High-Growth Firms and Employment

By P. Schreyer. 2000

213 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/de60b7e9c812d1009499b6bf78b20b387ada70e5

How researchers see this paper

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

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

Gazelles as job creators: a survey and interpretation of the evidence (2010, unknown): “This conclusion is based on relating the contribution of Gazelles to total job growth in the economy, to the job contribution of new firms established in 1996 and to total 20 As does the Swedish study in Schreyer (2000).”
The Dynamics of Employment Growth: New Evidence from 18 Countries (2014, background): “Finally, a few contributions have examined the role of high growth firms (HGFs).6 Using data from five OECD countries and Quebec, Schreyer (2000) finds that high-growth firms account for a disproportionately large share of gross jobs gained, and that small firms have higher net job creation rates…”
Is the R&D behaviour of fast-growing SMEs different? Evidence from CIS III data for 16 countries (2008, methodology): “On average, younger firms grow faster than other firms, and the smallest firms grow faster than the rest (Schreyer, 2000, Caves, 1998).”
High Growth Entrepreneurs, Public Policies and Economic Growth (2007, background): “With regard to job creation it is not new firms per se that are the key, but the relatively small number of fastgrowing ‘gazelles’ that make up the lion’s share of jobs in new firms (Birch 1979; Gallagher and Miller 1991; Kirchhoff 1994; Storey 1997; Schreyer 2000; Buss 2002).”
CSR, Innovation, and Firm Performance in Sluggish Growth Contexts: A Firm-Level Empirical Analysis (2015, background): “In line with Schreyer (2000), small firms are particularly focused on their higher job creation and job destruction rates.”
Why Butterflies Don’t Leave: Locational Behavior of Entrepreneurial Firms (2007, background): “However, empirical research has indicated that it is not new firms per se (which are often little more than self-employed individuals) that are the key, but, rather, the relatively small number of fast-growing new firms that account for the lion’s share of net new job creation (Birch 1987; Kirchhoff”
Are high-growth firms one-hit wonders? Evidence from Sweden (2015, background): “Studies have therefore investigated what characterizes these firms, and whether the share of HGFs differs across countries (Schreyer, 2000; Hoffman and Junge, 2006; Bravo-Biosca, 2010).”
High-growth firms: Introduction to the special section (2014, methodology): “…policy, they are unlikely to be useful vehicles for public policy given the difficulties involved in predicting which firms will grow, the lack of persistence in high growth levels, and the complex and often indirect relationship between firm capability, high growth, and macro-economic performance.”
High-growth firms and innovation: an empirical analysis for Spanish firms (2014, background): “In fact this pattern is in line with previous studies for Spanish firms during the period 1990- 1994, the link between firm growth and age appears to be robust, when the probability of being part of the set of HGF firms does not decline as firm age rises (Schreyer, 2000).”
Firm Growth: Empirical Analysis (2010, unknown): “To reduce the impact of ﬁrm size on the growth indicator Birch (1987) and Schreyer (2000) used a combination of both the relative and absolute growth rates.”