Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) are going through a process of transcendental change as a result of globalization and the economic opening that our country has experienced. These companies represent a high percentage of its total companies, generate most of the current jobs, and are a core part of national economic growth, since many families depend economically on them.
Taking into consideration the importance of these manufacturing companies we will know what are the success factors in strategic direction that they have in the Guadalajara metropolitan area from the point of view of strategic planning, strategies and competitive factors, the resources and capabilities of each of them and finally the alliances and commercial agreements they have with other companies.
Key words: success factors, strategies, small and medium enterprises.
Introduction.
How to achieve and sustain competitive advantage is a question for the success and survival of companies. The study of the causes of the differences in profitability between companies is a controversial topic and widely dealt with in the academic literature, given that many works have sought to answer the question: What are the variables that explain the competitiveness of the company?
The objective of this research focused on the analysis of the influence of variables related to the general and specific environments; Although external variables influence the achievement of a competitive advantage, the incidence of internal variables is much higher. Determine which are the Success Factors in Strategic Management that Small and Medium Manufacturing Companies have in the Guadalajara metropolitan area, in order to achieve a competitive advantage. The results give the guideline of knowing the development of small and medium-sized companies, providing a solid analysis of the differences in the competitiveness of these companies that participated in the study.
A review of the bibliography shows that there are many works that analyze the importance of external variables compared to internal ones, but there are few that delve into the internal part to identify which variables the company must ensure or apply to be competitive..
The hypothesis is based on knowing whether the Strategic Directorate will positively influence the success of small and medium-sized manufacturing companies in the Guadalajara metropolitan area. A feature that is very fashionable today is the Strategic Management of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises. Various studies indicate that in developed countries this capacity for strategic management plays an important role in the success and survival of this type of company. Any company that is capable of developing adequate management and that has the appropriate strategies may have a greater probability of success.
Will small and medium-sized companies understand what competitiveness is and what internal factors of their companies favor it? Part of this research tries to answer these questions, in order to say that these types of companies have advanced in the area of strategic management and in the knowledge of their companies.
The research questions are as follows: What is the strategic direction of Small and Medium Enterprises? What are the characteristics of Successful Small and Medium Enterprises? What are the internal success factors of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises?
The document is structured in the following way, in a first section a bibliographic review of the success factors in small and medium-sized companies regarding the strategic direction is made. Then the results of the research are presented and finally the conclusions of the study.
Success factors in small and medium-sized companies.
The importance of Small and Medium Enterprises in the Manufacturing sector in the Mexican economy suggests that understanding the success of companies is crucial for the stability and health of the nation's economy. In Small and Medium Business Observatory (2003) (study evaluated and approved by the Intersecretarial Commission for Industrial Policy of the Ministry of Economy, Mexico), the authors offer a number of general causes for the success of small and medium-sized companies, such as Training in company management and issues, Financing for working capital and acquisition of fixed assets and modernization of the plant, Promotion and support of ISO certifications and other techniques to improve quality and productivity, Supply-demand liaison actions for suppliers, Customer service,Sales growth, Growth in employees, are typical appointments for the success of small and medium-sized companies.
Recent studies (Meeham, 2002; McComb, 2001) show that despite the variety of internal factors that lead small businesses to success, almost all of them are related to the figure of the entrepreneur. Within the various areas of knowledge that have to be addressed in the study of business success, almost all confirm that the founder is the cornerstone for success to actually occur.
By identifying the success factors in the different management application processes in the current company, you will be in a position to propose a basic model of such management in the new company. Attention to the role of successes as a strategic factor within the organization began in the mid-1970s (Rothwell, 1994).
Entrepreneurs who are just starting out must keep in mind that success depends largely on oneself and on the causes or circumstances that can be controlled or modified. It is easy to blame others, the state or the environment, when things go wrong for us. However, as has been seen, the success of new entrepreneurs is fundamentally within their own organizations, looking for these innovation factors that lead us to have a better competitive advantage, is the main theme of this empirical study of small and medium-sized companies in the Guadalajara metropolitan area in the manufacturing sector in all its branches.
Small and Medium Enterprises that succeed beyond their limitations often seek to increase their knowledge of new markets and do not hesitate to reconsider their hypotheses and question their sense of smell, despite the fact that this is very useful in the market in which is located.
