This paper examined the relationship between perceived strategic uncertainty (PSU), environmental scanning and information sources used by owner/managers of a sample of 161 small firms in the high technology sector. The results indicate that the technology, customers/markets and competitors/industry sectors created the greatest level of PSU. As the PSU levels increased in the environment, the decision-makers in this sample increased the frequency of scanning in all sectors and increased the frequency of use of personal, internal and external sources. Impersonal sources were not used with greater frequency with increasing PSU levels. There were age effects in the relationship between PSU and scanning behavior.

The environmental conditions facing today’s businesses are increasingly fraught with complexity, turbulence, and uncertainty. In order to prosper under such conditions, organizations must find new ways to respond and adapt. Thus, environmental information has become a critical resource and effective environmental scanning practices represent a crucial managerial activity. The need to collect accurate information is particularly important for managers of high technology firms since rapid advances in technology, accelerated globalization, and greater competitive intensity have increased the general level of uncertainty facing these enterprises (Bourgeois, 1985; Zahra and Bogne, 2000).

This study of small high technology manufacturing firms is one attempt to test accepted views about perceived uncertainty and information scanning. Executives from 161 small high technology firms were surveyed to assess the relationships between the uncertainty they perceive in various environmental sectors and the environmental scanning practices they employ. This study has two primary objectives. First, it attempts to determine in which of seven environmental sectors executives of small firms in the high technology sector perceive the greatest amount of strategic uncertainty, and the corresponding scanning behaviors they most commonly used to address perceived strategic uncertainty (PSU) within these environmental sectors. Second, this study seeks to identify the differences and similarities in the PSU, environmental scanning behavior, and information sources used by decision makers in newer and older high technology manufacturing firms. Entrepreneurs have limited time and information processing capabilities. As a result, it is important to determine the various sources of strategic information and their utility for managers in new ventures in the high technology sector. We believe that the results of this study will provide the basis for accomplishing this.

The external environment refers to the relevant physical and social factors outside the typical boundaries of an organization that influence managerial decision-making. It can be meaningfully classified into at least seven categories or sectors: technology, competitors/industry, customers/markets, suppliers, political/legal, economic, and social/cultural (Dill, 1958; Daft, Sormunem, and Parks, 1988; Duncan, 1972). The initial four sectors are considered to be part of the task environment and tend to have a direct impact on the competitive situation of individual organizations. The remaining sectors, on the other hand, have a more indirect influence on individual organizations and are considered to be part of the general environment.

It is widely accepted that the external environment is a primary source of uncertainty for managers responsible for identifying opportunities and threats facing their respective organizations (Duncan, 1972). Duncan (1972) proposed that perceived uncertainty is comprised of a complexity dimension and a variability dimension. Complexity referred to the number of environmental elements and the level of interdependence among them, while variability referred to the rate of change in the environment. Duncan (1972) argued that the variability aspect was most important to organizational adaptation. Daft et al. (1988) contended that perceived sector importance translates perceived environmental uncertainty into strategic uncertainty. Thus, strategic uncertainty reflects the strategic value of environmental information for organizational performance.

The different environmental sectors exhibit different levels of strategic uncertainty, and the sectors within the task environment change more rapidly and should therefore be perceived as more important than the general environment sectors (Daft et al., 1988). While empirical research has largely been supportive, it has not been conclusive (Sawyerr, 1993; Elenkov, 1997). Daft et al. (1988), for example, discovered no statistically significant differences between the perceived strategic uncertainty (PSU) within the task environment and the PSU within the general environment. The authors, however, observed that the customer sector (task) had the highest strategic uncertainty score, followed by the economic (general), competitor (task), technology (task), political/legal (general) and socio-cultural (general) sectors. Studies focusing exclusively on the perceptions of small business managers have yielded similar results (Smeltzer, Fann, and Nikolaisen, 1988; Brush, 1992). Brush (1992), for example, observed that managers of new ventures perceived information about the “immediate” marketplace environment (e.g., customer opinions, customer behaviors, and competitor’s strategy) as more important than information about the “remote” marketplace environment (e.g., demographic trends, socio-cultural trends, and population trends).

