Page 1

Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Flash Eurobarometer

European Commission

Observatory of European SMEs Analytical report

Fieldwork: November-December 2006

Flash Eurobarometer 196 – The Gallup Organization

Report: May 2007

This survey was requested by DG Enterprise and Industry and coordinated by the Eurobarometer Team of the European Commission. This document does not represent the point of view of the European Commission. Analytical Report, page 1 The interpretations and opinions contained in it are solely those of the authors.


The Gallup Organization

Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Flash EB Series #196

Observatory of European SMEs Conducted by The Gallup Organization Hungary upon the request of Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry

Survey organised and managed by the Eurobarometer Team of the European Commission This document does not represent the point of view of the European Commission. The interpretations and opinions contained in it are solely those of the authors.

THE GALLUP ORGANIZATION

page 2


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table of contents Table of contents.................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Main findings ......................................................................................................................................... 7 1. SMEs in Europe ................................................................................................................................. 9 1.1 The sample of the survey .............................................................................................................. 9 1.2 Business performance and outlook.............................................................................................. 11 1.2.1 Turnover ............................................................................................................................... 11 1.2.2 Employment ......................................................................................................................... 14 1.3 Crafts sector ................................................................................................................................ 16 2. Constraints on business performance............................................................................................ 17 2.1 Overview of reported constraints ................................................................................................ 17 2.2 Perceived evolution of business constraints ................................................................................ 20 2.3 Details on business constraints .................................................................................................... 24 2.3.1 Limited access to finance ..................................................................................................... 24 2.3.2 Labour force too expensive .................................................................................................. 25 2.3.3 Lack of skilled labour ........................................................................................................... 26 2.3.4 Implementing new technology ............................................................................................. 27 2.3.5 Implementing new forms of organisation............................................................................. 28 2.3.6 Lack of quality management ................................................................................................ 29 2.3.7 Problems with administrative regulations ............................................................................ 30 2.3.8 Problems with infrastructure ................................................................................................ 31 2.3.9 Problems with purchasing power of customers .................................................................... 32 2.4 The administrative burden in Europe .......................................................................................... 33 2.4.1 Favourable change in administrative constraints.................................................................. 33 2.4.2 Evaluation of regulations...................................................................................................... 34 2.4.3 Time spent with administrative requirements ...................................................................... 36 2.5 Operating within the Internal Market of the EU ......................................................................... 38 2.5.1 Opportunities provided by the internal market ..................................................................... 38 2.5.2 Harmonised standards in the EU .......................................................................................... 42 3. SMEs in the global economy........................................................................................................... 44 3.1 Exports ........................................................................................................................................ 44 3.1.1 Performance and outlook...................................................................................................... 44 3.1.2 Export destinations ............................................................................................................... 48 3.1.3 Constraints to exports ........................................................................................................... 51 3.2 Inputs purchased abroad .............................................................................................................. 54 3.3 Foreign business partnerships ..................................................................................................... 55 3.3.1 Destinations .......................................................................................................................... 57 3.3.2 Drivers .................................................................................................................................. 59 3.3.3 Effect on employment .......................................................................................................... 61 4. Competition...................................................................................................................................... 62 4.1 Coping with intensified competition ........................................................................................... 62 4.1.1 Increasing quality ................................................................................................................. 64

Analytical Report, page 3


The Gallup Organization

Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

4.1.2 Increasing marketing activity ............................................................................................... 65 4.1.3 Increasing product differentiation ........................................................................................ 66 4.1.4 Reducing costs ...................................................................................................................... 67 4.1.5 Forming strategic partnerships ............................................................................................. 68 4.1.6 Reducing prices .................................................................................................................... 69 4.1.7 Increasing working hours ..................................................................................................... 70 4.1.8 Looking for new foreign markets ......................................................................................... 71 4.1.9 Reducing production ............................................................................................................ 72 4.2 The marketing budget.................................................................................................................. 73 5. Innovation ........................................................................................................................................ 75 5.1 Income from innovation .............................................................................................................. 75 5.2 Constraints of innovation ............................................................................................................ 77 5.3 Energy efficiency ........................................................................................................................ 80 6. Human resources ............................................................................................................................. 81 6.1 Composition of workforce .......................................................................................................... 81 6.1.1 Geographic origin ................................................................................................................. 81 6.1.2 Educational attainment ......................................................................................................... 83 6.2 Human resource problems ........................................................................................................... 86 6.2.1 Unfilled vacancies ................................................................................................................ 86 6.2.2 Recruiting problems ............................................................................................................. 87 6.2.3 Recruitment strategies .......................................................................................................... 90 Annex tables ......................................................................................................................................... 94 Technical note .................................................................................................................................... 254 Representativeness of the results ................................................................................................. 255 Margins of error .......................................................................................................................... 256 Exchange rates............................................................................................................................. 257 Sizes of the samples .................................................................................................................... 259 Survey questionnaire......................................................................................................................... 261

page 4


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Introduction The current survey, a successor of earlier SME Observatory Surveys, was carried out in the 27 Member States of the European Union (25 at the time of the fieldwork), as well as in Norway, Iceland and Turkey – in the countries participating in the Multiannual Programme for Enterprise & Entrepreneurship (MAP)1 – under the framework of the Flash Eurobarometer survey series. .It included for the first time large-scaled enterprises (employing 250+ persons) in its sample. The purpose of this Specific Contract is the provision of information, through a survey, on the characteristics and specificities of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) across Europe. For this purpose, the replies of SMSs are compared to those of large-scaled enterprises (LSEs). The current survey is primarily enquiring general characteristics of firms active in the countries surveyed, perceptions on business constraints, competition and human resources problems and data on internationalisation and innovation. The survey questionnaire was tested and improved in a pilot survey conducted in six countries. The sample of the survey covered all firms active in the countries surveyed, in any of the following industries (with NACE main codes2): D. Manufacturing, F. Construction, G. Wholesale and retail (referenced as “trade”), H. Hotels and restaurants (“hospitality”), I. Transport, storage and communication (“transport”), J. Financial intermediation (“financial”), K. Real estate, renting and business activities (“business services”), N. Health and social work (“healthcare”), O. Other community, social and personal service (“personal services”). The sample was stratified by country, industry (NACE main codes) and number of persons employed (1-9, references as “micro-SMEs”, 10-49 “small-sized SMEs”, 50-249 “medium-sized SMEs”, and 250+ persons, “large-scaled enterprises” or LSEs).3 The sample was selected disproportionally to have a minimum number of cases in each cell of this three-dimensional matrix.

Abbreviations used in this report:

EU25

All surveyed countries: AT, BE, DE, DK, EL, ES, FI, FR, IE, IT, LU, NL, PT, SE, UK, CZ, CY, EE, HU, LT, LV, MT, PL, SK, SI, BG, RO, IS, NO, TR, The 15 pre-2004 Member States: AT, BE, DE, DK, EL, ES, FI, FR, IE, IT, LU, NL, PT, SE, UK New Member States from the 2004 enlargement: CZ, CY, EE, HU, LT, LV, MT, PL, SK, SI NMS10 plus BG, RO (any reference to “new Member States” in this report means this group) Pre-2007 EU: EU15 and NMS10 combined

EU27

The current EU: EU15 and NMS12 combined

AT

Austria

FI

Finland

NL

BE

Belgium

FR

France

NO

Norway

BG

Bulgaria

HU

Hungary

PL

Poland

E30 EU15 NMS10 NMS12

Netherlands

CY

Cyprus

IE

Ireland

PT

Portugal

CZ

Czech Republic

IS

Iceland

RO

Romania

DE

Germany

IT

Italy

SE

Sweden

DK

Denmark

LT

Lithuania

SI

Slovenia

EE

Estonia

LU

Luxembourg

SK

Slovakia

EL

Greece

LV

Latvia

TR

Turkey

1

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/enterprise_policy/mult_entr_programme/programme_2001_2005.htm NACE Rev. 1.1, see http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/ramon/nomenclatures/ 3 See SME definition at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/enterprise_policy/sme_definition/index_en.htm 2

Analytical Report, page 5


The Gallup Organization

Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

ES Spain MT Malta UK United Kingdom Overall, Gallup interviewed 16 339 SMEs (17 283 enterprises in total) across the survey area, and 14 683 SMEs in the 27 Member States of the European Union, dominantly between the 17th of November and 15th of December4, 2006, over the telephone. The country breakdown of case numbers and field periods is explained in the Annex of this report. Eligible respondents were top company managers, responsible for strategic decision-making, who are typically General Managers, owners or financial managers.

Post-stratification weights were used to restore the artificially distorted proportions according to company size and industry sector. When we are discussing EU-wide or other international summary estimations, results are weighted to correct for the disproportional selection of countries, and the various segments within the countries. The weighting was based on the estimated number of SMEs in the sampled segments of the total economy. A technical note indicating the manner in which the Gallup partner institutes conducted the survey can also be found at the end of this analysis. It provides further detail on interviewing methods, sampling and the statistical margins of error.

4

Appointments set up during the fieldwork period were followed up until the 3rd January, 2007.

page 6


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Main findings ⎯ 2006 seemed to be a better year for SMEs in the new Member States; they reported a 15% increase in turnover compared to 2005. At the European Union (EU) level (and according to those who agreed to answer both of the questions: 41%) 2006 was an improvement over the previous 12 months, as 110% of the 2005 turnover was achieved. Based on recent reports, the outlook for 2007 is rather optimistic as well. Across the EU, 41% of SMEs expect an increase in income in 2007, 35% anticipate no change and 12% foresee a decrease in turnover in 2007. The least optimistic are the Hungarian SMEs; Romanian, Irish and Polish businesses are extremely optimistic: about two-thirds of them expect sales growth during 2007. In contrast to turnover expectations for 2007, SMEs expect much more stability regarding the number of people they will employ. Almost seven out of 10 SMEs (67%) do not anticipate significant changes in the number of employees they will have in 2007. Those who do expect change are predominantly optimistic, with 18% expecting increased employment, and just10% expecting a decrease. The business outlook seems to be more optimistic in the new Member States. ⎯ The most important individual business constraints reported by SMEs was the purchasing power of customers: (46% of the managers interviewed in the EU reported that this issue was a business constraint in the last two years) Two other problem areas affect most European businesses: these are the stringent administrative regulations (more than a third – 36% – of SMEs claim to have faced difficulties in this area over the past two years) and the issue of the availability (35% report problems) and cost of appropriate human resources for SMEs (33%). Relatively fewer large businesses encountered problems with the purchasing power of their customers. They are most troubled by administrative regulations (42%) and the lack of manpower (35%). On top of the widespread confirmation of these various business constraints, the perception of recent change of these constraints is quite pessimistic as well. ⎯ At the EU level, 44% of SMEs consider themselves to be operating in an over-regulated environment. On the other hand, 29% are satisfied with the current regulations, and an additional 12% would even welcome additional measures to achieve goals: for example, a better financed public sphere or a cleaner environment. On balance, SMEs that find regulations fair, or too modest, are only slightly fewer in number than those who think that the regulations go too far. ⎯ Overall in the EU, less than one in 10 SMEs is directly involved in exports (8%). However, some small open economies report a much higher involvement of SMEs in this field (e.g. in Estonia 23% of companies have some turnover from exports, Slovenia: 21%, Finland: 19%, Denmark: 17%, etc.). At the same time, some of the largest EU countries are not particularly inclined to be involved in cross-border trade. These include Spain (3% say they are), France (6%), Italy (7%), Romania (7%) and Poland (7%). Reportedly, exports made up 4.6% of the total turnover of the SMEs surveyed. The larger the enterprise, the more likely it is to report some turnover from exports; almost three in 10 – 28% – of large scale enterprises (LSEs) but only 7% among micro-enterprises had exported. While 19% of the turnover of the replying LSEs was generated in this way, the figure for micro-enterprises was only 5%.

Analytical Report, page 7


The Gallup Organization

Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

⎯ Looking at the EU in total, the reported amount of exports of SMEs increased quite markedly in 2006 (up by 12% compared to 2005). On one hand, the outlook for 2007 is optimistic (as exporters do not count on a decrease of such turnover in any country, and the balance of expected changes is in the positive range in all but five of the EU’s Member States), however, exporters anticipate a slowdown in the growth of turnover from exports (+8%) compared to the reported change from 2005 to 2006 (+12%). ⎯ The main constraint that exporters faced was the lack of knowledge of foreign markets (which might be related to current or new export destinations), followed by decreased price competitiveness due to import tariffs in destination countries. Almost as important was the difficulty caused by different regulations that still prevail within the EU’s single internal market; 9% mentioned this as their prime concern. ⎯ European SMEs believe that competition in their markets has increased over the past two years. Six out of 10 managers stated that competition has recently intensified. The perception of increased competition is even more widespread among LSEs. In response to tighter competition, the primary strategy of European SMEs is to enhance product quality and intensify marketing efforts. Increasing working hours, looking for new markets abroad, and, especially, cutting production are seen as last resort strategies. ⎯ 10% of European SMEs’ turnover comes from their new or significantly improved products or services. Even so, almost four out of 10 SMEs in Europe say that they do not have new products or that they do not have income from new products (37%). Such SMEs (with no recent innovations) were found to be in greater proportions in the new Member States than in the pre-2004 EU. EU SMEs regard four factors as being equally important barriers to innovation: problematic access to finance, scarcity of skilled labour, a lack of market demand and expensive human resources. These are the key challenges they face in their desire to innovate. The larger an enterprise, the more likely it is to suffer from human resource problems, and the less likely it is to suffer from the lack of funds to innovate. ⎯ SMEs in Europe employ a dominantly local workforce (across the EU, 89% of the labour force comes from the region of the enterprise), some of the labourers come from regions of the country other than where the SME operates (7%), and only 4% of workers come from abroad. This shows a relatively sedentary European workforce, and a limited possibility for hiring (or limited willingness to hire) non-local - let alone foreign - labour. ⎯ Finding and hiring the appropriate workforce is a challenge for many SMEs in Europe. Especially in the new Member States, a significant number of jobs remain unfilled. Less than half of European SMEs say they have no recruitment problems. The primary problem is related to the availability of an appropriate workforce; any excessive wage demands are only a relatively distant second issue.

page 8


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

1. SMEs in Europe The introductory chapter of the report briefly describes the samples used by the Observatory of European SMEs Survey in each country to explore the attitudes regarding various issues presented in the subsequent sections. Besides giving a background on the national samples, we will discuss the overall business trends and outlooks regarding turnover and employment.

1.1 The sample of the survey The activity sector of SMEs in our survey reflects the characteristics of the universe5, defined by main NACE (1.1) codes. The sampling strategy prescribed the minimal number of SMEs required in each sector, (see sampled sectors on the table below6) for obtaining the necessary number of cases for within-country sector-by-sector analyses. This report analyses industry sectors only at EU27 level. The table contains the weighted distribution of SMEs in the various industry sectors in each of the economies surveyed, and in the EU27 zone.

D. Manufacturing

F. Construction

G. Wholesale and retail

H. Hotels and restaurants

I. Transport, storage and communication

J. Financial intermediation

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

N. Health and social work

O. Other community, social and personal service

Activity sector, %

EU27 SME

13

11

27

7

6

5

22

5

5

BE

6

14

32

9

4

1

23

1

10

CZ

15

9

28

11

6

1

16

9

4

DK

14

10

26

6

7

7

9

11

10

DE

9

10

23

8

4

5

27

7

6

EE

16

10

17

9

10

10

22

2

4

EL

14

11

40

12

6

0

12

0

5

ES

10

14

25

5

8

6

22

4

6

FR

26

9

20

8

6

3

26

1

2

IE

16

10

26

14

5

4

15

6

4

IT

13

11

31

6

4

4

21

5

6

CY

7

12

25

12

13

11

6

5

9

LV

11

6

27

5

6

18

10

8

8

LT

16

7

38

5

9

1

16

4

3

LU

4

3

30

11

9

7

24

3

9

HU

13

11

28

5

4

1

28

4

6

MT

18

7

30

13

7

2

14

2

6

NL

5

4

22

4

3

23

27

2

8

5

In several cases, sectors had to be collapsed in order to achieve convergence in the weighting procedure (that is two or more sectors – weighting “classes” – had to be aggregated and a corresponding aggregated target figure was used for the weighting routine) therefore slight differences from the universe parameters are possible. See the Technical and Evaluation Report for exact details on sampling procedure. 6

Contrary to the original plan, it was not possible to sample the P. Private households with employed persons segment due to lack of sample source as well as population characteristics in many of the countries involved.

