“Business Growth”—Do Practitioners and Scholars Really Talk about the Same Thing?

Abstract

The current growth literature has stalled over which measures to use in empirical studies, causing a fragmented theory base. This paper claims that there is a third issue that further curbs efforts in developing a better understanding of business growth. Based on a thorough literature review, a quantitative, and a qualitative study, we find that academic scholars and entrepreneurs do not talk about the same thing when they say "business growth." For practitioners, growth is a more complex phenomenon-with a strong emphasis on internal development-which differs from the simplified conceptualization of growth used in empirical studies.

Myth-busting and entrepreneurship policy: the case of high growth firms

“…Whilst this debate is not the focus of this paper, definitional issues are important because conceptions of business growth vary markedly between scholars and practitioners (Achtenhagen et al 2010). We wish to argue that perceptions of business growth also appear to differ between scholars and policy makers.…”

“…Key concerns are that the definition omits firms which may be growing rapidly but fall just outside this exacting growth threshold ; turnover and employment do not necessarily reflect how entrepreneurs themselves conceptualise growth (Achtenhagen et al 2010); and that the mathematics of percentages biases the measure towards smaller -and hence newer -businesses. There is also concern over what should be measured.…”

Re-imagining the growth process: (co)-evolving metaphorical representations of entrepreneurial growth

“…Focusing solely on economic growth, however, conceals other possible dimensions by which growth might be experienced, such as: personal, social, spatial and environmental (Achtenhagen et al, 2010;Anderson 1998;Haugh 2007;Korsgaard and Anderson 2011). Making other dimensions visible might also bring into question the desirability of economic growth, specifically challenging the academic willingness to understand and promote growth simply in terms of the assimilation and accretion of resources (Anderson 1998;Dean and McMullen 2007;Parrish and Foxon 2009).…”

Crescimento Organizacional: Uma Ideologia Gerencial?

“…De forma similar, Starbuck (1971) refere-se a crescimento organizacional como "change in an organization's size when size is measured by the organization's membership or employment" (p. 11). Vale notar que ênfase na expansão quantitativa na ideia de crescimento pode, também, referir-se a outras variáveis, em particular, incremento das vendas, lucro, retorno sobre patrimônio líquido (ROE) e retorno sobre ativos (ROA) (Achtenhagen, Naldi, & Melin, 2010 Apesar da predominante ênfase quantitativa na utilização do termo, Penrose (1959) chama a atenção ao fato de que crescimento também envolve aspectos qualitativos. Neste sentido, crescimento abrange um processo de desenvolvimento interno ao qual se integram as noções quantitativa e qualitativa do crescimento.…”

“…Do ponto de vista ideológico, a priorização dos interesses do acionista é legitimada pela construção de um discurso homogêneo em torno da reificação da organização, ou seja, defende-se o crescimento organizacional para a maximização do lucro como o grande objetivo da organização. Isto sem questionar que a organização é uma entidade social formada por múltiplos interesses (Cyert & March, 1963), nem sempre conformados à ideia de crescimento (Achtenhagen et al, 2010;Wiklund, Davidsson, & Delmar, 2003).…”