Relevance of the Mann Whitney Wilcoxon test in the survival analysis of newly established companies in Tunisia (case of the sfax region)

Ayadi, Sahar; Ghorbel, Sonia Zouari Article Relevance of the Mann Whitney Wilcoxon test in the survival analysis of newly established companies in Tunisia (case of the sfax region) Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research Provided in Cooperation with: Springer Nature Suggested Citation: Ayadi, Sahar; Ghorbel, Sonia Zouari (2018) : Relevance of the Mann Whitney Wilcoxon test in the survival analysis of newly established companies in Tunisia (case of the sfax region), Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, ISSN 2251-7316, Springer, Heidelberg, Vol. 8, Iss. 12, pp. 1-20, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-018-0093-7 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/196946 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ RESEARCH Open Access Relevance of the Mann Whitney Wilcoxon test in the survival analysis of newly established companies in Tunisia (Case of the sfax region) Sahar Ayadi 1* and Sonia Zouari Ghorbel 2 * Correspondence: ayadisahar1@ gmail.com 1 University of Sfax Faculty of Economocs and Mangement of Sfax, UMR Quantitative economics URECA, Road of the Aereport, 3018 Sfax, Tunisia Full list of author information is available at the end of the article Abstract This research focuses on the factors of survival and growth of new enterprises in Tunisia. Based on previous research, we hypothesize that three factors influence the survival and growth of these firms: factors related to the entrepreneur, factors related to organizational characteristics and characteristics of the environment from start-up. We test these assumptions on a sample of 60 companies. The results show that human capital and the experience of the entrepreneur have a relatively small impact on the survival of newly created firms. Similarly, the intensity of preparation for creation by accompanying structures is not generally a key factor for survival. On the other hand, organizational characteristics (the amount of capital invested at start-up or customer structure) are strongly linked to the survival of the latter. Keywords: Survival, Newly created companies, Growth factors, Mann-Whitney Test Introduction This study analyzes the efficiency and impact of incubators on the survival rate of firms that employ them. The study also identifies whether other factors such as degree of business innovation, firm size, sector, and export activity affect firm survival. Backgrounds The interest in business creation is now more intense than at any point in the last 20 years. Business incubators seek to boost regional development by fostering business and employment creation (Furdas, M. and K. Kohn (2011a). In this study, 60 entrepreneurs were interviewed. The criteria for the section was that the must have worked An attempt was made to interview 60 entrepreneurs who had lived with their companies for more than three years and reached the first five years. Only companies that are in a start-up situation and who have not exceeded their fifth birthday and meet the criteria for novelty and small size will be affected by the study. The selection of cases was also carried out in terms of internal diversity as a heterogeneous group composed of different sectors (Bertaux et al., 2006, p.28, Pirès, 1997). The sample studied then included 60 entrepreneurs from Sfax different academic backgrounds who created micro- or small enterprises, located in urban areas of the Sfax region.We have intervewd the Tunisian banks , how they Journal o f Globa l E ntre p reneurshi p Researc h © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-018-0093-7 accord credits and does the carecteristics of campany sector as crafts and Tunisian pastry, the technology sector (software implementation for example), the catering sector and the services influence the acceptance of the credit report.We studied the legal files of new companies that have not exceeded the first 5 years of creation. Those who are located in the region of Sfax with Tunisian accounting experts, their financial statements (balance sheets and statements of results) Methods Empirical Analysis Research Methodology This exploratory and interpretative study is based on a qualitative approach based on a longitudinal case study. This research method is based on the work of Yin (1990) who defined the case study as: "an empirical investigation that studies a contemporary phenomenon in its real context, when the boundaries between the phenomenon and the context are not clearly obvious, and in which multiple sources of evidence are used. " Yin (1990) also points out that any phenomenon observed through a single case study can be general in scope. The research was based on an in-depth analysis of data collected at different times over a period of perception of new companies created since 2010. After a distant perception of the field and a theoretical deepening on the studied phenomenon. It was decided to observe the consequence of the creation of these new companies established in the Region of Sfax. An attempt was made to interview 57 entrepreneurs who lived with their businesses for more than three years and reached the mark of the first five years. Preliminary exploration The purpose of the preliminary exploration is to highlight aspects of the phenomenon studied from the study of the variety of positions. To do this, we have endeavored to respect the principle of external or intergroup diversification advocated by Bertaux et al., 2006, (p.28) and Pirès (1997). Each actor has his own representations, perceptions, beliefs and ideas. The representations of each other overlap, favoring the emergence of a representation that is close to "objective reality" (Bertaux et al., 2006: 28). In order to respect this principle, we interviewed in a very open manner three categories of actors: specialized researchers, privileged witnesses and actors who are the new promoters of the companies concerned by the study (Quivy and Van Campenhoudt, 2006: 59). The category of interlocutors is composed by privileged witnesses. "They are people who, by their position, their actions or their responsibilities, have a good knowledge of the problem" (Quivy and Van Campenhoudt, 2006, p.60) and whose professional activity puts them in direct contact with creators of companies in survival situation. For this type of interlocutor, we interviewed support-managers of support structures such as the Sfax business center, the bankers of the International Union of Banks UIB-credit managers, accountants-consul- tants. We explored the role of entrepreneurial relational degree and social capital in providing financial support to Tunisian funding agencies or support mechanisms. Deepening of the phenomenon The second stage of qualitative exploration aims to deepen our understanding of the phenomenon, but only within a small and homogeneous group. Only companies in a Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 2 of 20 start-up situation that have not exceeded their fifth birthday and who meet the "new business" criteria will be affected by the study. Case selection has also been reasoned in terms of internal or intra-group diversity (Bertaux et al., 2006, p.28, Pirès, 1997). The sample studied then includes 57 entrepreneurs from different university programs, having created micro- or small enterprises, located in urban areas of the Sfax region, operating in the sector of commerce, crafts or services. In addition to the principles of homogenization and internal diversification, the constitution of the field of study was also based on the criteria of theoretical relevance, intrinsic quality of cases, exemplarity and accessibility (Pirès, 1997). After a first selection, we selected entrepreneurs who had various experiences of failure including cases of disappearance, ie cases of entrepreneurs who had been forced to abandon their business plan, who have changed the design of their old businesses. Others who have had bad experience in their jobs for the benefit of a leader. For the collection of data, we first favored the use of non-directive interviews that were later consolidated by semi-directive interviews. The first interviewees are led by closed questions. The second interviews are led by open questions and follow a purely chronological line. To return to points that require more explanation, the second interviews are more directed.We have used a questionnaires with likert echelle 5 point skills. The emergence of a new generation of entrepreneurs to alleviate unemployment in Tunisia is an economic priority in the face of a public sector with a low capacity for job creation and a weakening private sector. One way to fight unemployment is to promote entrepreneurship. Moreover, the State has tried to promote entrepreneurship through the provision of support structures and support for the creation of companies (e.g., Agarwal et al. 2007). However, the average 4-years mortality rate of new Tunisian firms is 40% (e.g., Khelil et al. 2011). For this, Tunisia needs today a new generation of entrepreneurs, giving new impetus to the national economy and changing the rules of the game in the private sector. We should seek today to promote a new entrepreneur who invests in high value-added sectors, which will have a favorable political and economic environment in order to ensure the survival and success of the newly created company ( e.g., Mejri and Ramadan, 2016). Nevertheless, given that the entrepreneur’s journey is risky and full of uncertainty, the latter risks abandoning his journey halfway. Therefore, it is not only a question of increasing the number of entrepreneurs in the country; but rather to study the sustainability of these jobs, as well as the sectors in which they are created. This research questions for this study are: How does the entrepreneur achieve a successful business? Why do some companies succeed and others fail? In addition, what are the factors that favor the survival of the newly created company? These are questions that we are tempted to provide answers. Our aims are to analyze the determinants of the success and survival of the newly created company. From this research, we will explore the criteria for the survival of the new company (Section 1). Then, in the second section, the key factors of survival of the new company are reached and the hypotheses of our research are advanced ( Section 2). We will identify the research methodology and how we will be able to validate or invalidate the assumptions of the survival of the young company. We used the Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon test. This is a method of analyzing ordinal qualitative data (Section 3). Finally, in the fourth section, we discuss the results of our research (Section 4). Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 3 of 20 Review of the literature Survival analysis Organizational development theorists have studied the early years of a new company extensively. It seen as a preliminary step leading to growth and leading to success and success ( e.g., Verstraete and Saporta 2006). Indeed, the start-up period is mainly criticized for the fragility of the created entity, it would be its youth that would represent the major risk and which would generate the problems to be solved (e.g., Verstraete & Saporta 2006). Therefore, it is from the entry of companies in the start-up phase that sometimes precedes the creation process and its legal creation (e.g., Sammut 2001) that it is possible to identify those companies that were created. Some authors describe this phase as a stage of survival (e.g., Churchill and Lewis 1983)atthe“valley of death”(e.g., Sweeney 1982). Indeed, it is the period when the failure rate is highest (e.g., Lorrain and Dussault 1988; Cressy 2006). So the survival of the young firm is the minimum criterion, the first step, the necessary element in the access to the success of a company (e.g., Tamàssy 2006;Littunen et al. 1998). Entrepreneurship research focuses on survival as a period ranging from 1 to 3 years (e.g., Teurlai 2004), which ultimately corresponds to the presumed duration of the start-up phase (e.g., Sammut 1998). Our field of study is limited to companies that are at the end of the start-up phase and have not exceeded the first 5 years of their existence (e.g., Gartner et al. 1992) in the pre-organization phase (e.g., Katz and Gartner 1988), or in the downstream phase of growth and expansion. The duration of a project’s survival refers to the period between the date of its actual creation and/or its commencement and the date of its closure or cessation of its activity. We take as the original event the start date of the activity of the companies created and as the last date, that of the cessation of activity. Key factors in the survival of newly created companies University studies and OECD research identify a list of factors that influence the survival rate of firms. While macroeconomic conditions, industrial cycles and existing market discriminations have an impact on the survival of firms. In addition to the factors related to the characteristics of the manager and his newly created enterprise (e.g., Irastorza and Pena 2014; Schoof 2006;OECD2008; Kautonen 2013). Assumptions related to the manager The age of the entrepreneur: Older people are more likely to have work experience, so firms run by older people have higher survival rates (e.g., Furdas and Kohn 2011a,b). However, at the same level of experience, a young entrepreneur has a better chance of survival (e.g., Sapienza and Grimm 1997; van Praag 1996). Education: when the entrepreneur’s level of education is high, the better the company’s performance and the better the survival rate (e.g., Schiller and Crewson 1997). In addition, the diploma of the project bearer gives chances of survival and passes the course of the third year of activity. In addition, a qualified entrepreneur is more likely to have a perennial business than an inexperienced entrepreneur is. Experience: Relevant past experiences (self-employed or self-employed activities in the same sector or occupation) are likely to increase the chances of survival Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 4 of 20 (e.g., Brüderl and Preisendörfer 1998;Luk1996; Cooper et al. 1994). Data suggests that this factor has no impact (e.g., van Praag 2003). Similarly, the experience of an entrepreneur has a stronger impact on female creators. The perennial firm rate by experienced women is higher than those run by experienced men. This experience must be longer than 3 years; otherwise, experience does not influence sustainability (OECD 2012a,b). On the contrary, Langowitz and Minniti (2007) explain that women have less self-confidence than men in making decisions business development. This is why businesses by men survive compared to those by women. The survival rate is higher by creators formerly employed by the same sector or business owner than those who were unemployed or students (Court of Auditors 2012). The financial resources of the entrepreneur: the more a small independent firm has its own financial capital available to the firm (the self-financing of the entrepreneur), the more likely it is to succeed ( e.g., Brüderl and Preisendörfer 1998; Cooper et al. 1994). However, small firms are less likely than large firms to have access to sufficient capital are. As for the entrepreneur’s capital, many researchers emphasize the importance of initial capital to ensure the survival and success of the business. However, Wagner (1994) found that the higher the capital intensity, the greater the chance of its survival. Other researchers such as Berryman (1983); Keasey and Watson (1991); Cressy (1994) choose a financial approach and specify the importance of a solid financial basis for the survival of newly created societies. Assumptions related to the characteristics of the newly created company The first step of the creation of the enterprise, it can be called birth at its start. In survival and growth, it transforms and modifies its structure, thus organizing its maturity (e.g., B. De Montmorillon, 1997). First, early survival studies focused on two characteristics of the company, the age and the size. Evans (1987) was one of the first to demonstrate that age and size increase the likelihood of survival of a firm. However, more recent studies suggest that the rate of change in firm size would be more influential the survival of the company (e.g., Agarwal and Rao, 1996; Cefis and Marsili, 2005). The analysis carried out by INSEE on the three and 5-years survival of companies created in the form of Ex Nihilo of the 2006 generations show that a company created by partners is the more likely to be perennial than the individual business. In addition, we have the age of the company: Small and new businesses often have more limited resources and capacity than the large firms. This is why newly created small firms have higher death rates than the large firms (e.g., Mata and Portugal, 1994, Audretsch and Keilbach 2008,SharmaandKesner1996,Cooketal.2012). However, if the company seeks to develop, it must seek a competitive advantage to position itself on the market. The survival and development opportunities offered to each company also depend on its competitive position: relevance of the market segmentation, relative quality of supply, level of competitiveness. There is also the Innovation capacity: entrepreneurs whose activities are based on new products, services or technologies face a greater risk of rejection of their products by markets than those who market already accepted products, services or technologies. Therefore, innovation capacity is associated with a higher death rate (e.g., Furdas and Kohn 2011a,b). Baum et al. (2000) demonstrates that firms increase their chances of Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 5 of 20 life by making innovation research alliances. Indeed, the degree of centrality on the research network affects the performance of the firm. Startups would benefit from making alliances to have access to information and skills that allow for better performance. Furthermore, collaboration with public partners such as universities, high schools and schools is more likely to survive (George et al. 2002). The role of employees and product development Capacity: Business development theories assume that the business grows through the acquisition of new productive assets and/or the hiring of personnel under the direct disposal of the company. Therefore, it is to acquire “raw”production capacities to adapt them to the specific needs of the company ( it is an internal learning of new resources that tend to make these new capacities specific to the needs of the company business). Product development is an important aspect of the development of new enterprises. To this end, Shoonoven et al. (1990) argue that developing a portfolio of new products is necessary for new firms to put in a quick cash inflow, gain external visibility and legitimate rapid trade from where Increase in the probability of survival as concerning cosmetics, human health and pharmacy. H1 The characteristics of the newly created company have a positive influence on the survival of the new company. Assumptions centered on the company environment The choice of location: For Jacob (2001), opening up to a local market results in growth that develops according to a proximity strategy and which operates essentially in a market where uncertainty is low and where needs are not sophisticated which leads to a lower degree of innovation and less widespread use of business practices. On the other hand, the firm that opens up to an international market is more innovation-oriented, giving more importance to the development of new products as well as to the improvement of existing production methods ( e.g., Audretsch, 1998). Aimed at a well-devel- oped organizational structure in order to satisfy the requirements of importers. Similarly, De Toni and Nassimbeni (2001) point out that the environment in which the young firm is located can promote growth. Such as the case of a young company sheltered by a nursery. The latter provides support logistics, assistance and linkage with a network of technical and commercial partners (Starbuck, 1965). Therefore, it is considered a stimulating growth location. Similarly, companies in a dense and resource-rich environment (notably cognitive), which can generate significant savings and, above all, have a positive influence on the growth of young companies. Flexibility to competition: The inverse and taking into account this positive effect of the territory, the intensity of competition associated with a high local density of establishment of the sector of the young enterprise could tend to penalize its growth (L. Pouquet et al. 2004). The measure of survival is the subject of a wide-ranging debate and depends on different estimates of the evolution of variables such as profit, assets, fixed assets, value added, employment, sales or (St-Pierre et al. 2005). It can be measured by the increase in turnover, without necessarily Employment and vice versa. Similarly, there may be growth in turnover and deterioration in value added (e.g., Wiklund 1999). Thus, the phenomenon of survival is multifactorial as there is not a single causal factor but a conjunction of Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 6 of 20 favorable factors ( e.g., Boissin et al., 2008, Pouquet et al. 2004) note that the need for survival has two dimensions. The first is the need to ensure competitiveness, or simply the survival of the company. This “objective”need for growth is particularly marked when the company suffers from a dimension that is less than the optimal minimum size of its sector and is thus penalized in terms of costs vis-à-vis its competitors (e.g., Audretsch 1995). H2 The characteristics of the environment of the newly created company have a positive influence on the survival of the company. Indeed, the need to reach “critical size”can also arise from the importance of R & D or communication investments that the company must make to stay in the race. The second dimension of the need for growth is a more psychological one. It refers to the place of growth in the objectives of the manager and his company environment (e.g., Cuervo 2005). Social capital: It is increasingly accepted by the scientific community that entrepreneurial activity integrates the social relationships of entrepreneurial networks that allow them to access the resources they need more easily by being in a way or ‘Another better connected these days (e.g., Stam, 2013). The literature clearly indicates that social capital, or the resources that entrepreneurs can access through their personal network, enable the entrepreneur to identify opportunities (e.g., Bhagavatula et al. 2010), mobilize resources and Build the legitimacy of their enterprises (e.g., Elfring and Hulsink 2003; Zimmerman & Zeitz, 2002). It is also known that social networks influence economic performance (e.g., Court of auditors 2012). A network is a social structure composed of individuals (or organizations) called nodes that are connected by one or more types of interdependencies (e.g., professional, friendship, kinship). Social networks influence the flow and quality of information because actors prefer to trust people they know. Trust, defined by Granovetter (1985,2005) as the certainty “that others will do things well”develops within the networks. Individuals need confidence. Granovetter (1985) argues that social networks allow the development of social capital, access to information, the discovery of opportunities, etc. They are made up of weak links and strong ties. While weak links provide access to wider information, strong personal relationship-based relationships improve co-operation between structures or individuals and problem solving (e.g., Bøllingtoft and Ulhøi, 2005). The amount of capital invested at start-up: According to Aparicio et al. (2016) firms with high capital at start-up have a higher probability of surviving than those with low financial resources. For Starbuck (1965) survival is not a spontaneous or random phenomenon, but rather a result of a combination of factors linked in particular to the characteristics of the company, its strategic positioning, but also to the financial structure And its operating constraints. This is the consequence of a decision, such as creating employment for the decision maker and increasing production in response to a stronger demand or in order to stimulate demand (e.g., Verstraete et al. 2011). We find also, Carpenter and Petersen (2002), Trovato and Becchetti (2002) show that the lack of capital limits the probability of survival as well as the rate of growth. In this regard, Becchetti and Trovato (2002); Riding and Haynes, (1998) show that the availability of capital through debt and bank lending and by the contribution of equity were very important factors in promoting the survival and growth of the firm (e.g., Aparicio et al. 2016). Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 7 of 20 H3 The resource characteristics of the entrepreneur of the newly created enterprise has a positive influence on the survival of the company. Research methodology and sample Research model Choice of the research model: We identify the effect of factors related to the entrepreneur, the company and the environment that influence survival is studied (Table 1). Y The survival of the newly created firmðÞ ¼β0þβ1 Business characteristicsðÞþβ2 Environmental effectðÞ þβ3 Entrepreneurial resource characteristics þμtð Participants In this study, 60 entrepreneurs were interviewed. The criteria for the section was that the must have worked. An attempt was made to interview 60 entrepreneurs who had lived with their companies for more than 3 years and reached the first 5 years. Only companies that are in a start-up situation and who have not exceeded their fifth birthday and meet the criteria for novelty and small size will be affected by the study. The selection of cases was also carried out in terms of internal diversity as a heterogeneous group composed of different sectors (Bertaux 2006; Pirès 1997). The sample studied then included 60 entrepreneurs from different academic backgrounds who created micro- or small enterprises, located in urban areas of the Sfax region. Tunisian crafts and Tunisian pastry, the technology sector (software implementation for example), the catering sector and the services. We used a questionnaire with a 5 point-Likert scale (1 = disagree to 5 = agree). The variable of the company is measured by 7 items and the variable of the environment is measured by 6 items. There is also the variable of the business resources of the entrepreneur is measured by 6 items. Finally we controlled the company survival and his continuous by the five new year’s, it is measured by two items that are the age and size of the firm. Materials and procedure First, we used the “SPSS20”software to explain the results obtained using the data collected. First, a major component analysis will be performed. Then, we study the Table 1 Variables and items The newly created company factor The environmental factor The Business Resource Factor Company Age Choice of location Age of the entrepreneur Company size Intensity of competition experience Activity area Accompanying structures Self-financing Role of employees Bank support Family Support Innovation capacity Role of suppliers Network of friends Product quality /Price Role of clients Social Capital: Business and Information Network Franchise of brand Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 8 of 20 leads to greater chances of survival than choosing to locate on more personal criteria. This result confirms all the research that shows the importance of externalities for activities based on innovation and technology (location and agglomeration effects), as well as the role of the regional context as a source of specific knowledge and expertise. (Audretsch 1998; Lasch et al., 2005), a too rapid internationalization being linked to high risks. Conclusion The aim of this work was to explore the survival factors of newly created firms. To do this we have mobilized the survival theories of the newly created company while taking into account theories that analyze the success and failure of newly created companies. In this paper, we studied the concepts around the new company. We based on theories that deal with the life cycle of the company, by which we talked about the survival of the newly created company that is a spiral between success and failure (e.g., Khelil et al., 2010). We have used the factors related to the characteristics of the new firm and the characteristics of the entrepreneur in the theory of population ecology (of a deterministic nature), the theory of resources (of a voluntarist nature) and the theory of entrepreneurial motivation (of emotional nature). These theories offer a broad vision to relativize the dominant conception of success centered on the entrepreneurial context and the social capital of the entrepreneur. While taking into account the financial dimension of this theory, the factor of financial resources is used (Bruyat 1993, Bruno and Leidecker, 1988, Everett and Watson 1998, Smida and Khelil 2010). This phenomenon is multidimensional because it is appreciable from several obvious variables. It is multifactorial in the sense that entrepreneurial failure is not the exclusive consequence of a single causal factor, but the result of a conjunction of several explanatory variables which according to our theoretical framework, revolve around three dimensions: environmental context, own resources of the company and motivation of the entrepreneur (Khelil et al. 2012). Indeed, the SMOCS model of Smida has treated the life cycle of the company well. However, Smida has studied failure, success, and survival in most of his articles and at different times. As an indication, Smida (1992), (pp. 59–62) originally designed the SMOCS model to delimit and study the different combinations of futures. This research led us to conclude that this literature refer to the success by citing often combines the success factors of the company which are resulted after the survival of the company. This eliminates the explanation of the entrepreneur’s figure and focuses on what ends up. So, this research is part of the analysis of the facts of the entrepreneur, his actions to lead his business life. The survival of the company can be well explained by the links established by the entrepreneurs between them and distant markets and the analysis of the role of export agents. Moreover, intense competition marks horizontal relationships between new firms, which is all the stronger as barriers to entry are low. However, the latter can be achieved in areas such as the technical training services sector or in the case of large companies benefiting from capacity subcontracting. These include the benefits of market access and skilled labor, the use of advanced technologies and the desire to benefit other less developed counterparts, and intensive inter-firm cooperation. Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 15 of 20 Concerning the strategy of companies, especially small businesses are strongly conditioned by the motivation of the entrepreneur, as Julien and Marchesnay (1996)have shown that perceptions and decisions are influenced by entrepreneurs’economic preferences and social references. As demonstrated, for example, Bertrand in his thesis (1996). Despite its structural weaknesses, the new company has the highest growth rate dynamism that can be assessed in terms of job investment. Besides, cheap labor is of quality. From a methodological point of view, we used the Mann Whitney Wilcoxon test as a method of analysis because of our qualitative data and nonparametric tests should be applicate. Our data analysis method is the SPSS 20. Thus, our research can be described as both qualitative and exploratory. The data analysis method helped us by correlation matrix tool and multiple regression. That’s why we found relevant results regarding the acceptance (H1) proposing that the characteristics of the company significantly influence their survival and in particular increase the continuity and survival of newly created projects. Then, we concluded that the hypothesis (H2) is partially validated. There is also the hypothesis (H3) which postulates that the survival of newly created firms depends on the financial and material arrangement of the entrepreneur, this hypothesis is not validate because the incubators of the new companies do not want to finance there for a long time. Also, the banks don’t accept to finance a new company’s, they haven’t a trust and safeguards of solvability. Therefore, our results which are based on the multiple regression include that the characteristics of the new company as the characteristics of the entrepreneur and his self-financing influence her continuity for a long term such as the innovation and the role of the employees. Research perspectives The work carried out in this paper has important methodological, theoretical and technical limitations. First of all in terms of methodology, our bias towards the qualitative approach suffers from the recurring criticisms addressed to this method and even more so when it is integrated into techniques very little accepted in the community such as the Mann-Whitney test Wilcoxon. This is why we are looking for a more adequate method of data analysis. In the same vein, our choice of semantic analysis and comprehensive interpretation based on the interpretative paradigm suffers from similar reservations. On the other hand, our posture of the transversal disciplinary combining various social and human sciences and it is reprehensible from superficiality. This is a part of the risks incurred and assumed in the exploratory phase of research, the apprentice-researcher who wants to discover thescientifichomeinallthelatitudes. Moreover, the specific legal and financial status of new firms reduces comparative protocols for large enterprises. Finally, to a lesser extent, the quantitative and qualitative shortcomings of the available data as well as the sample may undermine the credibility of the approach as well as the results of the research. On the theoretical level, since the study of the determinants of the success of the company is linked to failure, a whole field of study remains to be explored in the field of space science. In addition, analyzing the firm’s praxeology in the temporal dynamics requires other methodological orientations, such as extending the sample to other entrepreneurs in various branches of activity, as well as involving other territorial players Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 16 of 20 and different stakeholders directly involved (e.g., Gérard and Dokou 2001). With regard to certain studies on the available resources of new enterprises, some appear, and at times confirm, sometimes nuance the results of our life stories. Our interpretations lead us to approach the theory of resources to the theory of organizational development. However, non-economic factors such as the concept of social capital. It is defined as “the non-financial part of the company’s assets”, the desire to succeed, for example. On the empirical level, an important work of deepening should be carried out within a multidisciplinary team, with the help of mixed software in order to analyze the quantitative and qualitative analysis data. Additional files Additional file 1: Supplementary material. (PDF 47 kb) Additional file 2: Questionnaire about the survival factors of newly created companies in Tunisia (Case of the Sfax Region). (DOCX 16 kb) Acknowledgements The authors are grateful of the contributions from the Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Rresearch. Authors also thank the helps of the University of Sfax for his assistance. We are sincerely appreciate the help and guidance of our colleagues, friends and my professors; some of which are Dr. Sonia Zouari Ghorbel the professor in the Higher Institute of Business administration of Sfax-Tunisia and The professor Younes Boujelbene in The University of economics and management of Sfax, Tunisia. We are really appreciate the encourage of the Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research Editorial Office and the support of Miss Rachel Bernales the JEO Assistant. We are really proud to work with the editors of this journal and the reviewer who have a high qualification in their comments. This paper was ameliorated by the comments of the reviewers. We are kindly thanking the University of Tahran for his support of this paper. Funding This study is partly funded by the University of Sfax. Availability of data and materials Data and supporting materials for this research are attached as Additional files 1and 2. More information shall be provided in the Additional file 1. Authors’contributions Our contribution in this paper is to encourage entrepreneur to build companies with success. This study has may create opportunities for future researchers in entrepreneurship. For instance, the study only addresses a particular type of business incubation center as the banks within the Region of Sfax Future research could examine, and even compare, different business incubation centers in different geographies. Therefore, after testing the propositions with the data collected by the new entrepreneurs. We see how the effort of the entrepreneur to survival his company. The aim in this research is to use the test of Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon in the qualitative analysis. It is a good method to help researchers to finding the relation between the causal conditions. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Publisher’sNote Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Author details 1 University of Sfax Faculty of Economocs and Mangement of Sfax, UMR Quantitative economics URECA, Road of the Aereport, 3018 Sfax, Tunisia. 2 Higher institute of business administration of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia. Received: 27 September 2017 Accepted: 23 February 2018 References Acs, & Audretsch, DB. (1987). Innovation, Market Structure, and Firm Size. Review of Economics and Statistics,59(4), 567–574. Agarwal, MK, & Rao, VR. (1996). An empirical comparison of consumer based measures of brand equity. Marketing letters,7(N°3), 237–247. Agarwal, R, Audretsch, D, Sarkar, MB. (2007). The process of creative construction: knowledge spillovers, entrepreneurship, and economic growth. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal,(3–4), 263–286 https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.36. Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 17 of 20 Aparicio, S, Urbano, D, Audretsch, D. (2016). Institutional factors, opportunity entrepreneurship and economic growth: Panel data evidence. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,102,45–61. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.techfore.2015.04.006. Audretsch, B. (1998). Agglomeration and the location of innovative activity. Oxford Review of EconomicPolicy,14(2), 18–29 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/14.2.18. Audretsch, DB, & Keilbach, M. (2008). Resolving the knowledge paradox: Knowledge-spillover entrepreneurship and economic growth. Research Policy, 37(10), 1697–1705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.08.008. Audretsch, DB. (1995). Innovation, growth and survival. International Journal of Industrial Organization,13(4), 441–457. Baum, J, Calabrese, T, Silverman, B. (2000). Don’t go it alone: alliance network composition and startups’performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal,21, 267–294. Becchetti, L, & Trovato, G. (2002). The determinants of growth for small et medium sized firms. The role of the availability of external finance. Small Business Economics,19(4), 291–306. Berryman, J. (1983). Small Business Failure and Survey of the Literature. European Small Business Journal,1(4), 47–59 Première publication le 1 août 1983. Bertaux R., Hirlet P., Prepin O., Streicher F. (2006), L’encadrement intermédiaire dans les champs sanitaires et social. Un métier en construction, Éditions Seli Arlan. Bhagavatula, S, Elfring, T, Van Tilburg, A, Van De Bunt, G. (2010). How social and human capital influence opportunity recognition and resource mobilization in India’s handloom industry. Journal of Business Venturing,25,245–260. Birch, DL (1979). The Job Generation Process, unpublished report prepared by the MIT Program on Neighborhood and Regional Change for the Economic Development Administration. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce. BOISSIN, J-P, CHOLLET, B, EMIN, S. (2008). Les croyances des étudiants envers la création d'entreprise - Un état des lieux. Revue Française de Gestion,180,25–43. Bøllingtoft, A, & Ulhøi, JP. (2005). The networked business incubator—leveraging entrepreneurial agency? Journal of Business Venturing,20(2), 265–290. Brüderl, J, & Preisendörfer, P. (1998). Network support and the success of newly founded business. Small Business Economics,10(3), 213225 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1007997102930. Bruno, AV, & Leidecker, JK. (1988). Causes of new venture failure: 1960s vs. 1980s. Business Horizons,31(n° 6), 51–56. Bruyat C. (1993), Création d’entreprise : contributions épistémologiques et modélisation, Thèse de doctorat en Sciences de Gestion, Université Pierre-Mendès-France de Grenoble. Carpenter, R. and Petersen, B. (2002). Les imperfections du marché des capitaux, les investissements dans les technologies de pointe et le nouveau financement par actions Revue économique , vol. 112, numéro 477. Cefis, E, & Marsili, O. (2005). A matter of life and death: innovation and firm survival. Industrial and Corporate Change,14(6), 1167. Churchill, N. C,q and Lewis, V. L. (1983), The five stages of small business growth, Harvard Business Review, May/June. Cook, R, Campbell, D, Kelly, C. (2012). Survival rates of new firms: An exploratory study. Small Business Institute Journal,8(2), 35. Cooper, AC, Gimeno-Cac son, FJ, Woo, CY. (1994). Initial human and financial capital as predictors of new venture performance. Journal of Business Venture,9(5), 371–395. Court of Auditors (2012). Devices to support business creation, evaluation report for the national assembly. Evaluation and public policy review committee, (vol. 4). Cressy R., (1994). The importance of human resources in the creation and survival of enterprises. Paper presented at EUROPMI conference 1–2 September 1994 Cressy, R. (2006). Why do most firms die young. Small Business Economics,26(2), 103–116. Cuervo, A. (2005). Individual and environmental determinants of entrepreneurship. The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal,1(3), 293–311. De Montmorillon B. (1997), La gestion de l'emploi, Encyclopédie de gestion, Economica. De Toni A, Guido Nassimbeni, (2001) «La propension à l'exportation des petites entreprises: une comparaison des leviers de gestion organisationnels et opérationnels dans les unités exportatrices et non exportatrices», Journal international du comportement entrepreneurial et de la recherche Vol. 7 Numéro: 4, pp.132-147. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005762. Elfring, T, & Hulsink, W. (2003). Networks in entrepreneurship: The case of high-technology firms. Small Business Economics,21, 409–422. Evans, D. (1987). Tests of Alternative Theories of Firm Growth. Journal of Political Economy,95, 657–674. Everett, J, & Watson, J. (1998). Small business failure and external risk factors. Small Business Economics,11(4), 371–390. Furdas, M. and Kohn, K. (2011a). Why is start-up survival lower among necessity entrepreneurs? A decomposition approach, 2011. http://www.iza.org/conference_files/EntreRes2011/kohn_k2086.pdf Furdas, M, & Kohn, K (2011b). Why is start-up survival lower among necessity entrepreneurs? A decomposition approach. Workshop on entrepreneurship research,(p.24)http://conference.iza.org/conference_files/EntreRes2011/kohn_k2086.pdf. Gartner, WB, BIRD, BJ, STARR, JA. (1992). Acting as if: Differentiating entrepreneurial from organizational behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,16(n° 3), 13–31. George,G,Zahra,S,Wood,D.(2002).Theeffectsofbusiness–university alliances on innovative output and financial performance: a study of publicly traded biotechnology companies. Journal of Business Venturing,17(6), 577–609. Gérard, A, & Dokou, K. (2001). Entrepreneurial coaching and construction of key success factors. Journal of Business Research,20–21. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology,91(3), 481–510. Granovetter, M. (2005). The impact of social structure on economic outcomes. Journal of Economic Perspectives,19(1), 33–50. Holtz-Eakin, D, Joulfaian, D, Rosen, HS. (1994a). Entrepreneurial decisions and liquidity constraints. RAND Journal of Economics,25(2), 334–347. Holtz-Eakin, D, Joulfaian, D, Rosen, HS. (1994b). Sticking it out: Entrepreneurial survival and liquidity constraints. Journal of Political Economy,102,53–75. Irastorza, N, & Pena, I. (2014). Immigrant entrepreneurship: Does the liability of foreignness matter? Business and Management Research,3,1. Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 18 of 20 Jacob, B. (2001). Getting tough? The impact of mandatory high school graduation exams on student outcomes. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,23(2), p99–p122. Julien, P-A, & Marchesnay, M (1996). L’entrepreneuriat. Paris: Économica. Katz, J, & Gartner, W. (1988). Properties of Emerging Organizations. Academy of Management Review,13(n° 3), 429–441. Kautonen, T, Van Gelderen, M, Tornikoski, ET. (2013). Predicting entrepreneurial behaviour: a test of the theory of planned behaviour. Applied Economics,45(6), 697–707. Keasey, K, & Watson, R. (1991). The state of the art of small firm failure prediction : Achievements and prognostic. International Small Business Journal,9(n° 4), 11–29. Khelil, N, & Smida, A (2012). In G Chasseigne, B Cadet, C Giraudeau (Eds.), Cartographie cognitive à l'aide de l'analyse structurelle : un essai d'identification des facteurs de risque d'échec des entrepreneurs, Risque, stress et décision, (pp. 79–96). Khelil, N., Smida, A., Zouaoui, M. (2012). Contribution à la compréhension de l‟échec des nouvelles entreprises : exploration qualitative des multiples dimensions du phénomène, Revue de l‟Entrepreneuriat, n° 1, vol. 11,39-72. Khelil, N, Smida, A, Zouari, M. (2011). Contribution à la compréhension de l’échec des nouvelles entreprises : exploration qualitative des multiples dimensions du phénomène. Revue de l'entrepreneuriat,11,17–78. Langowitz, N, & Minniti, M. (2007). The Entrepreneurial Propensity of Women. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,31(3), 341–364. Lasch, F, Le Roy, F, Said, Y. (2005). Les déterminants de la survie et de la croissance des start-up TIC. Revue française de gestion,2(n° 155), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.3166/rfg.155.37-56. Littunen, H, Storhammar, E, Nenonen, T. (1998). The survival of firms over the critical first 3 years and the local environment. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development,10(n° 3), 189–202. Lorrain, J, & Dussault, L. (1988). Entrepreneurs and opportunists: A comparison of their management behaviors. SME International Journal,1(2), 157–176 https://www.erudit.org/fr/revues/ipme/1994-v7-n1-ipme5006405/1008368ar/. Luk, STK. (1996). Success in Hong Kong: Small business owners. Journal of Small Business Management,34(3), 68. Mata, J, & Portugal, P. (1994). Life Duration of New Firms. Journal of Industrial Economics,42,227–246. Mejri, I, Maarouf, R. (2016) Capital social, connaissances et identification d’opportunités entrepreneuriales dans un processus d’internationalisation : cas de la Tunisie. Marché et organisations Vol 2 (n° 26),p189 OECD (2008), Innovation and growth with rationale for an innovation strategy OECD (2012a). OECD Economic Surveys: Korea 2012. Paris: OECD Publishing https://doi.org/10.1787/eco_surveys-kor-2012-en. OECD (2012b). OECD Science, Technology and Industry Outlook 2012. Paris: OECD Publishing https://doi.org/10.1787/sti_ outlook-2012-en. Phillips, BD, & Kirchhoff, BA. (1989). Formation, growth and survival; small firm dynamics in the U.S. economy. Small Business Economics,1(1), 65–74. Pirès, A.P. (1997). Échantillonnage et recherche qualitative : essai théorique et méthodologique. Dans J. Poupart, J.-P. Deslauriers, L.- H. Groulx, A. Laperrière, P. Mayer & A.P. Pirès, La recherche qualitative : Enjeux épistémologiques et méthodologiques (p.113- 172). Boucherville : G. Morin. Pouquet, Laurent Mazars, Marjorie, Moati, Philippe (2004). Croissance des jeunes entreprises et territoires. Approche Économétrique. Cahier de recherche Crédoc. Centre de Recherche pour l’Étude et l’Observation des Conditions de Vie. CREDOC. Riding, AL, & Haines, GJ. (1998). Defaulting on loan guarantees: Costs et benefits ofencouraging early-stage growth. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 504–518. Sammut S., (1998). « Comment aider les petites entreprises jeunes », Revue Française de Gestion, Novembre-Décembre. Sammut, S. (2001). Processus de démarrage en petite entreprise: système de gestion et scénarios. Revue de l'Entrepreneuriat. cairn. Info. https://www.cairn.info/revue-de-l-entrepreneuriat-2001-1-page-61.html Sapienza, HJ, & Grimm, CM. (1997). Founder characteristics, start-up processes, and strategy/structure variables as predictors of shortline railroad performance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,22(1), 5–24. Schiller, BR, & Crewson, PE. (1997). Economic Inquiry,35(3), p523–p531. Schoof, U. (2006). Stimulating Youth Entrepreneurship: Barriers and Incentives to Enterprise Start- Ups by Young People, ILO, Geneva, International Labour O% ce. Seger, CA, Desmond, JE, Gabrieli, JDE, G., H. (1997). Glover FMRI studies of verb generation priming and unusual verb generation. Society for Neuroscience Abstracts,23, 1402. Sharma, A, & Kesner, I. (1996). Diversifying Entry: Some Ex Ante Explanations for Post-Entry Survival and Growth. Academy of Management Journal,39, 635–677. Shepherd, DA, & Wiklund, J. (2009). Are we comparing apples with apples or apples with oranges? Appropriateness of knowledge accumulation across growth studies. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,33(1), 105–123. Shoonoven, CB, Eisenhardt, KM, Lyman, K. (1990). Speeding Products to Market: Waiting Time to First Product Introduction in New Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly,35(1), 177–207. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393555. Short, JC, Moss, TW, Lumpkin, GT. (2009). Research in social entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal,3(n°2), 161–194. Smida, A. (1992), Prospective des métamorphoses du système technique et management des ruptures technologiques, Thèse de doctorat d’Etat ès sciences de gestion, Université de Caen Basse-Normandie. Smida, A, & Khelil, N. (2010). Repenser l’échec entrepreneurial des petites entreprises émergentes : proposition d’une typologie basée sur une approche intégrative. Revue Internationale PME,23(n° 2), 65–106. Stam, E. (2013). Knowledge and Entrepreneurial Employees: A Country Level Analysis. Small Business Economics,41(4), 887–898. Starbuck (1965). Organizational Growth and Development. In JG March (Ed.), Handbook of Organizations, (pp. 451–533). Chicago: Rand McNally. St-Pierre, B, et al. (2005). Fonctions conservées et spécifiques de mammifères issu72. Acides nucléiques Res,33(2), p464–p477. Sweeney, GP (1982). Les nouveaux entrepreneurs : petites entreprises innovatrices. Paris: Les Éditions d’Organisation. Tamàssy, C. (2006). Determinants of Regional Entrepreneurship Dynamics in Contemporary Germany: A Conceptual and Empirical Analysis. Regional Studies,40(n° 4), 365–384. Teurlai J.CH. (2004). « Comment modéliser les déterminants de la survie et de la croissance des jeunes entreprises », Cahier de recherche, Centre de recherche pour l„étude et l„observation des conditions de vie Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 19 of 20 Trovato, G, & Becchetti, L. (2002). The Determinants of Growth for Small and Medium Sized Firms. Small Business Economics,19, 291–306. Van Praag, CM (1996). Déterminants de l'entreprenariat réussi. Amsterdam: Éditeurs de thèse. Van Praag, CM. (2003). Business survival and success of young small business owner. Small Business Economics,21(n°1), 1–17. Verstraete, T, & Jouison-Laffite, E (2011). A business model for entrepreneurship, (p. 68). Northampton: Edwar Elgar Publishing Inc. Thiery Verstraete, Bertrand Saporta (2006). Création d'entreprise et entrepreneuriat.Les Edition de l' Adreg.p50-76 http://www.editions-adreg.net/ Wang, S, & Zhou, H. (2004). Staged financing in venture capital: moral hazard and risks. Journal of Corporate Finance,10, 131–155. Wiklund, J. (1999). The sustainability of the entrepreneurial orientation –performance relationship. Entrepreneurship Theor. Pract,24(1), 37–48. Zimmerman, MA, & Zeitz, GJ. (2002). Beyond Survival: Achieving New Venture Growth By Building Legitimacy. Academy of Management Review,27(3), 414–432. Ayadi and Ghorbel Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research (2018) 8:12 Page 20 of 20