See discussions, st ats, and author pr ofiles f or this public ation at : https:www .researchgate.ne tpublic ation311713682 [606121]

See discussions, st ats, and author pr ofiles f or this public ation at : https://www .researchgate.ne t/public ation/311713682
The Characteristics of the Small and Mediu m Sized Companies of Romania
Conf erence Paper · May 2011
CITATIONS
0READS
40
1 author:
Luminit a Cr sitina Pir au
Univ ersitatea Tehnic a Cluj-Napoc a
34 PUBLICA TIONS    8 CITATIONS    
SEE PROFILE
All c ontent f ollo wing this p age was uplo aded b y Luminit a Cr sitina Pir au on 18 Dec ember 2016.
The user has r equest ed enhanc ement of the do wnlo aded file.

1st International Conference on Quality and Innovation in Engineering and Management 17th – 19th of March, Cluj -Napoca, Romania
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SMALL AND MED IUM SIZED COMPANIES
OF ROMANIA

Pirău Luminița Cristina
PIRǍU Luminița Cristina is a doctoral Student: [anonimizat] , Department of the Management and Systems
Engineering , The Technical University of Cluj -Napoca, 28, Memorandumului S treet, Romania.
ABSTRACT : The issue of competitiveness is a widely sought one for eac h stakeholder in the economy system, starting from the
smallest organization form and ending with economic regions. This is why this paper is just one of the papers that will deal with this
issue. The present paper aims to identify the characteristics of t he small and medium sized companies in Romania and the way in
which they deal with competitiveness. We will present the factors which influence the competitiveness of a company (both in t he
general business environment and in the specific environment of it s industry), the data collected from such companies that would
allow the identification of the stage in which Romania is found nowadays and the role and importance of small and medium size d
companies over the economic environment.
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Macroecon omic Competitiveness Concept
At macroeconomic level, competitiveness can be defined in
various ways, among which, for instance, the ability to create
and maintain an environment where the production of added or
surplus value for its enterprises (organisati ons) and the increase
of the prosperity of its [1]. A definition of worldwide
competitiveness at the present moment was given by the
economist Robert J. Carbaugh [2]: “International
competitiveness represents the capacity of a country to design,
produce an d market goods and services either of higher quality
or at a lower price than the products and services provided by
another country, in the context of a fre e market and fair
competition”.
The Organisation for Economic Co -operation and
Development (OCDE) [3 ] defines competitiveness as follows:
“the capacity of companies, sectors, regions, states or
supranational bodies, placed in an international competition, to
provide in a sustained manner a high income from capitalising
production factors and a higher inc ome from capitalising
labour”. This definition highlights the significant impact of the
competitiveness of a nation upon the level of incomes and,
implicitly, upon the living standard of a country. This means,
then, that an important emphasis is put on the social finality the
increase of competitiveness can have.
In the modern theory , as mentioned by the Austrian economist
Peter Schifico, competition coexists with monopolistic
elements; consequently it has multiple forms, as it becomes
manifest not only in the form of prices, but equally, in the way
it produces, in the product quality, in the policy of sale and in
multiple competition levels. This view, typical for the time in
which we live, can also be regarded as the basis of the notion
of competitive adva ntage. In view of the competitive advantage
and of the measures to be taken by a country (economy) to
reach competitive advantage, two features of competitiveness
need to be valorised: the multi -factorial character and the
process feature, where the intern al and external sides meet,
where productivity in making use of the available production
factors of a reference economy and the efficiency of running
commercial relations among countries meet [4]. At least two main directions can be distinguished with resp ect
to competitiveness [5], namely one that regards
competitiveness as a mirror of performance in international
trade (import and export being taken into account) and the
second, that considers competitiveness from the viewpoint of
the relations that contr ibute to setting up an economic system
where one produces and sells what one wants, while striving to
reach a relative, static and dynamic efficiency .
