TABLE OF CONTENT
Title page i
Dedication ii
Acknowledgments iii
Certification iv
Approval page v
Table of contents vi
Abstract ix
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION 1
- Background of the Study 1
- Statement of the Problem 5
- Objectives of the Study 6
- Research Questions 7
- Research Hypotheses 7
- Scope of the Study 9
- Limitations of the Study 10
- Operational Definition of Key Terms 12
Organisation of the Study 11
Profile of Selected Small Firms 11
References 13
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 14
- The Importance of Entrepreneurship to Economic Development 14
- Stages of Development and their Differing Skills Needs 21
- The Growth Stages of Small Scale Firms in an Economy 24
Financing
the Growth Stages of Small Scale Firms 31
- Managing a Growing Business: The Internal Strategies 36
- Critical Issues in the Management of Growth Stages of Small
Scale Firms 43
- Challenges
of Managing the Growth Stages of Small Scale
- Firms 51
- Managerial Orientation and Goals 52
2.81. Human
Resource Management 53
2.8.2 Managerial
Capacity 54
2.8.3 Customer
Base 55
2.8.4 Policy
Implications and Adoptions 56
2.8.5 ICT and
Commerce 58
2.8.6 Policy
Consistency 59
Reference 62
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 65
- Introduction 65
- Research Design 65
- Sources of Data 66
- Method of Data Collection 67
- Population of the Study 68
- Sampling Procedure/sample Size Determination 68
- Questionnaire Design and Administration 70
Techniques(s)
from Data Analysis 71
- Degree of Freedom 72
- Confidence Level/Level of Significance 72
- Decision Criterion 73
Reference 74
CHAPTER FOUR
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA 75
- Introduction 75
- Presentation of Data 75
- Analysis of Data 80
- Interpretation of Data 82
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
- Introduction 90
- Summary of Findings 90
- Conclusion 91
- Recommendations 92
- Suggested areas for Further Research Study
Research Paper 98
Journals 99
Bibliography 100
ABSTRACT
Analysis of growth stages in small firms, a
study of selected firms in Enugu
metropolis is a research aimed at critical assessment of the metamorphosis in
the growth stages of small firms and the factors incidental to the growth or
retardation in the life of the firms in the state.
Considering the critical role small firms
play in catalyzing rapid economic development, growth in stages of a firm
depicts a favourable business environment where the available resources are
efficiently utilized to achieve organisational objectives. But when growth
become less dynamic or retards, firms shrink in size thereby showing the pace
or prospect of economic growth. The variable responsible for these phenomenon
are encapsulated in the chapters as follows: Chapter one introduces the
background of the study, statement of the problem, objectives of the study,
research questions, research hypothesis, scope of the study, organisation of
the study and the profile of selected small firms. Chapter two literatures
review. Chapter three dwelt on the research methodology used for analysis of
research findings. Chapter four presents the data gathered, analysis and
interpretation of the data, while chapter five summarizes research findings,
conclusion and recommendations as well as suggested areas for further research
study.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACK GROUND OF THE STUDY
Every business passes through
identifiable stages in its life span. Several growth strategies
related to business management
approaches have been presented in the literature. Managing growth is a
major strategic issue for a growing firm (Arbaugh and Camp, 2000). Strategy is
the most important determinant of firm’s growth (Weinzimmer, 2000). Among
high-growth firms, Dsouza (1990) identifies three primary strategic clusters
- Build strategy, emphasis on vertical
integration.
- Expand strategy, emphasis on resource
allocation and product differentiation; and
- Maintain strategy, emphasis on market
dominance and/or efficiency.
Patel, (1995) gives an
insight into how firm, particularly small firms, graduate from one stage of
growth to another. In his analysis, (Patel, 1995) asserts that firms can be
understood as progressing linearly overtime from one stage to another as one
management problem after another is solved. Some firms remain small for years,
while other small firms grow into medium- sized or even large organisations in
a relatively short period. The possibility of small firms re-experiencing early
crisis stages would also be seen to be excluded.