Since the actions of individual firms, especially small firms, have very limited influence on general environmental forces, executives should perceive such forces as relatively less important than more immediate concerns. Conversely, forces related to the task environment may exert more direct influence on the decisions concerning a small firm’s profitability and general well-being. Thus, it is expected that executives of small high-technology firms will place greater importance on factors associated with the task environment relative to those factors within the general environment.

Hypothesis 1: Managers will perceive greater strategic uncertainty within the sectors in the task environment compared to the sectors in the general environment.

Environmental scanning refers to the activities associated with the acquisition of information about events, trends, and relationships that may potentially affect the supplies of resources (Pfeffer and Salanick, 1978) or protect the core organization from uncertainty (Thompson, 1967). Aguilar (1967) defines scanning as the “the way in which top management gains information about relevant events occurring outside the company in order to guide the company’s future course of action” (p. vii).

Empirical research suggests that higher levels of environmental uncertainty generally elicit more intensive scanning efforts (Auster and Choo, 1993; Daft et al., 1988; Elenkov, 1997; Sawyerr, 1993). However, uncertainty about an environmental sector alone may not prompt an executive to increase his/her scanning activities in that particular sector. Rather, only those sectors deemed to be strategically important would be carefully monitored. Daft et al. (1988), for example, argued that executives would scan in sectors of highest uncertainty in order to reduce that uncertainty. The results of their study indicated that the decision makers of high performing firms “tailor scanning more closely to perceived uncertainty. Scanning efforts are focused more directly on areas of strategic uncertainty and information need” (p. 134).

Since the task environment refers to forces that may have an immediate and direct impact on an organization, managers should focus relatively more of their scanning efforts on these forces compared to the forces in the general environment (Johnson and Kuehn, 1987; Smeltzer et al., 1988). Empirical research generally supports this assumption. Brush (1992), for instance, reported that more than half of the 66 managers that participated in her study “never” collected information about the remote marketplace (e.g., socio-cultural trends) while fewer than 15 percent “never” collected information about the immediate marketplace (e.g., customer opinions). Mohan-Neill’s (1995) study of 68 small business decision makers produced similar findings. Relative to general environmental issues, uncertainty about the task environment is likely to play a more influential role in management’s decision-making. Thus, management should devote relatively more time and effort to the collection of relevant information about these more immediate forces. Hence, we propose the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 2: The frequency of environmental scanning activities will be more positively associated with perceived strategic uncertainty in the sectors in the task environment relative to the sectors in the general environment.

Personal sources refer to direct human contact and tend to include friends, family members, and close business associates, among others. Impersonal sources, on the other hand, are typically written and include formal reports, newspapers, trade publications, the output of management information systems, and similar information sources. Collectively, the literature suggests that managers of small businesses tend to use personal sources of information more than impersonal sources (Dubini and Aldrich, 1991; Smeltzer et al., 1988; Brush, 1992; Mohan-Neill, 1995; Lang, Calantone, and Gudmundson, 1997). The prevalence of this information scanning mode among small business decision makers can be attributed to: (1) the general lack of resources for information scanning activities (Mohan-Neill, 1995); (2) the lack of sophisticated information management systems (Kagan, Lau, and Nusgart, 1990); (3) the concentration of scanning responsibilities into one individual instead of a management team (Hambrick, 1981); (4) and the quantity and quality of accessible environmental information (Pearce, Chapman, and David, 1982).

Personal sources of environmental information may be particularly important among executives of small high technology manufacturing firms. Such firms typically compete in rapidly changing environments so time specificity becomes extremely relevant (Kefalas and Schoderbek, 1973). Defined as the extent to which information loses value if not used very soon after it first becomes available, time specificity applies to the acquisition of information (because it changes more quickly) and the responsive use of information (because the firm needs to react more quickly to the information) (Stalk and Hout, 1990). Since time specificity of environmental information is particularly pertinent in dynamic environments such as those facing most high technology industries, it may represent the only sustainable source of advantage an organization possesses (Stalk and Hout, 1990). Consequently, executives should rely more heavily on personal environmental scanning activities to address uncertainty. Hence we hypothesize the following:

Hypothesis 3: Personal sources of information will be used more frequently for addressing perceived strategic uncertainty in all sectors of the environment relative to impersonal sources of information.

