Toward a theory of financial bricolage: the impact of small loans on new businesses

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of small loans on new firm performance using data from the second Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics, a large longitudinal data set of new firms in the USA. Contrary to prior research which suggests that small or microloans primarily benefit entrepreneurs who experience disadvantages in the marketplace, the findings revealed no significant differences in loan source or loan amount by gender, ethnicity, or employment status during the early years of the firm. The findings did reveal, however, that the motivations (push vs pull) of the entrepreneur were a determinant of loan source. From this, the authors begin to develop a theory of financial bricolage based on the premise that small loans secured at key points in time can make a significant difference on firm performance for all types of entrepreneurs, not just those who have traditionally be classified as “disadvantaged.”

The data for this study was taken from the Panel Study on Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED II). The authors focussed on business performance measures over the six years of that study to reassess existing findings on relationships between microfinance and underperformance, especially among women, ethnic and unemployed entrepreneurs, from a financial bricolage perspective. Specifically, the authors will assess the impact of small or microloans on business performance over time by tracking the role of financial sources, amount of money borrowed, background characteristics, and motivation to start a business (i.e. push or pull).

The results also revealed no significant difference by gender, ethnicity, or employment status in the source of amounts of small loans secured during the first two years of the businesses. Thus, consistent with the theory of financial bricolage, all types of entrepreneurs engaged in seeking out small loans during the early years of their businesses’ existence.

Although using the PSED II has many advantages, it is not protected from methodological pitfalls. One such potential disadvantage is the fact that this database allows the authors to understand the development of US-based nascent entrepreneurs, but overlooks other countries. Future research efforts should be focussed on surveying nascent entrepreneurs from other countries and cultures to expand the understanding of the relations between small loans and financial sources on business performance worldwide. This could be most useful for intensifying research in regions that generate more push and/or pull entrepreneurs. A second disadvantage inherent in the PSED is that interviews in follow-up surveys may have become impossible over time, resulting in missing data. In addition, the reasons for being unable to reach interviewees are not always clear. In the entrepreneurial realm, these reasons have a great impact on the understanding of the development of new businesses. Interviewees’ businesses may have gone bankrupt, merged with other firms and thus changed contact details, gone global and therefore left the country, etc. (Delmar and Shane, 2003); these could bias the results. A final potential weakness in the PSED is that the data are based on entrepreneurs’ self-reports which are known to be prone to many kinds of response bias.

By offering practical education aimed at enhancing the financial performance of entrepreneurs, the authors believe that they can meet the challenges posed by the research (e.g. Du Rietz and Henrekson, 2000; Parker, 2004; Pfeiffer and Reize, 2000; Reynolds et al., 2002) on performance gaps between entrepreneurs with different background characteristics and those embarking on entrepreneurship with different motivations (push vs pull). In line with the financial bricolage theory, the results may aid governmental bodies, educational and academic institutions oriented toward entrepreneurs, and small businesses, in constructing programs that will train entrepreneurs to be attentive to the diverse range of potentially available resources, including small loans and different financial sources.

The research challenges the necessity-opportunity simplistic categorization and builds upon prior work in the field of bricolage, or the practice of “making do with whatever is at hand,” to begin developing a theory of “financial bricolage.” It is the contention that all new businesses are resource-constrained due to challenges posed by asymmetric information. Thus, new businesses, in general, do not have access to a full range of funding alternatives. In light of this, small loans may be critical for the survival and success of not only necessity-based businesses but opportunity-based businesses as well. The results and findings bear this out.