Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Profitability and size of newly established firms

  • Published:
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Does size matter for new firms and do they need to be large to be profitable? From small to large firms, a wide range of arguments have explored the possible strengths and liabilities associated with size. Despite the long interest in the relation between size and profitability, the empirical evidence is mixed and inconclusive. To date, studies focus mainly on established firms. In order to advance the knowledge on the relation, we examine the effects of size on the profitability of newly established firms in their first years of business. Overall, the results show that size has a positive impact on the profitability of new firms. In particular, increases in the number of employees have a positive effect on the return on assets that indicates that being small is a liability for new firms. Further, this finding indicates the need for a certain critical mass of employees when firms start out. By starting out with a higher number of employees, new firms may invest in the development of their performance by stimulating learning and motivation and, in this way, increase their profitability and their chances of survival. In addition to the liability of smallness, we also investigate the moderator effect of age. Our conclusions support the liabilities of obsolescence and senescence arguments that state that as firms age, they have difficulties in adapting to the external environment and face internal inertia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amato, L. (1995). The choice of structure measure in industrial economics. Quarterly Journal of Business and Economics, 34(2), 39–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amato, L. J., & Amato, C. H. (2004). Firm size, strategic advantage, and profit rates in US retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 11(3), 181–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, B. W., Fuerst, F., Mansley, N., & Wang, Z. (2019). Size effects and economies of scale in European real estate companies. Global Finance Journal, 42, 100470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anyadike-Danes, M., Bjuggren, C. M., Gottschalk, S., Hölzl, W., Johansson, D., Maliranta, M., & Myrann, A. (2015a). An international cohort comparison of size effects on job growth. Small Business Economics, 44(4), 821–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anyadike-Danes, M., Hart, M., & Du, J. (2015b). Firm dynamics and job creation in the United Kingdom: 1998–2013. International Small Business Journal, 33(1), 12–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arend, R. J. (2014). Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: How firm age and size affect the ‘capability enhancement–SME performance’ relationship. Small Business Economics, 42(1), 33–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bamiatzi, V., & Hall, G. (2009). Firm versus sector effects on profitability and growth: The importance of size and interaction. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 16(2), 205–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bamiatzi, V., Bozos, K., Cavusgil, S. T., & Hult, G. T. M. (2016). Revisiting the firm, industry, and country effects on profitability under recessionary and expansion periods: A multilevel analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 37(7), 1448–1471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B., Ketchen Jr., D. J., & Wright, M. (2011). The future of resource-based theory: Revitalization or decline? Journal of Management, 37(5), 1299–1315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barron, D. N., West, E., & Hannan, M. T. (1994). A time to grow and a time to die: Growth and mortality of credit unions in New York City, 1914-1990. American Journal of Sociology, 100(2), 381–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker-Blease, J., Kaen, F., Eterabi, A., & Baumann, H. (2010). Employees, firm size and profitability in U.S. manufacturing industries. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 7(2), 119–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berk, J., & DeMarzo, P. (2014). Corporate finance, 3rd Ed. Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgelman, R. A. (1991). Intraorganizational ecology of strategy making and organizational adaptation: Theory and field research. Organization Science, 2(3), 239–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burja, C. (2011). Factors influencing the companies’ profitability. Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 13(2), 215–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canbäck, S., Samouel, P., & Price, D. (2006). Do diseconomies of scale impact firm size and performance? A theoretical and empirical overview. Journal of Managerial Economics, 4(1), 27–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J., Bauerschmidt, A., & Hofer, C. (1998). The determinants of new venture performance: An extended model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(1), 5–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coad, A., Segarra, A., & Teruel, M. (2013). Like milk or wine: Does firm performance improve with age? Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 24, 173–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coad, A., Segarra, A., & Teruel, M. (2016). Innovation and firm growth: Does firm age play a role? Research Policy, 45(2), 387–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coad, A., Holm, J. R., Krafft, J., & Quatraro, F. (2018). Firm age and performance. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 28(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhawan, R. (2001). Firm size and productivity differential: Theory and evidence from a panel of US firms. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 44(3), 269–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eurostat (2008). NACE Rev. 2: Statistical classification of economic activities in the European Community. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3859598/5902521/KS-RA-07-015-EN.PDF. Accessed: 15 August 2019.

  • Eurostat (2020). Business demography main derived indicators - NACE Rev. 2 (B-N excluding K64.2) [TIN00142]. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/product?code=BD_9BD_SZ_CL_R2&mode=view. Accessed: 11 July 2020.