A key contribution of the framework of
growth stages of small firms in the view of (Churchill and Lewis, 1984) is the
identification of the success-disengagement stage, wherein, after reaching a
level of stability, the firm’s owner-manager may voluntarily choose not to
pursue further growth as an objective.
Literature in industrial economics
typically views owner-managed firms as being “equally if not more likely to
pursue growth oriented policies than management controlled companies”. (Hay and
Morris, 1991). This is normally due to principal-agent problems associated with
management-controlled firms. Thus, the expectation that growth is a desired objective
for all small firms underlies most policy intervention tools which try to
create conditions in which small and medium firm can grow.
Meanwhile, a growth state analysis of
small firms needs to integrate issues specific to family firms since many small
firms are owner-managed. Fundamental factors that make family firms different
from other small businesses include: a
strong identification of individuals with the business itself and the challenge
of establishing a balance between family and business concerns (Kets, 1996).
Harvey and Evans, (1994) use a six-stage life
cycle model for family businesses to integrate these issues with the growth
stage literature; these studies indicate how family firms manage the issues of
control and how owner’s involvements can affect the firm’s growth orientation.
Thus the separation of growing firms into the success growth and the success
disengage stages in the view of (Churchill and Levis, 1983) may be of greater
importance to owner-managed firms than in other types of firms.
Meanwhile, available literature on
small scale firms/industry contains a wealth of empirical information on the
static aspects of their life cycle. Most of the information is the extent,
composition, characteristics, factor proportions, and consumption patterns
among others of the sector are based on cross-sectional data. According to (Chuta,
1995), time series data on the sub-sector are however not available for most
developing countries including Nigeria.
As such, discussions relating to the dynamism and growth of the sector have not
yielded fruitful results. Policy formulation, project and programme design over
the years have focused on the problem of short-term employment creation without
proper understanding of their long-term implications.
Traditionally, scholars have used a
biological analogy to explain the growth patterns of organisations (Kazanjian,
1988). A basic assumption in an organisation life cycle is that regularities
occur in organisational development, and these regularities can be segmented into
stages (Dodge and Robbins, 1992). Previous research according to (Lee, 2005)
has contained varying numbers of life cycle stages. As noted by (Dodge and
Robbins, 1992), there is a fair broad range in the number of stages specified
as the organisation emerges from birth through maturity and eventually decline.
Four general stages appear common to all, a start up or conceptual and
developmental stage, a growth or commercialisation stage, a domain protection
or expansion stage and stability or consolidation stage (Dodge and Robbins,
1992; Hanks and Chandler, 1994; Miller and Friesen, 1994).
This study as initiated is aimed at
assessing the growth orientation of a small firms located in different
industries in Eastern Nigeria. These firms
belong to the pharmaceutical, oil (petroleum) and manufacturing industries
respectively.
Nigerian small firms at present
experience a lot of problems and thus is not just as an effect of the economic
downturn. There are a number of bottlenecks, including under-capitalisation,
difficult in gaining access to bank credits and other financial markets; corruption
and a lack of transparency, high bureaucratic costs, but most of all, lack of
government interest and support for the roles that the small firms play in
national economic development and competitiveness.
In an investigation into the reasons
why some small firms grow and others do not, (Hay, 1994) concludes that over
the long term, it is rather an external barriers to growth, that exert the
decisive influence upon small firms production cost and its rate of growth. The
key internal growth constraint is managerial capacity and the unwillingness on
the part of the owner-manager to incur the risks associated with growth. In
another study that draws lessons for Indians small firms on the basis of
inter-country case study comparisons, (Nanjundan, 1994) observes “the size of
enterprises does not crucially determine business performance measured either
in economic or social terms. Instead, business performance depends decisively
on organisation structure, public and private policies which influence growth
and development”.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM