Using Contribution Analysis to evaluate small & medium enterprise support policy

Abstract

This research illustrates a pragmatic approach to evaluating the small and medium sized enterprise policy support in small or intermediate N research situations. A public interest perspective is taken. The suggested approach is most appropriate in settings where, for a variety of reasons, a study is unable to meet the requirements of a true experimental design (e.g. random assignment, establishment of counterfactuals, control groups, random samples, etc.). This approach will deliver findings on the contribution of the multiple factors influencing a result and will show whether the implicit theory of change for the policy under evaluation makes the expected contribution to the observed result and in what way. The Contribution Analysis finds that the theory of change for the policy under analysis was not verified in the study period. The outputs and outcomes of the analysis broadly support this conclusion. Moreover, the study finds that the primary limiting factor on profitable small and medium sized enterprise growth was the 'limited endowments of managerial resources' (Penrose, 1959) to manage the value-adding growth process and the lack of 'well thought out, well managed projects' (Walsh, 1985) and not lack of access to equity finance as surmised by policymakers. Whilst Ireland is used as the case example in the study, there are significant lessons for policy evaluators in other late-developing states and in regions with policy autonomy in the enterprise domain.

Debureaucratization Limits in Administrative Procedures Codification: Lessons from Slovenia

“…Therefore, with regard to legal regulation and debureaucratization, there is the basic need for a systemic search for a balance between regulation and administrative burden in the public interest, which should not suppress but rather promote economic activity, the competitiveness of national and regional economies, and indirectly also the development of the society as a whole (Buckley 2016). Excessive rules lead to red tape.…”

Tax-Related Burden on SMEs in the European Union: The Case of Slovenia

“…The lowest value is provided for merger of tax and customs authority in 2014 what can be interpreted as a rather internal effect not impacting tax payers. These estimations collide with other research findings on procedural, informatization-oriented and organizational simplifications to be the most often, that is approximately 50% of all reforms analyzed globally in last three years, and efficient as opposed to public interest threating deregulation and substantive criteria reduction (Kovač & Jukić, 2017; see also Buckley, 2016). Such red tape reduction programs are, to our belief, among the most effective tools to tackle economic slowdown and administrative bureaucracy as an obstacle to higher national and regional competiveness.…”

“…These resources may refer to finances, personnel with appropriate knowledge and skills as well as infrastructure to implement existing regulation. But a one-size-fitsall definition or understanding (tax) red tape is not possible -it is therefore quite common to lack evaluation and further databased decision-making if policy values, principles and goals have not been defined in the first place (Buckley, 2016). Instead, a cross-disciplinary and inter-regional dialogue is necessary to address issues, such as governmental tax policies (Kovač & Jukić, 2017).…”

Revisiting Contribution Analysis

“…As such, it explores how and why interventions are working and for whom. Contribu tion analysis is increasingly being used in evaluations (Buckley, 2016;Buregeya, Brousselle, Nour, & Loignon, 2017;Delahais & Toulemonde, 2017;Downes, Novicki, & Howard, 2018;Kane, Levine, Orians, & Reinelt, 2017;Noltze, Gais bauer, Schwedersky, & Krapp, 2014;Ton, 2017), and in particular to address causal issues in complex settings (Koleros & Mayne, 2019;Palladium, 2015).…”