Another definition belongs to Directorate General for
Economic and Financial Affairs (DGECFI N) of the Eur opean
Commission [6 ]. The experts in the European Commission
claim that: “Competitiveness is the capacity of a country to
achieve internal economic growth and external balance; on the
basis of the external performance of highly industrialised
countries wor ld trade. However, by putting an emphasis on the
role played by product differentiation in the competitive
strategy of the companies, the industrial economy has limited
this kind of approach and considered that it is not a proper
basis for a fully comprisi ng evaluation of competitiveness”.
Among other modern theories regarding competitiveness one
can mention Porter' theory of competitive advantage [7]. This
theory starts from the observation that some countries are more
successful that in exporting, in spi te of a lower economic and
natural potential. Porter claims that the origin of such situations
lies in the way countries and their companies design strategies
to increase productivity and competitiveness in time.
1.2. Microeconomic Competitiveness Concept
In pr esent -day competition context, maintaining the companies
on the market, having competitiveness and acquiring
competitive advantage, irrespective of the industrial field of
action, mainly depends upon their resources and competences
as well as upon the stra tegies adopted by their managers.
Strategic c ompetitiveness appears when a company is able of
define and implement a strategy that creates value [4]. Strategic
competitiveness refers to the competitive advantage developed
in each and every business [8]. The production of high quality
goods and services is in tight connection with the capacity of
an enterprise to be competitive in a market, in the conditions
set by the respective market. There are authors [9] who see the
capacity to obtain high prices for th e worldwide marketed
products as a more attractive objective and a stronger evidence
for it than selling at lo wer prices. Thus, OECD (1992) [3 ]
considers competitiveness as the ability of a company of

producing goods and services that enable that company t o
reach a higher position than its competition.
The main factor that defines the position of the company is the
strategy designed and implemented by the managers. In this
respect, competitive advantage is acquired by the company that
creates the added valu e that the rest of competitors cannot
reproduce [10]. According to the references, competitive
advantage could also be defined in relation with the fact that a
company can implement a strategy that competitors cannot
imitate or for whom the strategy in que stion is too costly to be
put to work [4]. Grant argues that a company has competitive
advantage appears when a company has a higher profit than its
competitors [11].
To clearly identify its advantages or disadvantages versus its
competition and to protect itself from external attacks, a
company must have a clear strategy about how to get
competitive advantage. The analysis of the competition means
to analyse the key factors affecting a certain market segment,
to identify competitors and classify them with respect to the
strength they possess [12 -15]. The rules of competitive
business permanently change. In order to be successful,
entrepreneurs have to follow various means; they have to
change them in time. A successful business requires
developing a unique competitive advantage, which provides
value to its customers and cannot be easily SME s imitated by
competitors. The company that has competitive advantage
becomes a market leader and its profits will be higher than the
average. In the long run, a company r eaches a sustained
competitive advantage if it has the capacity to develop those
essential competences that will enable it to meet the customers'
demands better than its competitors .
To maintain competitiveness, companies have to be concerned
with innovati on; in some of the industrial fields, this means
that companies can individually make innovations, while in
others (such as those making use of advanced technologies)
innovation is reached by cooperating with other companies.
The awareness of the real prod uction capacity is valuable
because it defines the size of costs and the potential to meet the
customers' demands. The proper strategic management of this
capacity creates the premise to reach competitiveness.
2. RESEARCH METHODS, OB JECTIVES
AND HYPOTHESES
In most countries, SMEs are the driving force of the economy,
covering up to 99% of it and generating the largest part of
products and services. The SMEs constitute an essential
indicator for the state and performance of a country and the
living standard of a population and they increase employability
[16]. This paper attempts at defining the role of SMEs in the
Romanian economy and the crisis -related consequences for
their economic competitiveness. For this purpose, aspects
concerning the economic, social an d legislative environment as
well as their impact upon SMEs will be investigated.
The empirical research will concern the collection of secondary
data that will be analysed and interpreted. Data collection will
make use of the information in national and i nternational
databases, and in the Eurostat, and Rossta t statistical services
and the documents in this sector. Both a qualitative and
quantitative analysis will be performed in the two stages of
data processing.
The work hypotheses at the basis of our res earch are:
 Romanian economy is characterised by openness and
concern to increase competitiveness.
 Romania has a sustained policy of increasing SMEs
competitiveness.  The main problems related to increasing SMEs
competitiveness are given by bureaucracy, high taxation ,
political instability.
 In Romania, the number of SMEs going bankrupt because
of the economic crisis is high.
These were the working hypotheses from which we started our
research. Objectives were also defined. We will begin by
describing the sta te and competitiveness of the Romanian
SMEs.
3. FEATURES OF THE SMAL L AND
MEDIUM ENTERPRISES F ROM
ROMANIA
Romanian economy is characterised by openness and concern
to increase competitiveness. In Romania, the volume of the
imports is exceeded by the exports v olume. An important
figure shows that about 35% of the overall volume of exports
was made by SME s, in 2008 [16 ]. SMEs form the key sector
for economic growth and sustainable development as in other
countries, such as the developed countries, where SMEs
contribute in a proportion of at least 50% to the GDP [16].
Most of the imports of consumer goods in Romania belong to
SMEs in 2008. They provide an important number of
workplaces, increasing employability and absorbing part of the
labour that became availabl e after the restructuring of the
economy. Through their specific mobility and flexibility,
SMEs can also have an important impact upon the process
through which production adapts to the market demands.
The main law defining the measures to set up and deve lop
Romanian SMEs is Law no.346 from July 14th 2004 [16].
According to this law, the enterprise means any form of
organising an economic activity, is autonomous from the point
of view of capital and is authorised to trade to make profit,
while observing th e requirements of competition. In conformity
with Law 346/2004, small and medium enterprises are the
companies that fulfil the following conditions: the number of
employees is under 250, their yearly turnover is up to eight
million Euros (equivalent in Lei – the Romanian currency) or
have a balance of up to five million Euros (equivalent in lei),
and are independent, that is maximum 25% of their capital is
held by other companies, which do not belong to the SME
category.
SMEs are placed on the first position in the list of number of
companies registered: 98 .44% of the companies registered in
Romania at the end of the year 2007 were SMEs [16]. An
important indicator is the number of employees in SMEs, and
thus is important because SMEs absorb apart of the labo ur laid
off by large sized companies. Though in the interval 2004 –
2006, large companies used to provide more workplaces, in
2007 there is a big change so that in 2009 SMEs managed to
offer about 6.5 % more jobs than large companies.
Table 1. Distribution of labour force in Romania .
2004
[%] 2005
[%] 2006
[%] 2007
[%] 2008
[%] 2009
[%]
Small and
Medium
Enterprises 44.9 47.3 49.5 50.3 51.9 53.25
Large
companies 55.1 55.7 50.5 49.7 48.1 46.75
(Source: Rom anian Statistical Yearbook, 2010 ) [17]
If one looks a t the number of employees, one can find that in
private SMEs, between 2004 -2009 , micro -enterprises do not

offer the largest number of jobs, in spite of the fact that they
form the largest number of companies.
Table 2. Number of employees in SMEs, 2004 -2009.
Category 2004
[%] 2005
[%] 2006
[%] 2007
[%] 2008
[%] 2009
[%]
Micro 31.2 33.8 34.1 32.5 33.2 34.8
Small 30.9 30.4 31.3 33.5 32.7 32.9
Medium 37.9 35.8 34.5 34.0 34.1 32.3
(Source: Rom anian Statistical Yearbook, 2010 ) [17]
Table 3. Number of active S MEs, per size , 2004 -2008.
Category 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Micro 358.787 386.561 410.763 431.029 558.031
Small 36.392 39.128 43.419 47.022 47.603
Medium 9.121 9.158 9.322 9.577 9.850
Total 404.300 434.847 463.504 487.628 615.484
(Source: White Carta of SMSE , 2009 ) [18]
SMEs play and significant role in sustaining economic growth
and performance in economy. The contribution of local SMEs
to the GDP has constantly increased from 1995 till 2001, and
then started to fluctuate. In 2008, the Romanian SMEs
generated 80% of GDP [19], which is the highest percentage
recorded after 1990, when the percent was only 16.4 [20].
