Firm and industry effects on firm performance: A generalization and extension for new ventures

By Jeremy C. Short, A. McKelvie, Dave J. Ketchen, Gaylen N. Chandler. 2009

176 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Economics and Econometrics, Management of Technology and Innovation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/70f8de01d7574df816493e85e1ce65bc882b1a58

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Economics and Econometrics

In Management of Technology and Innovation

Citations in the corpus

Social Capital and Learning Advantages: A Problem of Absorptive Capacity (2014, background): “Yet some entrepreneurial firms are able to better organize themselves to outperform others despite the liabilities of newness to which resource constraints and knowledge deficits contribute (Short et al., 2009).”
Revisiting the firm, industry, and country effects on profitability under recessionary and expansion periods: : A multilevel analysis (2016, methodology): “Indeed, this new stream of research revealed that industry effects, although not predominantly, are important in shaping firm profitability, and account for as much as 23.5 percent of total variance in firm profitability (Short et al., 2009).”
Untangling the relationships among growth, profitability and survival in new firms (2013, unknown): “This is comparable to previous studies on new firm survival, and indicates that survival is important to account for in the analysis of firm growth (Phillips and Kirchhoff, 1989; Levie, Don and Leleux, 2011; Short et al., 2009).”
The contribution of tangible and intangible resources, and capabilities to a firm’s profitability and market performance (2013, background): “Although the main prescription of the RBV points to firm-level factors as the most important determinants of firm performance, it does not omit the industry effects completely (McGahan and Porter, 1997; Short et al., 2009).”
Explaining the entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship in emerging economies: The intermediate roles of absorptive capacity and improvisation (2017, unknown): “If it were, then firms that exhibit EO would never lose their way, which indeed is a fallacy (e.g., Short et al., 2009).”
Contextualization and the advancement of entrepreneurship research (2014, background): “The factors that trigger these changes have received attention, highlighting shifts in an industry’s landscape (Short et al., 2009), the nature and mix of competition (e.”
Disentangling the effects of organizational capabilities, innovation and firm size on SME sales growth (2013, unknown): “Sales growth in small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is of widespread interest in economics and business research, but the drivers of such growth remain a source of debate (Dobbs and Hamilton 2007; Bahadir et al. 2009; Short et al. 2009; Stam and Wennberg 2009).”
Operational Slack and Venture Survival (2013, background): “Such survival rates have been typical in venture studies (Headd 2003, Short et al. 2009).”
The Etiology of the Multilevel Paradigm in Management Research (2011, methodology): “…flexible multiple regression approach was often used to discern the nature of the higher-level effects by regressing the Misangyi et al. (2006), Short et al. (2009), Holcomb et al. (in press) Illustrated the application of three-level mixed models, which combined nested organizations with…”
Empirical research on entrepreneurial orientation: An assessment and suggestions for future research (2013, background): “First, researchers could examine the relative impact and interactive influence to examine which dimensions benefit, suppress or have no effect on specific outcomes (Short et al., 2009).”