IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v12y2024i24p3912-d1541736.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Micro, Small or Medium, New or Old—Are There Differences? Testing Business-Specific Difficulties

Author

Listed:
  • Mihaela Brîndușa Tudose

    (Faculty of Industrial Design and Business Management, “Gheorghe Asachi” Technical University, Profesor Dimitrie Mangeron 29, 700050 Iasi, Romania)

  • Savin Dorin Ionesi

    (Faculty of Industrial Design and Business Management, “Gheorghe Asachi” Technical University, Profesor Dimitrie Mangeron 29, 700050 Iasi, Romania)

  • Ionuț Dulgheriu

    (Faculty of Industrial Design and Business Management, “Gheorghe Asachi” Technical University, Profesor Dimitrie Mangeron 29, 700050 Iasi, Romania)

  • Liliana Buhu

    (Faculty of Industrial Design and Business Management, “Gheorghe Asachi” Technical University, Profesor Dimitrie Mangeron 29, 700050 Iasi, Romania)

  • Valentina Diana Rusu

    (Department of Social Sciences and Humanities, Institute of Interdisciplinary Research, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, Alexandru Lăpușneanu Street, No. 26, 700506 Iasi, Romania)

Abstract

The use of various mathematical and statistical methods for modelling economic processes and phenomena requires compliance with certain conditions/rules. To formulate general conclusions or predictions, in economic research, large databases are often used, related to more or less homogeneous samples, without taking into account the spatial or structural differences of the analysed processes or phenomena. Starting from the results of previous research focused on the identification and evaluation of difficulties in the business environment, the present study is based on the principles of mathematical induction, with the objective of testing these results, in order to assess whether the conclusions formulated are valid for a limited number of cases. Based on the primary data collected and tested (using Cronbach alpha, Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy and Bartlett tests) it was shown that the difficulties selected for evaluation are present in the analysed business environment. Then, factor analysis was applied to identify the most important groups of factors, which bring together one or more difficulties specific to the analysed population. After the validation of the factorial model and after a preliminary test of the normality of the variables, the Mann-Whitney U test was applied to assess whether, at the level of independent groups (constructed on the basis of three dichotomous variables), the difficulties identified are common or show significant differences. Contrary to the results of previous studies, the present study indicates that the difficulties analysed affect more new businesses (recently established), which have fewer employees and are classified as micro-enterprises.

Suggested Citation

  • Mihaela Brîndușa Tudose & Savin Dorin Ionesi & Ionuț Dulgheriu & Liliana Buhu & Valentina Diana Rusu, 2024. "Micro, Small or Medium, New or Old—Are There Differences? Testing Business-Specific Difficulties," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-29, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2024:i:24:p:3912-:d:1541736
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/24/3912/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/24/3912/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eckel, Carsten & Yeaple, Stephen R., 2024. "Inefficient labor market sorting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    2. Jian Xu & Binghan Wang, 2018. "Intellectual Capital, Financial Performance and Companies’ Sustainable Growth: Evidence from the Korean Manufacturing Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Daron Acemoglu & Jorn-Steffen Pischke, 1999. "The Structure of Wages and Investment in General Training," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(3), pages 539-572, June.
    4. Giorgio Calcagnini & Annalisa Ferrando & Germana Giombini, 2015. "Multiple market imperfections, firm profitability and investment," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 95-120, August.
    5. Yuming Zhang & Chao Xing & Xiaohan Guo, 2023. "The Shielding Effect of Access to Finance on Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises during the COVID-19 Crisis: Comparing Fintech and Traditional Finance," Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(8), pages 2383-2397, June.
    6. Teodora Roman & Nicu Marcu & Valentina Diana Rusu & Erika Maria Doacă & Adelina Andreea Siriteanu, 2023. "Tax Payment and the Performance of SMEs: A Longitudinal Analysis on EU Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-15, January.
    7. Costa, Paula L. & Ferreira, João J. & Torres de Oliveira, Rui, 2023. "From entrepreneurial failure to re-entry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    8. Akifumi Kuchiki, 2024. "Brake Segment for Agglomeration Policy: Engineers as Human Capital," Economies, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-28, June.
    9. Enrique Alberola & Ángel Estrada & Daniel Santabárbara, 2014. "Growth and imbalances in Spain: a reassessment of the output gap," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 5(2), pages 333-356, August.
    10. Egidijus Bikas & Evelina Glinskytė, 2021. "Financial Factors Determining the Investment Behavior of Lithuanian Business Companies," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-19, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Checchi, Daniele & Visser, Jelle & van de Werfhorst, Herman G., 2007. "Inequality and Union Membership: The Impact of Relative Earnings Position and Inequality Attitudes," IZA Discussion Papers 2691, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Moretti, Luca & Mayerl, Martin & Mühlemann, Samuel & Schlögl, Peter & Wolter, Stefan C., 2017. "So Similar and Yet So Different: A Comparative Analysis of a Firm's Cost and Benefits of Apprenticeship Training in Austria and Switzerland," IZA Discussion Papers 11081, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Addison, John T. & Belfield, Clive R., 2004. "Unions, Training, and Firm Performance: Evidence from the British Workplace Employee Relations Survey," IZA Discussion Papers 1264, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Ardiana N. Gashi & Geoff Pugh & Nick Adnett, 2008. "Technological change and employer-provided training: Evidence from German establishments," Economics of Education Working Paper Series 0026, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    5. Stieglitz, Moritz & Setzer, Ralph, 2022. "Firm-level employment, labour market reforms, and bank distress," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    6. Bhaskar, V & Holden, Steinar, 2002. "Wage Differentiation via Subsidised General Training," Economics Discussion Papers 8851, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    7. Teixeira, Aurora A.C. & Tavares-Lehmann, Ana Teresa, 2014. "Human capital intensity in technology-based firms located in Portugal: Does foreign ownership matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 737-748.
    8. Bingley, P. & Eriksson, T, 2001. "Pay Spread and Skewness. Employee Effort and Firm Productivity," Papers 01-2, Aarhus School of Business - Department of Economics.
    9. Kyota Eguchi, 2010. "Minimum Wages and Trainers' Dilemma," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 24(2), pages 128-138, June.
    10. Sauermann, Jan, 2015. "Worker Reciprocity and the Returns to Training: Evidence from a Field Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 9179, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Meier, Volker & Schiopu, Ioana, 2015. "Optimal higher education enrollment and productivity externalities in a two-sector model," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-13.
    12. Mihaela Brindusa Tudose & Valentina Diana Rusu & Silvia Avasilcai, 2021. "Performance Management for Growth: A Framework Based on EVA," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-19, March.
    13. Edward P. Lazear, 1995. "Personnel Economics," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121883, December.
    14. Bert Minne & Marc van der Steeg & Dinand Webbink, 2008. "Skill gaps in the EU: role for education and training policies," CPB Document 162, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    15. Anurag Banerjee & Parantap Basu, 2008. "Who pays for job training?," CDMA Conference Paper Series 0802, Centre for Dynamic Macroeconomic Analysis.
    16. Garloff Alfred & Kuckulenz Anja, 2006. "Training, Mobility, and Wages: Specific Versus General Human Capital," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 226(1), pages 55-81, February.
    17. Malcomson, James M. & Maw, James W. & McCormick, Barry, 2003. "General training by firms, apprentice contracts, and public policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 197-227, April.
    18. Hans Dietrich & Harald Pfeifer & Felix Wenzelmann, 2016. "The more they spend, the more I earn? Firms' training investments and post-training wages of apprentices," Economics of Education Working Paper Series 0116, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    19. Eguchi, Kyota, 2004. "Trainers' dilemma of choosing between training and promotion," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(6), pages 765-783, December.
    20. Ratapol Wudhikarn & Nopasit Chakpitak & Gilles Neubert, 2020. "Improving the Strategic Benchmarking of Intellectual Capital Management in Logistics Service Providers," Post-Print hal-03188190, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2024:i:24:p:3912-:d:1541736. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.