One of the most widely accepted views is that the United States is a country that embraces the entrepreneur and considers their failures as learning experiences. In contrast it is thought that the Europeans and in particular British have less drive to become self employed preferring job security, and that when a European businesses fails it is a reflection on the owner’s incompetence. According to Herbig et al (Herbig et al., 1994, pg 2) “Europeans are less likely to start new businesses at a rate of between one-third and one-sixth of their American counterparts.” But is this due to the cultural attitudes towards risk and failure? Or other factors that are unique to the United States?
There is a wide body of literature detailing the Japanese working practices, and much of it focuses on how the Japanese tend to place themselves within a group and work for the good of the group. Arguably, the highest moral value in Japanese business is ningen kankei (human relationships). Hence the entrepreneur/small business owner manager is not highly regarded as they have left the group in order to pursue their own goals, which is unusual in Japanese society. Although the Japanese does have examples of successful entrepreneurs, they are created ‘not because of the system but in spite of it’. Examples such as Honda who faced opposition from the government when trying to expand into the automotive industry (Ramo, 1988) show how difficult it can be for firms not only to start up a new business from scratch but also to venture in their present business. Another Japanese business practice that discourages individuals from starting a new business is the seniority based wage system that big companies in Japan use. Due to this, the gap between entrepreneur’s earnings and that of salaried workers steadily increases the older they get. Whilst at the same time, it gives experienced, skilled workers little incentive to make the transition to be entrepreneurs.
Cultural attitudes towards business are often mirrored by the government’s policies towards them. Similarly to the case where Japanese government tried to inhibit Honda’s diversification, other countries governments have attempted to promote entrepreneurship as a means to economic growth.
The United States attitude towards business taxation has reflected their growing endorsement of Start ups firms. In 1978 Silicon Valley and other high tech firm lobbied successfully to have capital gains tax cut from 49% to 28% which lead to investment trebling in two years. The major source of this additional investment was from venture capital companies who in turn put money into the high tech industries. This paved the way for the 1981 decision by congress to cut capital gains tax yet again to 20%. (Herbig et al., 1994).
The US government, public and private sectors have also come up with a rather innovative way of promoting new business called, incubating. The idea of incubating is that new businesses, to become successful need many elements. What the incubators aim to do is bring the necessary elements such as capital, entrepreneurs, experience and technology together in order to produce a successful business. Herbig has identified four different types of incubators: The University related type for example Georgia Advanced Technological Center, which offers businesses a range of help, The private type such as the Utah Innovation Center, which has a public-private partnership with the University of Utah, The community type such as the Fulton Carroll Center which was originally intended for urban renewal and operates privately but not for profit, and finally the Corporate/Franchise type such as the Rubicon group which has a panel of advisors for every areas of business. In this case the Rubicon group operate with their start up businesses as a joint venture into which the Rubicon group input the expertises. Such innovative as this helps ensure that the support is there for the firm thus encouraging more people into entrepreneurship. (Herbig et al., 1994).
Although on a personal level failure in business can be distressing, it can on the aggregate have a positive effect on the economy. Storey, (REF) identifies three ways in which businesses failure helps the economy. Firstly, business failure levels help indicate which sectors of the economy are riskiest and which are safer, so if banks and venture capitalists can invest in the safer options steady economic growth is more likely to occur than the riskier option which could facilitate the boom bust cycle. Secondly in the process of ‘failing’ small business owners are likely to have learned a lot about how to conduct business and what they could/should have done to help their business. If they are able to use this information either to inform others and help them make the correct decisions, then something positive will result. Finally the small business owner may be able to use that knowledge in order to form a more successful business.
http://www.atimes.com/japan-econ/DF21Dh01.html
The United States can be said to have a less pe
It is difficult to get empirical evidence on attitudes towards risk and fao
The relationship of structure to entrepreneurial and innovat Marketing Intelligence & Planning; Bradford; 1994; ; ; ;