Analytical Report, page 9


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

D. Manufacturing

F. Construction

G. Wholesale and retail

H. Hotels and restaurants

I. Transport, storage and communication

J. Financial intermediation

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

N. Health and social work

O. Other community, social and personal service

Activity sector, % (continued)

AT

10

7

25

15

5

2

20

7

8

PL

12

12

39

4

9

4

12

4

3

PT

15

14

26

10

6

7

15

4

3

SI

17

11

18

5

6

14

26

2

3

SK

15

13

23

7

5

12

10

7

7

FI

7

14

22

7

5

8

17

7

13

SE

12

13

21

7

8

8

9

10

12

UK

10

11

25

9

5

5

27

6

4

BG

12

0

58

9

7

0

11

4

0

RO

14

8

42

5

7

1

18

2

3

TR

15

14

34

6

14

3

5

2

5

NO

14

14

15

3

8

8

16

11

10

IS

19

14

17

5

5

6

16

7

11

The target sample of the survey was privately owned and independent SMEs (defined as majority private ownership). 92% of the SMEs interviewed were independent private business entities, 5% were local units / subsidiaries of another business SMEs, and 3% were non-profit or semi-government SMEs. The graph below shows the distribution of the different types of SMEs across participating countries. In the new Member States, the proportion of independent profit-oriented SMEs is slightly higher (95%) than in the pre-2004 EU sample (91%). a non profit enterprise: foundations, associations, semi-government

Type of enterprise 1 00

0 2

1 2

3 1

2 1

1 4

a subsidiary of another enterprise an independent enterprise 0 5

2 3

0 5

1 4

2 3

1 4

1 4

3 3

2 5

2 6

3 5

2 6

3 5

3 5

7 2

3 5

1 8

5 5

1 8

4 4

5 4

3 8

7 5

2 7

4 8

8 6

6 10 13 11 10 7 8 15

75

50

98 97 96 96 96 95 95 95 95 95 94 94 94 93 92 92 92 92 92 91 91 91 91 91 91 90 89 87 87 86 86 83 81 78 74

25

BG RO CZ PT TR PL NMS12 EE DE EL IT SK NMS10 SI LT EU27 NL EU25 CY HU EU15 IS IE ES AT UK MT LV FR BE FI LU DK SE NO

0

Q1. How would you characterise your enterprise? Is it ‌ Base: SMEs, % by country, DK/NA not shown

page 10


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

1.2 Business performance and outlook SMEs were asked to report their turnover, and the number of persons employed by them, for 2005 and 2006 (estimated). We also asked them about their views on the future, in particular their expectations for the year 2007. This section reports on these findings.7

1.2.1 Turnover SMEs were asked about their turnover in 2005 and their expected turnover in 20068. More than half of the companies decided not to disclose the figure (54% -- ranging from 79% in Belgium to 14% in Sweden). Generally, managers in Nordic countries were the most willing to share turnover information – and any figure amount related to their business – with us.

Turnover, employment and productivity figures by size-class, % EU-27

SME Activity sector

Size class

EU27 SME

2005 turnover (thousand euro) per enterprise 1 724

Number of persons employed per enterprise, 2005 7

Per person turnover, 2005 (thousand euro) per enterprise 241

1-9 persons employed

1 151

4

10-49 persons employed

3 657

20

251 163

50-249 persons employed

16 847

100

162

250+ persons employed

205 901

1278

170

D. Manufacturing

1828

10

166

F. Construction

1382

7

216

G. Wholesale and retail

2685

6

405

H. Hotels and restaurants I. Transport, storage and communication J. Financial intermediation K. Real estate, renting and business activities N. Health and social work O. Other community, social and personal service

685

8

72

1290

7

152

1521

5

308

1145

6

180

404

7

59

2003

7

89

It seems that the workers of those small SMEs that provided the survey with a turnover figure are more productive. If we divide the 2005 turnover by the number of persons employed in 2005 (see next section), we find that in the microSME segment, the per-person turnover is clearly above that of the other size classes (251,000 euro vs. 160-170 000 in the larger segments). Such per-person turnover is the lowest among SMEs in healthcare (59,000) and the highest in wholesale and retail (405,000).

7

The figure amounts reported over the telephone suffer from a certain bias. While on paper forms managers have time and can look for assistance in answering questions related to their business data (turnover, exports, etc.), over the telephone they seem to be very reluctant to give a top-of-mind figure about their most sensitive business data. The high lack of reported figure amounts especially affects Chapter 1.2. 8 The amount figures were collected in national currency, and for the non-eurozone Member States re-calculated to euro. The exchange rates are provided in the Technical note in the Annex

Analytical Report, page 11


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

As the graph below shows, the turnover structures in the new and old Member States are very different: more than twice as many SMEs in the NMS12 zone earned less than 150 thousand euro (49%) compared to the EU15 countries (22%). Bulgaria (86%), Turkey (63%), Latvia (62%) and Romania (59%) are the countries with the most SMEs belonging to the lowest income category, while only 11% in Italy and 12% in France earned less than 150,000 euro in 2005. more than 5.000.000 EUR 2.000.000 to 5.000.000 EUR 1 .000.000 to 2.000.000 EUR 500.000 to 1 .000.000 EUR 1 50.000 to 500.000 EUR less than 1 50.000 EUR

100

75

50

25

0 1 2 3 8

1 2 3 7

2 3 12

1 3 2 6

1 5 4 3 2 10 10

3 1 3 9

4 7 6 10

2 3 5

3 3 6

2 10

3 5 5

5 4 9

6 7 8

2 3 6

4 6 9

6 8 7 6 10 9 7 10 10 10 10 10 6 7 9 11 14 13 15 11 16 10 8 19 14 14 12 12 8 9 14 14 11 24 17 12 7 11 20 29 26 15 31 24 26 18 8 17 18 15 16 17 19 17 17 17 27 18 18 28 19 22 32 26 32 44 15 28 28 86 27 29 30 34 33 30 37 42 34 41 63 62 59 58 56 55 54 26 30 49 46 43 40 40 36 34 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 22 19 17 17 16 16 16 7

12

6 9

7 7

6 9

3 5 4 2 10 12 23 14 15 14 19

11

21

20 17

21 17 12 17

25 20 23

36 36 23 24 28 27 15

14 14 14 12

FI

FR

BE

EL

IE

AT

LU

MT

IS

SE

DK

ES

EU15

NO

EU25

EU27

PT

UK

PL

DE

NL

SI

LT

EE

NMS10

CZ

NMS12

SK

CY

HU

LV

RO

TR

0 BG

7 15

11

IT

2005 revenue categories

Q7. What was the turnover, that is the annual sales, of your enterprise in 2005? Base : SMEs, % by country, only valid responses shown (without DK/NA)

On the other hand, in the pre-2004 EU countries, more than three times as many SMEs have a turnover of at least 5 million euro (7%) compared to firms in the NMS12 zone (2%). Turnover outlook SMEs were asked to report on their expected turnover in 2006 (the fieldwork was carried out in November-December 2006) and on their outlooks for 2007. The graph below shows the change from 2005 to 2006, based on country- (or region-) level (weighted) average turnover for 2005 and 2006. Change in revenue, 2005-2006

104

104

PT

106

AT

CY

107

FR

106

107

DK

IT

107

CZ

DE

108

108

LU

108

BE

109

EU25

109

110

EU27

108

110

FI

MT

110

EU15

110

ES

SE

111

IE

UK

112

111

HU

115

114

EL

NMS10

115

NL

SK

115

117

116

LV

NMS12

117

119

SI

IS

119

NO

121

123

BG

120

124

TR

PL

124

LT

124

EE

RO

(100 = 2005)

Q6. What is the expected turnover (annual sales) of your enterprise in 2006? Q7. What was the turnover, that is the annual sales, of your enterprise in 2005? Base : those SMEs who gave their turnovers for both years, 100* (q6/q7), averages, by country

From a growth perspective, year 2006 seemed to be better for SMEs in the new Member States; they reported a 15% increase in incomes in 2006 compared to 2005. On EU level (and according to those who agreed to answer for both questions: 41%) 2006 is a better year than the previous one, with 110% of the 2005 turnover achieved. The most income growth was reported in Estonia (+24), Romania (+24) and Turkey (+24). A 4 percent growth was reported even in the least optimistic countries: Portugal and Cyprus.

page 12


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Expectations regarding the yearly turnover in 2007 compared to 2006 100%

11 6

75%

50%

25%

6 7

9 4

8 5

8 4

7 6

7 6

6 2

15 24 25 27 28 27 27 36

7 6

17 5

35

7 7

5 5

5 11

11 7

7 6

12 12 11 11 12 12

35 39 35 39 33 27 28 29

19

25

9

DK/NA Decrease Remain about the same Increase 8 7

5 9

15 12 12 12 17

35 42 43 26

12 12 12

26 5

35 35 36

4 10 13 10 17 12 13 25 9 22 38 15 25 21 12 32 14

30 29

46

36 39 43

6 35

26 31 29 68 63 62 60 60 60 60 56 52 52 51 51 50 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 41 39 39 38 35 35 34 31 30 30 30 26

RO IE PL EE LV EL LT SI NO LU IS FI UK NL ES NMS12 NMS10 TR SK DK SE BG EU27 EU25 EU15 BE MT AT CZ IT DE PT FR CY HU

0%

Q8. What do you expect regarding the yearly turnover in 2007 compared to 2006? The turnover of your enterprise in 2007 will increase, remain unchanged, or will decrease? Base : SMEs, % by country

Just like the recent reports, the outlook for 2007 is rather optimistic as well. On EU-27 level, 41% expect an increase in income in 2007, 35% anticipate no change, and 12% count on decreasing turnover for 2007 (12% are not sure or are unwilling to say). The least optimistic are Hungarian SMEs; this was the only economy where more SMEs anticipated shrinking incomes (32%) than income growth (26%). One third or less of the SMEs in Cyprus (30%), France (30%), Portugal (30%) and Germany (31%) expect an improvement in turnover. On the other hand, Romanian (68%), Irish (63%) and Polish (62%) businesses are extremely optimistic: around two thirds of them expect income growth for 2007.

Analytical Report, page 13


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

1.2.2 Employment In a structure similar to the turnover question, the survey asked managers to report on the numbers of persons they employed in 2005, 2006, and on the expected trend in the number of employed persons for 2007. An average European SME employs 6,8 persons (on EU-27 level, only 6% did not answer this question). SMEs report the largest number of employed persons in Slovakia (12,5 persons), Estonia (10,4 persons) and Malta (9,7 persons). On the other hand, SMEs are the smallest on average in Turkey (with 4,7 persons employed), Cyprus (5,1) and the Czech Republic (5,2). (This 2005 number of persons employed figure was used for the subsequent breakdowns where we analyse various attitudes within various size classes.)

4,7 TR

5,1 CY

5,7

5,2 CZ

PL

5,8

5,8 IT

HU

6,1

ES

6,0

6,3

6,1

NMS12

EL

6,4 BG

NMS10

6,5

6,5 PT

SE

BE

6,8

6,5

EU25

6,8

6,9 NO

EU27

6,9

7,2 NL

EU15

FI

IE

7,2

7,3

7,2

SI

FR

7,5

7,5

AT

7,9

7,5 DE

UK

8,1

7,9

LT

DK

8,1 LU

9,3

8,5

IS

LV

RO

9,7

9,5

MT

SK

EE

10,4

12,5

Number of persons employed, 2005

Q3. How many persons, including part time workers, were employed in your enterprise on average in 2005? Base: SMEs, averages, by country

As we said, SMEs were asked to report on the number of persons employed they had in 2006, as well. The graph below shows the change from 2005 to 2006, based on country- (or region-) level (weighted) average of persons employed for 2005 and 2006. Change in number of persons employed, 2005-2006

104

103

103

103

102

102

101

UK

FR

DE

ES

CY

LT

HU

106

105

SE

106

MT

106

BE

EE

EU15

109

TR

107

109

CZ

107

109

NMS10

EU25

110

PL

EU27

110

NO

109

111

PT

108

111

NMS12

IT

112

BG

NL

114

112

AT

118

116

IS

119

FI

LU

123

121

IE

LV

126

124

EL

DK

129

SK

138

135

SI

RO

(100 = 2005)

Q3. How many persons, including part time workers, were employed in your enterprise on average in 2005? Q4. How many persons, including part time workers, were employed in your enterprise on average in 2006? Base: those SMEs who gave their employee size for both years, 100* (q4/q3), averages, by country

Reportedly, 2006 brought a slightly higher employment for the European Union SMEs (+7 percentage points). The most employment growth in the SME sector was detected in Slovenia (+38), Romania (+35) and Slovakia (+29).

page 14


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Expectations regarding employment in 2007 compared to 2006 100%

8 6

75% 38

4 3

46

9 3

4 7

1 4

5 8

1 6

5 6

6 6

4 6

6 7

1 7

2 6

6 7

2 5

48 50 57 50 56 54 55 57 57 63 62 59 65

50%

DK/NA Will decrease Will remain about the same Will increase 3

14

56

5 5

14

3 3

1 4

1 6

1 7

5 5 10 10

5 9

3 13

2 9

4

64 60

72 74 72 73

4 3 12 10 16 2

4 8

1 11

3 7

2

22 26

67 68 69 67 7 2 69 7 0 73 73 78 65

41 39 38 37 37 35 33 33 30 30 30 29 27 27 27 22 22 21 21 19 18 18 17 17 17 17 16 16 15 14 13

CY

CZ

DE

HU

FR

EU15

AT

IT

PT

EU25

SE

EU27

FI

DK

ES

BE

SK

NL

MT

IS

NMS10

NO

LU

NMS12

EL

BG

LV

SI

TR

EE

PL

LT

RO

0%

7

4

IE

48 46

68

UK

70

25%

2

Q5. What are your expectations regarding the number of employees in your enterprise in 2007? Will it increase, remain unchanged, or will decrease? Base: SMEs, % by country

In contrast to turnover expectations for 2007, SMEs expect much more stability regarding the number of persons employed. Almost seven in ten SMEs (67%) do not anticipate significant changes in the number of persons employed in 2007. Those who do expect change are overwhelmingly optimistic, with 18% expecting increased employment, and 10% expecting a decrease (5% could not tell). Again, outlooks seem to be even more optimistic in the new Member States, some of which are the most optimistic of all the 30 countries investigated. In Romania, 48% anticipate increased employment, 46% do so in Lithuania, and 41% in Poland. On the other hand, the number of pessimists outscored optimists in the UK (22% anticipate a decrease and 7% an increase in employment) and Ireland (26% vs. 4%). A brief statistical note might provide additional explanations regarding the accuracy of amount- and exact figure reports. There is no statistically significant correlation between the reported change in employment and the reported change in turnover for 2005 and 2006. On the other hand, there is a strong, significant (0.628**) correlation between the positive outlooks for 2007 regarding income and employment.

Analytical Report, page 15


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

1.3 Crafts sector Crafts is a somewhat vague category that describes artisan (or at-least labour intensive), small-scale production of various goods and services, from everyday items such as food products to precious items such as jewellery or artwork. Very often, SMEs in this sector produce goods characteristic of the national cultures in which they operate. In some countries, this sector is clearly defined by national regulations (e.g. in Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Austria, Poland, Slovenia – marked with lighter grey on the chart below), while in other countries, SMEs may or may not define themselves as belonging to the crafts sector. Belonging to crafts sector

75

3 10 3 45

39

2

64 65

8

59

3

4

3

0 5

64 65 66 69 65

12

59

1

2

1

1

4

4

1

1

4

0

2

0

3

7 0 69 7 0 7 1 67 68 7 2 7 3 70 75 77 79 77 68

50

25

13

2

Yes 5

2

1

No 0

3

0

DK/NA 2

7 9 7 6 7 9 82 83 80 84 84

9

2

7 8 93

52 51 33 33 33 33 32 31 30 30 30 29 29 29 28 28 28 27 26 26 25 22 21 20 19 19 19 19 17 17

17 16 15 13

PL

LT

FI

BG

ES

NO

RO

NMS12

BE

NMS10

PT

CY

SI

LV

SE

SK

AT

EU27

EU25

EL

DE

IT

EE

UK

EU15

DK

MT

NL

IE

LU

IS

CZ

FR

TR

0

6

HU

100

Q10. [in BELGIUM, GERMANY, FRANCE, ITALY, LUXEMBOURG, AUSTRIA, POLAND, SLOVENIA] Does your enterprise belong to the crafts sector of your country? OR Do you think that your enterprise belongs to the crafts sector of your country? Base: SMEs, % by country

On average, slightly over a quarter of European SMEs consider themselves belonging to the crafts sector (28%). Such self-identification is more widespread in the pre-2004 EU than in the newer Member States. The lowest proportions of crafts SMEs were recorded in Hungary (6%), Lithuania (13%) and Poland (15%) while the majority of SMEs in Turkey claim to be part of this sector (52%), and a great number of companies declared belonging to the crafts sector in France (51%) and Iceland (33%) as well. As Table 8b in the Annex shows, self-identification with the crafts sector is the highest in the micro SME segment (employing less than 10 persons), where almost three out of ten SMEs say they belong to that sector (29%). More than half of SMEs active in the manufacturing sector say they are part of the crafts sector (57%), and such reports are also very frequent in the construction industry (47%).

page 16


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2. Constraints on business performance The Enterprise Observatory Survey tested nine potential constraints that European SMEs are typically burdened with. The tested constrains were: -

Limited access to finance Labour force too expensive Lack of skilled labour Implementing new technology Implementing new forms of organisation Lack of quality management Problems with administrative regulations Problems with infrastructure, e.g. roads, gas, electricity, communication, etc. Problems with the purchasing power of customers

Managers were asked to assess whether or not they have faced any of these constraints over the past two years. The interview also clarified how they perceive the evolution of each of the issues they faced: i.e. do they perceive the situation to have been improving or deteriorating in the recent past?