The use of the concept of Success Factors as an information systems methodology was introduced by John Rockart as a mechanism for chief executives to define their information needs. Rockart sketched out what might result from an interview between an analyst and a CEO. The first result is a set of critical success factors for the executive. As a second result, the measures in terms of performance for the critical success factors found. Rockart specified that the method could be used to identify critical areas of interest and to provide initial descriptions of information measures that reflect these critical areas (Carballo, 1990).
According to (Fragoza, 1994) the critical success factors method basically allows the creation of a project outside the definition of the problem. This is done by decomposing a clearly defined goal into a list of sub-objectives called factors. The function of critical success factors is to guide and focus managers towards the main activities of their business and to think about their most critical information needs, in order to take advantage of an organization's valuable resources, such as financial ones., materials, humans and time.
Many discussions exist in the literature about success, predominantly using only the financial criteria. Attention is limited to other types of successes within Small and Medium Enterprises, such as the personal goals of the owners, the motivation to be in that business. Therefore, measures of success for Small and Medium Enterprises must reflect a combination of the personal characteristics of the owners and the environment where the company is located.
Small and Medium Business successes can be measured by different criteria; one may be financial and non-financial, although the literature pays more attention to financial measures. Traditional measures of business success are based on number of jobs, return on investment, profits, financial health. These measures of success implicitly include other measures such as growth, quality, innovation, and strategic direction.
What are the success factors.
(Rockart, 1982), defines critical success factors as: "the key areas in which favorable results are absolutely necessary for a particular manager to achieve his goals." Similar to this definition, but simpler, (Grant, 1996) define critical success factors as: "the elements that make a company successful".
On the other hand, Eberhagen and Naseroladl (1992) define critical success factors as "those few variables that affect an administrator to achieve his goals in his current or future areas of activity".
There are key areas within Small and Medium Enterprises to be able to deliver a successful result. The critical success factors methodology is based on identifying these crucial areas to be successful in a company. Rockart (1979) mentions that this method focuses on administrators' individual information needs and each of their current information needs, whether hard or soft.
Success Factors represent external and internal conditions that need to be addressed frequently and cautiously by senior executives. These factors set usage metrics for operational control and strategic planning. (Luck, 1996).
In Mexico, as in other countries, there are many organizations that do not have their goals, priorities, and resources oriented or directed, therefore, using critical success factors will be the basis for generating a new profile. Critical success factors will allow senior executives to outline their priorities and target their resources.
The key to the success of current organizations can be defined by focusing the critical resources of the activities that differentiate between their success or failure. This is taken into consideration for the use of critical resources, resulting in better performance and results of each process in the organization.
Strengths and weaknesses of critical success factors.
The critical success factors method is not entirely foolproof. By itself it is a good tool for administrators, however it requires their experience and ability to develop better performance in the identified critical areas. Below is an evaluation of the critical success factors made by Carballo (1990).
Strengths of critical success factors:
- They provide effective support to the planning process. It allows investigating information services that can affect the competitive position of a company.
- The method is received with great enthusiasm by executives. It is used for the structured analysis of the high levels of a company.
Weaknesses of critical success factors :
- The degree of difficulty of executives in determining the critical success factors of a company depends on their position within it. Executives who are unfamiliar with strategic and tactical planning may have trouble dealing with the nature of business. Critical Success Factors It is very difficult for some executives to try to figure out information needs using only critical success factors.
It is important to mention that the critical success factors do not remain constant over time, their determination depends on the time they are analyzed and also varies from one organization to another. This implies that they must be constantly monitored and measured, so that the performance of the person, organization or industry is consistent with changes in the business environment.
Small and medium businesses.
It will begin to explore the field of small and medium-sized companies since it is important to know that there are within these companies that make them the pillars of the economy of many countries, it is necessary to investigate the characteristics of these companies, the world trend, national and local, their competitive advantages and how they are taking effect in order to have a better position in the market, the importance of knowing their internal success factors. The above leads to know these frames of reference for this research.
The importance that small and medium-sized companies have in the economic development of Mexico, lies in the number of establishments of this type that exist in our country: approximately 95.0% of companies in Mexico are micro-industries, 4.8% of companies established, correspond to the classification Small company (3.9%) and Medium company (0.9%), only the remaining 0.2% correspond to large companies and occupy 64% of the personnel of the country's production plant (INEGI, 2004)
It is difficult to claim in a definition to collect all the elements that determine that a company is "small" or "medium", nor those that differentiate companies, sectors or countries at their different levels of development.