External sources of information include trade publications, direct contact with customers, suppliers, and executives from other companies as well as attendance at industry-related meetings. Internal sources of information about the external environment include memos, output from management information systems, and direct contacts with managers and employees of the organization.

The results of empirical research suggest that executives of large organizations value both information generated internally and information obtained from outside their respective organizations. However, research focusing on the environmental scanning activities of small firm decision makers is far less conclusive. Several scholars argue that managers of small firms rely more heavily on internal sources of information compared to external sources (Smeltzer et al., 1988; Arbuthnot, Slama, and Sisler, 1993). Pineda, Lerner, Miller and Phillips (1998) contend that managers of small firms may have a high internal locus of control. Thus, they are less willing to seek and accept advice from others. Alternatively, several authors have hypothesized that small business decision makers must rely more heavily on externally focused scanning activities because their respective firms lack sufficient information gathering resources (Churchill and Lewis, 1983; Mohan-Neill, 1995). Mohan-Neil (1995), for instance, found positive correlations between firm size and management’s use of environmental information obtained from outside the organization. Firms with more employees, for example, were more likely to obtain relevant environmental information from external databases.

Managers must fully understand the internal capabilities of their respective firms as well as the external characteristics of the environment before the necessary “quick and appropriate reaction” in an accelerated technological environment is possible (Bettis and Hitt, 1995; Walters and Priem, 1999). Thus, we believe that managers of smaller firms with relatively fewer resources and underdeveloped internal scanning processes will rely more heavily on external sources of information when faced with high levels of perceived strategic uncertainty. Such external scanning activities should be most common when addressing uncertainty about the more immediate task environment. However, external information can also be useful when dealing with issues related to the more remote general environment. Hence, we hypothesize the following:

Hypothesis 4: External sources of information will be used more frequently for addressing perceived strategic uncertainty in all sectors of the environment relative to internal sources.

Firm age is frequently treated as a contingency variable in small firm research (e.g., Smallbone and North, 1995; Wijewardena and Tibbets, 1999). Entrepreneurship research generally supports the importance of external environmental contact and scanning and suggests that lack of information is a primary problem for new ventures (Chrisman and Leslie, 1989; Brush, 1992). As such, it is anticipated that firm age may play a crucial role in the current study. New ventures face high levels of uncertainty because they possess limited resources and lack legitimacy in the marketplace (Churchill and Lewis, 1983). Moreover, younger firms are at a disadvantage when it comes to information because they have not amassed a significant amount of historical or internal data from which to draw. Unlike their larger more established counterparts, a majority of their information must come from external sources (Mohan-Neill, 1995; Johnson and Kuehn, 1987). However, their formal scanning activities are constrained by their resources (Matthews and Scott, 1995; Robinson and Pearce, 1984; Shrader, Mulford and Blackburn, 1989). Therefore, they must resort to using personal, social contacts to obtain the information necessary for firm advancement (Powell, Koput and Smith-Doerr, 1996; Smeltzer et al., 1988). Hence, we hypothesize the following:

Hypothesis 5: Personal scanning activities will be more effective for addressing perceived strategic uncertainly among young ventures than for mature firms.

Hypothesis 6: Externally focused scanning activities will be more effective for addressing perceived strategic uncertainty among young ventures than for mature firms.

Sample

Questionnaires were distributed to the owner, president or CEO of 357 manufacturing firms headquartered in a major metropolitan area of a large Southwestern state. These firms represent all firms competing in at least one of three manufacturing industries classified as “high technology” by the National Science Foundation (Littler and Sweeting, 1990): computing equipment, telecommunication equipment, and semi-conductors and electronic components. One hundred and sixty-one of the 357 surveys distributed were completed and returned, representing a response rate of roughly 46 percent. The average respondent was a college-educated, 50 year-old male. The average firm in the sample was 17 years old and reported sales of less than $5 million. Thirty-four percent were less than 10 years old, 39 percent had been in business between 10 and 20 years and the remaining 27 percent of the sampled firms were over 20 years old. In terms of employment size, the average firm had 31 employees. However, nearly two-thirds of the sampled firms employed fewer than 20 employees.