2.1 Overview of reported constraints The most important individual business constraint reported by European SMEs was the purchasing power of the customers: 46% of the managers interviewed in the territory of the current European Union told us that the limited purchasing power of their customers constituted a difficulty over the last two years. Beyond the problem of finding the customer base able to afford the products and services offered, two problem areas emerge as affecting most European businesses: the problems of stringent administrative regulations (over one third of SMEs claim to have faced difficulties in this area over the past two years, 36%) and the issues of the availability (35% report problems) and cost of appropriate human resources for the enterprise (33%). Constraints/difficulties encountered in the last two years (%) Problems with the purchasing power of customers

46

Problems with administrative regulations

36

Lack of skilled labour

35

Labour force too expensive Problems with infrastructure (e.g. roads, gas, electricity, communication, etc.)

33 30,9

23 21

Limited access to finance Implementing new technology

17 16

Implementing new forms of organisation Lack of quality management

EU27

11 0%

25%

50%

75%

Q21. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? Base: SMEs

Analytical Report, page 17


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Almost every fourth European SME reported having difficulties related to infrastructure (23%). A similar proportion reported having only limited access to appropriate finances (21%). 17% and 16%, reported constraints that are temporary by nature: implementing new technologies and new forms of organisation, respectively. Finally, about one tenth of the managers interviewed reported problems stemming from the lack of a management system of the appropriate quality (11%). Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years?

1-9

10-49

50-249

250+

D. Manufacturing

F. Construction

G. Wholesale and retail

H. Hotels and restaurants

I. Transport, storage and communication

J. Financial intermediation

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

N. Health and social work

O. Other community, social and personal service

Activity

EU27 SME

Size class

Limited access to finance

21

20

20

18

16

23

22

20

23

25

15

17

26

33

Labour force too expensive

33

32

33

32

27

37

37

33

40

39

18

28

26

42

Lack of skilled labour

35

33

44

46

42

45

50

32

41

36

25

27

21

36

Implementing new technology

17

16

15

18

21

18

16

18

19

15

18

16

17

11

Implementing new forms of organisation

16

14

17

20

26

14

15

17

18

15

14

13

17

21

Lack of quality management

11

10

12

16

16

13

14

11

16

9

8

8

10

14

Problems with administrative regulations

35

35

38

40

38

36

39

35

40

36

34

34

43

34

Problems with infrastructure e.g. road, gas, electricity, communication, etc.

23

22

23

24

23

22

22

26

30

33

17

17

22

24

Problems with the purchasing power of customers

46

46

41

38

29

49

42

53

47

38

42

40

41

45

Average9

26

25

27

28

26

29

29

27

30

27

21

22

25

29

Obviously, the various segments of the European economy are differently affected by each of these problems. However, the main patterns are prevalent in almost every size segment and industry category (e.g. the purchasing power of customers is the most often reported constraint, while the lack of quality management is the least often reported constraint in most segments and industries). As the table above shows, the average “constraint levels� of various enterprise segments are very similar to one another. Even though this figure is just a plain arithmetical average of a non-exhaustive list of potential business difficulties (with prominent problem areas, such as taxation, missing); this simplified measure shows a relatively even overall spread of concerns throughout the European economy. However, there are noteworthy differences within the particular problem areas by company segments and industries. The largest European enterprises are the least concerned about the issue that generally troubles many European SMEs. Only 29% of LSEs (employing at least 250 workers) encountered problems with the purchasing power of their customers (while 46% of the SMEs are affected by such difficulty). LSEs are most troubled by administrative regulations (38% with almost as many among the SMEs sharing this concern: 36%) and the lack of manpower (42%, vs. 35% among SMEs). 9

The arithmetic average of % of enterprises experiencing each of the constraints investigated

page 18


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

On the other hand, the purchasing power of customers is a prime concern of the smallest enterprise segment. Almost every second manager leading businesses with less than 10 persons employed report having encountered such difficulties in the recent past (46%). According to managers in most industry sectors, this is the most important problem. This was especially true of managers in trade (wholesale and retail) where 53% reported difficulties with the purchasing power of their customers. Only in the construction sector does customer purchasing power drop down to second place in the list of concerns of SMEs. This sector is most affected by constraints related to the lack of skilled labour, half of managers (50%) pinpointed human resource problems as the issues most affecting their business performance. This concern is especially prevalent in the small (10-49 employee) enterprise segment (44%), while micro- enterprises are the least troubled by this issue (33%). Of all sectors in Europe, privately owned healthcare reported the least difficulties in hiring appropriate personnel (21%). Healthcare sector SMEs, on the other hand, are by far the most challenged by the various administrative regulations they have to comply with (43%).

Analytical Report, page 19


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2.2 Perceived evolution of business constraints After having clarified the issues that concern businesses in Europe, the survey inquired about respondents’ perceptions regarding the recent change (over the past two years) in the constraints they encounter. The overall picture (as well as the more detailed one) is quite pessimistic, especially in the aspects that concern most enterprises. SMEs that report having faced difficulties with administrative regulations dominantly believe that the situation is further deteriorating (on EU27 level the perception of deterioration outscores improvement, and even stagnation by 30 percentage points). The same can be said about those small and medium sized enterprises that reported difficulties with the purchasing power of customers (-25), and expensive labour costs (-16). Evolution of business constraints, EU27 100

75

42

44 62

51

49

51

48

57

Increased 65

Remained about the same

50

12

11

9

8

Problems with the purchasing power of customers

Lack of quality management

Problems with infrastructure e.g. road, gas, electricity, communication,

Lack of skilled labour

36

Decreased 30

8

7

5

4

Problems with administrative regulations

14

0

42

Labour force too expensive

41

39

Limited access to finance

39

Implementing new technology

45 25

Implementing new forms of organisation

40

25

Q22. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Base : SMEs, % among those who report such difficulty , DK/NA not shown

Regarding the problems with lack of skilled labour, the situation is somewhat less unfavourable, but still deterioration outscores with stagnation or improvement by 4 percentage points. SMEs do not predominantly count on a worsening situation in problems related to infrastructure (-3), organisational change (0), or introducing new technologies (+2)10. Finally, SMEs give somewhat more positive – however still fundamentally gloomy – reports regarding the difficulties associated with limited access to finance (where improvement and stagnation outscores the perception of further deterioration by 9 points) and lack of quality management (+14). But even in these aspects, as the graph shows, only a handful of SMEs report improvement; most experienced stagnation. As the table below suggests, contrary to the rather similar average incidence rates of all constraints, the average perception of change is markedly different in the various enterprise categories. (The table shows the percentage point difference between improvement or stagnation on one hand, and deterioration. This strategy was chosen to accentuate continuing unfavourable tendencies. For the detailed frequency distribution for each answer category, please refer to the respective Annex tables). Clearly, the situation is least improving in the segment of medium-sized European enterprises; these are reporting the most unfavourable recent change in their situation with a -6 balance score. In the other SME size classes enterprises are split in assessing the recent trend, with about as many 10

The calculated percentage point differences might differ from similar figures that are derived from the illustrations or the Annex tables by 1 percentage point, due to rounding. The +/- figures are calculated on a nonrounded basis.

page 20


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

witnessing improvement as deterioration or stagnation, while LSEs dominantly do not expect further deterioration (+8). Among the industry sectors, difficulties seem to be especially increasing in the hospitality and the financial services sectors (-17 and -16, respectively). How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? (EU27, net difference between (% decreased + % unchanged) and % increased shown, negative figures show deterioration)

1-9

10-49

50-249

250+

D. Manufacturing

F. Construction

G. Wholesale and retail

H. Hotels and restaurants

I. Transport, storage and communication

J. Financial intermediation

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

N. Health and social work

O. Other community, social and personal service

Activity

EU27 SMEs

Size class

Limited access to finance

9

16

14

4

32

11

4

17

7

-1

-8

18

-3

-7

Labour force too expensive

-16

-13

-14

-20

-3

-14

-18

-15

-36

-14

-23

-12

3

-15

Lack of skilled labour

-4

0

0

-4

-10

-8

-2

-2

-15

3

2

1

-3

-16

Implementing new technology

2

10

4

2

-7

7

-7

11

-14

1

-11

0

5

0

Implementing new forms of organisation

0

7

19

1

8

-8

-7

12

-9

4

-24

5

0

-18

Lack of quality management

14

27

25

16

50

18

15

11

-4

34

0

24

61

-14

Problems with administrative regulations

-30

-27

-38

-30

-10

-28

-24

-33

-32

-27

-37

-31

-43

-17

Problems with infrastructure

-3

6

10

2

39

-3

0

-3

-6

-8

-1

-9

11

16

Problems with the purchasing power of customers

-25

-25

-16

-21

-29

-24

-21

-24

-45

-10

-40

-24

-5

-40

Average

-6

0

0

-6

8

-6

-6

-3

-17

-2

-16

-3

3

-12

In some areas, an overall tendency of further deterioration is observable: for example in the burden created by administrative regulations or by purchasing power problems: all size classes and SMEs in all industries dominantly report an increase of those burdens. As we said, the picture is quite homogenous; those who experienced constraints witnessed either stagnation or further deterioration. Investigating the difference between perceived stagnation and improvement on one hand and improvement on the other, reveals different patterns in the various countries.

Analytical Report, page 21


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

We find relatively positive assessment of the trends (meaning that the dominant perception is not further deterioration) in each problem area in Slovenia, Sweden and Turkey. We find the opposite in Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg and Malta, where the problems have been increasing in each aspect surveyed. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? (SMEs, net difference between (% decreased + % unchanged) and % increased shown, negative figures show deterioration) Limited access to finance

BE -40

BG 29

CZ 24

DK 62

DE 32

EE 54

EL 41

ES -2

FR -53

IE 53

Labour force too expensive

-30

-23

Lack of skilled labour

-24

12

-21

20

19

11

-10

16

-67

-7

-10

-46

-37

-33

42

-3

-47

Implementing new technology

-51

14

29

-1

6

-4

8

53

-5

-34

11

Implementing new forms of organization

-22

65

19

17

5

-10

50

0

-43

43

Lack of quality management

-34

Problems with administrative regulations

-39

58

54

-16

-13

25

41

30

58

21

-57

30

-5

-45

9

24

31

-48

-13

Problems with infrastructure

-46

Problems with the purchasing power of customers

-43

-22

28

-36

-9

-38

6

31

-27

1

57

15

-39

-18

47

-47

-2

-64

Average

-37

9

15

11

3

31

4

30

5

-48

12

Limited access to finance

IT -16

CY 20

LV 37

LT 44

LU -30

HU -13

MT -36

NL 42

AT 18

PL 33

Labour force too expensive

-29

-19

-43

Lack of skilled labour

-20

19

-36

-57

-22

-76

-43

-15

-4

-7

-36

0

-13

-26

2

14

-15

Implementing new technology

-9

-44

Implementing new forms of organization

-16

1

39

26

-20

-3

-18

-3

-2

56

39

42

-37

5

-22

-25

-22

Lack of quality management

-12

3

65

11

64

-59

24

-11

27

48

58

Problems with administrative regulations

-47

Problems with infrastructure

-17

-18

45

36

-25

-63

-31

-1

-27

28

11

30

54

-21

-24

-45

-46

1

Problems with the purchasing power of customers

31

-49

-29

-23

32

-53

-30

-54

6

-21

4

Average

-24

-6

11

23

-30

-21

-32

-1

1

28

Limited access to finance

PT 33

RO 25

SI 40

SK 40

FI 35

SE 40

UK 45

TR 20

NO 27

IC 65

Labour force too expensive

19

-7

25

-4

-1

32

-1

3

-34

-21

Lack of skilled labour

34

13

29

11

17

26

22

2

8

12

Implementing new technology

12

14

37

61

-13

43

21

9

25

1

Implementing new forms of organization

24

33

29

65

-7

29

20

22

10

42

Lack of quality management

53

48

50

49

27

66

40

27

24

67

Problems with administrative regulations

52

14

18

12

12

5

-47

37

-27

10

Problems with infrastructure

24

33

20

16

26

41

-14

24

2

18

Problems with the purchasing power of customers

-38

12

24

28

35

41

17

6

29

63

Average

24

20

30

31

14

36

11

17

7

29

page 22


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

In the next subchapter, we will go into the fine details of the patterns presented in this table. To complete this overview of the constraints experienced by European SMEs, we created an overall map presenting the current situation and the recent experience of change. The graph below gives a summary measure of all constraints encountered, and the recent trends in the perceived constraints. The EU-27 average defines a point to which we might measure individual countries, especially the EU Member States. The grey dashed lines – showing the EU-27 average – define four squares on the graph, each showing different characteristics compared to the European Union benchmark.

Recent change

(all constraints experienced, average)

Current level of constraints & recent change of situation 50 SE

40 EL 30

SI SK PT

TR

20

IC

PL

LT

LV

CZ RO

10

DE

EE

IE

UK

BG

0

FI DK NO

ES

AT

EU27

NL

-1 0

CY

-20

HU LU

IT

-30 MT

BE

-40

FR

-50 -60 50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

Incidence of constraints Base: SMEs

(all 9 constraints, average)

The upper right square is the most advantageous one, where SMEs face only a few obstacles, and most of those who do face obstacles do not consider their situation to be further deteriorating. Especially Nordic countries (Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Finland and Sweden) are in this situation, along with the UK, Spain and the Netherlands. In the upper lefts square we find those countries where SMEs are constrained more than the EU average, but their situation has not been deteriorating further. The countries belonging to this group are predominantly new Member States (Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania) accompanied by Greece and Portugal. Turkey is the negative extreme in the reported number of problem incidences and lack of promising changes. In the bottom right cubicle we find those economies where a relatively low proportion of the SMEs face the difficulties we investigated, but they dominantly report a worsening situation (inhabited only by Luxembourg and – marginally – by Cyprus) Finally, the most disadvantageous location on this map is its bottom left square with countries where SMEs are not just troubled by the various constraints, but have been experiencing further deterioration in their situation: France, Belgium, Italy, Hungary and Malta.

Analytical Report, page 23


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2.3 Details on business constraints After presenting the overall picture and highlighting some of the key findings of this question segment, we provide detailed analyses of each constraint’s incidence and recent evolution in the countries covered by the survey.

2.3.1 Limited access to finance Limited access to finance is a problem for 21% of European SMEs. Like many of the other constraints, limited access to the necessary finances is a problem especially for the new Member States of the EU. Besides Turkey (where 45% of SMEs encounter such difficulties) the inability to properly finance the business and its development is especially widespread in Malta (35%), Hungary (29%), Belgium (29%), Lithuania ( 28%), Poland and Slovakia (both 27%). On the other hand, only 7% of SMEs report similar constraints in Finland, 9% do in Denmark and 11% do in Spain. Estonia is the only new Member State that reports favourable conditions (only 12% have encountered such difficulties).

Limited access to finance Constraints/difficulties encountered in the last two years:

Yes

No

1 00

45

ES

EE

NL

AT

IE

NO

CY

UK

LV

EU15

IS

BG

FR

EU25

EU27

SI

SE

RO

CZ

LU

DE

IT

PT

EL

NMS12

NMS10

SK

PL

BE

TR

LT

35 29 29 28 27 27 26 25 25 25 24 23 23 23 22 22 21 21 21 21 21 21 20 20 20 19 18 18 17 14 12 11

0

MT

25

61 65 66 63 68 65 65 65 7 2 68 7 9 7 9 82 72 71 71 71 74 77 7 4 7 7 7 9 7 7 84 87 59 7 0 66 67 65 67 7 2 7 1

9

7

FI

60

DK

48

50

HU

75

Q21. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? a) Limited access to finance Base: SMEs, % by country, DK/NA not shown

Evolution in the past two years Decreased

Remained about the same

Q22. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? a) Limited access to finance Base: SMEs, % among those who report such difficulty , DK/NA not shown

Increased

1 00

23 16 29 27 35 25 38 32 40 32 38 26 44 45 35 46 56 57 49

26 9

5

20 28 30 3 2 0

LU

ES

IT

FI

EU15

CZ

EU25

EU27

LV

56

BE

32 37

FR

47 5 6

67 7 7 7 0 60

MT

31

15 14 14 14 14 14 13 13 13 13 11 10 10

PL

LT

NMS12

UK

SE

DK

IC

PT

DE

SK

NO

IE

SI

RO

EL

AT

TR

64

BG

63 5 8 56 49 45 46 31 31 41 36 44 51 54 52 39 44 5 0 44 49 40 40 45 39

33 29 28 25 25 23 21 21 21 20 20 20 20 18 17 17 15

NL

0

17

NMS10

25

30 33 33

EE

37

33

CY

50

23

HU

75

27 40 41 24 36 27

The difficulties are reported to be increasing especially in France (where the difference between stagnation of improvement and further deterioration of the situation among affected SMEs was -53 percentage points), Belgium (-40) and Malta (-36). The least pessimistic perception of the problem was detected in Iceland (+65), Denmark (+62), Estonia (+54) and Ireland (+53) . The only country where the perception of improvement outscored the perception of further deterioration was the Netherlands. On the EU-27 level, the problem seems to continue, with a balance score of -9. Limited access to finance is not the primary concern of most SMEs, but there are evident differences between the various segments. The smaller an enterprise, the more likely it is to have experienced difficulties in connection to financing (SMEs: 21%: LSEs: 16%). SMEs active in the financial sector are the least likely to suffer from insufficient access to finances (15%). Appropriate financing is the

page 24


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

most difficult to obtain in the personal service sector (33%), healthcare (26%) and the transportation sector (25% report problems). In most SME segments, the situation has not been deteriorating over the past two years. As we said, the SME average shows a +9 percentage point balance. The corresponding figure for LSEs troubled by insufficient access to finance is +32. Among industry sectors, those in the best (financial services: -8) and worst situations personal services: +7) report a balance showing further deterioration. The least recent deterioration is reported in the trade and business services sectors (+17, +18, respectively).

2.3.2 Labour force too expensive Too expensive labour is a problem for 33% of European SMEs. Especially Hungarian managers are concerned about the excessive costs of labour in their country (71% say that they have encountered difficulties in this regard over the past two years), followed by their Turkish (61%), Belgian (46%), Italian (45%) and Czech (43%) colleagues. By far, Bulgarian SMEs are the least troubled by disproportionate labour costs (10% report such difficulties), and only one fifth or less of SMEs report such business constraint in the Netherlands (16%), Iceland (18%), Denmark (18%), Romania and Norway (both 19%).

Labour force too expensive Constraints/difficulties encountered in the last two years:

Yes

No

1 00

49 53 52 53 50 53 57 57 58 62 63

50

BG

IS

NL

DK

RO

NO

LU

ES

LV

UK

SK

FR

EE

DE

EU15

PL

EL

PT

EU27

AT

IE

FI

LT

SI

NMS12

SE

MT

NMS10

IT

TR

HU

0

46 45 43 43 43 41 39 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 33 33 33 33 33 32 29 28 25 25 23 23 23 19 19 18 18 16 10 CZ

61

BE

71 25

53 61 62 63 63 63 63 59 64 7 0 7 1 7 2 7 4 68 7 2 68 7 3 7 9 7 5 81 7 5 85

EU25

37

CY

26 75

Q21. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? b) Labour force too expensive Base: SMEs, % by country, DK/NA not shown

Evolution in the past two years Decreased

Remained about the same

Q22. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? b) Labour force too expensive Base: SMEs, % among those who report such difficulty , DK/NA not shown

Increased

1 00

40

54

39 54

5 3 5 1 49

66

38

32

5 5 61 5 7 5 7 5 3

5 9 64

69

65 66 7 3 64

50 7 9 56 55

50

4

4

4

4

3

3

3

2

2

2

BE

FI

3 2 31 1

1

LU

4

LT

5

FR

NO

EU15

5

NMS10

UK

20 1

5

NMS12

5

SI

6

IT

6

CZ

7

SE

7

MT

7

47

PL

7

30 29 24 32

EU27

8

23

IS

8

59 34 32

EU25

8

SK

3 8 3 5 36 3 6 41

BG

60 26

EL

40 41 43

DK

51

NL

37 32

ES

RO

PT

13 10 10 10

51

DE

36 39

AT

20

TR

0

48

39

IE

25

88 84

56 7 1

36 11 16 1 0

28

0

0

LV

53 51

CY

67

EE

39

48

HU

75

Most of the affected SMEs in Hungary consider the situation to be further deteriorating (here the balance of perceived recent intensification of the problem vs. other perception has a negative balance of -76 percentage points), as do SMEs in Estonia (-67) and Lithuania (-57). Reports are not as unfavourable, on the other hand, from Sweden (+32), Slovenia (+25), and Denmark (+20). On the EU27 level, the situation is deteriorating, with a balance score of -16. The problem of labour costs is more or less equally important for all sectors and segments. However, the LSEs are somewhat less concerned than SMEs (27% versus 33%) as are companies active in the

Analytical Report, page 25


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

field of financial services (18% think that expensive labour has been a constraint for them in the recent past). Labour costs are the most important problem for the personal services (42%) and the hospitality sector (40%). The issue of disproportionate labour costs seems to be further deteriorating in most SMEs segments, especially in the hospitality sector (-36), the financial sector (-23) and in the construction industry (-18). Managers in the healthcare (+3) sectors are, however, more likely to report stagnation.

2.3.3 Lack of skilled labour Lack of skilled labour is a problem for 35% of European SMEs. It is an eminent concern for almost three quarter of managers in Lithuania (72%)..At least half of SMEs have encountered such difficulties in the past two years also in Turkey (60%), Estonia (60%), Greece (54%), Romania (53%), and Finland (51%), as well. The non-availability of appropriate manpower is a problem least widespread in the Netherlands (20%), Hungary (22%) and Germany (26%).

Lack of skilled labour Constraints/difficulties encountered in the last two years:

Yes

No

1 00

24

38 40

75 50

72

40 42 49 51 53 53 55 48 54 55 59 59 58 56 57 56 61 56 56 55 61 61 62 63 63 67 62 66 7 0 66 7 1 71

60 60 54 53 51 47 44 42 42 42 42 41 40 40 40 39 39 39 37 37 36 35 35 35 34 34 33 32 30 28 28 26 22 20

25

NL

DE

HU

UK

BG

IE

DK

SE

AT

EU15

EU25

CY

EU27

ES

LU

IT

NO

NMS10

IS

NMS12

SI

CZ

FR

BE

MT

PL

PT

SK

FI

LV

EL

RO

EE

LT

TR

0

Q21. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? c) Lack of skilled labour Base: SMEs, % by country, DK/NA not shown

Evolution in the past two years Decreased

Remained about the same

Q22. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? c) Lack of skilled labour Base: SMEs, % among those who report such difficulty , DK/NA not shown

Increased

1 00

36 41 44 44 40 46 56 45 54 59 62 46 68 65

9

8

8

8

8

8

7

7

6

6

6

5

5

5

4

4

4

4

3

3

3

2

1

SK

CZ

NL

HU

NO

IC

IT

BE

SE

EE

LU

FI

DK

BG

LV

FR

23

9

PT

58 55 48 46 51 53 41 38 47 42 41 35 34 29 30

71

SI

56 58

43

EU15

37 39 39 40

35 31

EU25

24

52 51 5 1 51

EU27

11 10 10

38

68

NMS10

11

50

LT

47 24

DE

AT

RO

UK

CY

TR

16 16 15 14 14 14 11

EL

0

36 41 37 47 42 46 37 31

PL

25

41 60

ES

55

IE

50

39 43 43 51 57

NMS12

45 37 49

MT

29 75

On the European Union level, slightly more managers claim that the constraint has been intensifying over the past two years (-4). The issue of the scarcity of skilled manpower is reported to be increasingly problematic especially in the Baltic States; in Lithuania as well as Latvia (the difference between perceptions of stagnation or improvement and further deterioration is -36 percentage points in both countries) and in Estonia (-33). The situation is the least discouraging in Greece (+42), Portugal (+34), Slovenia (+29), and Sweden (+26). The lack of skilled labour is more prevalent among LSEs (with 42% of managers mentioning it), compared to SMEs (35%, and specifically to micro enterprises: 33%). Especially the construction (50%) and manufacturing sectors (45%) report limited access to skilled labour. The recent change is perceived to be most unfavourable in the hospitality sector (-15) and in the personal services sector (16).

page 26


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2.3.4 Implementing new technology Implementing new technologies is a problem for 17% of European SMEs. In the EU, there was no economy where more than about one third of SMEs consider implementing new technology to be a constraint. Turkish respondents are most affected by such difficulties (35% say they encountered this in the past two years), followed by Portuguese (31%), Romanian (27%), and Lithuanian managers (25%). On the other hand, Austrian (9%), Icelandic (9%) and Bulgarian (9%) SMEs are the least troubled by the consequences of implementing new technologies.

Implementing new technology Constraints/difficulties encountered in the last two years:

Yes

No

1 00

9

9

BG

IS

SE

9

AT

PL

DE

IE

NO

EE

LU

FI

IT

EU15

EU25

NL

NMS12

ES

UK

EL

FR

SI

HU

CZ

BE

LV

SK

CY

LT

PT

RO

TR

17 17 17 17 17 17 15 15 15 14 14 13 12 12 11

EU27

35 31 27 25 23 23 23 22 22 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 17

0

DK

25

64 67 7 3 68 7 2 7 3 7 2 7 8 69 7 6 7 5 7 3 80 7 2 7 3 7 6 7 3 7 2 7 7 7 7 7 8 84 83 83 7 3 85 83 7 8 7 6 83 86 7 5 90

MT

63 66

50

NMS10

75

Q21. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? d) Implementing new technology Base: SMEs, % by country, DK/NA not shown

Evolution in the past two years Decreased

Remained about the same

Q22. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? d) Implementing new technology Base: SMEs, % among those who report such difficulty , DK/NA not shown

Increased

1 00

37

32

57 54

7 2 54

43 66

51 47 45 49

75 43

54

8

8

7

7

7

7

7

7

5

5

5

4

4

4

3

3

PT

DE

LV

CZ

CY

FI

NO

MT

IT

BG

2

2

2

2

2

22 24 1 0

BE

8

45 44 51 45

LU

9

EU15

30

EE

36 42

37

AT

59 24

DK

62 56

HU

43 42 42 40 49 40

29

EU25

LT

IE

UK

RO

PL

EL

SI

SK

63 38

49 48 48 51 44 50

FR

52 53 55

18 17 16 15 14 14 13 13 12 11

TR

0

34

28 52

EU27

41 45 41

25

36 35 33

IC

63 53 62

49

SE

36

41 38 44

ES

61

24 21

NL

50

31

NMS10

45

NMS12

17 75

One might think that by definition, these constraints are temporary, and diminish over time. Looking at our results, this is definitely not the case. The overall perception in the EU is that these problems did not decrease, just on the contrary, a slight majority say they increased over the past two years; with a balance score of (-2). In several countries, such problems seem not to worsen (especially in Slovakia: +61, Poland: +56 and Greece: +53), while a deteriorating tendency was detected in several others (especially in Belgium: -51 and Cyprus: -44 ). Implementing new technology affects the various enterprise categories rather similarly: 17% of the SMEs and 21% of the LSEs report such problems. The hospitality (19%) and the financial sector emerges (18%) as the group where technology updates cause relatively the most problems. The constraints caused by recently introduced technologies are worsening the most in the large scale enterprise segment (-7, as opposed to the overall result of +2 in the SME sector) and the hospitality sector (-14). The situation is reported to be relatively more favourable by the trade (+11), healthcare (+5), and manufacturing (+7) sectors.

Analytical Report, page 27


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2.3.5 Implementing new forms of organisation Being a concern for 16% of European SMEs, organisational change – unlike any other constraint investigated – is somewhat less likely to pose a problem in the new EU Member States than in the old ones. Besides Turkish SMEs (39%), Belgian (26%), Portuguese (26%) and Greek (24%) SMEs are the most likely to report that implementing new forms of organisation resulted in difficulties in their business operation in the recent past. On the other hand, Hungarian, Danish, Bulgarian (all 7%), Norwegian, Polish and Swedish businesses (all 8%) are the least likely to suffer from the negative effects of organisational turmoil.

Implementing new forms of organisation Constraints/difficulties encountered in the last two years:

Yes

No

1 00

7

DK

PL

NO

7

7

HU

DE

8

SE

8

BG

8

FI

11 10 10 10

NL

11

NMS10

EE

AT

LV

IE

LU

CZ

LT

EU25

ES

EU27

UK

MT

EU15

SI

RO

IS

SK

IT

FR

TR

26 26 24 20 20 19 18 17 17 17 16 16 16 16 16 16 14 13 13 13 12 12 11

EL

39

0

BE

25

83 7 0 7 9 81 7 4 7 8 7 1 81 7 6 7 8 7 8 7 7 81 83 7 5 81 83 85 7 9 7 9 7 9 80 86 82 87 84 7 8 75 77

NMS12

70 70 70 78 77

CY

57

50

PT

75

Q21. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? e) Implementing new forms of organisation Base : SMEs, % by country, DK/NA not shown

Evolution in the past two years Decreased

Remained about the same

Q22. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? e) Implementing new forms of organisation Base : SMEs, % among those who report such difficulty , DK/NA not shown

Increased

1 00

17

72

17

40

57

51 45

58

9

9

9

8

8

8

7

7

7

7

5

5

5

5

5

4

EE

FR

24

38

48

67

62 36

CZ

46 50

CY

30

PT

41 41 39

DE

28

MT

38

35 51 7 1

DK

BG

NMS12

11 10 10

SI

UK

PL

TR

IC

LV

NO

IE

LT

RO

SK

EL

24 21 19 18 18 18 17 16 15 15 14 11

57

57 28

50 35

EU15

25

0

47 53 56

38

47

52

27

3

2

2

0

SE

69 44

42

EU25

52 55

49 49 52

BE

34

58

EU27

47 52 51

53

FI

50 60

NL

50

30

HU

58

48

IT

59

LU

38 35 30

ES

42

17 37

NMS10

30 29

AT

75

24 16 33 28 25

As was the case with the previous constraint, the negative effects of organizational change do not appear to be temporary at all. The proportion who report improvement is only 8%, and the EU-27 level balance score of “0” suggests a mixed picture whether or not the problem has been intensifying over the past two years. Not only this constraint is less prevalent in the new EU countries, it is also less likely to have been worsening in the recent past. Countries like Slovakia (-65), Bulgaria (-65), and Poland (-65) perceive their disadvantageous situation to be the most enduring. At the same time, the majority of managers in France (+43), Luxembourg (+37), Netherlands (+25) think that their situation has become easier in this respect. The larger the enterprise, the more it is struggle with organizational issues. While 16% SMEs claim to have encountered difficulties related to the implementation of new organizational solutions (and only 14% of micro enterprises), 26% of LSEs have faced such constraint over the past two years. Among industry sectors, differences are only modest, with hospitality (18%) and the personal service (21%) sector emerging as the branch with the most problems associated with restructuring or other organizational change. The constraints caused by implementing new forms of organisation are deteriorating most in the financial sector (-24). On balance, as many SMEs witness deterioration as

page 28


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

stagnation or improvement (0). The dominant perception is less unfavourable in the trade (+12), transportation (+4) and business services (+5) sectors.

2.3.6 Lack of quality management The lack of quality management is the business constraint that least bothers European SMEs: it has been a constraint for 11% on EU27 level. It is a concern relatively most prevalent in Turkey (37%), Lithuania (31%) and Slovenia (24%) and least widespread in Bulgaria (4%), Germany (6%), Cyprus, Denmark and the Netherlands (all 7%).

Lack of quality management Constraints/difficulties encountered in the last two years:

Yes

No

1 00

8

8

7

7

7

6

NL

CY

DE

4

BG

8

DK

9

AT

11

PL

11

SE

11

LU

11

NO

11

IT

11

NMS10

11

EU15

11

EU25

NMS12

IE

HU

ES

PT

FR

MT

IS

LV

11

EU27

84 87 82 82 84 87 7 6 85 88 88 73 76 77 78 77 7 8 84 80 83 83

FI

7 9 7 9 80 80 81 84 7 9 87

SK

EL

BE

EE

SI

TR

0

63

37 31 24 21 19 19 19 18 18 16 15 14 13 12 12 12 11

LT

25

68 7 5 7 7

UK

61 7 1

CZ

59

50

RO

75

Q21. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? f) Lack of quality management Base: SMEs, % by country, DK/NA not shown

Evolution in the past two years Decreased

Remained about the same

Q22. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? f) Lack of quality management Base: SMEs, % among those who report such difficulty , DK/NA not shown

Increased

1 00

17

22 35

33

25 30 46

30

24 24 38 36 37 42 46 42

17

67

50

78 72

6

5

4

4

3

3

1

1

16 0

LU

8

CZ

9

BG

9

LV

30

SI

11

19

BE

11

58 58 67

DK

11

36 38

13 11 10 9

41

75 62 61

FI

45 42 45

60

IT

HU

NO

ES

CY

UK

NL

RO

EE

SK

SE

TR

IC

22 21 20 18 17 17 16 16 16 16 15 14 13 13 13 11

60

MT

36

46 48 50

PT

57 56 55 49 45

21

36 38 21 55 55

DE

46

FR

66

EU25

59

NMS10

65

EU15

52

EU27

60

PL

EL

17 36

NMS12

43

0

16

79

40

34

24

AT

25

17

LT

50

IE

75

16 35

Lack of quality management is a problem more typical in the large scale enterprise segment; LSEs (16%) are more likely to report such concern than SMEs (11%). This constraint is not very easy to fix either, however the perception of deterioration is less prevalent compared to the other constraints investigated. The balance score of +14 on the EU level shows that companies encountering such difficulties did not predominantly face an increase of the problem recently. There are only five economies where most of the SMEs affected predominantly confirmed continuous degradation of their situation: Luxembourg: (-59), France (-57), Belgium (-34), Italy (-12) and Malta (-11). In the remaining countries, rather the perceptions of a stagnant or even improving situation dominate. This is especially the case in Iceland (+67), Sweden (+66), and Lithuania (+64). Greece is the only country where more SMEs witness an improving situation (34%) than deterioration (16%). In most SME segments the trend is stagnation, but in hospitality (-4) and personal services sectors (14) we detected further deterioration.

Analytical Report, page 29


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2.3.7 Problems with administrative regulations Administrative regulations pose an important burden on conducting business according to SMEs especially in Hungary (55%), the Czech Republic (54%), Slovakia (52%) and Slovenia (47%) – the EU27 average is 36%. New Member States are considerably more likely than old EU members to be troubled by excessive or inappropriate regulations. Countries most content with the regulatory environment are Spain (with only 11% admitting administrative difficulties), Latvia (13%), Norway (15%), Cyprus and Finland (17-17%).

Problems with administrative regulations Constraints/difficulties encountered in the last two years:

Yes

No

1 00

36 42 46 49 51 53 51 50 54 57 55 59 62 60 60 62 66 66 62 68 7 1 7 0 69 64 69 7 0 7 2 7 4 66 7 8 82 7 9 83 82 81 50 75

ES

LV

CY

NO

IS

FI

LU

EE

PT

LT

DK

TR

RO

IE

SE

EL

NL

AT

UK

EU15

EU27

EU25

BE

FR

PL

BG

DE

MT

NMS12

SI

IT

NMS10

CZ

HU

0

55 54 52 47 47 45 45 44 43 42 41 38 37 36 36 34 34 32 31 29 28 28 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 19 17 17 15 13 11

SK

25

Q21. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? g) Problems with administrative regulations Base: SMEs, % by country, DK/NA not shown

Evolution in the past two years Decreased

Remained about the same

Q22. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? g) Problems with administrative regulations Base : SMEs, % among those who report such difficulty , DK/NA not shown

Increased

1 00

4

4

4

4

3

3

2

2

2

25 24

36 29

1

1

1

0

BE

4

68

AT

4

63

IT

PL

5

73 73

FR

LV

5

34 39

BG

IE

5

25

15 3

NO

SK

6

43

64 58

DE

FI

6

72

DK

SI

6

51 81

HU

8

LU

8

EU15

8

30 30 31 27

EU25

9

38

EU27

9

50 51 21

CZ

11

47 35 40 40 28

55 65 65 59 68

IC

11

73

EE

11

46 45

47 65

UK

55

59 52 52

SE

65 35

PT

ES

TR

LT

EL

19 14 13 12 12

RO

48 45 46

35

25

0

65

54 53 57

35

NL

41

27 56

MT

50

40

41 43 43

47

NMS10

24

30 34 31

CY

35 41

NMS12

75

On average, the burden that seemed to deteriorate the most during the past two years was the problem of administrative regulations. In the EU, the percentage of SMEs that report recent worsening of the situation is 30 percentage points more than the ratio of those that report stagnation or the very few who perceived improvement over the past two years. This balance score is the least favourable in Hungary (-63), and in some of the largest European economies, such as France (-48), the United Kingdom (47), Italy (-47), and Germany (-45), Stagnation (or improvement) instead of deterioration was mostly detected in Portugal (+52), Latvia (+45), Turkey (+37) and Lithuania (+36). While all sectors witness a worsening situation in this respect, SMEs in the healthcare (-43) and the financial (-37) sectors gave the most unfavourable reports.

page 30


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2.3.8 Problems with infrastructure Problems with infrastructure is a concern for 23% of European SMEs. Managers from Greece (47%), Malta (46%), , and Ireland (41%) reported in highest numbers that they had problems due to inadequate infrastructure. Four out of ten SMEs in Turkey claimed that their businesses were adversely affected by the lack of proper infrastructure. Besides Poland (the largest economy of the new Member States, 36%), the latest additions to the EU, Bulgaria (39%) and Romania (38%) also struggled with problems related to infrastructure. On the other hand, only 9% of SMEs from Finland, 12% of SMEs from Denmark, and 14% of such enterprises from Luxembourg encountered similar constraints.

Problems with infrastructure e.g. road, gas, electricity, communication, etc Constraints/difficulties encountered in the last two years:

Yes

No

1 00

75

52 52 59 58 58 56 62 62 61 63 67 67 62 7 1 7 0 7 5 7 4 7 0 7 5 7 4 7 3 7 8 7 7 7 6 7 9 7 4 82 81 81 83 7 7 84 7 8 82 89 50

9

FI

DK

SE

LU

IS

16 15 15 14 12

ES

FR

EE

AT

CY

NO

IT

EU15

NL

UK

BE

EU25

DE

LT

EU27

LV

PT

HU

SI

SK

CZ

NMS10

PL

NMS12

BG

RO

IE

TR

EL

0

47 46 41 40 39 38 36 34 34 34 32 32 30 26 26 23 23 23 23 23 22 22 21 21 19 18 18 17 17

MT

25

Q21. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? h) Problems with infrastructure e.g. road, gas, electricity, communication, etc Base: SMEs, % by country, DK/NA not shown

Evolution in the past two years Decreased

Remained about the same

Q22. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? h) Problems with infrastructure e.g. road, gas, electricity, communication, etc Base: SMEs, % among those who report such difficulty , DK/NA not shown

Increased

1 00

70

54

58

68

71

52

FI

DK

8

IT

8

BE

9

DE

9

62 37 42 32 40 39 27 32 25 31 23 8 7 7 7 6 6 5 4 2 2 1 0

FR

19 20

HU

UK

SK

CY

CZ

LV

SE

NO

IC

PT

ES

TR

NMS10

NMS12

LT

EE

PL

EL

62

LU

34 39 39

BG

58 53 49 45 46

AT

39

24 22 21 19 16 15 15 15 14 13 12 12 12 12 12 11 10 10 10

RO

0

43 43 48 45 47 50

EU15

25

37 55 48 61 54

SI

32

25

40 73 72

MT

60

28 35 38 40 39 38 42 41 32 45 41 49 57 51 51

NL

43 44

59

EU25

54

23 49

IE

50

32 34

EU27

21 75

Of companies struggling with infrastructure problems, those in the Netherlands (-46), Belgium (-46), Malta (-45), France (-39), Denmark (+36) are most likely to report that their situation is further deteriorating. Contrary to the EU-wide trend, SME managers in Greece (+57) and Lithuania (+54) do not believe the situation to be changing for the worse. About a fifth or more SMEs in Greece, Romania, Poland and Estonia (19%-24%) say that this problem has been decreasing in the past two years. Slightly more SMEs in the EU-27 countries have been experiencing a worsening situation over the past two years compared to those who felt otherwise (-3). Infrastructural problems disturb the transportation sector the most (33%), followed by the hospitality industry (30%). There is no significant difference in the balance score between SMEs and LSE (-3 and -1, respectively) both groups are relatively pessimistic about their situation.

Analytical Report, page 31


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2.3.9 Problems with purchasing power of customers As mentioned above, most small and medium-sized SMEs in Europe report having problems with the purchasing power of their customers. 46% of the managers interviewed in the territory of the current European Union told us that their customers lack appropriate purchasing power. This concern is most widespread in Greece (77%), Portugal (74%) and Turkey (73%). Showing a huge gap between the two ends of the ranking, in Norway and Denmark, only 13% of SMEs indicate facing similar problems.

Problems with the purchasing power of customers Constraints/difficulties encountered in the last two years:

Yes

No

1 00

56 59 63 7 0 7 0 7 3 7 4 7 5

50

25

77 74 73 66 65 61 60 58 55 54 54 54 52 52 50 49 49 48 46 45 45 44 42 40 36 34 33 30 29 26 25 24 23

IS

UK

IE

SE

FI

ES

NL

EE

LU

PL

LV

SI

EU15

EU25

LT

EU27

FR

CY

NMS10

NMS12

IT

BE

CZ

SK

AT

BG

RO

DE

HU

TR

MT

EL

PT

0

7 8 82

13 13

DK

27 28 35 35 40 44 42 45 44 41 44 46 48 51 48 51 51 54 52 55 58 62

NO

22 24 26 75

Q21. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? i) Problems with the purchasing power of customers Base : SMEs, % by country, DK/NA not shown

Evolution in the past two years Decreased

Remained about the same

Q22. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? i) Problems with the purchasing power of customers Base: SMEs, % among those who report such difficulty , DK/NA not shown

Increased

1 00

65

34 63

37 69

74 72 72 76

54

81

54

14 14 12 12 12 11 10 10 10

9

9

8

19 19 25 20 14 15 7 6 4 3 3 1

LU

22

MT

25

BE

24

SI

37

BG

HU

AT

NMS12

NMS10

19 25 25

IT

24 20 22

NO

30 30

56

EL

55

FR

50

FI

19

LV

SK

CZ

UK

PL

RO

EE

LT

IC

NL

IE

32 69 62 62

CY

44

26 25 25 25 24 24 22 20 20 20 20 19 18 18 18 16 15

TR

27

70 33 32 38 32 43

25

0

30 51 51 60 64 63

ES

27

42 50

61

EU15

56

43 48 41 46 35

EU25

27

PT

40

34 45

EU27

26

18

SE

50

34

DE

47

DK

75

This is not only the prime concern of most European SME, the problem also seems to have been worsening quite significantly over the past two years, at least overall. The EU-27 average shows a balance score of -25: most SMEs say that their situation has been degrading over the past two years in this regard. Even if in most economies, SMEs are less and less able to find the appropriate purchasing power for their products (the trend is especially unfavourable in France: -64, Malta: -54, Luxembourg: -53, Italy: -49 and Greece: -47), affected SMEs in some European economies do not provide such gloomy reports. SMEs who do not predominantly witness deterioration in this regard were found in largest proportions in Iceland (+63, which is the only country where more managers sensed improvement than deterioration), Estonia (+47), and Sweden (+41). In each SME segment those who perceive further decline are in the majority as opposed to any other opinion, the most in the hospitality sector (-45), and the least in healthcare (-5)

page 32


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2.4 The administrative burden in Europe As we saw in the previous analysis, coping with administrative regulations is a significant constraint for many SMEs in Europe – second only to the problem of customers’ (lack of) purchasing power. We also detected an unfavourable tendency in this regard: most companies that claim to be overburdened by administrative regulations report that the situation has gotten worse in the past two years. In this section, we focus on improvement and take a closer look at the background of these issues.

2.4.1 Favourable change in administrative constraints Following up on the question we discussed in Chapter 2.3.7, we asked those who reported a decrease in experienced administrative difficulties about the main cause to which they attribute this favourable tendency. As there were multiple filters ahead of this question (the group that answered this question both encountered administrative difficulties and reported improvement in administrative constraints over the past two years) only a handful of companies came to answer it11. A very detailed analysis is therefore impossible. Decrease in administrative constraints due to... Fewer regulatory obligations The regulations and their implementation by the government have been simplified Cheaper or easier communication through ICT tools (e-government) DK/NA

20

31

22

27

Q23. You have answered that the constraints due to regulations have decreased, please indicate what you consider to be the cause. Was it due to … Base: %, those SMEs who mentioned that constraints due to regulations have decreased

As the chart above suggests, respondents primarily attribute the reduced administrative difficulties to e-government. Many SME managers had no clear opinion on this issue or could not decide between the various options provided (20%). Although nominally the most numerous group of managers praise the effects of e-government in ensuring easier administration and communication with authorities (31%), almost as many attribute the favourable change to simplified provisions and procedures (27%). A somewhat smaller group report a decrease in the number of regulatory obligations (22%). The sample sizes in the individual countries and sectors are too small to provide sound, reliable estimations in a more detailed breakdown. Nevertheless, we see a marked difference between the EU average and the new Member States’ results. In the twelve countries that joined the EU recently, the positive effects of e-government tools (44% mentioning this option) are more pronounced.

11

212 in the EU-27 countries, for further details please check Table 27a and 27b in the Annex

Analytical Report, page 33


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2.4.2 Evaluation of regulations The following question was aimed at understanding perceptions of the current regulations: Governments impose various regulations for businesses in order to achieve certain goals. Do you think that the regulations that apply to your company are appropriate to achieve these goals, for instance the protection of the environment or the financing of the provision of general public services? - Yes, - No; the regulations go clearly too far, - No; the regulations go slightly too far, - No; the regulations could be more ambitious in order to achieve their goals. - [DK/NA] As the graph below shows, answers received in the various countries of Europe show great variation. While 69% of Finnish SMEs are content with the regulations they exist under, only 15% of German businesses are happy with the provisions they are confronted with. Appropriate regulations

No the regulations could be more ambitious No the regulations go slightly too far No the regulations go clearly too far Yes

1 00

1 19 75

5

16 6 5 10

9

10 16

15

11 7

13

8

9

13

17 20 24 26

50

69

64

25

56

13 22

5

3

9 22 18

24

13 15 23 27

7

4

11

25 18

11 14

10 18

9

12 12 12 10

11

11

17 17 17 12 22

11

8

14

11

14

16

20

21 21 18

12 13 10 14 15

23 13 21 18 10 13 3 5 26 25 21 28 12 13 8 28 27 28 31 30 20 23 13 16 27 26 29 28 29 38 20 18 23 30 34 18

47 44 41 39 38 38 37 37 36 36 35 34 34 33 33 31 29 29 29 29 29 27 26 26 26 25 24 24 24 21 19 15

DE

HU

SI

IT

PL

LT

NMS10

CZ

NMS12

NO

PT

AT

EU25

EU27

FR

EU15

NL

RO

SK

UK

EE

TR

MT

SE

LV

CY

BG

BE

DK

ES

EL

LU

IS

IE

FI

0

Q24. Governments impose various regulations for businesses in order to achieve some goals, Do you think that the regulations that apply to your company are appropriate to achieve their goals, for instance the protection of the environment or the financing of the provision of general public services? Base : SMEs, % by country, DK/NA not shown

At EU-27 level, 44% of SMEs consider themselves to be operating in an overregulated environment (27% say that regulations clearly go too far, and 17% say that they go “slightly” too far). On the other hand, 29% are satisfied with the current regulations, and an additional 12% would even welcome additional measures to achieve goals like a better financed public sphere or a cleaner environment. On balance, only slightly fewer SMEs in the EU think that regulations are proportional or even too modest, than that they go too far (41% vs. 44%, -3). The five economies where regulations are considered to be the most excessive are Italy (38% answer that regulations go “clearly too far”), Germany (34%), Portugal (31%), Hungary (30%) and Austria (30%)and. Looking at various SME segments, the micro SMEs with 1-9 and 10-49 persons employed are most likely to answer that regulations go “clearly too far” (28-28%). SMEs active in the hospitality sector (33%) and in transportation / communication industry (32%) are the most likely to share this opinion. The response on the other extreme (that regulations could be more ambitious) was most frequently mentioned in Turkey (24%), Malta (23), Cyprus (22%), Slovenia (21%) and – again – in Germany

page 34


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

(20%). Differences across SME sectors are minimal in this respect (figures are between 11% and 13%). Regulations are... point difference between % appropriate+modest and % slightly+clearly excessive regulations, negative numbers show a dominant perception of excessive regulations)

55

47 46 45

37 36

27 27 24 24 21

12 10

9

8

1

0

0

-1 -2 -2 -3 -3 -3 -3 -4 -4 -4 -4 -5

-6 -9 -13

-21

-27

IT

DE

SK

AT

HU

CZ

PT

EU15

PL

EU25

LT

EU27

EE

NMS10

LV

UK

NL

NO

FR

NMS12

SI

BE

DK

RO

SE

EL

ES

LU

TR

BG

MT

FI

CY

IS

IE

stringent

appropriate or less

(percentage

Q24. Governments impose various regulations for businesses in order to achieve some goals, Do you think that the regulations that apply to your company are appropriate to achieve their goals, for instance the protection of the environment or the financing of the provision of general public services? Base : SMEs, % by country, DK/NA not shown

On a more general level, we found a by and large favourable evaluation of the situation in 13 Member States (and two non-EU countries), with a positive balance between “appropriate” or even “not ambitious enough” answers and “clearly-“ or “slightly” excessive responses. This is especially the case in Iceland (+55), Ireland (+47), Finland (+46) and Cyprus (+45). In some of the largest EU economies, on the other hand, this balance is negative: in Italy (-27), Germany (-21) and Austria (-13), managers dominantly think that their businesses are over-regulated. A similar analysis shows a greater dissatisfaction among the small sized companies with 10-49 persons employed (-8)(-8), and in the hospitality sector (-10) as well as the transportation/ communication industries (-12). The only SME segment where the balance is clearly positive, (that is, where firms are generally content with the current level of regulations or would even accept more) is the community, personal and social service industry (+11) (See Annex Table 28b.)