Companies can be classified considering their line of business, in service, commercial and industrial companies. In turn, these can be classified considering the number of employees who work and the volume of sales measured in annual minimum wages. The justification for subdividing companies by size lies in the fact that among them there are differences of various kinds in level of investment, employment, technology, organization, among others (Ibrahim and Goodwin, 1986).
According to the Official Gazette of the Federation (DOF) of April 25, 2003, the stratification criteria of companies in Mexico are established as follows (Table 1).
Table 1. Stratification of companies by size.
| SECTOR / SIZE | MANUFACTURER | COMMERCE | SERVICES | |
| MICRO COMPANY | 0 to 10 | 0 to 10 | 0 to 10 | |
| SMALL COMPANY | 11 to 50 | 11 to 50 | 11 to 50 | |
| MEDIUM COMPANY | 51 to 250 | 31 to 100 | 51 to 100 | |
| BIG COMPANY | More than 251 | More than 101 | More than 101 | |
Source: Official Gazette of the Federation (2003).
The importance of this type of companies is that they contribute in all the countries of the world, with the absolute majority of the productive establishments, employment and national income, constituting the backbone of the internal market, regional development and the massification of the well-being of the population (Zevallos, 2003). Given this, no one can deny the importance of Small and Medium Enterprises for the economic development of a country.
Small and Medium-sized Enterprises around the world form the basis for business development. According to a study carried out by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 2002, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises represent between 96 and 98% of the existing companies in the member countries of said organization and They are the main generators of employment, since they represent between 57 and 81% of jobs in these countries, thus generating 70% of GDP.
In the European Union they represent more than 99% of the 12 million companies that exist, they occupy more than 70% of the workers and generate almost 70% of the GDP, while in Mexico they occupy 99.7%, they represent 64% of jobs and they generate 42% of the GDP. Given the figures, no one can deny that Small and Medium-sized Enterprises are essential for employment, both because of the number of workers they currently have and for their ability to generate employment.
Small and medium-sized companies should be considered as more creative and innovative than large companies (O'Shea, 1998), they have more freedom of expression inherent in their size, which helps to facilitate and take charge of innovative behavior. Their markets are more limited, they have great flexibility in their production structure (Evans and Moutinho, 1999), they have the capacity to operate with small profit margins and they can make decisions faster, these companies have a limitation in financial capital, human resources, materials and information resources.
Typically, small and medium-sized enterprises are relatively small in the industry they belong to, their continuous evolution is uncertain, they generally cannot formulate planning, they may have a bad attitude towards the munificent details of daily procedures (Bennett, 1993), and they show a high personality in the administration of the company according to the style of the owner (Stokes and Fitchew, 1997).
In the opinion of (Gray, 1993) small and medium-sized enterprises have a limited impact on marketing networks. Many small businesses have little experience with the owner / manager in reference to government regulations and bureaucracy, venture capital, taxes and general business management. Employees in small companies are strongly motivated, as they are responsible for the tasks in the organization and work more than employees in large companies (Bennett, 1993).
Small and Medium-Sized Businesses are not identical, many of them are different depending on the industrial sector in which they operate, the growth goals and the style of administration of the owner, these actions are inherent characteristics that impact the way in which they operate. companies (Ahmadi and Helms, 1997).
Anzola (2002), mention that the small company can compete satisfactorily in the market where it operates, there are fully identified common factors that help them, such as: flexibility in administration, personal contact with the market that is it serves and the application of the talent and specialization of the owner.
Likewise, the application of the owner's talent and specialization, where the great knowledge that the owner has in a special area is beneficial for them, since it is he who makes the decisions. Such an advantage is important considering that successful companies spend a lot of time on the job and that the person who is primarily interested in it should do it. One of the most relevant characteristics of small and medium-sized companies is the role of the owner.
In the small company, the leader performs management and operational tasks, since he is the one who envisions what to do in the business, he is also the one who executes what he manages to imagine, gets the necessary financing, designs the products and processes, buys the technology and the most important inputs, manages all physical assets and personnel, produces, teaches others to do it and supervises the work, sells most of what is produced. It is only to the extent that he matures as a manager and finds reliable collaborators that he delegates these functions.
Small and Medium-sized Successful Businesses in the Guadalajara Metropolitan Area.
In Mexico, success does not enjoy such a positive image. Rather, it generates jealous attitudes and, long ago, it was considered undesirable. However, today, this image of success is changing. To enhance the chances of success, it is necessary to prepare, visualize and analyze as many situations, antecedents and alternatives as possible.
