 Revisiting Stinchcombe's 'liability of newness': a systematic literature reviewRoberto Cafferata, Gianpaolo Abatecola and Sara Poggesi International Journal of Globalisation and Small Business, 2009, vol. 3, issue 4, 374-392 Abstract: In providing a seminal explanation of the 'struggle for survival' between newborn organisations and older ones, Arthur Stinchcombe (1965) introduced the 'liability of newness' hypothesis to account for those relevant problems that firms may face in the first years of their life cycle. Despite lively research commitment, an up-to-date systematisation of the theoretical and empirical findings on this topic is missing. This paper aims at contributing to fill this gap through a systematic literature review based on rigorous criteria. Our main results suggest that, although partially integrated, Stinchcombe's theoretical underpinnings are still widely supported within the scientific community to date. These research findings can also contribute to improve knowledge on what is currently known and what prospectively constitutes a challenge for future research in this area. Keywords: adolescence; liability of newness; firm life cycle; population ecology; literature review; Stinchcombe; newborn organisations; company development; new firms; firm survival; competition. (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ids:ijgsbu:v:3:y:2009:i:4:p:374-392 Access Statistics for this article More articles in International Journal of Globalisation and Small Business from Inderscience Enterprises Ltd |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.