Analytical Report, page 35


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2.4.3 Time spent with administrative requirements While this is a common measure of the administrative burden in various economies, SME managers had great difficulties with estimating the human effort it takes to cope with all regulatory requirements within their organisation. 40% of managers in the EU could not estimate the amount of work spent with fulfilling regulatory requirements. European Union SMEs that responded to this question spent, on average, 69 man-days annually with satisfying the regulatory requirements. This ranges from a spectacular 146 man-days in Slovenia to 13 in Estonia, 22 in Cyprus and 25 in Iceland. The extraordinarily high figure in Slovenia might have been the temporary result of preparations for the euro changeover, which certainly increased the administrative burden on SMEs quite significantly, especially in the months when the fieldwork of this study was conducted. SMEs in the old EU Member States apparently spent more time with administration than those in the newly acceded countries (71 vs. 58 days). Working days spent in 2006 related to the compliance with information requirements contained in legislation

EE 13

25

22

IS

CY

31

26

42

39

LT

FI

42

IE

NO

42

AT

UK

46

42

PL

TR

HU

46

46

SE

51

50

EL

MT

54

53

DE

DK

55

54

NL

NMS10

56

55

FR

BG

58

57

LV

CZ

EU25

NMS12

69

EU27

63

71

69

EU15

90

88

IT

BE

96

96

SK

LU

106

104

PT

RO

146

SI

ES

139

(in man-days)

Q25. How many working days, that is man days, have been spent this year in total in your enterprise with administrative tasks directly related to the compliance with information requirements contained in legislation, such as the time and effort in filling out forms? Base : SMEs, man days, by country

Of course the number of man-days spent with administrative tasks is dependent on the size of an SME, too. The different structures of various national economies, especially regarding the size of SMEs, might have an effect on the number of working days spent coping with bureaucratic requirements. The graph on the next page shows the proportion of the reported number of working days spent with administrative tasks within the estimated total Annual Work Units (AWU)12 (that is all man-days annually) at the given SME, and provides the averages for the various countries. As evident from these results, the top-ranking country did not change: the reported relative burden on companies is the highest in Slovenia, where managers claim that a fifth (20%) of all cumulated days (spent with work by all employees at their SME) was spoiled by completing various administrative tasks. The reported situation is not much better in Spain (17%) or Portugal (17%) where SMEs reportedly sacrifice almost one fifth of all their time spent working to fulfil bureaucratic requirements. The situation reported from Belgium and Slovakia is also worse than the EU average; here 12-12% of working time is spent satisfying bureaucratic requests. On average, reportedly 8% of the total time spent at SME workplaces in the European Union is spent with paperwork, fulfilling administrative obligations. While this might reflect an overstatement of the 12

Annual Work Unit is a standardised calculation method of man-days of a person employed in 8 hours that calculates with 255 man-days for full time employment. For more details please refer to Eurostat Concepts and Definitions Database: http://forum.europa.eu.int/irc/dsis/coded/info/data/coded/en/gl009928.htm. Our estimation of AWU is not perfectly “clean” as we assume that each person reported to be working with an SME is working 8 hours per day.

page 36


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

issue, and many managers could not even recall the volume of necessary work, this proportion is rather high. As we already hinted, the bureaucratic time-burden is a bit lighter in the New Member States, with a reported 7% of working hours spent with administration. Estimated relative time-burden due to administrative tasks, %

2

2

2

NO

CY

FI

IS

EE 1

3

3

MT

4

4

LV

TR

IE

4

4

AT

EL

5

5

HU

5

FR

5

LT

PL

6

6

DK

UK

6

6

SE

7

6

BG

NMS10

7

7

CZ

NMS12

8

7

EU27

DE

8

8

NL

EU25

EU15

10

8

IT

11 10

RO

12

SK

BE

LU

17

PT

SI

12

17

ES

20

Man-days spent with administration divided by Annual Work Units (number of employees X 255)

Q25. How many working days, that is man days, have been spent this year in total in your enterprise with administrative tasks directly related to the compliance with information requirements contained in legislation, such as the time and effort in filling out forms? Base: SMEs, averages, by country

On the favourable end of this scale we find Estonia – a country with great advances in implementing e-government. Here, reportedly 1% of all working hours were spent dealing with administrative tasks. A nearly as favourable situation was reported from Iceland, Finland and Cyprus: in these countries, SMEs said they spent about 2% of their total human efforts to comply with bureaucratic requirements. Relative time-burden of administrative tasks (% EU27, man-days spent with bureaucracy / total AWU in SME)

SME Activity sector

Size class

Estimated relative time-burden of administrative tasks, % EU27 SME

8

1-9 persons employed

9

10-49 persons employed

2

50-249 persons employed

1

250+ persons employed

0

D. Manufacturing

5

F. Construction

9

G. Wholesale and retail

8

H. Hotels and restaurants

6

I. Transport, storage and communication

10

J. Financial intermediation

10

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

9

N. Health and social work

9

O. Other community, social and personal service

8

The table above confirms that administrative tasks can be better absorbed by larger organisations. Micro SMEs sacrifice most resources in complying with the required paperwork (9%), while this burden does not reach half percent at large scaled enterprises. There is limited variation across the various industry sectors; manufacturing reports the lightest burden (5%) and the transportation / communication and the financial intermediation sectors the greatest (10-10%).

Analytical Report, page 37


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2.5 Operating within the Internal Market of the EU The European Union offers several opportunities meant to decrease the constraints on businesses operating in the common European marketplace. This survey tested whether or not SMEs appreciate some of these possibilities offered by the internal market of the EU.

2.5.1 Opportunities provided by the internal market When asked about the relative importance of the major features of the internal market, over one third of managers (32-35%) commented that these opportunities were not relevant to them, either because they only trade/operate inland, or for some other reason. Especially micro enterprises and those in construction, financial intermediation, healthcare and other social / personal services tended to answer that the question was irrelevant in their case. The majority of SMEs in the EU consider the same currency in several Member States to be the most important feature of the internal market from their enterprises’ point of view (26% consider this very important and an additional 15% say it is “rather” important for them). This proportion is not significantly higher in the eurozone (26% important and 18% rather important), which means that SMEs inside and outside of the euro area benefit nearly equally from the common European currency. The larger an enterprise, the more likely it is to consider the euro as an important opportunity: 35% of LSEs regard having the common currency as very important (and an additional 22% say it is rather important), while ‘only’ 25% of the micro enterprises regard the common currency as very or rather important from their own perspective. The same rule applies to all features tested: larger enterprises (especially LSEs) appreciate the opportunities provided by the internal market more than smaller companies do (see Annex Tables 30b-33b for details). Possibilities offered by the EU internal market, % EU27 Same currency in most of the Member States

15

26

9

16

32

2

very important rather important

Single Market legislation including harmonised technical standards

20

No border controls any more

19

18

9

15

33

4

34

3

35

2

80

100

rather not important not important at all

Hire workers from other EU countries

9

0

13

12

20

10

13

21

29

40

60

grey does not do business elsewhere in the EU / not relevant

DK/NA

Q26. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union. Base: SMEs

European SMEs – at least those who do not dismiss the idea of doing business in the internal market – also acknowledge the importance of EU-wide harmonised standards; significantly more managers think this is an important feature of the internal market (38% say it is very or rather important) than who think that it is not important (24% say it is not at all or rather not important for them). The evaluation is less clearly positive for disappearing internal borders: only slightly more managers find it important (very or rather: 32%) than unimportant (rather not or not at all: 31%). Finally, the ability to hire workers from other EU countries is not a relevant opportunity for most European SMEs: 29% say it is not important at all, 13% indicate that it is rather not important, and only 9% say it is very important to them.

page 38


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Especially Irish (83%), Slovenian (who switched over to the euro a month after the study was completed; 71%) and Portuguese (68%) SMEs consider the common currency to bring direct opportunities for them. In most economies, the majority admitted that it is rather or very important for them that there is a common European currency in circulation in several important Member States that produce the bulk of the EU’s economic output. In many countries where this opportunity was not considered important, this was the result more of a lack of interest in / awareness of doing business on the internal market than of a negative evaluation of the inherent possibilities of the euro. For example, in Hungary, where the smallest number of SMEs consider the euro to bring them important possibilities for doing business in the EU (29%), the proportion of those with an opposing opinion is even smaller. Only 10% say that the euro is not, or rather not important in trading within the EU. But a large majority of Hungarian SMEs (63%) spontaneously respond that they do not do any business with the EU, therefore the question is not relevant for them (see Annex table 31a). Features of the EU internal market:

Same currency in most of the Member States % not at all + rather not important % very + rather important

100 14 20 21

75

11

18 5

36 23

36

20 19 20 17 18

25

17

50

35

35 19 19

10

19 25 26 25

55

44 26

19

25 24 26

8

83 7 1 68 67 66 66

25

27

7 61 60 60 59 58 53 53 52 49 49 48 45 45 44 44 44 42 41 41 41 38 38 35 33 32 31 31 28 27

NO

HU

DE

UK

SE

LV

CZ

DK

ES

NMS10

EU15

EU25

EU27

NMS12

PL

LT

IS

IT

NL

SK

FR

FI

TR

CY

BE

AT

EE

BG

LU

EL

RO

MT

SI

PT

IE

0

Q26. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union. b) Same currency in most of the Member States? Base: SMEs, % by country

The only countries where the relative majority consider the euro to be unimportant for them are Denmark (44% think it is not or rather not important versus only 35% indicating it is important or very important) and the UK (55% vs. 31%). In Sweden, which is the third old EU Member State that opted not to join the eurozone (yet), the relative majority consider the euro an important opportunity for their businesses.

Analytical Report, page 39


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Features of the EU internal market:

Harmonised technical standards % not at all + rather not important % very + rather important

100

75

22 8

20

14

33

40 18 13 20

50

25

34

29 15

7

25 29

45

31 15

16 23 21 24 25 20 20

26 26 30

40

22 25 24 21 11 68 66 64 64 7 60 59 55 53 51 51 50 49 48 47 46 46 44 42 40 39 39 38 38 37 37 37 37 36 36 33 32 32 30 30 29

HU

SE

NL

ES

DE

NO

FI

DK

FR

EU15

CZ

UK

LV

EU25

IT

EU27

CY

AT

NMS10

NMS12

BE

LU

IS

PL

EL

TR

SK

EE

MT

IE

LT

PT

RO

SI

BG

0

Q26. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union. d) Single Market legislation including harmonised technical standards? Base: SMEs, % by country

Harmonised technical standards are also seen as rather beneficial in most European economies, again with the exception of the UK and Denmark. Such standards seem to be rather important for the two latest additions to the EU. Slovenia tops this list (with 68% of SMEs considering such harmonised standards very- or rather useful), and Bulgaria comes second (66%). Portuguese (64%) and Romanian (64%) managers are also among those most appreciative of the possibilities created by technical harmonisation across the internal EU market. Features of the EU internal market:

No border controls any more % not at all + rather not important % very + rather important

100

75

27 30

31

39 21

28 25

38 24

11 14

23

50

25

62 61 57 56 55 55 55 53 51 50 47

36 41

31 36

48 25

53 52

26 24 28 25 31 31 32 33 23 22

30

18

29

37

9 42 40 40 39 37 36 36 34 33 33 33 32 32 32 32 30 29 27 25 25 25 24 20 20

DE

NO

HU

SE

IS

DK

ES

CZ

NL

EU15

EU25

LV

EU27

FR

IT

PL

NMS10

UK

BE

NMS12

FI

LU

CY

AT

SK

PT

MT

EL

LT

BG

RO

EE

TR

SI

IE

0

Q26. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union. a) No border controls any more Base: SMEs, % by country

Slovenian (62%), Irish (61%), Estonian (56%), and – interestingly – Turkish managers consider the disappearing national borders to present important opportunities. In Turkey, which has yet to join the EU, 57% appreciate the lack of border control between several EU Member States. Being part of the system is obviously not a requirement of its appreciation: two out of the three countries where the most businesses consider this important are not or not full participants of the Schengen mechanism (providing free circulation of goods and people). The countries where the dominant perception of businesses is that this feature is “not” or “not very” important are Denmark (53% vs. 25%), Iceland (a non-EU country participating the Schengen agreement; 52% vs. 25%), the UK (not fully participating the Schengen mechanism); where 48% say

page 40


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

that the lack of border control is “not at all” or “rather not” an important possibility for them, while 36% are on the contrary opinion. Also in the Czech Republic (33% vs. 29%); Norway (also part of the Schengen area, 29% vs. 20% ); and Germany (37% vs. 20%) the majority say that it is “not” or “rather not” an important business opportunity that some of the former borders in Europe do not physically exist anymore. Features of the EU internal market:

Hire workers from other EU countries % not at all + rather not important % very + rather important

100

75

40 36 49 52 38

50

33 38

50

56

38 36

28 19

25

43

49

60 38 42 41 42

31

78

68

59 31

37 36 35 34 30 30 28 26 25 25 24 24 23 22 22 21 21 21 19 19 18 18 17

42 40

51 40

49 45 48 51

44 25

17 17

16 15

15

14 13 12 11

5

IE LU PT TR MT CY BE IS FR ES RO AT EL IT LT PL EU15 EU25 EU27 NO SI UK NL DK EE NMS12 NMS10 SK SE FI LV CZ BG DE HU

0

51

51

Q26. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union. c) Hire workers from other EU countries? Base : SMEs, % by country

Finally, most SMEs in Europe disagree that their freedom to employ workers from other Member States provides important opportunities for them. The economies that dominantly consider this possibility as essential or rather important are Ireland (where 51% of SMEs consider the possibility to use EU-foreign labour and an important opportunity versus 40% who do not) and Luxembourg (43% vs. 36%). While most SMEs in Spain are indifferent, those who had an opinion also considered this feature of the internal market as important for them (26% vs. 19%). Those with an opinion were highly split in Cyprus (34% assess this feature positively versus 33% who think it is unimportant) and France, too (28-28% in both camps). Least happy are Estonians about this property of the internal market, where 78% of SME managers interviewed regarded free (inward) movement of labour is not a relevant opportunity for them. UK SMEs are the second (68%) and Slovenians the third most likely to dismiss this feature as unimportant.

Analytical Report, page 41


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

2.5.2 Harmonised standards in the EU In order to increase competition and to remove barriers from economic cooperation and trade, the EU has been implementing EU-wide common standards to harmonise the technical properties of goods and services throughout the Member States. As we saw in the previous section, most of those managers who do not spontaneously reject the possibility of doing business in the EU consider such harmonised regulations “important” for their business. Naturally, those harmonised standards apply to all companies, not only those for whom a more uniform European market facilitates business. We asked respondents the following question: “Nowadays, technical standards and certain regulations are often decided at the EU level to avoid trade barriers. Do you see any benefits for your enterprise in EU standards replacing national regulations, or not?” If we put it this way, most European SMEs answered “no”, meaning that they do not see any benefits for their enterprise from EU standards (52%), and only less than one third (29%) claimed that this process is beneficial for them. Benefit of the EU standards replacing national regulations No Yes

100

75 29 35 32

44 27 35

50

25

50 30 33

44 28 36

48 50 50

54 52 53 42 5 1 52

66 54 51 38

69 7 2 66

49 5 7 41

5 4 63

77 58

51 50 47 46 43 42 40 39 38 36 35 33 33 33 33 33 31 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 28 27 26 24 22 21 21 21 19 17

16

CZ

UK

IS

LV

DE

HU

AT

SE

FR

ES

NL

SK

IE

NMS10

EU25

CY

EU15

EU27

BE

NMS12

PT

FI

DK

LT

NO

PL

LU

EE

BG

EL

MT

SI

RO

IT

TR

0

Q27. Nowadays, technical standards and certain regulations are often decided at the EU level to avoid trade barriers. Do you see any benefit for your enterprise that EU standards replace national regulations, or not? Base: SMEs, % by country

SMEs in Italy (51%), Turkey (50%), Slovenia (47%) and Romania (46%) are the most likely to say that EU standards benefit them. Altogether, there are six EU Member States where the number of managers who do see benefits is greater than the number of those who do not see benefits. In seventeen states, those who do not see benefits are in a clear majority (in the remaining two states, opinions are about evenly split, see Annex table 34a). However, adding the “it depends” category to the affirmative answers (also recorded by interviewers when this reply was provided spontaneously13) we find that in 10 Member States, more managers agree – even if conditionally – that harmonisation has benefits. In another 15 Member States, the majority of responses are “unconditionally” negative. At EU-27 level, if we add the “it depends” answers to the “yes” answers, we still see more managers saying that harmonisation has no benefits for them (52%), compared with the 38% who do see some benefits – even if only conditionally. One would expect large corporations to favour such harmonisation or uniformisation of standards more strongly than small firms. Indeed, our results show significant difference between SMEs (30% 13

On EU-27 level, 9% of SMEs responded this way.

page 42


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

see benefits in EU standards replacing national ones, 53% do not) and large enterprises (38% vs. 46%). Still, the “yes” answers do not outscore negative answers in any of the industry sectors or size classes. However, adding the conditional affirmation (the “it depends” answers), we find that in the manufacturing sector (where the difference between any, even conditional yes and no answers is +7 percentage points) and the trade sector (+6) the majority do see benefits in EU regulations replacing national ones. On the other hand, in the healthcare (-25), personal services (-20) and hospitality (-23) sectors, even if we include the conditional confirmation of perceived benefits, most managers are clearly pessimistic about possible gains from EU standards substituting national ones.

Analytical Report, page 43


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

3. SMEs in the global economy The second important area of analysis in this report is related to the experience and behaviour of European SMEs in the globalised market. In this chapter we will discuss the topics of exports, import of key inputs, and foreign direct investment of European SMEs.

