There is an ongoing debate within the academic literature about the value of the business plan in the development of the small firm. On closer inspection of the research, there appear to be clear benefits in the use of business planning as a process within the smaller business. This is in contrast to the production of a business plan as an output focused predominantly on convincing and acquiring resources from other organisations and individuals.\ud \ud As a process, business planning can be both formal and informal. It is also focused on understanding and responding to the context within which the business operates. Strategic awareness capability, as both bundle of activities and a core competence, helps to make sense of this context, and serves as a means of managing interactions between the firm and its environment. It also allows for a more sensitive reading of the limitations and strengths of the planning process in markets that are, for the small business, generally unpredictable and complex.\ud \ud When combined, strategic awareness capability and planning effectiveness can be used to develop a typology of business types that provides insight into the process by which business development can be supported. In addition, strategic awareness capability can be considered a core competence of the small business and conceptualised in terms of different levels of experience, and expertise. As a result, small firms with varying levels of experience face different challenges and needs when using and developing strategic awareness and capability

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of market orientation on exploratory and exploitative innovation, and the moderating effects of family ownership on these relationships. Design/methodology/approach – This study utilizes multi-group path analysis and confirmatory factor analysis in LISREL on data from 228 firms in the Australian service sector. Findings – This study establishes that both customer and competitor innovation are positively related to exploitative and exploratory innovation. However, customer orientation does not lead to significantly stronger effects on exploitative innovation than on exploratory innovation, and competitor orientation does not lead to significantly stronger effects on exploratory innovation than on exploitative innovation. In addition, the study found that the relationship between customer orientation and exploratory innovation was stronger for family firms, while the relationships between competitor orientation and both exploratory and exploitative innovation were stronger for non-family firms. Research limitations/implications – The cross-sectional design is one weakness of this study. In addition, as firms in the present study came from the service sector the generalizability of the findings to other sectors of the economy need to be determined. Practical implications – These findings of this study highlight the need for managers to build a strong market orientation in order to promote innovation, and consider the effects of ownership structure on innovation strategies. Originality/value – This study is the first to measure the relative influence of customer and competitor orientation on a firm’s use of exploitative and exploratory innovation strategies.

Experiencing and coping with uncertainty is common to most small businesses. The knowledge that is generated and applied as a result is a product of and a response to this condition, and so can be considered as knowing in and through practice. A consideration of knowledge as contingent upon unpredictable internal and external factors leads to the identification of multiple types of knowledge-asknowing. As such, knowledge within small businesses can be characterized as contextualized ‘bundles’ of knowing that are shaped by, and in turn shape, the business and the uncertainty of its internal dynamics and external environment.

This study, commissioned by the Supreme Council of Health in the State of Qatar, focuses on the main noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) globally and regionally, in order to gauge their potential impact on Qatar. The research shows that the Gulf Cooperation Council is projected to be affected dramatically by NCDs in the coming years. The top five NCDs that will affect Qatar in terms of economic burden and disability-adjusted life years are cardiovascular diseases, mental health and behavioral disorders, cancer, respiratory diseases, and diabetes. Whilst these diseases have diverse effects on patients, their causes can be traced to “… common lifestyle-related, or behavioral, risk factors such as tobacco use, a diet heavy in fat, and physical inactivity”. The total direct and indirect costs to the Gulf Cooperation Council calculated for the above five NCDs were $36.2 billion in 2013, which equates to 150% of the officially recorded annual health care expenditure. If this trajectory is maintained, spending per head of population in Qatar will reach $2,778 by 2022. These figures demonstrate not only the potential financial impact of the main NCDs, but also give an idea of how the current health system is working to address them.

An overview of policy thinking on start-ups: context and drivers of public assistance for new venture creation There is broad agreement at a policy level that new business creation is an integral component of an entrepreneurial and dynamic economy (DTI, 2001; EC, 2003; OECD, 1998; Reynolds et al, 2000). Start-ups and self-employment are seen as important sources of new wealth and jobs, as well as a means of enhancing overall competitiveness as entrants seek out and create new business opportunities and activities (for example, DTI, 2001; EC, 2003). (1) Raising levels of involvement in business start-up also increases the number of people directly involved in entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial endeavours and as such is a primary manifestation of and opportunity for engagement with enterprise (SBA, 2002). A preoccupation with encouraging higher levels of start-up can be seen in recent policy thinking on new venture creation in Europe. In 2000 the European Council of Ministers' Lisbon Conclusions identified a need to stimulate entrepreneurship bỳ`c reating a friendly environment for starting up and developing innovative businesses'' (EC, 2000). The continued commitment to encouraging entrepreneurial activity can be seen in the Spring 2005 communication of the European Council, which noted:``There are just too many obstacles to becoming an entrepreneur or starting a business, and, therefore, Europe is missing opportunities'' (EC, 2005, page 16). The European Commission's Green Paper on Entrepreneurship in Europe recognised the central importance of new venture creation to the development of entrepreneurship, noting that Europè`n eeds more new and thriving firms'' (EC, 2003). In the United Kingdom the White Paper on Enterprise, Skills and Innovation, Opportunity for All in a World of Change (DTI, 2001) highlighted the importance of encouraging individuals to start businesses, and linked this with the broader development and encouragement of a culture of enterprise and entrepreneurship: