Skip to main content
Log in

Export promotion programs, export capabilities, and risk management practices of internationalized SMEs

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to analyze the effectiveness of public policies on the international performance of the small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Specifically, we investigate the effect of public export promotion programs (EPPs) on two types of organizational capabilities, i.e., export capabilities which have been already used in previous modelization and international risk management practices as an original variable intended to better explain the effectiveness of public policies on the SME’s international performance. We use a quantitative methodology based on a structural equation modeling approach applied to a sample of 147 internationalized French SMEs that used EPPs. Our results add value to theoretical and empirical knowledge on the effectiveness of public support programs on the international performance of SMEs, since we demonstrate an indirect effect between EPPs and international performance, through export capabilities and risk management practices. We also show that by strengthening the risk management practices, EPPs stimulate the SME in implementing foreign direct investment strategies.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We cannot ignore the interest in the enterprise risk management (ERM) concept, which has grown rapidly over the past two decades, with regulators, professional associations calling for its adoption, the most common being the COSO framework (COSO 2004). This approach of risk management, largely based on the reference to large companies, suggests that firms address all their risks (operational, financial, legal, strategic) comprehensively and coherently, instead of managing them individually (Bromiley et al. 2015). The aim of this holistic framework is the identification, assessment, and monitoring of all threats and opportunities facing a firm, in order to promote increased risk-management awareness and culture, translating into mature operational and strategic management decisions and, hence, offers competitive advantage (Farrell and Gallagher, 2015; Nocco and Stulz 2006; Brustbauer 2014). However, it appears that the best practices that these frameworks are supposed to provide do not have a clear theoretical or empirical foundation, and their effectiveness is still largely unanswered (Paape and Speklé 2012). The application of a standardized framework does not systematically help to improve risk management quality, but, on the contrary, less structured, less standardized, more subjective, and exploratory risk management approach to risk management would be more relevant (Mikes 2009; Paape and Speklé 2012). Moreover, ERM is frequently an “umbrella concept” and finally refers to a very heterogeneous set of more or less informal practices (Power 2009). These arguments invite us not to use an over-sized analytical framework of risk management in our research, fundamentally anchored in the small business context for which the pragmatic nature of risk management is essential.

  2. Researches in strategic management have recently developed and tested models that not suggest a simple linear relationship between an antecedent variable (e.g., practices or formal procedures) and a desirable outcome variable (e.g., performance, innovation, effectiveness), but a U-shaped (or inverted U-shaped) relationship (Busse et al., 2015; Haans et al. 2016). Many relationships studied follow an inverted U-shaped pattern, meaning that “too much can be as bad as too little.” One explanation of this phenomenon can be found in the “too-much-of-a-good-thing” effect (Busse et al., 2015), which provides from a compensation of desired effects (benefits) by parallel and undesired effects (costs). For example, in the entrepreneurship field, Chrisman et al. (2005) tested an inverted U-shaped relationship between the amount of formal planning and firm performance, because beyond a certain level of formalization, the incremental benefits (understanding of capacities and resources, development of long-term policies) are not sufficient to support the incremental costs (overconfidence and cognitive rigidity). However, in our study, we do not sense this quadratic effect, because of the context of the businesses and the research topic in itself. The companies concerned by public support are small companies, poorly equipped in terms of risk management tools, who can only benefit from being helped in the development of managerial practices. There is little risk that the costs of implementing risk management practices exceed the benefits generated. This is all the more true that public aid provided by specialists is very targeted and adapted to the firm’s characteristics (specially its size) and to the firm’s specific international strategy and that leaders prefer to set up practices sized to their needs. A risk of overconfidence or organizational rigidity is less conceivable in the small business context.

References

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the anonymous reviewers of SBEJ that have significantly improved the paper thanks to their insightful and constructive comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexis Catanzaro.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 11 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Catanzaro, A., Teyssier, C. Export promotion programs, export capabilities, and risk management practices of internationalized SMEs. Small Bus Econ 57, 1479–1503 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00358-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00358-4

Keywords

JEL classification

Navigation