3.1 Exports Similarly to the reports regarding their turnover (see section 1.2.1), SMEs were asked to report the amount of their turnover obtained from exports for 2005 and 2006 (estimated), and they were also requested to share their views about the year 2007. This section reports on the findings.14

3.1.1 Performance and outlook First of all, a large number of SMEs do not export at all (see Annex Table 38a). Overall, less than one in ten SMEs is involved in exports in the EU (8%). While some small open economies report a much higher involvement in exports (Estonia: 23% of companies have some turnover from exports, Slovenia: 21%, Finland: 19%, Denmark: 17%, etc.) Small and medium-sized enterprises in some of the largest EU countries are, on the other hand, not very much inclined to be involved in cross-border trade: most notably Spain (3%), France (6%), Italy (7%) , Romania (7%) and Poland (7%). But some of the smaller economies are quite closed as well, with a low proportion of SMEs involved in exports: Cyprus (3%), Bulgaria (4%), Malta (6%). Exporters Proportion of enterprises with any revenue from exports 25 20

19

17

16 16 15

5

14 13 12

11

11

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

8

8

8

8

8

8

7

7

7

7

7

6

6

4

3

3

ES

23 21

CY

10

BG

15

FR

IT

MT

CZ

RO

PL

TR

BE

EU15

EU25

EU27

NMS12

EL

NMS10

DE

PT

LV

LU

UK

IE

HU

SK

NO

NL

SE

AT

IS

LT

DK

SI

FI

EE

0

Q31. How much turnover was generated by exports in your enterprise in 2005? Base: SMEs, % gaining any revenue shown, by country

The table to the right reflects marked differences in involvement in export according to company size as well as industry sector. The larger the enterprise the more likely it is to report some turnover from exports (7% among micro-enterprises, but almost one third – 31% – of large scaled enterprises). Export turnover is most often reported in the manufacturing (14%) and trade sectors (12%), while the lowest numbers are found in healthcare (2%) and financial intermediation (2%).

14

As we noted earlier, the amount figures reported over the telephone suffer from a certain bias. While on paper forms managers have time and can look for assistance in answering questions related to their business data (turnover, exports, etc.), over the telephone they seem to be very reluctant to give a top-of-mind figure about sensitive business data. Also, in the survey was no separate question that asked about export activity, instead the turnover from exports was asked, which resulted in underreporting the export activity because a number of managers denied to give a turnover figure for that, and therefore they claimed that they are not exporting.

page 44


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

On average, European SMEs had a reported export turnover of 83 700 euro in 2005. Exports made up 4,6% of the SME turnover in the EU, as the table to the right indicates.

Exporters by industry segments, % EU-27

SME Activity sector

Size class

EU27 SMEs

In contrast, 19% of 2005 LSE turnover was attributed to exports, and even within the SME sector larger size classes reported higher relative income from exports. The most significant proportions of export incomes were found in the transport/storage/communications (9%) and manufacturing (8%) sectors. SMEs in trade are also report a turnover ratio from exports that exceeds the overall average (6%). Only a negligible part of the sales income in healthcare (0.4%) and hospitality (0,8%) comes from exports.

Any export turnover in 2005 8

Proportion of income from exports, 2005 4,6

7

5,0

1-9 persons employed 10-49 persons employed

13

7,9

50-249 persons employed

24

14,9

250+ persons employed

28

19,4

D. Manufacturing

14

7,8

F. Construction

5

2,0

G. Wholesale and retail

12

5,9

H. Hotels and restaurants I. Transport, storage and communication J. Financial intermediation K. Real estate, renting and business activities N. Health and social work O. Other community, social and personal service

1

0,8

9

9,0

2

1,7

6

4,2

2

0,4

The similar proportions show significant 3 2,0 variance across countries in Europe, with SMEs from Belgium (15% of their 2005 income came from exports) Estonia (12%) and Slovenia (11%) appearing to be the most reliant on income from export, followed by firms from Iceland (10%). On the other hand, exports are the least important source of income in Greece (2%) and Cyprus (a little over 2%). Exports’ share in the revenue 15,2

(2005)

11,9 11,0 9,7 8,0 8,0

2,0

EL

CY

2,5 2,4

LV

BG

MT

IT

HU

DE

ES

UK

IE

NO

SE

EU15

EU27

EU25

CZ

PT

RO

NMS12

FI

5 ,5 5,3 5 ,1 5,0 4,9 4,8 4,6 4,6 4,4 4,3 4,2 3,9 3,6 3,6 3,5 3,5 3,3 3,0 3,0

NMS10

6,3 6,2

PL

SK

AT

LU

FR

NL

LT

IS

DK

SI

EE

BE

7 ,1 7 ,0 6,9

TR

8,4 8,4

Q7. What was the turnover, that is the annual sales, of your enterprise in 2005? Q31. How much revenue was generated by exports in your enterprise in 2005? Base : those SMEs where they gave the turnover and export for 2006, 100*(Q31/Q7) averages, by country ‘no answer’ to export amount was recoded to 0

Analytical Report, page 45


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Export trends SMEs were asked to report their expected turnover generated by exports in 2006 (the fieldwork was carried out in 2006 November-December) and their outlooks for 2007. The graph below shows the change from 2005 to 2006, based on the difference of enterprise-level turnover for 2005 and 2006.

Export revenue change 2005-2006

94

CY

SI

ES

EE

FR

EL

RO

PL

EU15

NO

72

85

102

100

103

102

106

105

107

NMS12

DK

107

CZ

106

107

SK

NMS10

109

108

FI

AT

111

110

BE

109

111

DE

LU

112

EU27

HU

113

112

EU25

113

119

NL

SE

119

PT

UK

120

113

120

LV

BG

125

120

IE

125

TR

IS

135

132

IT

LT

139

135

MT

(2005 = 100)

Q31. How much turnover was generated by exports in your enterprise in 2005? Q32. How much is the expected turnover from exports in 2006? Base: those SMEs where they gave the export for 2006 and 2005, 100*(q32/q31), national averages, by country

On the EU level the reported amount of exports increased quite markedly in 2006 (by 12% compared to 2005). The gloomiest reports in this regard came from the few exporters in Cyprus and Spain, but also from Slovenia (all reporting a lower expected turnover from exports in 2006). On the other hand, spectacular growth was reported by the few exporting companies in, Malta (+39), by exporting SMEs in Italy (+35), Turkey (+35) and Ireland (+32). Expectations regarding exports in 2007 compared to 2006

Will decrease Will remain about the same

(valid answers only) 100

2 18

7 16

75

9

4

2

2

Will increase 7

19 29 32 34 29

17 13 20 26

3

4

6

6

10

7

2

8

8

7

10

8

5

5

8

28 36 36 35 36 32 41 40

46 20

42 46 43 46 51 52 49

18

41

8

5

2

6

6

6

3

8

54 59 63 59 60 63 67 62

4

76

50 81 7 8

25

7 2 67 67 64 64 63 61 61 60 60 58 58 53 52 52 52 49 47 47 46 45 43 43 42 38 36 36 35 35 31 31 30

20

LV RO TR PL SI BG IS MT EL EE LT NMS12 NMS10 SK NO ES CY DK HU IT BE LU AT FI NL PT CZ IE SE EU27 EU25 EU15 FR DE UK

0

Q33. What is your expectation for 2007 regarding your enterprise’s turnover generated by exports? Base : SMEs, %, DK/NA + no export foreseen not shown, by country

The outlook for 2007 is generally optimistic as well. 35% of those who replied from the EU-27 level with a valid answer (i.e. did not refuse or did not spontaneously claim that no exports were foreseen for 2007) expect growing export turnover in 2007, the majority (59%) anticipating no change, and only 6% expecting decreasing income from exports in 2007. The fewest SMEs with improving export expectations were detected in the UK (20%). The results are highly polarised: significantly more companies among those answering validly in the new Member States anticipate export growth for 2007 (60%) compared to the EU15 (31%). Especially optimistic are SMEs in Latvia (81%), Romania (78%), Turkey (72%) and Poland (67%).

page 46


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Expected export revenue change 2006-2007

103

102

101

99

LU

CY

DE

SE

105

103

UK

FR

107

106

LT

ES

EU15

108

108

AT

107

108

EU27

IT

108

108

IS

110

109

CZ

PT

EU25

111

BG

111

113

112

FI

SI

113

NL

EL

114

114

DK

SK

NO

EE

115

115

NMS10

114

115

RO

NMS12

115

115

HU

117

116

IE

PL

LV

121

119

MT

131

121

TR

BE

(2006 = 100)

Calculated figures, based on: Q32. How much is the expected turnover from exports in 2006? Q33. What is your expectation for 2007 regarding your enterprise’s turnover generated by exports? Will increase / Will remain about the same / Will decrease / [no exports are foreseen for 2007] / [DK/NA] Q33a. Could you, please estimate the expected [IF Q33 = 3] increase OR [IF Q33 = 1] decrease of exports compared to 2006, in percent. WRITE IN PCT/ [DK/NA] Base :SMES. The 2006 export figure was multiplied by the projected increase/decrease (all other cases were kept unchanged) and than it was divided by the 2006 amount of exports, averages, by country

The various size classes are similarly optimistic in their expectations for 2007: small enterprises are, however, where exporters anticipate the highest increase for 2007 +16%. Optimism is slightly lower in the larger segments (LSEs: +9%, see table to the right).

SME Activity sector

The most optimistic economies are the Turkish (where SMEs anticipate an overall 31% higher mean export turnover than in 2006), followed by Belgian and Maltese firms (+21% both) and Polish companies (+19%). Even in the least optimistic economies, stability of export income is projected for 2007 (Cyprus, -1%, Luxembourg, +1%), while in several others a slight increase is anticipated (France +2%; Sweden, Germany +3%; Germany, UK +2%).

Size class

Looking at another aspect of export outlooks for 2007, we find some old Member States to appear on the top spots. On the graph above, we estimated the mean turnover increase based on reports about 2006 export turnover, and the anticipated percentage change for 2007. This fuller picture of export outlooks is optimistic on one hand (as exporters do not count on decrease in any country, and the balance of expected changes is well in the positive range in all but five Member States), but it is a bit pessimistic as well, because exporters anticipate a Anticipated change in exports for 2007, % EU-27 slowdown in the growth of turnover from exports (+8%) 2007 compared to the reported change from 2005 to 2006 projection (+12%). (2006 = 100) EU27 SME

108

1-9 persons employed

111

10-49 persons employed

116

50-249 persons employed

108

250+ persons employed

109

D. Manufacturing

107

F. Construction

115

G. Wholesale and retail

109

H. Hotels and restaurants I. Transport, storage and communication J. Financial intermediation K. Real estate, renting and business activities N. Health and social work O. Other community, social and personal service

109 111 104 104 104 111

Among the various industry categories construction emerges as the most optimistic for 2007 (+15%) along with transport and personal services (+11% both).

Analytical Report, page 47


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

3.1.2 Export destinations Main export destinations of enterprises in the European Union

Most EU SMEs indicated that their primary export destination was Germany (12%. Overall, seven out of ten firms (66%) indicated a country in the (2007) EU as their main export target. The EU countries most frequently indicated as key export destinations were France (10%), Spain (6%), the Netherlands (6%), Italy (5%), the UK (4%), Austria (4%), Belgium (3%), Ireland (3% Greece (2%) and Sweden (2%). For 14% of EU SME, the primary export target was the rest of the EU. 14% reported a European country outside the Union. 7% traded primarily with Asia, 5% with North America, and 4% with Africa. Only a handful of SMEs indicated that their key export country was somewhere in South America or in the Oceania region (1% for both).

Australia & Oceania; 1

South America; 1 Africa; 4 North America; 5

DE; 12

Asia; 7 FR; 10

other Europe; 14

ES; 6

NL; 6 Other EU; 10

IT; 5

CZ; 1 PT; 2 SE; 2

AT; 4 EL; 2 BE; 3 IE; 3UK; 4

Q34. What is the main country of destination for your exports? Base: those SMEs who have had exports and indicated the primary destination

Exporters who indicated that an EU country was their prime export destination were in the minority only in Turkey and Slovenia. Slovenians were most likely to export to a European country outside the EU (51% – to countries of Former Yugoslavia), while Turkish exporters were primarily trading with countries outside Europe (51%). The EU was the most dominant export destination in Bulgaria (100%), Slovakia (99%), Ireland (95%), Cyprus (94%), Norway (92%), Luxembourg (91%), Lithuania (89%), Spain (88%), Austria (87%) and Belgium (85%). Over one quarter of the exporters traded with countries outside the EU (besides the aforementioned Turkey) in France (27%), Spain (29%) and Czech Republic (30%). European countries outside the EU were mentioned most frequently by exporters in Slovenia that stands out in this respect (51%), in Hungary (25%), Denmark (23%), Iceland (22%), and Finland (22%). Main country of destination of exports 1 00

1

5 0

3 3

7 1

1 8

1 10

6 5

3 10 15 0

8 11

75

5 0 100 99 95 94 92 91 89 88 87 85 25

1

EU

Europe outside of EU

Outside Europe

1 6 6 8 8 9 11 12 15 15 15 19 14 20 22 16 22 16 27 22 22 21 18 29 30 23 18 17 17 25 13 13 13 1 7 9 22 51 51 7 6 15 19 4

4

81 80 80 80 7 7 7 7 7 5 7 5 7 4 7 4 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 1 7 1 69 68 65 63 63 62

8 54

48

40

SI

TR

IS

FR

SE

CZ

ES

UK

HU

DK

NMS10

EU15

EU25

EU27

PL

NMS12

LV

FI

IT

PT

NL

MT

EL

RO

BE

DE

EE

AT

LT

LU

NO

IE

CY

SK

BG

0

Q34 . What is the main country of destination for your exports? ? Base: SMEs, % by country

page 48


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Network structure of the European Union economies based on main export destinations of EU countries

The figure above shows the network structure of foreign trade within the EU15 as measured by a simplified indicator, limited to the primary destination of exports only. Edges (connecting lines between the countries) indicate significant export relations; the arrow heads indicate the direction of these relations. There is no isolated country in this network, meaning that each Member State (including the most recent ones) has some significant trade linkages with other EU Member States. The only country that is not a major export destination of any EU enterprise is Bulgaria, but firms from here do export to other EU countries. The countries in the core are the favourite export targets: the UK, Germany and France. Spain, the Netherlands, Austria and Italy also belong to what we defined as the “inner circle� of EU trade. In a second circle we find the countries with the strongest trade relations with the core countries: Poland, Belgium, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Denmark, Romania and some non-EU countries such as Turkey and Iceland. The third circle is composed of mainly smaller economies with lower numbers of exporters: Slovenia, Portugal, Ireland, Half of the Baltic/Nordic trade cluster is also similarly close to the core countries (Sweden, Lithuania, Estonia). However, Latvia, Finland, Norway (also belonging to this group) are farther away from this core network, together with the smallest

15

The analysis was conducted by NetMiner v2.6, based on the squared matrix of such trade relations within the EU. The diagram was extracted by the so-called Spring-ED algorithm. The Spring-ED algorithm is based on the idea that repelling forces are given to every pair of non-adjacent nodes, and adjacent nodes are placed near each other. Number of connections is 246, the average network density is 1.35.

Analytical Report, page 49


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Trading with a key partner in the EU is most typical of those few exporters in the hospitality (97%) and healthcare (92%) sectors.

page 50

Size class

Regarding their favourite export destinations, the various size classes do not differ as much as one would expect. Exporters in the trade and manufacturing industries are the most likely to have a key export target country outside of Europe (20% and 15% respectively).

Prime destination of exports (%, EU27, among exporters who disclosed their key target location ,q34)

SME Activity sector

Member States (that are very unlikely to be reported as main export destinations, such as Malta, Cyprus and Luxembourg) and the quite isolated Bulgaria.

EU country

Europe, outside the EU

Outside Europe

EU27 SME

72

13

15

1-9 persons employed

73

14

13

10-49 persons employed

71

9

20

50-249 persons employed

73

11

16

250+ persons employed

80

5

15

D. Manufacturing

73

12

15

F. Construction

72

17

10

G. Wholesale and retail

66

14

20

H. Hotels and restaurants

97

0

2

I. Transport, storage and communication

83

9

7

J. Financial intermediation

85

11

3

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

77

13

10

N. Health and social work

92

8

0

O. Other community, social and personal service

83

16

0


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

3.1.3 Constraints to exports Almost half of European SMEs involved in exports did not report any particular constraint related to their foreign trade activity: 36% declared no problems and 10% did not relate to any of the problems we listed in the following question: Looking at the last two years, what was the main constraint to exporting? Was it ... (READ OUT – ROTATE - ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE) - import tariffs/customs duties - lack of knowledge of foreign markets - lack of management resources - language problems - different regulations in other EU countries - regulations in non-EU countries - lack of capital - [no constraints at all] - [enterprise’s product/service is not suited to export] - [DK/NA]

The top ranked constraint exporters faced was information problem: 13% of those SMEs answering this question said they lacked knowledge of foreign markets (which might be related to current or new export destinations). The second most frequently mentioned problem was that of decreased price competitiveness due to import tariffs in destination countries (9%). Almost as important was the lack of capital to operate within the internal EU market, 9% mentioned this as their prime concern. Main constraint to exporting in the last two years no constraints at all

36

lack of knowledge of foreign markets import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination lack of capital

13 9 9

different regulations in other EU countries

8

lack of management resources

6

regulations in non-EU countries

4

language problems

3

enterprise s product/service is not suited to export

2

DK/NA

10

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Q35. Looking at the last two years, what was the main constraint to exporting? Was it .. Base: those SMES, who had any revenue from exports in 2005

Relatively less important constraints were the difficulty that different regulations still prevail (8%), the lack of management resources (6%), and different regulations in non-EU destinations (4%). Language problems (3%) and the limited export-suitability of products and services (2%) were the least frequently mentioned primary concerns.