Measures

Environmental Sectors—seven environmental sectors were used in this study (Daft et al., 1988; Duncan, 1972; Sawyerr, 1993). The sectors were divided into the task and general environment. The task environment includes the technology, competitors/industry, customers/market and suppliers sectors. The general environment includes the political/legal, economic, and social/cultural sectors.

Perceived Strategic Uncertainty (PSU)—PSU was measured using the following variables “ the degree of variability in the environment, the degree of environmental complexity, and the degree of sector importance to the accomplishment of organizational goals (strategic importance) (Daft et al., 1988; Duncan 1972). Each variable is measured using a seven-point horizontal numerical rating scale anchored by extremely low and extremely high. Psu was calculated by multiplying strategic importance with the sum of variability and complexity (Daft et al., 1988).

Environmental Scanning Behaviors—this construct was measured using the frequency of scanning, that is, the frequency with which the executives scanned each environmental sector. This variable was measured using a seven-point ordinal scale anchored by extremely infrequent and extremely frequent.

Sources of Scanning Information—this construct was separated into internal and external sources and personal and impersonal sources. Respondents were requested to indicate how frequently they obtained information used in making decisions about the future direction of their respective firms using these four sources. The frequency of use of each of the sources was measured using a seven-point ordinal scale anchored by extremely frequent and extremely infrequent.

Statistical Procedures

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Scheffe’s multiple range tests were used to test the initial hypothesis since these procedures identified the statistically significant differences in PSU across the seven environmental sectors. The next five hypotheses were tested using multiple regression analysis in which the control variables, scanning frequency variables, and sources of scanning information were regressed on the PSU variables representing each of the seven environmental sectors.

Since the last two hypotheses predicted that the relationships between perceived strategic uncertainty and the scanning behaviors of decision makers from new ventures would differ from those of older firms, the sample was split into two subgroups. In one, the firms were less than 10 years old. In the other subgroup, firms were more than 20 years old. Although it is unclear when a firm ceases to be considered a “new venture,” ten years was chosen because it is consistent with other empirical research (Mohan-Neill, 1995; Ostgaard and Birley, 1996).

The first hypothesis (H1) stated that managers will perceive greater strategic uncertainty within the sectors in the task environment compared to the sectors in the general environment. An ANOVA of the means revealed significant differences in perceived strategic uncertainty across the seven environmental sectors (F = 19.1, p < .001). Moreover, the results of Scheffe’s multiple range tests indicated that a different level of PSU characterized each sector. The sectors in decreasing order of perceived strategic uncertainty were: technology, customers/markets, competitors/industry, economic, suppliers, political/legal, and socio-cultural (see Table 1). The first three sectors are in the task environment, while three of the last four sectors are in the general environment, thus lending support to H1.

The second hypothesis (H2) stated that the frequency of environmental scanning activities will be more positively associated with perceived strategic uncertainty in the sectors in the task environment relative to the sectors in the general environment. H2 was not supported. As presented in Table 2, all of the regression coefficients for the frequency of scanning variables were statistically significant (p > .001).

Hypothesis three (H3) stated that personal sources of information will be used more frequently for addressing perceived strategic uncertainty in all sectors of the environment relative to impersonal sources of information. H3 was partially supported by the analysis. The relationship between the frequency of use of personal sources of information and PSU were positive and statically significant for two sectors of the task environment, competitive (p > .001) and technology (p > .05) (see Table 2). The frequency of use of impersonal sources, however, was not related to PSU in any of the sectors.

The fourth hypothesis (H4) stated that external sources of information will be used more frequently for addressing perceived strategic uncertainty in all sectors of the environment relative to internal sources. H4 was not supported by the analysis. Although a positive and significant relationship exists between external scanning frequency and PSU within four sectors (technology, competitors/industry, customers and economic), the frequency of internal scanning activities and the PSU within four environmental sectors (customers, suppliers, economic and social/cultural) were also positive and significant (see Table 2).