Creativity and the capacity for innovation are a fundamental factor in business success. Creativity and innovation do not only refer to products, it refers to all areas of the integral functioning of organizations.
In this section the results obtained in the field work will be known, the variables considered were derived from the revision of the theories about the success factors in small and medium-sized companies.
The population of companies to investigate corresponds to commercial companies of the manufacturing sector in all its industrial branches with a size between 10 and 250 workers. The distribution of companies in the population has been estimated from the database of the Jalisco Secretariat for Economic Promotion. The sampling frame for selection was the Jalisco State Information System, dependent on the same secretary mentioned above.
The valid responses obtained were 353, which supposes a response rate of 25.21%. A verification and control system was established for the questionnaires received, discarding those that did not have a sufficient level of quality (Table 2).
Table 2. Distribution of the sample by sector.
| INDUSTRIAL SECTORS | NUMBER OF COMPANIES | WEIGHT PER STRATUM | |
| Food, Beverage and Tobacco Production. | 73 | 20.68% | |
| Textile Production, Clothing and Leather Industry. | 63 | 17.85% | |
| Wood Manufacturing. | 24 | 6.80% | |
| Paper Production, Paper Products, Printing and Publishing. | twenty | 5.67% | |
| Production of Chemical Substances and Articles of Plastic or Rubber. | 41 | 11.61% | |
| Production of Goods Based on Non-Metallic Minerals. | 19 | 5.38% | |
| Basic Metallic Industries. | 41 | 11.61% | |
| Manufactures of Metal Products, Machinery and Equipment. | 42 | 11.90% | |
| Other Manufacturing Industries | 30 | 8.50% | |
| TOTAL | 353 | 100.00% |
Source: Own based on data from the Jalisco State Information System of the Ministry of Economic Promotion of the Government of Jalisco, 2004.
Management and Strategy.
The increase in global competitive pressures, the rapid proliferation of new technologies, the greater complexity of the markets and the need for greater productivity and quality have given rise, in response, to "strategic thinking" in companies.
For this reason, it is interesting to analyze whether the Small and Medium-Sized Companies in the Guadalajara metropolitan area have adopted this strategic perspective and, if applicable, what characteristics such an approach has. For this, four basic aspects were analyzed that can help us determine the strategic peculiarities of these companies: (1) the main competitive factors of the environment in which they carry out their activities, (2) strategic planning and the strategic typologies adopted, (3) the fundamental resources and capacities in which they support their competitiveness and (4) the alliances and cooperation agreements they make with other companies. These aspects are analyzed below.
Strategic Planning and Typologies.
The strategic planning process involves carrying out a series of formalized activities by companies aimed at identifying objectives and goals, and analyzing the external environment and internal resources in order to identify opportunities and threats in the environment and determine strengths and weaknesses of the organization (Navas y Guerras, 2002). This process will allow the company to formulate strategies appropriate to its objectives, taking into account the internal and external situation.
In this sense, Table 3 shows that 19.84% of small companies do carry out strategic planning, against 80.16% who do not carry out this type of strategy, we see a very significant difference between this type of companies, since in the medium-sized companies we have 94.06% if you carry out strategic planning in your companies. This strategic plan is a continuous process within companies, but in many cases it is not a success factor (Beetinger and Albro, 2001; Kaplan and Norton, 2001).
Table 3. Companies that Perform Strategic Planning.
| STRATEGIC PLANNING. | TOTAL
SMALL MEDIUM |
|
| YES | 50 *** 95 *** 19.84% 94.06% | |
| NO | 202 *** 6 *** 80.16% 5.94% | |
| TOTAL | 252 101 100% 100% | |
Significance of χ 2: *: p≤0.1; **: p≤0.05; ***: p≤0.01
Source: Own based on data from the survey applied in 2005.
Strategic planning is characterized by the flexibility to include and adjust new events and situations at any time, once the vision has been defined and accepted by the members of the organization, the challenge is to translate it into action.
The comparison of the companies that carry out strategic planning with the size and type of company is in Table 4, the small companies that do this type of activity 30.00% are family businesses. Regarding the small non-family business, 70.00% of these companies do this type of activity. With respect to the median family business, only 32.63% do it compared to 67.37% of non-family companies that do this management and strategy activity.
Table 4. Strategic Planning with the Size and Type of Company.
| STRATEGIC PLANNING. | SIZE OF SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISE | TYPE SMALL FAMILY COMPANY NON-FAMILY | TYPE MEDIUM FAMILY COMPANY NON-FAMILY | |
| YES | 50 *** 95 *** 19.84% 94.06% | 15 *** 35 *** 30.00% 70.00% | 31 *** 64 *** 32.63% 67.37% | |
| NO | 202 *** 6 *** 80.16% 5.94% | 130 *** 72 *** 63.36% 35.64% | 4 *** 2 *** 66.67% 33.33% | |
| TOTAL | 252 101 100% 100% | 145 107 100% 100% | 35 66 100% 100% | |
Significance of χ 2: *: p≤0.1; **: p≤0.05; ***: p≤0.01
Source: Own based on data from the survey applied in 2005.
With reference to the time horizon of strategic planning, graph 1 shows the number of small and medium-sized companies that carry out this planning according to their time, which is most convenient for them, we have that 62.00% of small companies plan It is one year, while in the horizon of more than 1 year we have 38.00%. The medium-sized company presents us that the 1-year horizon is 13.68% and for more than 1 year 86.32% of companies carry out this exercise.
Graph 1. Temporal Horizon of Strategic Planning.
Source: Own based on data from the survey applied in 2005.
Table 5. It shows us the differences between Small and Medium-sized Companies according to their size and age, there are significant differences for small companies with more than 1 year their time horizon between young companies 26.32% (5 companies) and mature companies with a 73.68% (14 companies), not so in small companies with a time horizon of one year where the difference is not significant. Thus, the largest and oldest SMEs carry out strategic planning in a long-term horizon in a greater proportion than small companies, 10 to 50 employees and young people.
Table 5. Time Horizon, Size and Age of the Company.
| TEMPORAL HORIZON. | SIZE OF SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISE | SMALL ANTIQUITY MATURE YOUNG COMPANY | ANTIQUITY MEDIUM MATURE YOUNG COMPANY | |
| 1 YEAR | 31 *** 13 *** 62.00% 13.68% | 14 ** 17 ** 45.16% 54.84% | 6 ** 7 ** 46.15% 53.85% | |
| MORE THAN 1 YEAR | 19 *** 82 *** 38.00% 86.32% | 5 ** 14 ** 26.32% 73.68% | 60 ** 22 ** 73.17% 26.83% | |
| TOTAL | 50 95 100% 100% | 19 31 100% 100% | 66 29 100% 100% | |
Significance of χ 2: *: p≤0.1; **: p≤0.05; ***: p≤0.01
Source: Own based on data from the survey applied in 2005.
Competitive strategies.
Porter's model of the five competitive forces (1980) constitutes a powerful analysis methodology that allows us to know what are the main characteristics of the competitive environment in which Small and Medium-sized Enterprises in the Guadalajara metropolitan area carry out their activities.
Specifically, this model analyzes the characteristics of the industry, measured by five factors: rivalry between existing competitors, the possibility of entry of new competitors, the threat of substitute products, the bargaining power of the buyers and the bargaining power from suppliers.
Thus, Porter's model allows researching on the structure of the industry, pointing out the opportunities and threats that Small and Medium-sized Enterprises in the Guadalajara Metropolitan Area have when competing within their specific environment.
As can be seen in figure 4, small companies consider that the most competitive factor in the industry is the one related to rivalry between existing competitors (4.91), followed by the ease of entry of new companies (4.77). The competitive factor least valued by companies refers to suppliers who have more power in negotiation than companies (3.25), followed by the ease of creating substitute products (4.24) and customers have more power in negotiation than companies (4.51).
The medium-sized company considered that the factor of greater competitiveness of the studied industry is the one related to the high competition among the companies in the sector to which they belong (4.94), followed by the relative ease of entering new companies (4.88) and, lastly, they expressed their opinion than the ease of creating substitute products (4.78). The competitive factor least valued by medium-sized companies is that which refers to the fact that suppliers have more power in negotiation than companies (3.39), followed by customers having more power in negotiation than companies (4.45). In their empirical studies (Cavusgil, 2002; Meeham, 2002), they refer that competitive forces in the market make companies strengthen their internal processes that help them to be better competitive.
Graph 4. Porter's Competitive Forces.
1 = Totally disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Regular, 4 = Agree, 5 = Totally agree.
Source: Own based on data from the survey applied in 2005.
