« Smokers, Boozers, Sunbathers and Health Insurance | Main | Can Job Turnover be Predicted? »

Growing Out of Growing Pains

Posted on Thursday, June 1, 2006 at 04:35AM by Registered CommenterRobert Cenek | Comments4 Comments

Small firms have a high failure rate. Why?

Eric Flamholtz, a professor at UCLA has been studying this question for the past 20 years. His intellectual work is first rate, and probably the most complete of all research on the topic. In brief, his research and experience in working with entrepreneurial companies suggests that all small companies experience “growing pains” as a normal part of their development. Growing pains refers to a situation in which a firm has outgrown its current infrastructure and must develop new systems, processes and structures to support its new size. If these issues are left unresolved, significant problems and even failure often result. Remember People’s Express?

Others hold the same view as Flamholtz. Hambrick and Crozier (1985) identified four basic challenges that small, high growth firms must solve – instant size, a sense of infallibility, internal turmoil, and extraordinary resource needs. Rapid, high growth in small firms can “mask” many organizational issues over the short term, but many “stumble.” Bringing large numbers of new employees into the firm taxes a host of organizational systems, and can easily erode its work culture and entrepreneurial spirit. Controlling for industry sector and ranking on the Inc. 500 lists, Markman and Gartner (2002) found that extraordinary high growth—in terms of sales and number of employees—was not related to firm profitability.

This article presents a complete overview of Flamholtz’s model. More information can be found at his website – http://www.mgtsystems.com.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (4)

I have an ongoing discussion with a friend - a PhD in a performance improvement/OD area. He made an interesting off-the-cuff statement about the lack of knowledge, even in large organizations, of the specific qualifications needed for high-level work in HR and Training. He commented on how often he'd seen people pulled-in from unrelated areas or even from outside the company. According to him it appeared they were hired because of good looks or personal connections. "Hey, you're a charming person - why not apply for our Training Manager job!" Sounds like a book opportunity to me. Locally, I've heard a few stories, seen some mis-matches, but I always assumed it was very, very infrequent.
Suggested Book Title: "Hire The Dinosaur!"
June 8, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterHoward Gutknecht
Excellent model. I'm chair of an EDC project on growing entrepreneur opportunities in our community. We're meeting resistance from all places our local angel group. This is very helpful.

Regarding the previous comment - almost as bad as hiring the charmer is "promoting" employees to HR and OD because they're "good with people" "organized" or "detail oriented." While nice to have, these skills are hardly enough to qualify an employee today to help manage HR responsibilties or train employees.
It's like putting the effervescent receptionist or fastidious administrative assitant in charge of hiring, retention, and development. While everyone feels good and few paper clips are wasted, productivity and profitability are merely happenstance by-procucts if they occur at all.
July 1, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterIra Wolfe
Ira:

I can not agree more. My experience in assisting small entreprenurial firms is that most are strapped for cash, and HR is seen as fluff that can be handled by the receptionist, or worse yet, the entrepreneur him or herself. Many also hire sham consultants who are inexpensive but who peddle concepts that are a step above snake oil at the best.
July 1, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterRobert Edward Cenek
I think the growing pains hypothesis is right on. One friendly addition I would make is that you need to also take strategy into account. Some firms (think of them as the future eBay's or Amazon's) need to get very big very fast because their strategy requires winning in a market where later entrants get locked out. Others can scale more gradually. In the first type, hitting growing pains will doom you. Not necessarily in the second, in which you have more time to recover.
July 7, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterRita McGrath

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.