The final two hypotheses addressed differences between younger and mature firms. Hypothesis 5 (H5) predicted that personal scanning activities will be more effective for addressing perceived strategic uncertainly among young ventures than for mature firms; while hypothesis 6 (H6) predicted that externally focused scanning activities will be more effective for addressing perceived strategic uncertainty among young ventures than for mature firms. As presented in Table 3, the regression coefficients reflecting the relationship between frequent use of personal sources of information and PSU within the technology, competitors/industry, and suppliers sectors were all positive and statistically significant (p > .05) in the analysis of the group of new firms. In addition, the coefficients depicting the relationships between the use of impersonal information sources and PSU within the technology and suppliers sectors were significant and negative. On the other hand, no statistically significant relationships were observed in the analysis of the older firms. Thus, H5 was partially supported.

Finally, the frequent use of external sources of information was associated with the PSU attributed to several environmental sectors for both young and mature firms. As predicted, the frequent use of external information was significant at p > .05 and positively related to PSU within the technology, competitors/industry and customers/markets environmental sectors among the sample of new ventures. However, the frequent use of such data sources was also positively associated with PSU within the competitors/industry, customers/markets, suppliers, and economic sectors among the sample of older firms. On the other hand, the coefficient reflecting the relationship between the frequent use of internal information and technology PSU was significant and negative among the new ventures. Among the older firms, positive relationships exist between internal information and the PSU attributed to the customers/markets, suppliers, economic, and social environmental sectors. Thus, H6 was not supported.

The results of this study present an interesting picture of the relationship between perceived strategic uncertainty and environmental scanning and the moderating role played by firm age. For the sample of firms in this study, the task environment sectors seemed to create high levels of perceived strategic uncertainty. This result is partly supported by prior studies in the area (Daft et al., 1988; Auster and Choo’s, 1993). The results of this study differ from those of the prior studies in terms of the rankings of each sector. For both the Daft et al. (1988) and Auster and Choo (1993) studies, the customers/markets sector created the greatest level of strategic uncertainty. However, for this sample of small firms, the technology sector created the greatest level of PSU, followed by the customers/markets sector. Since our sample is composed of small firms in the high technology sector. For these firms it is not surprising that the technology sector would create the highest level of PSU.

This study shows that the greater the level of PSU, the greater the scanning frequency for all the environmental sectors, both task and general. This result is supported by the results of prior research of larger firms (Auster and Choo, 1993; Boyd and Fulk, 1996; Daft et al., 1988). We had expected this result to differ for our sample of small high technology firms since prior research shows that decision makers in these firms tend to devote their time primarily to collecting information from the task environment sectors (Brush, 1992; Johnson and Kuehn, 1987; Mohan-Neill, 1995) mainly due to cognitive limitations and resource constraints. Larger firms seem to have greater resources and capabilities to collect remote information. However, the results for this sample of small firms indicate that as uncertainty increased for both task and general environment sectors, scanning frequency also increased. It may be that decision-makers in smaller firms generally devote their time to obtaining information from the task environment sectors due to perceived importance and resource constraints; however, if they perceive a high level of uncertainty in any sector of the environment, they increase scanning effort for that sector regardless of whether it is in the task or general environment.

We had expected that decision makers will rely more on personal sources as the level of PSU increased for all sectors since decision makers in small firms rely more on personal sources (Brush, 1992; Dubini and Aldrich, 1991; Lang et al., 1997; Mohan-Neill, 1995; Smeltzer et al., 1988). However, our results only offer partial support of our expectations. The decision makers in this sample seemed to rely on personal sources as the level of uncertainty increased only in the competitor and technology sectors, but not in the other task environment sectors. However, as expected, it appears as though they did not rely on impersonal sources to address uncertainty in any of the environmental sectors.

