Factors Hindering Export Development in Africa: Empirical Evidence ...

Factors Hindering Export Development in Africa:Empirical Evidence from SMEs in NigeriaJohn O. OkparaCollege of BusinessBloomsburg University of Pennsylvaniajokpara@bloomu.eduNicholas J. KoumbiadisDepartment of Business Administration, Braircliffe Collegenkoumbiadis@bcl.edu

Factors Hindering Export Development in Africa:Empirical Evidence from SMEs in NigeriaJohn O. OkparaCollege of BusinessBloomsburg University of Pennsylvaniajokpara@bloomu.eduNicholas J. KoumbiadisDepartment of Business Administration, Braircliffe Collegenkoumbiadis@bcl.eduABSTRACTExpansion of a nation’s exports has a significant positive effect on the growth of a nation’seconomy. Exports increase productivity, provide employment, and improve trade balances. Inspite of the benefits resulting from exporting, for many small and medium sized (SMEs)manufacturers in Nigeria, the process of exporting is plagued with numerous problems. Thepurpose of this paper is to investigate the factors hindering export development of smallbusinesses in Nigeria. A survey method was used to collect data from small businesses located inselected cities in Nigeria. Several statistical analyses were conducted to identifying the factorshindering export development of SMEs. There are various obstacles facing SMEs who want toparticipate in export markets. These barriers include: lack of finance, lack of qualified personnel,fear of foreign competition, lack of productive capacity, poor infrastructure, corruption,bureaucracy, and general lack of knowledge on how to export. Theoretical and practicalimplications of the study are discussed.

INTRODUCTIONExporting represents one of the major forms of international involvement for firms. This isprimarily because it does not absorb the resources which other forms entry strategies such jointventures and overseas operations generally demand and therefore, tends to be associated withless risk [18]. Many developing nations have identified exporting as a leading priority for theirindigenous firms and several countries have developed export-oriented trade strategies andextensive assistance programs to encourage export expansion [16; 22].Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) contribute to a country’s export around the worldSmall firms are becoming increasingly international in their operations; they also appear to beentering the international market at an earlier age than had been the case in previous decades [2].Nevertheless exporters in sub-Saharan Africa are facing overwhelming challenges that limit theirability to realize growth opportunities. Most sub-Saharan Africa countries have recognized theimportance of exports as an engine for economic growth. A number of these countries havedeveloped policies and strategies for export expansion, but most do not have a policy for smallbusiness. Given the scarcity of resources for overall export promotion, and reluctance to allocatemore funds for export development may be due to a lack of ability to target those firms that havea high potential to succeed [7] or those that may be motivated to export. Therefore, there is aneed for more research to identify and target segments within industries and individual firms thatnot only have the ability to export but also the tendency to do so [9].SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDYResearch dealing with the export barriers faced by firms in developing countries has been quiterare [17]. In comparison to the literature addressing internationalization, entrepreneurship andsmall business management, there has been significantly less research done on the factorshindering SME exports in Africa. Yet these firms represent one of the fastest growing segmentsin the economies of various African countries. Further, the overwhelming majority of studiesexamining export barriers facing SMEs have been conducted in West. There is a lack of researchon SMEs and export barriers in Nigeria. Our extensive literature search shows that research onthis topic is disappointingly scarce because very little studies have been conducted on this topicin SSA in general, and particularly in Nigeria. In the light of the benefits of exporting and therole of SMEs in achieving economic growth and poverty alleviation, this study becomessignificant. Since very little research has been done on this topic in Nigeria, there is a knowledgegap in our understanding of this issue with regard to the Nigerian environment; this study thus, isan attempt to bridge the gap. For small business entrepreneurs in Nigeria, an awareness of thebarriers hindering export development that result in superior export performance might inspiremore small businesses to enter into the export market. Therefore this study makes a significantcontribution to both practitioners and researchers. Our study provides insights to both exportersand nonexporters, as well as to decision makers, this may enhance performance at the firm leveland may be reflected in the nation's macro-economic performance. This study aims to examinethe relationship between export barriers and export development of SMEs in Nigeria. Majorexport barriers perceived by SMEs in Nigeria are identified and, subsequently, the relationshipbetween export barriers and export performance are examined.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKThe conceptual framework for this study is based on prior studies on export development. Thereare four basic factors that hinder export development [20]. The four factors include exportknowledge, internal resource constraints, procedural barriers and exogenous barriers [20]. First,‘export knowledge’ barriers refer to lack of information and knowledge about aspects related toexport activity. Lack of export knowledge has been established as an export barrier and mayconstitute an obstacle to increased commitment to international activity within a company [1].Export knowledge covers areas such as planning and general tactical principles of exportingregardless of the target market in question.Second, ‘internal resource constraints’ has been described as the need for a firm to possess aseries of resources in order for it to be able to initiate export activity. This type of barrier isrelevant, as it has been highlighted as one of the main reasons why many firms, particularlysmall or medium-sized ones, prefer to cling on to a domestically orientated strategy (4). Thefollowing aspects have been identified as the most important internal resource barriers: lack offinancial resources, and lack of personnel to devote time to export, and lack of productioncapacity [3; 4; 21].Third, are the procedural barriers, which have been described as an obstacles pertaining to theactivity itself and which could have their origins either in the firm’s domestic market or in theforeign markets [24]. Procedural barriers can be subdivided into two types: (a) controllable,those which can be easily solved given the right experience (e.g. documentation); and (b) notcontrollable, requiring case-by-case decisions, independent of the routine which has beenacquired through experience [20]. The following aspects of export activity can be considered asprocedural barriers: red tape and documentation, non-tariff barriers, import tariffs, transportationand distribution difficulties in foreign markets. Finally, exogenous barriers are described asobstacles that are externally imposed on the firms which are outside the control of the exportingcompany [20]. Factors such as the powerful competition faced in foreign markets, the risk ofvariation in exchange rates, political instability in foreign and domestic markets [3; 11; 13; 14].LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESESKnowledge BarriersIn their seminal work, [24] identified four sources of export barriers that affect firms’ exportactivities. They include export knowledge, internal resource constraints, procedural barriers andexogenous variables. In the following paragraphs we will comment on each of these exportbarriers individually. First, export knowledge barriers refer to lack of information relating toexport activity. In his pioneer work, [1] asserted that lack of knowledge about foreign marketsconstitutes a barrier to increased commitment to international activity within a company. Inanother landmark study by [5] highlighted the dynamic nature of barriers to exporting. Theyfound that firms starting export activity face difficulties in identifying opportunities in exportmarkets. In a similar study conducted by [23], the following were identified as knowledgebarriers, lack of awareness of export assistance, lack of awareness of benefits of export markets,lack of knowledge of best potential markets, lack of qualified staff, and overall lack ofknowledge of how to enter the export market [23, p.409].

Resource BarriersSeveral studies have identified internal resources as an impediment that limits the ability of firmsto export [4; 23]. The following factors have been highlighted as internal resource barriers: lackof financial resources, regarding the difficulty of obtaining the necessary funds required toinitiate or finance export operations [3; 4; 14; 23]. For example, in his landmark study of exportbarriers using a sample of 569 firms in Cyprus, [17] found that one the barriers facing firms whowant to export is difficulties associated with obtaining the necessary fund to finance exportactivity. Other researchers have also identified additional barriers as internal constraints thathamper export activity. The need to use honoring letters of credit were found by [21]; lack ofpersonnel to devote time to export activities [21], Furthermore, a firm requires a number ofexternal support resources such as banks willing to support firms’ international activities (citedin [24] or local trading firms that enable indirect export operations of manufacture.Procedure BarriersA third factor that has been identified to limit export activities are factors pertaining toprocedure barriers. According to [23], any firm interested in exporting is faced with a number ofprocedural barriers. Procedural barriers relate to the activity itself, which could have their originseither in the firm’s domestic market or in the foreign markets (24). According to[20], proceduralbarriers can be subdivided into two types: (a) controllable, those which can be easily solvedgiven the right experience (for example, documentation); and (b) not controllable, requiring caseby-casedecisions, independent of the routine which has been acquired through experience (forexample, non-tariff barriers). A review of relevant export literature indicates that amongprocedural barriers in export include the following: red tape and documentation. For example,these researcher have identify red tape or beurecracy as an obstacle to export [13; 14]; importtariffs is also another factor that has been identified as stumbling block to exporters [3; 11], nontariffbarriers, such as the establishment of various quality control and safety standards [3; 21],which occasionally involve the need to adapt products to the requirements of the differentforeign markets [13; 14] transportation and distribution difficulties in foreign markets anddomestic markets have been found to limit the ability of exporters [13]; and the difficulty offinding a trustworthy distributor in the target country [12; 13; 21].Exogenous BarriersThe final factor identified in the literature that seems to affect a firm’s ability to export is refersto as exogenous barriers. According to [23], exogenous barriers have their origins in theuncertainty of international markets, largely due to the activities of other players in the market –such as competitors, foreign governments, supply and demand – meaning that this type ofvariables transcend the control of the exporting company [24]. Factors such as the powerfulcompetition faced in foreign markets have been cited in this context [3; 11; 13; 14] as havepolitical instability in foreign markets [12], the risk of variation in exchange rates [3; 11; 13; 14]and the risk of losing money [5]. For example, a landmark study by [5] highlighted the dynamicnature of barriers to exporting. They identified consistent variations in barrier perceptions byexport stage, they concluded that as firms advanced in their export business, the greater thepercentage of firms that perceived difficulties in understanding foreign business practices,conforming to foreign product standards/specifications, collecting money from foreign customersand obtaining adequate representation in foreign markets.

HYPOTHESESH1: Export knowledge barriers within a firm will affect its ability to enter the export market.H2. Internal resources constraints within a firm will affect its ability to enter the export market.H3. Procedural barriers within a firm will affect its ability to enter the export market.H4: Exogenous barriers within a firm will affect its ability to enter the export market.METHODOLOGYSampleA questionnaire survey was used to elicit responses from small and medium-sized enterprises(SMEs) in Nigeria. The data for this study was collected in the spring of 2007. The sample wascomposed of firms listed in the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN) export promotiongroup directory. From this directory we selected five industrial sectors which met ourpredetermined criteria: (1) meet the definition of a small and medium enterprise defined by(Storey, 1994) as employing between 10 and 500 employees,(2) manufacture or export thefollowing products, food and beverages, textile and clothing, plastics and chemical, and leatherand shoes, (3) locate in industrial and manufacturing cities of Aba, Kano, Lagos, and PortHarcourt, and (4) have a minimum annual turnover of six million naira about ($50, 000). Arandom selection of 140 firms from the list was successfully contacted through a letter