As for the activity sector in which they are involved, SMEs
tend to be involved in the field of services and this is justified
by the fact t hat services do not require substantial investments
as compared to production. However, a significant increase of
the number of SMEs working in the field of construction was
noticed until 2008; after 2008, the figure decreased mainly due
to economic crisis .
The SMEs sector can essentially contribute to GDP, to creating
new jobs and to the stimulation of exports. SMEs have the
capacity of flexibly responding to demands of competitive
markets and of rapidly adapting to the structural and cyclic
changes of the economy. A developed SME sector will thus be
able to support stability and macroeconomic growth.
Unfortunately, the benefits of the Romanian economy derived
from the activity of the SMEs are considerably diminished
because there are not enough such enterp rises in our country.
Their density is much under the average in the European
Union, as only SMEs exist in Romanian for 1,000 inhabitants
as compared to 50 companies/1,000 inhabitants averagely in
the European Union UE [21].
The legislative regulations pro duced until now have negatively
affected the development and evolution of SMEs, especially
when the flat rate and the payment of VAT for transactions
beginning with year 2005 were introduced, making many
SMEs find themselves on the brink of bankruptcy. The lack of
clear taxation regulations and increased bureaucracy represent
some major problems Romanian companies have to face. The
flat rate has had an impact on micro -enterprises especially, as
they have to pay besides the 16% tax, this additional tax must
be paid whether profit is registered or not. Until this regulation,
they had to pay only 3% of the revenues, if the revenues did
not exceed 100.000 Euros. The minimum tax of 3% was given
up; now SMEs and especially micro -enterprises are dissatisfied
and th e consequence will be that small companies will become
less flexible and their investments will be blocked.
For the year 2010, there were intentions to implement a set of
measures to provide tax facilities to companies hiring laid off or unemployed persons . They could be waived from social
insurance taxes, for a time interval in the year 2010 with the
purpose to provide a job to the persons mentioned [21]. Such
companies could benefit from a reduction or even a tax
support, for a specific time interval, by not being obliged to
pay the employee and employer job -related taxes, with the
purpose to stimulate the employability .
4. THE FINANCIAL CRISIS IMPACT UPON
SMES
In the interval between October 2008 and October 2009, about
a quarter of the companies went bankru pt, more than half have
reduced their activity and only less than a third had not
recorded negative results [22]. Some of the SMEs continue to
develop, and apart of them maintain their operation at the same
parameters. The study also shows that the main di fficulties to
be faced by the undertakers are the diminution of the domestic
demand (mentioned by 62% of the SMEs), excessive taxation
(42%) and excessive bureaucracy (36%) [23]. The weight of
the Romanian households credits in GDP diminished from
21.9% in 2008 to 21.7% last year and will be situated at 21.3%
in 2008 and 2009 , the ratio between financial assets and GDP
increased from 26.6% to 33,3%. The financial debts of the
households are given by consumer credits, mortgage credits
and other loans. In onl y the first six months of 2009, in
Romania, over 100.000 SMEs out of 600.000 registered SMEs
went bankrupt and 200.000 in 2009 [24]. Those remaining on
the market had to implement measures to drastically reduce
costs, either by layoffs, or wage cuts or adm inistrative expense
cuts.
A comparative image of the situation of the Romanian and
European Union SMEs is given in Table 4.
Table 4 . SMEs in Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary and
Romania .
Criteria Poland Czech.
Republic Hungary Romania
Labour
force
employe d
in SMEs 9 million
employees
in SMEs 75% of
the
overall
labour
force 1.1
million
employe
es in
SMEs 6 million
employees
in SMEs
70% of the
overall
labour
force 60% of
the
overall
labour
force 70% of the
overall
labour
force
SMEs
contri –
bution to
GDP 50% of the
GDP 80% of
the GDP 50% of
the GDP 70% of the
GDP
Companie
s going
bankrupt 497
companies
went
bankrupt in
2009 6591
compani
es went
bankrupt
in seven
months
of 2009,
58%
more
than in
the same
period of
2008 349 000
SMEs
compani
es went
bankrupt
in 2009 100 000
companies
went
bankrupt
in 2009
and 30 –
40%
SMEs
companies
expected
to be
bankrupt
in the
economic

In Table 4, one can see the benefits brought about by the SMEs
to the development of the economy, as well as the devastating
impact of the econ omic crisis upon these companies. The
number of the Romanian SMEs is under the average number of
European SMEs. In spite of the small number of SMEs, the
companies going bankrupt represent a high percentage and
often this is due to the late and inefficient reaction of the duly
sworn bodies.