The decision makers in this sample seemed to rely as much on internal as on external sources. This is partially supported by prior research in larger organizations. Daft et al. (1988) found that the decision makers in their sample relied equally on both external and internal sources of information as strategic uncertainty increased. For our sample of firms, there was a greater reliance on external sources as PSU increased in the technology and competitors/industry sectors. This makes sense since sources of information about these sectors will tend to be external to the firm. Internal sources were relied upon as PSU increased in both the supplier and social/cultural sectors. We would have expected a greater reliance on external sources as PSU in the socio-cultural sector increased. However, this was not the case. Both external and internal sources were relied upon as the level of PSU increased in the customers/markets and economic sectors.

The results support the presence of age effects on the relationship between strategic uncertainty and scanning practices. As was expected, young firms relied more on personal sources as PSU increased in three of the task environment sectors, while mature firms did not seem to increase their use of personal sources as PSU increased in any of the sectors. The relationship between impersonal sources and PSU was negative and significant for the technology and supplier sectors among the young firms. This finding may be due to information accessibility (Culnan, 1983). It may be that decision makers in younger firms have developed a web of personal networks upon which they can rely, thus making personal sources more accessible relative to impersonal sources. Also due to time specificity, these decision makers may rely more on personal information sources than on impersonal when faced with increasing levels of uncertainty. It is faster, and easier, to ask someone for a piece of information than to spend the time necessary to research impersonal sources for the same piece of information.

Contrary to our expectations, both sets of firms, as opposed to only the young firms, relied on external sources of information as PSU increased. This is supported by prior research on larger firms that showed their reliance on both external and internal sources as PSU increased (Daft et al., 1988). As expected, mature firms relied more on internal sources than young firms as PSU increased. Actually, the only regression coefficient that was significant for the young firms in terms of internal sources was negative (technology sector). We had expected that they would rely more heavily on external sources, as opposed to internal sources, as the level of PSU increased; and this is what we found.

The results of this study have several implications. First, there appear to be size differences in uncertainty and environmental scanning behaviors of firms. While small and large firms have some similarities in terms of perceived uncertainty and their resulting environmental scanning behaviors, they do differ in important ways. The task environment seems to create the greatest perceived uncertainty for both small and large firms; and scanning frequency increased with higher levels of PSU for the task and general environments for both groups. However, small firms seem to rely much more heavily on personal sources of information than do large firms in coping with strategic uncertainty. Impersonal sources seem to hold little or no value for these small firms in the face of perceived uncertainty. This is in contrast to larger firms who rely on both personal and impersonal sources to address uncertainty in the environment. Again, this may be due to resource and cognitive limitations in smaller firms.

Second, the results of this study indicate that there are age differences in the information sources decision makers use when faced with uncertainty. While both sets of firms seemed to rely on personal sources to address uncertainty, especially in the task environment sectors, and neither seemed to rely on impersonal sources, the younger firms relied much more heavily on personal sources of information and seemed to decrease their use of impersonal sources as perceived uncertainty increased. Both younger and older firms increased their use of external and internal sources as PSU increased.

Smaller and younger firms, faced with greater resource constraints and cognitive limitations, need to develop a web of personal contacts to help them cope with uncertainty. From the results of this study, personal sources seem to have the greatest utility for these firms in addressing issues of strategic uncertainty, especially in the task environment sectors. In addition, they need to invest in developing both internal and external sources of information as these also seem to have utility in addressing strategic uncertainty in several sectors.

This research was a “coarse-grained,” cross-sectional study of one economic sector and thus will have limitations in its application to other, more stable industries. Although we believe the merits of single industry studies outweigh the drawbacks, future research should also continue examining environmental uncertainty and scanning behavior in small firms across a variety of industry settings. Longitudinal research designs, using finer-grained measurements, should be incorporated into future studies. The results of the current study suggest that the relationship between scanning and PSU changes as new ventures evolve into established enterprises. Lastly, prospective studies should include measures of firm performance to assess directly the relationships between perceived uncertainty and scanning and a new venture’s success.

CONTACT: Olukemi O. Sawyerr, Department of Management/HRM, College of Business Administration, California State University, Long Beach, 1250 Bellflower Boulevard, Long Beach, CA 90840-8501; (T) 562-985-7563; (F) 562-985-4557; sawyerr@csulb.edu

Note: Please contact the first author for a complete list of references.