The differences between companies regarding the valuation of these factors, we can see those originated by reason of the size of SMEs, as well as those explained as a consequence of their age, collected in Table 7.
Table 7. Competitive Forces, Size and age of the Companies.
| COMPETITIVE PORTER FORCES. | SIZE OF SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISE | SMALL ANTIQUITY MATURE YOUNG COMPANY | MEDIUM ANTIQUITY MATURE YOUNG COMPANY | |
| CUSTOMERS HAVE MORE POWER IN NEGOTIATIONS THAN BUSINESSES | 4.51 4.45 | 186 66 73.81% 26.19% | 28 73 27.72% 72.28% | |
| SUPPLIERS HAVE MORE POWER IN NEGOTIATION THAN BUSINESSES | 3.25 ** 3.39 ** | 165 ** 87 ** 65.48% 34.52% | 29 * 72 * 28.71% 71.29% | |
| IT IS EASY FOR NEW COMPANIES TO ENTER | 4.77 4.88 | 200 ** 52 ** 79.36% 20.64% | 17 84 16.83% 83.17% | |
| THERE IS A HIGH COMPETITION AMONG BUSINESSES IN THE SECTOR | 4.91 4.94 | 207 45 82.14% 17.86% | 12 ** 89 ** 11.88% 88.12% | |
| THERE ARE FACILITIES TO CREATE SUBSTITUTE PRODUCTS | 4.24 ** 4.78 ** | 152 100 60.32% 39.68% | 36 65 35.43% 64.37% | |
Item: 1 = Totally disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Regular, 4 = Agree, 5 = Totally agree.
ANOVA, significance of the F: * p≤0.1; **: p≤0.05; ***: p≤0.01
(When there is no homogeneity of variances, the significance has been calculated with the Kruskall-Wallis non-parametric test).
Source: Own based on data from the survey applied in 2005.
Main Resources and Capabilities.
The purpose of the analysis of resources and capabilities is to identify the potential of the company to establish competitive advantages by identifying and valuing the resources and skills it possesses or can access. This approach therefore adopts an internal rather than external orientation for the formulation of the company's strategy.
In order to carry out the internal strategic analysis, it is necessary to identify the different resources and capacities that are available for use and on which they rely to achieve competitive success. Following Grant (1996), a distinction can be made between tangible physical and financial resources and intangible, technological, organizational and human resources, the combination of the latter being what determines the capabilities of the company.
Small and Medium-sized Businesses in the Guadalajara metropolitan area were asked about the importance they gave to these five types of resources on a scale of 1 (minimum) to 5 (maximum), obtaining the results shown in figure 5.
As noted, Small companies give the highest relevance to the company's reputation and image (4.42), followed by financial resources (4.08), and physical resources (3.84) and the least valued to achieve competitive success are technological resources (3.26) and the knowledge, experience, adaptability and loyalty of its staff (3.17).
The medium-sized company gave the highest relevance to the reputation and image of the company (4.50), followed by financial resources (4.34), and looks in physical resources (4.20) for a basis for competitive success, the least valued were resources technological (3.78) and organizational resources (3.77), all these resources we must see that they are regular to the maximum seeking to have a good response to the success of their companies. As we can see in graph 7. Small and medium-sized companies give equal importance to their resources as a basis for achieving success in the market where they are interacting.
Graph 5. Importance of resources to support competitive success.
Item: 1 = Minimum, 2 = Low, 3 = Regular, 4 = High, 5 = Maximum.
Source: Own based on data from the survey applied in 2005.
Cooperation between Companies.
The alliance or cooperation between companies is, therefore, a procedure by which links and relations between companies are established, through legal formulas or with explicit or tacit agreements that, joining or sharing part of their capacities and / or resources, without merging, they establish a certain degree of interrelation in order to increase their competitive advantages.
The current conditions of instability and complexity in the environment require companies to adopt more flexible structures and obtain more resources to face the technological challenge. There are very few companies with sufficient resources to configure their value chain with absolute independence, so cooperation is configured as a very interesting option in order to achieve an acceptable competitive level (García, 1993).
In the survey, companies were asked if in the last two years they had established alliances or cooperation agreements with other companies for commercial activities, purchasing and supplies, logistics (transport, warehouses,…) and research, development and innovation (R + D + i). The graph allows us to verify that the percentages of the small and medium cooperating companies are relatively low.
