind that direct attention, experience, and action toward a business concept, set the form and direction of organizations at their inception. Subsequent organizational outcomes such as survival, development (including written plans), growth, and change are based on these intentions. The study of entrepreneurial intentions provides a way of advancing entrepreneurship research beyond descriptive studies and helps to distinguish entrepreneurial activity from strategic management.

2,630 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a definition of dynamic capabilities, separating them from substantive capabilities as well as from their antecedents and consequences, is proposed, and a set of propositions that outline how substantive capabilities and dynamic capabilities are related to one another, how this relationship is moderated by organizational knowledge and skills, and how organizational age affects the speed of utilization of dynamic capability and the learning mode used in organizational change.
Abstract: The emergent literature on dynamic capabilities and their role in value creation is riddled with inconsistencies, overlapping definitions, and outright contradictions. Yet, the theoretical and practical importance of developing and applying dynamic capabilities to sustain a firm's competitive advantage in complex and volatile external environments has catapulted this issue to the forefront of the research agendas of many scholars. In this paper, we offer a definition of dynamic capabilities, separating them from substantive capabilities as well as from their antecedents and consequences. We also present a set of propositions that outline (1) how substantive capabilities and dynamic capabilities are related to one another, (2) how this relationship is moderated by organizational knowledge and skills, (3) how organizational age affects the speed of utilization of dynamic capabilities and the learning mode used in organizational change, and (4) how organizational knowledge and market dynamism affect the likely value of dynamic capabilities. Our discussion and model help to delineate key differences in the dynamic capabilities that new ventures and established companies have, revealing a key source of strategic heterogeneity between these firms.

2,546 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The contributions and shortcomings of past entrepreneurship research can be viewed within the context of six research design specifications: purpose, theoretical perspective, focus, level of analysis, time frame and methodology as discussed by the authors.

2,166 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that legitimacy is an important resource for gaining other resources, and that such resources are crucial for new venture growth and that legitimacy can be enhanced by the strategic actions of new ventures.
Abstract: In this article we argue that (1) legitimacy is an important resource for gaining other resources, (2) such resources are crucial for new venture growth, and (3) legitimacy can be enhanced by the strategic actions of new ventures. We review the impact of legitimacy on new ventures as well as sources of legitimacy for new ventures, present strategies for new ventures to acquire legitimacy, explore the process of building legitimacy in the new venture, and examine the concept of the legitimacy threshold.

1,907 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is suggested that both cohesive and sparse networks are conducive to firm performance when they are aligned with and address firms' evolving resource challenges.
Abstract: This paper addresses whether cohesive networks of socially embedded ties or sparse networks rich in structural holes are more conducive to the success of new firms. We propose that the networks of emerging firms evolve in order to adapt to the firm's changing resource needs and resource challenges. As firms emerge, their networks consist primarily of socially embedded ties drawn from dense, cohesive sets of connections. We label these networks identity based. As firms move into the early growth stage, their networks evolve toward more ties based on a calculation of economic costs and benefits. This shift from identity-based to more calculative networks is manifested in the evolution of the firm networks: (1) from primarily socially embedded ties to a balance of embedded and arm's-length relations; (2) from networks that emphasize cohesion to those that exploit structural holes; and (3) from a more path-dependent to a more intentionally managed network. Thus, this paper suggests that both cohesive and sparse networks are conducive to firm performance when they are aligned with and address firms' evolving resource challenges. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

1,382 citations