In the eye of the beholder? Differentiating between SMEs and Mittelstand

Dados Bibliográficos

ID14869463
AutoresAndré Pahnke (0000-0002-5106-6080, Institut für Mittelstandsforschung, autor correspondente), Friederike Welter (0000-0003-4831-9523, University of Siegen), David B Audretsch (0000-0002-3815-7762, Indiana University Bloomington)
Ano2023
Volume60
Fascículo2
Páginas729-743
Data de publicação2023-02-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoSmall Business Economics (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0921-898X • E-ISSN: 1573-0913
EditoraSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1007/s11187-022-00612-x
OpenAlexW4223549774
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas4
Referências citadas45

A common fallacy is that small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are the translation for Mittelstand companies. Until today, no common, widely accepted, and consistently applied understanding of what constitutes the Mittelstand exists, and related international research is consequently less coherent as well as a strong evidence-base for policy makers lacking. Most empirical research has relied on data for SMEs, taking quantitative metrics on firm size as constituent features of Mittelstand companies. The paper challenges this simplified equation of Mittelstand and SMEs and provides a first comparison of different approaches to analyze Mittelstand companies. Focusing on the criteria owner-management, firm size, and a sense of belonging to the Mittelstand, we highlight systematic differences of these approaches. Consequently, we suggest a conceptualization of Mittelstand companies that paves the way for more comprehensive research by setting the distinctive company identity based on ownership and management at the core of what constitutes the Mittelstand. Plain English Summary Research on Mittelstand companies is faced with a dilemma. On the one hand, Germany’s Mittelstand companies have attracted increased attention in the entrepreneurship literature as well as from policy makers and media at an international level. On the other hand, there is no common, widely accepted and consistently applied understanding of what constitutes the Mittelstand. As a result, research on the Mittelstand is less coherent causing confusion in media, politics, and academia. The paper addresses this ambiguity of the term Mittelstand prevalent throughout the literature and compares different approaches to measuring, identifying, and classifying the Mittelstand. Highlighting their systematic differences, we finally suggest that research, policy makers, and practitioners should set the unity of ownership and management at the core of the Mittelstand. In this way, a more comprehensive and unified understanding of the Mittelstand and its heterogeneity should emerge at all levels

Business · Confusion · Entrepreneurship · Corporate Finance and Governance · Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences · Family Business Performance and Succession · Finance