Small Companies within Commercial Activities (34.13%) have agreements to market their products with other companies at the regional or national level. Purchases and Supplies (16.66%), we have that this number of companies that have agreements to be able to buy or source supplies in common are to regulate companies of the same line of business or industrial sector. Logistics (4.37%) there are very few companies that have agreements on this type of activity, usually these agreements are in small companies that have national or export markets, Research and Development(0.00%) within the small company this activity is not contemplated by any company that participated in the study, finally within the cooperation activities we have the companies that do not have any (44.84%) agreement, this point is the one with the highest percentage within small companies in the Guadalajara metropolitan area, reflects the little interest in being able to have an alliance or agreement to improve in some aspect where the company is failing or to expand its markets.
The Medium Company has very different data from small companies, here we see that there is a greater degree of integration of companies and it is easier for them to reach these alliances. Commercial Activities (55.56%) is the activity with the greatest weight because these companies have regional and national markets and need to have distributors in various parts of the country, this forces them to reach alliances or agreements in order to have a better presence in the markets where they are present. Logistics (13.86%) here we can say that these companies need this type of activity because a percentage of them their market is abroad and they need the support of agencies or other companies of this type in order to get their products to those markets.Purchases and Supply (23.76%) these alliances occur in this type of companies as a way to lower their costs of raw material and other raw materials that are required for their production processes, the companies surveyed from the same sector that have alliances to sourcing raw materials commented that these agreements have helped them to buy better quality raw materials abroad than a company alone could not do because of the volumes that have to be ordered. Investigation and development(1.98%) there are very few companies that have this cooperation agreement or alliance, what I could see is that most companies do not allocate a budget for this type of research, within the companies surveyed those in the food sector (sweets) carry out this activity. Finally we have the companies that do not have any agreement (4.95%) or cooperation alliance, the percentage of them is low and it does not have it because according to these companies they were not interested in being able to share their experiences with another company, graph 6.
Graph 6. Cooperation Alliances and Company Size.
Source: Own based on data from the survey applied in 2005.
Conclusions.
Among the main findings of this research, the following aspects stand out:
Successful small and medium-sized companies are characterized by effective leadership by their managers, highlighting their ability to lead the company in search of competitive success. The importance of the competitive strategies that are formulated and used will give small and medium-sized companies the necessary strength to be able to compete in any market that they see as having an opportunity to achieve success. Likewise, it is necessary to make the alliances necessary to continue strengthening the path to business success, and great care must be taken when carrying out its strategic planning, since it will reflect the direction that the company wants to follow.
Four basic aspects have been analyzed that can help us determine the success factors of Small and Medium Enterprises in the Guadalajara metropolitan area in the Strategic Direction of these companies.
Regarding competitive factors, companies consider that the most competitive factor in the industry is related to rivalry between existing competitors, followed by the entry of new companies. The competitive factor least valued by companies refers to the ease of creating substitute products, followed by customers having more bargaining power and the bargaining power of suppliers. Porter's five forces model applied to the small and medium-sized companies that participated in the study yields certain findings that we can consider normal for this type of company.
The research determines that small and medium-sized companies are in a very heterogeneous environment, where the various sectors studied present different results than those we usually know, in order to have more real success factors in this type of company, you must have a better information and that the entrepreneur is aware of the benefits of this information that can serve as a competitive advantage within the sector where your company is located.
By way of synthesis, it is possible to confirm that the results obtained are in many respects consistent with the literature reviewed, although other questions remain to be explored, such as the explanation of the influence of information technologies, the size and type of company, training of managers.
Likewise, it is necessary to point out some of the limitations found in carrying out this work. To those of the success measure used, we must add others that were not formulated but that need to be known as long-term success factors that explain the success or failure of small and medium-sized companies, to companies that did not want to participate Encourage them to cooperate in this type of work, since it is of utmost importance to know more deeply what they are like and how we can help them to have a greater survival.
However, it is considered that this work makes an important contribution to the knowledge of the explanatory factors of competitive success of small and medium-sized companies in the context of the Guadalajara metropolitan area.
Bibliography.