and faxrequesting their participation in the research. The firms identified from the list were personallyvisited or contacted by telephone for permission to participate in the study. To avoid loss anddelay due to the weaknesses in the communication and postal system in Nigeria a drop-off andpick-up method was adopted. This method ensured distribution and collection procedures, whichwere systematic and controlled by the lead investigator. Eight trained research assistants werehired and charged with the responsibility of distribution and collection of the surveyquestionnaires. A total of 96 usable surveys were received, which provided a response rate of69%. Of the 96 firms, 42 or (44%) are exporting firms and 54 or (56%) are non-exporting firms.SURVEY INSTRUMENTExport barriersThe export barrier was measured by the questionnaires developed by [24] and [23]. In thequestionnaire the respondent was asked to indicate to what extent he/she considered that variousdifferent export barriers acted as obstacles to the initiation or expansion of his/her firm’s exportactivity. Five-point Likert scales were used for this purpose, with responses ranging from ‘not anobstacle’ to ‘major obstacle’. Export barriers was measured by the following criteria: (1) lack ofknowledge of best potential markets; (2) lack of finances for market research; (3) lack of staff forexport planning; (4) effect of strong foreign competition; (5) general lack of knowledge of howto export, (6) lack of transportation and shipping costs, (7) language and cultural barriers, (8)Corruption, ( (9) poor infrastructure, (10) differences in exchange rates, and (11) bureaucraticbottlenecks or red tapes. In addition, respondents were asked to rank order what obstacle theyconsider to be the most important export barriers. Table 1 shows that lack of market knowledgewas ranked as the most important barrier, with a (mean of 4.60) followed by lack of exportfinance with a mean of (4.55) and the least important barrier was poor infrastructure with a mean

of (3.76). It is important to point out that with a mean of (3.78); poor infrastructure is stillperceived as a major barrier to export market. All measures were also examined and verified forface validity by six industry executives experienced in exporting and international business, andsix university professors who were published authors and have extensive experience teachingand consulting in the areas of international management, marketing, and export.Table 1: Ranking of export barriers by respondents (n = 91)Variables Mean Median RankLack of export market knowledge 4.60 4 1Lack of export finance 4.55 4 2General lack of knowledge of how to export 4.51 4 3Lack of knowledge about export assistance available 4.49 4 4Lack of qualified personnel to plan for export market 4.47 4 5Difficulty in handling export documentation requirement 4.45 3 6Intense foreign competition 4.36 3 7Limited managerial time to deal with exports 4.20 3 8Transportation and insurance costs 3.94 3 9Language differences (verbal/nonverbal) 3.92 3 10Lack of government incentives 3.89 3 11Lack of knowledge on how exchange rates work 3.86 3 12Corruption 3.78 3 13Poor infrastructure 3.76 3 14Factor analysis, reliability and validity of dataBefore carrying out factor analyses, reliability analysis for the scale was run through Cronbachalpha. The reliability of these results was 0.80, which is at or above acceptable range. In ourstudy, scales have a high level of internal consistency and are reliable (0.84). The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was 0.76 which can be considered an acceptable value.Factor analysis was undertaken by means of the maximum likelihood method. To be included ina factor an item must have had at least a 0.50 factor loading. Four factors explaining 68, 48% ofthe variance emerged from analysis (see Table 2). The resulting factors are knowledge barriers,resource barriers, procedural barriers, and exogenous barriers. To test the reliability of thefactors, alpha coefficients were computed for each of them.

Table 2: Rotated Factor Matrix for Problems Facing Small Business OwnersFactor Analysis Factor 1KnowledgeBarriersLack of awareness of export assistance .78availableLack of awareness of benefits of exports .83Factor 2ResourceBarriersFactor 3ProcedureBarriersLack of knowledge of foreign markets .88Lack of knowledge on how to export .79Lack of personnel for export planning .76Lack of financed for export market research .75Lack of capital to finance export sales .78Lack of banks with adequate foreign.76expertiseTransportation and shipping costs .77Documentation requirements and red tape .81Language and cultural barriers .79Lack of manufacturing capacity .83Intense foreign competition .79Exchange rate risks .76Risk of losing money .84Corruption .78Poor infrastructure .76Eiglenvalue 5.45 5.34 5.18 5.12Factor 4ExogenousBarriersPercentage of variance exp. 36.43 33.50 31.61 30.38Scale reliability .80 .85 .78 .78RESULTSHypothesis 1: Export knowledge barriers within a firm will affect its decision to enter the exportmarket. To test this hypothesis a total of 42 non-exporters were identified from the survey andwere asked to rate on a five point Likert scale (five being very important and one being notimportant at all) how knowledge factors affect their decision to enter the export market. Resultsof the data in Tables 3 and 4 indicate that the most important factors are export marketknowledge, general lack of knowledge on how to export, lack of export assistance, lack ofqualified personnel to plan for export market, and difficulty in handling export documentationrequirement. This supports hypothesis two. It is interesting observe that corruption and poorinfrastructure were the least influential factors were corruption and poor infrastructure. Onewould expect that in a country ridden with corruption and decapitated infrastructure should be amajor hindrance to export. This result is also consistent with similar results in the exportliterature (Crick, et al, 1998; da Silva, and da Rocha, 2000; Fillis, 2000; 37; Suarez-Ortega 2003;

Suarez-Ortega and Alama-Vera, 2005). It is interesting to notice that corruption and poorinfrastructure were not as important to firms as lack of market knowledge lack of exportingassistance.Hypothesis 2: Regarding internal resource constraints within a firm and how it affects itsdecisions to enter the export market. Cluster analysis using Ward’s method was used todifferentiate between exporting firms and nonexportering firm’s entrepreneurial orientation withrespect to financial resources and export market entry decision. Two distinct clusters of firm’sentrepreneurial orientation were identified, where cluster 1 refers to high entrepreneurialorientation or exporters and cluster 2 identifies with low entrepreneurial orientation ornonexporters. Table 3 shows that exporting firms have more financial resources and were able toengage in export activities than nonexporting firms. A logical explanation of this may be thatexporting firms were more proactive in seeking financial help than nonexporters. They may alsohave collateral that made it less difficult for them to get loans. This supports hypothesis 2indicating that internal resource barriers pose an obstacle to export development and mayinfluence a firm’s decision to not to enter the export market. The findings are consistent withprevious studies that have identified these factors as a hindrance to firm’s ability to enter theexport market [23]Table 3: Mean scores for the financial resource barriers of exporting and nonexportingfirmsVariables N Mean SDInsufficient capital to start export businessCluster 1. ExportersCluster 2. NonexportersDifficulty in getting bank loansCluster 1. ExportersCluster 2. NonexportersDifficulty in getting financial support from the governmentCluster 1. ExportersCluster 2. NonexportersDifficulty in getting financial support from non-financialinstitutionsCluster 1. ExportersCluster 2. NonexportersDifficulty in getting credit/discounts from suppliers/vendorsCluster 1. ExportersCluster 2. NonexportersLack of knowledge on how to get external fundingCluster 1. ExportersCluster 2. NonexportersNotes: Cluster 1 = Exporting firms; Cluster 2 = Nonexporting firms4942494249424942494249424.352.403.424.443.412.334.252.124.312.404.432.46.60.64.53.42.70.68.66.63.73.75.62.54

Table 4 shows that there are significant differences between exporting firms and nonexportingfirms at p < 0.05 with respect to bureaucracy, foreign competition, exchange rates, corruption,and infrastructure (roads and power supply) exporting firms and their counterparts. As depictedin Tables 5 exporting firms have higher means than their counterparts. Hypotheses 3 and 4 arelargely supported. Overall, in hypotheses 4 and 5 the exporting firms have higher means scoresthan the non-exporting firms.DISCUSSIONThe purpose of this exploratory research is to investigate barriers hindering small businessesfrom entering the export market. From the results of the study, one may conclude that there arevarious obstacles facing SMEs who want to participate in export markets. These barriers include(lack of finance, lack of qualified personnel for export activities, unwillingness of banks supportexport activities, fear of foreign competition, lack of productive capacity, poor infrastructure,corruption, bureaucratic bottlenecks, and lack of knowledge on how to export). With respect tolack of knowledge, export knowledge can be described as dependent on the relevance and depthof information available to the firm.Concerning financial support for developing export markets, many of the firms’ surveyed fir thisstudy indicated that lack of timely and adequate working capital constitute a problem for them.This not only adds costs but can also endanger the entire production operation. With regard topersonnel issue, the success of the firm’s export activities depends on the attitudes andcharacteristics of its staff. Export knowledge barriers can be attributed to a large extent to thelack of trained and experienced personnel. The majority of the respondents indicated the lack ofqualified decision