One should mention that from 2010, the Romanian Equity &
Development Finance (REDF) fund has become operational
and SMEs can ask for funding from it [23]. The state
contribution to this fund is of 22.5 million Euros, out of the 50
million Euros budget to be used in investments in company
capitals and implementation of new technologies. REDF is a
non-bank financial institution that will finance SMEs as an
incentive for development and investments [23]. The strategy
of the fund provides for supporting small and medium
companies that have a potential to develop and to become
international, that make green innovations and new
investments, where the economic capitalisation of the results of
research and innovation is needed, or where new products and
operations defined by a technological transfer feature are met
as well as international partnerships [23]. An interesting project
is the Project of Developing the Government Strategy for
developing the SMEs sector, to be performed b etween 2009
and 2013 at a cost of 3.489.040 lei [16]. In the framework of
this project, models of good practices from the EU Member
States will be scrutinised, and studies and micro -studies will be
made with respect to the following: the latest trends in s trategic
planning to support SMEs from EU, studies that can be
implemented in the case of Romanian SMEs, studies related to
the present -day situation of the Romanian SMEs, research on
the access to finances of the small and medium enterprises, the
entrepre neurial education level in Romania and innovative
activities in Romanian SMEs. The project is worth 3.489.040
lei, is 85% co -funded (2.965.684 lei) from the Social European
Fund, the rest of 15% (532.356 lei) being the contribution of
the beneficiary. The general objective of the project consists in
improving the institutional capacity of the ministry, through its
structures that respond of the small and medium enterprises, in
developing strategic projects with a view to the evolution of the
SMEs in Romania in those directions that are primary for the
development of the country.
The cuts of the wages and the laying off of the persons as a
reaction of adaptation to economic crisis can have major
repercussions upon the results of SMEs. Practically, if wages
are cut, employees' motivation decreases and their possibly
being fired increases confusion and panic. Redundancy also
means risk of making redundant exactly the worker needed.
This can happen because there is a common tendency of
dismissing a person that is not efficient in appearance, whose
output is not the expected one, in spite of the fact that the
person can have a key role in the organisation, or can be an
informal leader and this leads to growing discontent .
During crises, by comparison with large com panies, SMEs
have the advantage that they can be more flexible, they can
implement new services and can launch new products. As it is
not necessary to receive approvals or strategies from higher
level bodies, decisions are made much easier and more
efficie ntly in SMEs [2 5, 26 ]. In this way, SMEs can act faster,
can apply solutions adapted to market conditions more
efficiently. To be ready to innovate, management must know
and be aware of the competences existing in the organisation.
5. CONCLUSIONS
Competitiven ess represents a complex, and worldwide long –
debated concept. Tightly connected to the notion of competition, it expresses, in general, the capacity of
individuals, companies, economies, regions to keep their place
in the competition at internal and/or (ma inly) at international
level and of getting economic (and not only economic)
advantages in the context of a certain business environment. To
be competitive does not mean to set disadvantages for the other
trade partners, but to develop and fully use one's own
advantage.
Competition is a complex, multi -dimension and dynamic
process, only one measure can describe fully the competitive
environment. A factor which influences the dimension of the
competition on a market is the degree to which an economy is
open to competition. This openness not only determines the
increase of competition, but also provides facilities for
technological transfer, the support to disseminate the best
practices and the promotion of the access the knowledge
sources at global level .
