Rethinking Strategy for SMEE Support in the Light of the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem

Abstract

Serbia has started transition in 2000. Although it experienced fast growth prior to the global economic crisis, critical number of SMEs was not created to achieve a sustainable development of entrepreneurial sector. During the crisis period SMEs faced with development limits, especially shops and micro companies. In the period 2009-2014 Serbian economy had zero rate of growth, the business climate was generally somewhat deteriorated and support to SMEE weakened by Government, local level of governance and financial institutions. There are positive signs of economic recovery of Serbia during 2015 and 2016. The market reforms got momentum in some important areas. The Government successfully put under control huge budget deficit and public debt. The inflation rate became for the first time low, similar to the European level. The Strategy for support SME, entrepreneurship and competitiveness in the period 2015-2020 was enacted at the end of 2014. Its importance became critical considering weaknesses of entrepreneurial sector, bottlenecks and limits of existing governmental measures for SMEE support. The point is to highlight those from the point of view of development the entrepreneurial ecosystem, as a new conceptual framework designed to foster economic development via entrepreneurship, innovation and small business growth.

Harnessing E-Collaboration for Rural Tourism Recovery after COVID-19: Dual Analysis using SWOT and Porter’s Diamond Model

“…The need to collaborate and optimize IT to accelerate post-pandemic tourism is the basis for developing an electronic collaboration with actors outside the traditional tourism industry with better IT usage capabilities. Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are the tourism-related businesses most vulnerable to the effects of the crisis [13]. SMEs will find it very difficult to restore their businesses independently after the pandemic.…”

Entrepreneurial support: a theoretical framework and case study of Tunisia

“…Regarding the entrepreneurial intention, it follows the gradually developed state of mind and directs the attention of the individual to lead him to the moment when the context will lend itself to action (Bird, 1989;Stefanska and al., 2015;Hadzic and Pavlovic, 2017).…”

“…Avoiding the discrepancy between the profile of the project leader, the requirements of his or her activity and the assistance offered by the support staff means positioning the support in a logic of reciprocal consultation, co-reflection and coaction, despite the lack of experience of the person being supported (Ahmed and Saurav Mondal, 2022;Shaw, 2015;Hadzic and Pavlovic, 2017;Topimin and al., 2018). This duality, which favors iterative and sustainable interactions and avoids those that are rather punctual and ephemeral, allows mentees to better get to know each other and better understand the workings of entrepreneurship (Huatao and al., 2018).…”

“…For (PAUL, 2009;Rhattat, 2020;Tibaingana and al., 2022;Hadzic and Pavlovic, 2017), these elements make the accompanied person occupy the position of subject-actor and not that of taken in charge. In this sense, he/she does not have to be simply receptive to the instructions and directives formalized by the experts (Audet and Couteret, 2005;Kimathi, 2017;Tremblay and al., 2022;Penov and Georgiev, 2021).…”

Impact of Business Incubators’ Facilities on Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Creation: A Case of Business Incubator in Jordan

“…Serbia started the transformation process in the year 2000 because it faced many troubles in achieving sustainable development of the entrepreneurial sector because of the lack of a number of small and medium-sized companies (SMEs), as the Serbian economy was suffering a lot from the problem of economic growth in the period 2009−2014, in addition to, the ecosystem and the entrepreneurial climate is deteriorating significantly due to the lack of government support for small and medium-sized companies, in (2015 and 2016) the Serbian government managed to control the budget deficit after directing the government support and the governmental laws benefit towards these entrepreneurial companies and a lot of government reforms were undertaken in this period in which the Serbian government was able to achieve significant success in creating a supportive entrepreneurial ecosystem in order to improve economic development (Hadzic & Pavlovic, 2019).…”