Auster, E., & C. W. Choo. (1993) “Environmental Scanning by CEOs in Two Canadian

Industries.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science 44(4): 194–203.

Brush, C. (1992) “Marketplace Information Scanning Activities of New Manufacturing Ventures.” Journal of Small Business Management 30(4): 41–51.

Churchill, N., & V. Lewis. (1983) “The Five Stages of Business Growth.” Harvard Business Review 61(3): 24.

Daft, R., J. Sormunem, & D. Parks. (1988) “Chief Executive Scanning, Environmental Characteristics, and Company Performance: An Empirical Study.” Strategic Management Journal 9: 123–139.

Dubini, P., & H. Aldrich. (1991) “Personal and Extended Networks Are Central to the Entrepreneurial Process.” Journal of Business Venturing 6(5): 305–313.

Duncan, R. (1972) “Characteristics of Organizational Environments and Perceived Environmental Uncertainty.” Administrative Science Quarterly 17: 313–327.

Elenkov, D. (1997) “Strategic Uncertainty and Environmental Scanning: The Case for Institutional Influences on Scanning Behavior.” Strategic Management Journal 18(4): 287–302.

Johnson, J.L., & R. Kuehn. (1987) “The Small Business Owner/Manager’s Search for External Information.” Journal of Small Business Management July: 53–60.

Lang, J., R. Calantone, & D. Gudmundson. (1997) “Small Firm Information Seeking as a Response To Environmental Threats and Opportunities.” Journal of Small Business Management 35(1): 11–23.

Mohan-Neill, S. (1995) “The Influence of Firm’s Age and Size on Its Environmental Scanning Activities.” Journal of Small Business Management 33(4): 10–21.

Ostgaard, A., & S. Birley. (1996) “New Venture Growth and Personal Networks.” Journal of Business Research 36: 37–50

Pearce, J., B. Chapman, & F. David. (1982) “Environmental Scanning and Growing Firms.” Journal of Small Business Management 20(1): 27–34.

Pfeffer, J., & G. Salancik. (1978) The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York, NY: Harper and Row.

Pineda, R., L. Lerner, M. Miller, & S. Phillips. (1998) “An Investigation of Factors Affecting the Information-Search Activities of Small Business Managers.” Journal of Small Business Management 36(1): 11–22.

Powell, W., K. Koput & L. Smith-Doerr. (1996) “Interorganizational Collaboration and the Focus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology.” Administrative Science Quarterly 41(1): 116–145.

Robinson, R.B., Jr., & J.A. Pearce II. (1984) “Research Thrusts in Small Firm Strategic Planning.” Academy of Management Journal 9(1): 128–137.

Sawyerr, O. (1993) “Environmental Uncertainty and Environmental Scanning Activities of Nigerian Manufacturing Executives: A Comparative Analysis.” Strategic Management Journal 14(4): 287–299.

Shrader, C.B., C.L. Mulford, & V.L. Blackburn. (1989) “Strategic and Operational Planning, Uncertainty, and Performance in Small Firms.” Journal of Small Business Management October: 45–60.

Smallbone, D., & D. North. (1995) “Targeting Established SMEs: Does Their Age Matter?” International Small Business Journal 13(3): 47–64.

Smeltzer, L., G. Fann, & V. Nikolaisen. (1988) “Environmental Scanning Practices of Small Business.” Journal of Small Business Management 26(3): 55–62.

Stalk, G., & T. Hout. (1990) “How Time-Based Management Measures Performance.” Planning Review 18(6): 26–29.

Thompson, J. (1967) Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hill

Walters, B., & R. Priem. (1999) “Business Strategy and CEO Intelligence Acquisition.” Competitive Intelligence Review 10(2): 15–22.

Wijewardena, H., & G. Tibbits. (1999) “Factors Contributing to the Growth of Small Manufacturing Firms: Data from Australia.” Journal of Small Business Management 37(2): 88–95.

Zahra, S., & W. Bogne. (2000) “Technology Strategy and Software New Ventures” Performance: Exploring the Moderating Effect of the Competitive Environment.” Journal of Business Venturing 15: 135–173.