Does the sector matter? An analysis of high-growth firms and industry growth rates

Abstract

PurposeThis paper aims to analyze the effect of industry growth rates on the characteristics of high-growth firms (HGFs) that are active in a particular industry. By making a distinction between HGFs active in stable and declining industries and HGFs active in growing and high-growing industries, it is analyzed if the main dimensions of firm performance are significantly different for HGFs active in one of these different industry types. Gaining more insight into this industry aspect of high firm growth is important as governmental measures towards HGFs may be more effective if they have a specific sectoral focus.Design/methodology/approachA subset of 740 Belgian HGFs was analyzed. Data were gathered from the Belfirst database. HGFs were classified within their corresponding industry type: a declining industry (negative growth), a stable industry (0 −5% growth), a growing industry (5 −10% growth) and a high-growth industry (>10% growth). Four dimensions of structural firm performance that are expected to correlate with high growth were taken into consideration: productivity (value added per FTE), profitability (ROA), innovativeness (intangible assets) and financial health (solvency and liquidity).Tukey's range tests in conjunction with post-hoc analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were carried out to test for significant differences in all the mentioned variables for the HGFs in the four different industry types.FindingsResults show that HGFs active in a stable industry are not significantly more profitable or innovative than HGFs active in a growth industry. However, significant differences could be encountered when it comes to the other two dimensions of structural firm performance: productivity and financial health. It is shown that HGFs active in declining and stable industries are significantly more productive than HGFs active in growth industries and high-growth industries. Also, HGFs active in declining and stable industries have significantly higher liquidity ratios than firms active in growth industries, pointing towards a better financial health for HGFs in nongrowing industries.Research limitations/implicationsThe results confirm the conceptual logic that the differences between resource-based view (RBV) and industrial organization (IO) propositions will have an impact on the drivers of firm performance and high business growth. Every future study that focuses on the growth determinants of HGFs should be aware that considering the subset of HGFs as one homogenous group may be suboptimal. It is likely that the growth determinants of both HGF types will indeed be fundamentally different.Originality/valueUntil now, all studies on HGFs have considered the subset of HGFs as a whole. This paper tried to disentangle the subset based on the growth rate of the industry in which HGFs are mainly active. In this proposition, a reason for the lack of knowledge about characteristics of HGFs may – at least partially – be found in the fact that industry membership plays an important role in determining the characteristics of a high-growth firm. Future studies focusing on high-growth determinants may benefit from systematically taking the industry growth rates into account, with the knowledge that the propositions of two different theories – IO and RBV – may be the fundamental drivers of a firm's high-growth rates.

Influence of target industry growth on premiums in cross-border acquisitions

“…Third, we extend the research stream on high growth firms (Bos and Stam, 2014;Delmar et al, 2003Delmar et al, , 2013Sleuwaegen and Ramboer, 2020). We challenge findings by Dillen and Vandekerkhof (2021) who state that high growth firms are significantly more productive in declining and stable economies, instead of those located in burgeoning or high growth industries. Our findings on cross-border acquisitions in the G7 nations offer a different story.…”

“…Also, information asymmetry issues suggest that the cross-border acquirer may not be aware of the potential industry growth that the target firm has already realized or is able to achieve. In this vein, Dillen and Vandekerkhof (2021) illuminate a puzzling proposition that high growth firms may outperform in productivity in stable and declining industries but not in burgeoning or even high growth industries. Moreover, Porter (2008) argues that it is a common mistake to assume that fast growing industries are always automatically attractive industries.…”

Equity ownership concentration and firm growth: the moderating role of industry growth

“…A growing body of research shows that industry growth affects firm dynamics (Kim and Patel, 2021). The success of a firm is dependent on the industry in which it operates and on the position it takes within the industry (Dillen and Vandekerkhof, 2021). The industry growth rate is important to the point of being used as the sole measure of market attractiveness as is the case with the Boston Consulting Group product-portfolio matrix.…”

“…Industry growth also tends to decrease rivalry as it creates more opportunities for all industry members (Porter, 2008). Dillen and Vandekerkhof (2021) also noted that the strong growth of firms is related to favourable conditions in the external environment of the firm.…”

From rapid decline to high growth: where in the distribution did COVID hit hardest?

“…Background 2.1 COVID as a shock to fast-growth firms and declining firms On average, firms do not grow much, but there is considerable variation in growth rates, such that some firms grow fast while others decline rapidly (Bottazzi and Secchi, 2006). Fastgrowing firms have received considerable attention, because of their disproportionately large contributions to job creation and economic dynamism (Aldrich and Ruef, 2018;Dillen and Vandekerkhof, 2021;Cristofaro et al, 2023;Kuckertz et al, 2023). Fast-growing firms do not generally have smooth growth trajectories (Biga Diambeidou and Gailly, 2011), but are sensitive to disruptive events and shocks.…”