- Ahmadi, M. and MM Helms, (1997). "Small Firms, Big Opportunities: The Potential of Careers for Business Graduates in SMEs". Education and Training. 39 (2). Pp. 52-57 Anzola, R. Sérvulo (2002). Small Business Administration. Second edition. McGraw-Hill Publishing. Mexico.Bennett, R.: (1993), Small Business Survival, Natwest Business Handbooks, London: Pitman Publishing.Bettinger, Cass and Albro, Walt. "Strategic planning that computes". Bank Marketing. Vol. 43.October 2001, topic 8, pp. 26-31.Camisón, C. (2001): The competitiveness of the industrial company of the Valencian Community: analysis of the effect of the attractiveness of the environment, industrial districts and business strategies. Ed. Tirant Lo Blanch, Valencia.Carballo, M. Rómulo Fabricio (1990). "Strategies to determine the critical success factors of companies and their effects on planning information systems." Thesis. ITESM, Monterrey, NLCavusgil, S. Tamer (2002). "Extending the reach of e-business". Marketing Management. Vol. 11, March / April, topic 2, pp. 24-29 Copacino, William C (1999). "A new direction in strategic planning". Logistics Management and Distribution Report, Vol. 38, October.Eberhagen, Nielas; Naseroladl, Manssur (1992). Critical Success Factor. A survey ”. University of Váxjó.Evans, M. and L. Moutinho, (1999). "Contemporary Issues In Marketing, Houndmills, Basingstoke". Macmillan Business. Fragoza Ureta, Jesús Valente (1994). "Definition and Study of the critical factors of success for the computing function". Thesis. ITESM. Monterrey, NLGarcía de León Campero, Salvador. (1993). The Micro, Small and Medium Industry in Mexico and the challenges of competitiveness. Editorial Diana, SA de CV, México, DF P. 51 - 53. Grant, RM (1996): Strategic direction. Concepts, techniques and applications. Civitas, Madrid.Gray, C. (1993). "Stages of Growth and Entrepreneurial Carrer Motivtion". Chapter 9, pp. 149-159. in Francis Chittenden, Martyn Robertson and David Watkins (eds.). Small Firms Recession and Recovery. London: Paul Chapman Publishing Limited.Hoffman, Richard (2002). "Strategic planning: lessons learned from a big-business district". Technology & Learning. Vol. 22, May, issue 10, 26-38. Ibrahim, AB and JR Goodwin, (1986), "Perceived Causes of Success in Small Business", American Journal of Small Business 11 (2) (Fall), 41-50.INEGI (2004). "Economic Census 1999". Mexico.Kaplan, Robert S and Norton, David P (2001). "Building a strategy-focused organization". Ivey Business Journal. Vol. 65, May / June, item 5 12-19 Luck, S. (1996). "Success in Hong Kong: Factors self-reported by successful Small business owners". Journal of Small Business Management. October. Vol. 34. No. 3, pp. 68-75.McComb, James A (2001). "Moving from planning to progress". Credit Union Executive Journal. Vol. 41. July / August, pp. 24-27. Meeham, Michael (2002). "Users say lack of integration hurts B2B". Computerworld. Vol. 36, January, topic 1, pp. 8.Miles, RE and Snow, CC (1978): Organizational strategy, structure and process. West Publishing Company, New York.Navas, JE; Guerras, LA (2002): The strategic direction of the company. Theory and applications. Civitas, Madrid. Observatorio PyME México (2003): "First report of results 2002". Intersecretary Commission for Industrial Policy. Secretary of Economy. México.O'Shea, D., (1998). "The Role Of Small Firms In The Promotion Of An. Enterprise Economy". http://www.ul.ie/~govsoc/ulper/oshea.html Porter, ME (1980): Competitive strategy. Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. Free Press, New York. (There is a Spanish version: Competitive Strategy. CECSA. Mexico, 1982). Ribeiro, D. (2003). "Performance of innovative SMEs". European Journal of Business Management and Economics. Vol.12. no. 3, pp. 119-132. Rockart, John F. (1979). "Chief executives define and their own data needs." Harvard Business Review. March. USARockart, John F. (1982). "The changing role of the information systems executives: A critical success factors perspective". Sloan Managament Review Association. Rothwell R. (1994): “Industrial innovation: success, strategy, trains” in Dodgson M: Rothwell, R. editors: The Handbook of Industrial Innovation. Elgar Publishing Limited. Vermont USAStokes, D. and S. Fitchew, (1997). "Marketing in Small Firms: Towards a Conceptual Understanding", in Marketing Without Borders, Proceedings from the Academy of Marketing 1st Annual Conference, pp. 1509-1513.Zevallos V. Emilio. (2003). "Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises in Latin America". CEPAL Review. No. 79.