  • Fairfield, P., & Yohn, T. (2001). Using asset turnover and profit margin to forecast changes in profitability. Review of Accounting Studies, 6(4), 371–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernández, E., Iglesias-Antelo, S., López-López, V., Rodríguez-Rey, M., & Fernandez-Jardon, C. M. (2019). Firm and industry effects on small, medium-sized and large firms’ performance. Business Research Quarterly, 22(1), 25–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M., & Weiss, L. (1967). Firm size and profitability. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 49(3), 319–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T. (1998). Rethinking age dependence in organizational mortality: Logical formalizations. American Journal of Sociology, 104(1), 126–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ilaboya, O., & Ohiokha, I. (2016). Firm age, size and profitability dynamics: A test of learning by doing and structural inertia hypotheses. Business and Management Research, 5(1), 29–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeng, D. J. F., & Pak, A. (2016). The variable effects of dynamic capability by firm size: The interaction of innovation and marketing capabilities in competitive industries. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 12(1), 115–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M., & Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jónsson, B. (2007). Does the size matter? The relationship between size and profitability of Icelandic firms. Bifröst Journal of Social Science, 1(1), 43–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kale, S., & Arditi, D. (1998). Business failures: Liabilities of newness, adolescence, and smallness. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 124(6), 458–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kipesha, M. (2013). Impact of size and age on firm performance: Evidences from microfinance institutions in Tanzania. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 4(5), 105–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laurell, H., Achtenhagen, L., & Andersson, S. (2017). The changing role of network ties and critical capabilities in an international new venture’s early development. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(1), 113–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leal-Rodríguez, A. L., Eldridge, S., Roldán, J. L., Leal-Millán, A. G., & Ortega-Gutiérrez, J. (2015). Organizational unlearning, innovation outcomes, and performance: The moderating effect of firm size. Journal of Business Research, 68(4), 803–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. (2009). Does size matter in firm performance? Evidence from US public firms. International. Journal of the Economics of Business, 16(2), 189–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundmark, E., Coad, A., Frankish, J. S., & Storey, D. J. (2020). The liability of volatility and how it changes over time among new ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 44(5), 933–963.

  • Marques, R., & Witte, K. (2011). Is big better? On scale and scope economies in the Portuguese water sector. Economic Modelling, 28(3), 1009–1016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGahan, A. M., & Porter, M. E. (2002). What do we know about variance in accounting profitability? Management Science, 48(7), 834–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moser, K., Tumasjan, A., & Welp, I. (2017). Small but attractive: Dimensions of new venture employer attractiveness and the moderating role of applicants' entrepreneurial behaviors. Journal of Business Venturing, 32(5), 588–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papadogonas, T. (2007). The financial performance of large and small firms: Evidence from Greece. International Journal of Financial Services Management, 2(1–2), 14–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel, P. C. (2019). Opportunity related absorptive capacity and entrepreneurial alertness. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 15(1), 63–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel, P., Guedes, M., & Pearce, J. (2017). The role of service operations Management in new Retail Venture Survival. Journal of Retailing, 93(2), 241–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel, P., Pearce, J., & Guedes, M. (2019). The survival benefits of service intensity for new manufacturing ventures: A resource-advantage theory perspective. Journal of Service Research, 22(4), 352–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paul, J. (2020). SCOPE framework for SMEs: A new theoretical lens for success and internationalization. European Management Journal, 38(2), 2019–2230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, E. (1995). The theory of the growth of the firm. Great Britain: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pervan, M., & Višić, J. (2012). Influence of firm size on its business success. Croatian Operational Research Review, 3(1), 213–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, B., Pukthuanthong, K., & Rau, P. R. (2018). Size does not matter: Diseconomies of scale in the mutual fund industry revisited. Journal of Banking & Finance, 88, 357–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1979). The structure within industries and companies' performance. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 61, 214–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramasamy, B., Ong, D., & Yeung, M. (2005). Firm size, ownership and performance in the Malaysian palm oil industry. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 1(1), 81–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossi, M. (2016). The impact of age on firm performance: A literature review. Corporate Ownership & Control, 13(2), 217–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scallan, P. (2003). Introduction to manufacturing. In P. Scallan (Ed.), Process planning (pp. 1–34). Great Britain: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serrasqueiro, Z. S., & Nunes, P. M. (2008). Performance and size: Empirical evidence from Portuguese SMEs. Small Business Economics, 31(2), 195–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S., & Stuart, T. (2002). Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science, 48(1), 154–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard, M. (2020). The relationship between discretionary slack and growth in small firms. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16, 195–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen, J., & Stuart, T. (2000). Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(1), 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinchcombe, A. (1965). Social structure and organizations. In J. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 142–193). Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tulsian, M. (2014). Profitability analysis (a comparative study of SAIL & TATA steel). IOSR Journal of Economics and Finance, 3(2), 19–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications: A study in the economics of internal organization. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C., & Chen, K. (2009). Are small firms less efficient? Small Business Economics, 34(4), 375–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yazdanfar, D. (2013). Profitability determinants among micro firms: Evidence from Swedish data. International Journal of Managerial Finance, 9(829), 151–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • You, J. (1995). Small firms in economic theory. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(3), 441–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zenger, T. R. (1994). Explaining organizational diseconomies of scale in R&D: Agency problems and the allocation of engineering talent, ideas, and effort by firm size. Management Science, 40(6), 708–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the valuable financial support from the Foundation of Science and Technology (Project funded: UIDB/04521/2020).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ISEG (Lisbon School of Economics and Management), Universidade de Lisboa, Rua do Quelhas 6, 1249-078, Lisbon, Portugal

    Sofia Fonseca, Maria João Guedes & Vítor da Conceição Gonçalves

Authors
  1. Sofia Fonseca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria João Guedes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vítor da Conceição Gonçalves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria João Guedes.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fonseca, S., Guedes, M.J. & da Conceição Gonçalves, V. Profitability and size of newly established firms. Int Entrep Manag J 18, 957–974 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00730-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00730-6

Keywords

JEL classification

Search

Navigation