The present paper includes both theoretical and practical
aspects, as well as some managerial practices companies
should consider to acquire the competitive advantage necessary
and to successfully compete in the today's dynamic and
competitive environment. Fo r the companies to define
strategies that create value in view of competitive advantage,
managers must know well both the external environment and
the internal conditions. To be informed about the external
environment requires an analysis of the industry w here
companies act, that is of the forces that generate competition in
each industrial field, the analysis of the most valuable
competitors and the study of the dynamics of the industrial
competitiveness. With respect to the internal environment of a
compa ny, the manager should identify the resources and
competences of the company, as they are the potential sources
of reaching competitive advantage.
The administrative barriers significantly hinder the good
running of the businesses and mainly of the small a nd medium
enterprises, making them more vulnerable to the frequent
changes of the external environment. Besides the complexity of
the administrative procedures, one should also admit the time
consumption needed to solve them and the fact that SMEs have
to bear with bureaucracy.
Unfortunately, though SMEs should be intensely supported
because their evolution and that of the economy go hand in
hand, they are not encouraged fiscally and legislatively. Laws
change all the time, is often chaotic, so that the si tuation of
these companies is made heavier; even more, during these
years of crisis, supporting measures were not taken and
consequently, the health of SMEs has worsened. The social
securities represent a burden, financially and bureaucratically
as documen ts and procedures are complicated and time –
consuming for the companies. The major issues identified by
SMEs as a problem were related to laws, lack of efficient
consultancy programs, poor bank crediting and lack of stability
on the financial market.
After 2007 until now, many the institutions to support SMEs
were established. Let us remind the Romanian Centre for Small
and Medium Enterprises, the numerous foundations involved in
supporting entrepreneurs and small enterprise business men,
which have develope d actions to stimulate and coordinate the
development policies for the SMEs sector, as well as the
National Agency for Small and Medium and Cooperative
Enterprises (NADSME) at the l evel of the Romanian
Government. The government intends to play an active r ole in
providing services, but the confidence of the business men in
the capacity of the government to take up an active role is
reduced. Though there are efforts to support SMEs, they are
not enough mainly in training and consultancy, where the
government should assume more tasks. The laws and the

framework where businesses run are among the drawbacks that
generally affect SMEs.
So the important ideas are :
1. The Romanian economy concern and openness to increase
competitiveness is more evident as an intention than a
reality.
2. One cannot claim that Romania owns a strong policy that
can provide a proper framework for the running of
economic activities; the instruments used to improve the
state of this field are often improper and the economic
crisis has negativel y affected the SMEs development.
3. The main problems related to the increase of SMEs
competitiveness are actually brought about by the unstable
legislation, bureaucracy, high taxation and political
instability.
4. In Romania , the number of SMEs affected by the crisis is
not negligible, as seen from the comparison with other
Member States of the European Union.
The influence of the business environment upon SMEs is
decisive, as any change in the general business climate can
produce either positive effects or majo r distortions in these
enterprises, which exhibit a higher vu lnerability to external
factors.
6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research has been supported by the Project co -financed
from the European Social Fund “PRODOC”; Code of contract:
POSDRU 6/1.5/S /5 and POSDRU /18/1.2/G/9136 .
The assistance from Technical University of Cluj -Napoca in
data collection and for computational work is gratefully
acknowledged.
The author would like to thank Professor Laura Bacali for the
helpful ongoing discussions that have greatly be nefited my
thinking.
7. REFERENCES
1. * * * WEF. World Economic Forum, Global
Competitiveness Report 1994 , Geneva Switzwerland .
Available from Internet: <http://www.weforum.org >.
2. Carbaugh, R. J., International Ec onomics , 12th Edition,
Mason, OH: South -Western Cengage Learning, Canada
Library of Congress Control, Nelson Education, Ltd. ,
Canada, (2007).
3. * * * OECD. Organisation for Economic Co -operation and
Development , Programme on Technology and the
Economy, 1992 , Paris, France . Available from Internet:
<http://www.oecd.org> .
4. Hitt, M., Hoskisson, R., Ireland, R. D., Strategic
Management: Concepts and Cases, 8tb Edition,
Thomson/South -Western, USA (2007).
5. Hugues, K., European Comp etitiveness , Cambridge
University Press, U.K., (1993).
