A Typology of Strategic Behaviour among Small and Medium-Sized Exporting Businesses. A Case Study

Abstract

PIERRE-ANDRE JULIEN, AN INDUSTRIAL economist, is Director of the Bombardier Chair in Management of New Technology for Small Businesses and director of the Revue Internationale PME; Andr6Joyal is a regional economist and co-director of the Research Group in Economy and Management of Small Businesses (GREPME); Laurent Deshaies is a regional geographer and a member of GREPME. All three are professors at the University of Quebec at Trois Rivieres, Canada. Charles Ramangalahy is a research assistant with the Bombardier Chair. This paper presents the result of an in-depth case study of 20 small and medium-sized manufacturing firms, which examined their historical background, the entrepreneurs' objectives, marketing strategies, and the resources used to support export activities. Three different types of firms were identified. The first type, referred to as 'professional exporters', are proactive, have complex marketing strategies and use considerable internal and external resources in export development. A second type, referred to as 'opportunist' exporters, comprises small businesses that export as the opportunity arises; they wait for orders, behave reactively, have no specific strategy and no dedicated export resources. Between the two are 'transitional' exporters, firms trying either to achieve the status of professional exporters by becoming better organised, or to withdraw altogether from exporting in order to devote their resources to domestic market needs.

Strategic decision making in small firms: a taxonomy of small business owners

“…On the basis of our data, we were able to clearly distinguish between the five distinct types of decision makers. These results are in line with Julien et al (1997) and Wennekers and Thurik (1999), who proposed that there are distinct types of small businesses and entrepreneurs. The five types could also be sensibly connected with the variables that were not used to develop the taxonomy, including expenses, the type of decision, the innovation indicators and the cognitive ability indicators.…”

“…Given the variety in the small firms, we think that there may be multiple types of decision makers in these firms. In a case study of the strategic behaviour among 20 small and medium-sized exporting businesses in Canada, Julien et al (1997) identified three distinct types of small business and concluded that small businesses indeed do not behave like a homogenous group. Hence, we feel that it makes sense to further distinguish between the different types of decision-making processes of the SBOs.…”

A Comparative Study of International and Domestic New Ventures

“…Findings concerning the association between firm size and export propensity are mixed (Aaby and slater 1989;ali and swiercz 1991;Bilkey 1978;calof 1993). While Julien et al (1997) report that export propensity increases in a stepwise manner with firm size, Czinkota and Johnson (1983) find that firm size is not a determinant of export intensity. Whereas Fisher (1997) andcavusgil (1982) confirmed that firm size is not a good predictor of international activities, Grimes et al (2007, p. 67) note that size is "an obvious explanatory factor in export success, [yet] size is not necessarily viewed as a key export capability".…”

The realisation of tourism business opportunities adjacent to three national parks in southern Finland: entrepreneurs and local decision-makers matter

“…A lack of business-related knowledge has been demonstrated elsewhere to be a major problem with entrepreneurs that uphold a reactive and satisficing approaches to their businesses (e.g. Pred, 1967;Selby, 1989;Julien et al, 1997). The positive loading of the proposition that business ideas are independent of market or other knowledge supports those findings as it suggests that entrepreneurs lack business acumen.…”

“…They make business decisions in relative ignorance, often simply copying the actions of successful (adapter) businesses. The adaptor entrepreneurs are more likely to be proactive, while adopters are, by definition, reactive (Jennings & Beaver, 1997;Julien et al, 1997;McEvily & Zaheer, 1999, see also Kirton, 1976;Kangasharju & Hyrsky, 1998).…”