makers was a barrier to export participation. We found that firms who havequalified personnel to handle export activities were more engaged in export markets than thosewho did not have qualified staff. One may therefore surmise that well trained personnel areessential for export development.With reference to external barriers, a substantial number of exporting problems are said to berooted in the external environment. The nature of these problems tend to vary widely: distinctiveforeign consumer preferences, unfamiliar business protocols and practices, regulatory importcontrols by overseas fierce competition, exchange rate fluctuations and limited hard currency forinternational trade. In order to develop a proper export marketing strategy, solutions relating tothese obstacles must be found.Finally, exporting requires knowledge about export procedures. One of the most thingsmentioned by the respondents as a major obstacles to exporting concerns the time and paperworkrequired to comply with foreign and domestic market regulations. Governments do not solelyimpose these procedural requirements. Also independent organizations such as banks, shippingand insurance companies, have their own procedures. Reduction in time a paperworkrequirements may encourage nonexporters to engage in export markets.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONSThis exploratory study has attempted to investigate the perceptions of a number of factorsimpeding the development of export activities of manufacturing firms in Nigeria. This is an issueof paramount importance in international business and economic development of a developingeconomy like Nigeria since the way these barriers are perceived by exporting and non-exportingfirms often determines their future engagement and performance in international businessactivities. The study revealed that increasing competition in world markets, coupled with theinability to offer competitive prices abroad, were the two most serious barriers to export activity.The limited availability of foreign market information also constituted a major impediment,contributing to a higher level of uncertainty surrounding international business operations.Various implications are derived from the findings of the present study which concern policymakers, business executives and researchers. With regard to policy makers, certain policymeasures should be taken in order to reduce or alleviate the perceived inhibiting impact ofbarriers on manufacturing firms. Particular emphasis should be given, for example, to theimprovement of competitiveness of indigenous firms, the supply of information for thelocation/analysis of foreign markets and the provision of various tax and other financialincentives. These programs should be designed according to the specific organizationalrequirements of exporting and non-exporting firms. For instance, foreign market-relatedinformation should be directed more to firms with relatively few years in business, while theprovision of financial assistance should target smaller rather than larger firms.At the managerial level, efforts should be made to minimize the inhibiting effect of exportbarriers (particularly those of internal origin) on pre-export behavior, using various managementconsultancy and advisory services. These should aim at assisting managers in non-exportingorganizations to improve managerial skills, formulate sound export marketing strategies,understand the mechanics of exporting, and learn how to handle export documentation and soforth. Moreover, various professional business seminars undertaken by chambers of commerce,trade associations and other similar organizations should stress the benefits derived from exportsthrough the illustration, for example, of successful cases in exporting. Particular emphasis shouldbe placed on smaller and inexperienced firms which, owing to their inherent managerial,financial, personnel and other limitations, tend to overestimate export barriers.Finally, more research should focus on the inhibiting role of export barriers at the pre-exportstage. For instance, barrier perceptions could be investigated in accordance with non-exporters'degree of willingness to export. Moreover, it would be useful to examine the discriminatingeffect of other factors on export barriers, such as managerial and environmental determinants. Itwould also be advisable to incorporate in this analysis some of the developments of this study,such as the compiled list of barrier factors and the proposed classification matrix. Furthermore, itwould be useful to investigate the impact of barrier factors on pre-export behavior over a longperiod of time, by carrying out longitudinal studies.To understand export barriers facing SMEs and undertake effective export assistance a close cooperationbetween the government, its promotional agencies, the business community, and theprivate sector at large is significant. Thus, administrations, managers, and other stakeholders inNigeria need to learn the skills of their counterparts in developed as well as developing countries.