6. * * * E.U. European Commission, The General Direction
for Economic and Financial Affairs, European
Competitiveness Report, 2001 . Available from Internet:
<http://ec.europe.eu/economy_finance/publications >.
7. Porter M. E., Competitive Advantage. Creating and
Sustaining Superior Performance , New York, Free Press,
(1998).
8. Porter, M. E., From Competitive Advantage to Corporate
Strategy, Harvard Business Review , May/June, pp 43 -59,
(1997). 9. Uri, P., Bericht uber die Wettbewerbsfahigkeit der
Europaischen Gemeinschaft, Luxembourg, 1971,
mentioned in: Aiginger, K., Competitiveness: From a
Dangerous Obsession to a Welfare Creating Ability with
Positiv e Externalities, J. Ind. Compet. Trade , Vol. 6:
pp.161 –177, (2006).
10. David, F., Strategic Management. Concepts and cases,
11th Edition, New Jersey: Pearson/Prentice Hall, (2008).
11. Grant, R. M., Contemporary Strategy Analysis. Concepts,
Techniques, Applicatio ns, 4th Edition, Malden MA Press,
Blackwell, U.K., (2002).
12. Borza, A., Nistor, R. L., Mitra, C., Bordean, O., Social
Entreprise and Competitiveness, Revista de Management
& Marketing , Vol.4, No.3, pp.19 -34, (2009 ).
13. Bacali, L., Manual de inginerie economic ă: marketing ,
Editura Dacia, Cluj -Napoca, România, (2002).
14. Cândea, R. M., Cândea, D., Competențele emoționale și
succesul în management , Editura Economică, București,
România, (2005).
15. Pirău, L . C., Bacali, L ., (Research on the) Factors that
could influence the market competitiveness of Romanian
organizations , III International Science Conference,
Knowledge Society , Vol. 4, pag. 72 – 76, Nessebar,
Bulgaria, (2009).
16. * * * Agenția pentru implementarea proiectelor și
programelor pentru SMEs . Available from Inte rnet:
<http://www.animmc.ro >.
17. * * * Anuarul Statistic al României, Institutul Național de
Statistică, România , (2010). A vailable from Internet:
<http://www.i nsse.ro/cms/rw/pages/index.ro.do >.
18. Nicolescu O., Maniu I. A., Maniu I.I., Nicolescu C.,
Anghel F., White Carta of Small and Medium Size
Enterprises from Romania 7th Edition, Editura LIDANA,
București (2009).
19. Hodorogel, R. G., The Economic Crisis and its E ffects on
SMEs, Theoretical and Applied Economics , Vol. 05(534),
No. 5(534), pp.79 -88, (2009).
20. Nicolescu, O., Nicolescu, C., Antreprenoriatul și
managementul întreprinderilor mici și mijlocii: concepte,
abordări, studii de caz , Editura Economică, București,
România, (2008).
21. * * * U.E. Uniunea Europeană, Raport general privind
activitatea Comisiei Europene 2009 . Available from
Internet: <http://europa.eu/generalreport/ro/2009/files/
rg2009_ro.pdf >.
22. * * * <http://www.immromania.ro/noutati/noutate.php?id
=2225>.
23. * * * <http://www.manager.ro/sti ri/afaceri/situatia –
IMMurilor -din-romania -884.html >.
24. Antonescu F. , Situația de ansamblu a IMM -urilor în
semestrul I 2010, Economistul , Nr. 3271 (4 297) Editura
AGER, București, 16 Decembrie, (2010).
25. Borza, A., Mitra C., Bordean O., Mureșan A., Supuran R.,
Antreprenoriat. Managementul firmelor mici și mijlocii.
Concepte și studii de caz, Editura Risoprin t, Cluj -Napoca,
România, (2009b ).
26. Zimmerer , T. W., Scarborough, N. M., Wilson, D., 2008,
Essentials of Entrepreneurship and Small Business
Management, 5th Edition, New Jersey: Pearson/Prentice
Hall Press, U.S.A. (2008).

View publication statsView publication stats