The result of this study is that sound export strategies (firms) and policies (governments) shouldconsider all the potential barriers identified from this research before an export venture can beundertaken. Export markets may provide many promising opportunities and prospects; however,the challenge is to engage in export activities while solving the major export barriers.REFERENCES1. Aharoni, Y. (1966). The Foreign Investment Decision Process. Boston, MA: HarvardGraduate School of Business Administration, Division of Research.2. Andersson, S., Gabrielsson, J., Wictor, I. (2004). International activities in small firms:Examining factors influencing the internationalization and export growth of smallfirms, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 21 No.1, pp.22-34.3. Bauerschmidt, A., Sullivan, D. and Gillespie, K. (1985) ‘Common Factors UnderlyingBarriers to Export: A Comparative Study in the US Paper Industry’, Journal ofInternational Business Studies 16(3): 111–23.4. Bilkey, W. (1978), "An attempted integration of the literature on the export behavior offirms", Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 9 pp.33-46.5. Bilkey, W. J. and Tesar, G. (1977) ‘The Export Behavior of Smaller-sized WisconsinManufacturing Firms’, Journal of International Business Studies 8(1): 93–8.6. Bitner, M., Nyquist, J., Booms, B. (1985), "The critical incident as a technique for analyzingthe service encounter", in Bloch, T., Uptah, G., Zeithaml, V. (Eds), ServiceMarketing for a Changing Environment, AMA, Chicago, IL, pp.48-51.7. Cavusgil, S.T. (1990), "On the internationalization process of firms", European Research,Vol. 8 No. 6, November, pp. 273-80.8. Central Intelligence Agency (2006), The World Factbook, available at:www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/vm.html.9. Jaffe, E.D. and Pasternak, H. (1994, "An attitudinal model to determine the export intentionof non-exporting small manufacturers", International Marketing Review, Vol. 11No. 3, pp. 17-32.10. Johanson, J. and Vahle, J. (1990), “The Mechanism of Internationalization," InternationalMarketing Review, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 11-24.11. Karafakioglu, M. (1986) ‘Export Activities of Turkish Manufacturers’, InternationalMarketing Review 3(4): 34–43.12. Kaynak, E., Ghauri, P. N. and Olofsson-Bredenlöw, T. (1987) ‘Export Behavior of SmallSwedish Firms’, Journal of Small Business Management 25(2): 26–32.

13. Kedia, B. L. and Chhokar, J. (1986) ‘Factors Inhibiting Export Performance of Firms: AnEmpirical Investigation’, Management International Review 26(4): 33–43.14. Keng, K. A. and Jiuan, T. S. (1989) ‘Differences between Small and Medium-sizedExporting and Non-exporting Firms: Nature or Nurture’, International MarketingReview 6(4): 27–40.15. Katsikeas, C., Morgan, R. (1994), "Differences in perceptions of exporting problems basedupon firm's size and export experience", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 28No.5, pp.17-35.16. Kotabe, M. and Czinkota, M.R. (1992, "State government promotion of manufacturingexports: a gap analysis", Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 23, Winter,pp. 637-58.17. Leonidou, L. (2004), "An analysis of the barriers hindering small business exportdevelopment", Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 42 No.3, pp.229- 302.18. Morgan, R. E. (1997). Export stimuli and export barriers: evidence from empirical researchstudies, European Business Review. Vol. (97), 2, pp. 68-90.19. Perry, J. (2002), “A tale of taters and techies”, U.S. News and World Report, December2,available www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech/articles/021202/archive_038303.htm.20. Ramaswami, S. N. and Yang, Y. (1990) ‘Perceived Barriers to Exporting and ExportAssistance Requirements’, in S. T. Cavusgil and M. R. Czinkota (eds) InternationalPerspectives on Trade Promotion and Assistance. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.21. Rabino, S. (1980) ‘An Examination of Barriers to Exporting Encountered by SmallManufacturing Companies’, Management International Review 20(1): 67–73.22. Seringhaus, F.H.R. (1993, "Export promotion in developing countries: status and prospects",Journal of Global Marketing, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 7-31.23. Suarez-Ortega, S. (2003) ‘Export Barriers: Insights from small and medium-sized firms’,International Small Business Journal, Vol. 21, pp. 403-419.24. Yang, Y. S. (1988) ‘An Export Behavior Model of Small Firms: Identifying Potential andLatent Exporters among Small and Medium Manufacturers’, PhD thesis, University.25. Yeoh, P. and Jeong, I. (1995), “Contingency relationships between entrepreneurship, exportchannel structure and environment A proposed conceptual model of exportperformance”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 29, No.8, pp.95-115.