Analytical Report, page 51


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

The various constraints are regarded differently by the various enterprise segments (as shown on Table 39b in the Annex16). LSEs are only somewhat more likely than SMEs to report no constraints on exporting (40%), and they are also primarily burdened by lack of knowledge of foreign markets (11%). Among the various industry sectors, trade SMEs are the most troubled by import tariffs (14% mentioning this as the primary constraint to exports). In the manufacturing and construction sectors, the lack of knowledge of foreign markets poses the most important challenge (indicated by 15% and 22%, respectively). SMEs in the financial sectors complain most frequently about non-harmonised regulations across the EU (15%), followed by those in the transport/logistics/communication sector (10%). Exporters in the latter sector suffer the most from the lack of capital to support their exporting activity (24%). The table on the next page shows, for each of the countries surveyed, the three most frequently mentioned difficulties that SMEs involved in exports face. The picture is highly diverse, although the relatively small number of cases in the analysis (see Annex Table 39a) limits the reliability of the results. Looking at the top three answers in each country, we find that the lack of knowledge of foreign markets is among the top three difficulties in the majority of countries. It does not make the top three in the Czech Republic, Denmark, Luxembourg, Hungary, Slovakia, and Iceland. Lack of appropriate information is the most frequently mentioned exporting problem in, Greece, Slovenia, Finland, Estonia Portugal and Turkey. The lack of capital, diverse regulations in EU countries, and high import tariffs also appear very frequently in the top three export constraints in every country. Lack of capital burdens exporting SMEs the most in some of the new Member States: the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Lithuania but also in Austria, Belgium, Ireland, Spain, and Turkey. Customs duties are the most significant constrains in Bulgaria, Greece, Latvia, Malta, Italy, Slovakia, United Kingdom and Slovenia. Lack of harmonisation in the internal EU market is the prime concern of most exporters in Germany, the Netherlands as wee as in Bulgaria, Estonia, Czech Republic and Latvia. Problems with regulations in non-EU markets appear in the top three problems in nine countries, including the Czech Republic, Estonia, Lithuania, Sweden, Hungary, Luxembourg, Poland.

Constraints to exporting (Most frequently mentioned responses by country, %) BE lack of capital lack of knowledge of foreign markets different regulations in other EU countries

10 7 2

CZ lack of capital different regulations in other EU countries regulations in non-EU countries

DE different regulations in other EU countries lack of knowledge of foreign markets import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination

16

14 12 11

28 16 11

DK different regulations in other EU countries lack of management resources lack of capital

EE lack of knowledge of foreign markets different regulations in other EU countries regulations in non-EU countries

24 19 11

9 7

EL lack of knowledge of foreign markets import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination language problems

The size of the exporter subsample are in several countries rather low, see Table 39a in the Annex

page 52

9

30 14 7


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Constraints to exporting, continued (Most frequently mentioned responses by country, %) ES lack of capital

15

lack of knowledge of foreign markets

11

lack of management resources

10

FR import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination lack of knowledge of foreign markets lack of capital

IT lack of knowledge of foreign markets import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination lack of management resources

14 13 8

17

lack of capital

13

different regulations in other EU countries

9

lack of capital

13 12 10

lack of management resources

18 16 10

24 2 2

10 9 7

7

23 17 16

9

regulations in non-EU countries

6

lack of knowledge of foreign markets import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination

22 19 16

AT

language problems

lack of management resources

SI lack of knowledge of foreign markets lack of capital import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination

31 31 7

lack of capital

lack of management resources

16 12

11 9 5

RO lack of capital

15

lack of knowledge of foreign markets different regulations in other EU countries

NO lack of knowledge of foreign markets different regulations in other EU countries

24

SE regulations in non-EU countries lack of knowledge of foreign markets

BG

TR

7

5

10

lack of capital

9

9

lack of capital

lack of capital

20

lack of knowledge of foreign markets

11

10

lack of capital regulations in non-EU countries different regulations in other EU countries

8

lack of capital

12

11

11

28

16

12

lack of capital

12

import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination different regulations in other EU countries

14

HU

FI

UK

9

19

lack of knowledge of foreign markets

lack of knowledge of foreign markets import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination different regulations in other EU countries

15

LV import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination different regulations in other EU countries lack of knowledge of foreign markets

PT lack of knowledge of foreign markets lack of capital enterprise s product/service is not suited to export

SK import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination

lack of knowledge of foreign markets import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination

NL different regulations in other EU countries lack of knowledge of foreign markets regulations in non-EU countries

PL lack of knowledge of foreign markets lack of capital different regulations in other EU countries

5

19

LU import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination regulations in non-EU countries

MT import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination lack of knowledge of foreign markets

7

lack of capital

CY enterprise s product/service is not suited to export lack of knowledge of foreign markets import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination

LT lack of knowledge of foreign markets

11

IE

15 8

IC

10

different regulations in other EU countries

4

9

lack of capital

4

8

regulations in non-EU countries

4

Analytical Report, page 53


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

3.2 Inputs purchased abroad SMEs do not only sell their products in global markets, but also purchase significant amount of their inputs (raw materials, energy, capital, etc.) on foreign markets. 12% of the inputs of an average EU SME are purchased abroad, excluding labour (4% of workers come from abroad, as discussed in section 6.1.1 later in this report). The percentage of inputs purchased abroad is the highest in the smallest and most open economies in Europe: Malta (46%), Luxembourg (40%), Ireland (35%), Estonia (31%), Iceland (27%) and Cyprus (27%). On the other hand, some of the largest European countries are the least reliant on foreign resources, especially France (6%), Italy (8%), Germany (9%) and Spain (10%) but also the Czech Republic (9%) and Norway (10%). 100

Percentage of inputs purchased abroad

75

50

25

46

40

35 31 27 27 25 24 23 23 23 2 1 2 1 2 0 17

16 15

14 14

14

14 13

13 13

13

12 12

12

11

10 10

9

9

8

6

MT LU IE EE IC CY TR SI RO LT EL BE DK PT AT LV UK NMS12 PL SK FI SE BG NMS10 NL HU EU27 EU25 EU15 ES NO CZ DE IT FR

0

Q36. What percentage of your inputs, – including capital, energy and raw materials, but NOT including labour – is purchased abroad? % by country

SME Activity sector

It seems that it is the size of the host economy, rather than the size of the SME that really matters in the proportion of inputs purchased abroad. The differences by SME size are minimal; however, as the pattern shows, larger SMEs are somewhat more likely to obtain inputs from foreign markets. LSEs obtain almost 18% of inputs from abroad, compared to the 12% average among SMEs.

Size class

The size of the economies is closely related to the need for foreign inputs detected among SMEs. The negative correlation between the size of economies17 and the proportion of inputs purchased abroad is statistically significant, and relatively strong (Percentage of inputs purchased abroad 0,497**). The smaller the economy, the higher the (%, EU27) % percentage of inputs purchased abroad. EU27 SMEs

11,7

1-9 persons employed

11,5

10-49 persons employed

13,3

50-249 persons employed

15,8

250+ persons employed

17,6

D. Manufacturing

14,8

F. Construction

8,1

G. Wholesale and retail

21,3

H. Hotels and restaurants

4,0

I. Transport, storage and communication

11,3 The differentiation is more pronounced when we look at the results in a breakdown by industry. The J. Financial intermediation 5,1 percentage of inputs purchased abroad was the highest K. Real estate, renting and business 5,5 activities in the wholesale and retail sector (21%, however these N. Health and social work 6,8 might also include redistributed import goods that are O. Other community, social and not necessarily considered as classical production 5,8 personal service inputs), in manufacturing (15%), and in the transport/storage/ communication sector (11%). The hospitality industry uses the least inputs from 17

Gross domestic product, current prices 2006, IMF, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2006/02/data/weoselgr.aspx

page 54


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

outside the national economy (4%, although it is the most likely to obtain labour from abroad, as we will discuss later), and the financial intermediation sector as well as the business services sector uses very limited inputs from international markets (5% and 6%, respectively).

3.3 Foreign business partnerships Overall, 5% of SMEs in the EU receive some income from foreign business partnerships, either from subsidiaries or joint ventures abroad. Belgium stands out among EU economies with the highest percentage of SMEs with foreign business partnerships bringing them income (13%). It is second to Turkey which reportedly has the most SMEs in Europe with foreign subsidiaries or joint ventures abroad (14%). Also significantly more involved in foreign investment than the EU average are Portugal, Ireland, France and Luxembourg (all 10%).

14,4

Foreign business partnerships

1,9

1,8

1,3

0,8

0,2

0,1

IT

DE

CY

CZ

HU

BG

2,0

2,0

SI

LV

AT

2,3

2,9

2,8

NMS12

ES

3,2

3,0

NMS10

RO

NO

3,7

3,3

NL

EE

4,5

SK

3,7

4,6

EU27

MT

4,9

4,8

EU25

5,2

4,9

LT

5,6

PL

EU15

5,6

IS

6,8

5,8

SE

EL

7,0

DK

7,9

7,5

FI

LU

UK

9,9

9,6

IE

FR

10,3

PT

BE

TR

10,0

12,7

(proportion of enterprises gaining any revenue from foreign subsidiary or joint venture abroad)

Q37. How much of your total turnover, that is your annual sales in percentages is created in foreign subsidiaries, joint ventures abroad? Base: SMEs % any income from foreign business partnerships , [no subsidiary or joint venture] and [DK/NA] answers were recoded to zero income, by country

On the other hand, such partnerships are the rarest in some of the new Member States: especially in Bulgaria, Hungary and the Czech Republic, where the proportion of SMEs with foreign business engagements does not reach 1%, but also in Cyprus with just over 1% of SMEs reporting some turnover attributed to foreign business partnerships). The patterns are similar in Germany and in the two Southern economic strongholds of the pre-2004 EU: around 2% of SMEs report foreign subsidiaries or joint ventures contributing to their income in Italy and Spain, and the situation is similar in Latvia and Slovenia as well (both 2%). The picture is only slightly different if we focus on the significance (the relative proportion in the total SME turnover) of the income produced in foreign partnerships. On EU27 level, slightly over 2% of all SME turnover are created by foreign business partnerships18.

18

This figure is not weighted by the size of the turnover; it provides a simple average of the reported proportions

Analytical Report, page 55


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Revenue from foreign business partnerships

8,1

(aggregated proportion of income from joint ventures and foreign subsidiaries) 6,5 5 ,2 4,7

3 ,0 2 ,8

BG

CZ

HU

CY

SI

0 ,4 0 ,4 0 ,3 0 ,3 0 ,1 0 ,0

LV

1,0 0 ,8 0 ,7

IT

SK

AT

NO

NMS12

NMS10

RO

MT

EU27

EU25

EU15

EE

NL

LT

UK

SE

EL

IS

FI

PL

BE

FR

DK

LU

IE

PT

TR

2 ,3 2 ,3 2 ,2 2 ,1 2 ,1 2 ,0 1,9 1,8 1,7 1,6 1,5 1,4

DE

3 ,4 3 ,4 3 ,3

ES

3 ,9 3 ,9 3 ,8 3 ,7 3 ,7

Q37. How much of your total turnover, that is your annual sales in percentages is created in foreign subsidiaries, joint ventures abroad? Base: SMEs ; q37a+q37b [no subsidiary or joint venture] and [DK/NA] answers were recoded to zero income, averages, by country

Turkey again appears at the top of the ranking (8,1%), followed closely by Portugal (6,5%). The two Member States attributing 5% of turnover to foreign business partnerships are Ireland (5,2%) and Luxemburg (4,7%). As the table below shows, large-scaled enterprises are much more likely than SMEs to be involved in foreign business partnerships, with one fifth reporting some income from such sources (20% vs. 5%). But the contribution of such a partnership to the income of large scaled European enterprises is still quite modest, with only 7% of annual sales being generated from foreign business partnerships even in the largest enterprise segment. The proportion is 2% throughout the SME segment. Foreign business partnership (%, EU27) % having any turnover from foreign partnerships 4,8

% of turnover from subsidiaries 1,3

% of turnover from joint ventures 0,8

% of turnover from foreign partnerships in total19

1-9 persons employed

3,6

1,1

0,7

1,8

10-49 persons employed

5,8

1,4

0,7

2,1

50-249 persons employed

8,2

1,7

0,8

2,5

250+ persons employed

19,9

5,3

2,1

7,4

D. Manufacturing

5,1

1,4

0,5

1,9

F. Construction

3,7

0,9

0,8

1,7

G. Wholesale and retail

5,9

1,9

1,1

3,0

H. Hotels and restaurants

5,4

1,1

1,0

2,2

I. Transport, storage and communication

5,5

1,4

1,5

2,9

J. Financial intermediation

6,5

2,0

1,1

3,1

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

4,2

0,9

0,6

1,5

N. Health and social work

0,7

0,1

0,3

0,4

3,6

0,4

0,8

1,2

SME Activity sector

Size class

EU27 SME

O. Other community, social and personal service

2,1

Among the various industries, financial intermediation comes at the top being the most likely to engage in foreign partnerships (7%), however only by a narrow margin; the differences are very modest. The highest income ratios from foreign business relationships were detected in the financial (3%), trade (3%) and transport/storage/communication (3%) sectors 19

there might be +/- 0.1 difference due to rounding

page 56


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

The sector that is the furthest away from the EU average is healthcare; virtually none of these companies gain income from foreign business partnerships, and only a negligible portion of their turnover comes from such investments.

3.3.1 Destinations Main destinations of cross-border business Africa; 1 partnerships

While European SMEs are somewhat more inclined to be engaged in exports towards non-EU countries (see section 3.1.2), the destinations of foreign business partnerhips are more likely to remain in Europe: 77% of the locations of all joint ventures and foreign subsidiaries mentioned are in the territory of the EU versus 72% of all export destinations.

Australia & Oceania; 2 South America; 3

BE; 11

North America; 5 Asia; 9

FR; 11

other Europe; 4

other EU; 9

DE; 10

Belgium, France and Germany attract the most foreign interest by SMEs in PL; 2 setting up business partnerships: they FI; 2 ES; 7 SE; 2 are the target destinations for a third of NL; 3 IT; 6 AT; 3 all foreign business partnerships in the IE; 3 UK; 4 DK; 5 EU. Other favourite locations within Q38. In what countries do you have existing subsidiaries/joint ventures?? the EU are Spain (7%), Italy (6%) and up to three mentions possible, % of responses, EU27 Denmark (5%). Seven other Member Base: those SMEs who reported having a subsidiary or participating a joint venture abroad, and indicated the country % EU27 States hosts at least 2% of the foreign investment from other EU countries: the UK, Ireland, Austria, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland and Poland. The remaining fourteen Member States are the home of only 9% of foreign business engagements of European SMEs.

SME Activity sector

Size class

Main destinations of cross-border business partnerships (% of responses, EU27, among SMEs who reported having a subsidiary or participating a join venture abroad, and indicated the country) EU country

Europe, outside the EU

Asia

Elsewhere

EU27 SMEs

77

4

9

10

1-9 persons employed

72

5

11

12

10-49 persons employed

85

2

5

8

50-249 persons employed

67

10

11

11

250+ persons employed

67

2

17

14

D. Manufacturing

79

2

10

10

F. Construction

85

0

4

11

G. Wholesale and retail

71

4

14

11

H. Hotels and restaurants

78

5

9

8

I. Transport, storage and communication

82

12

6

0

J. Financial intermediation

85

0

9

5

Analytical Report, page 57


The Gallup Organization K. Real estate, renting and business activities

Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Other than the EU, Asia is an important location to bo business 92 3 0 4 N. Health and social work for EU SMEs: 9% of all joint O. Other community, social 70 0 3 26 ventures and foreign subsidiaries and personal service mentioned are located in that continent. 5% are in North America (the US and Canada), 4% elsewhere in Europe, 3% in South America, and a negligible proportion in Africa (1%) and in Australia and Oceania (2%). 81

4

5

10

While small and micro SMEs focus mainly on cooperating with other EU countries and companies, medium-sized SMEs and especially large scale enterprises look for outsourcing locations beyond the EU. 17% of all locations mentioned by LSEs are in Asia. The medium-sized enterprise segment is more likely to have foreign cooperation in Europe, outside the EU (10%). Industries that are most likely to engage in partnerships in other continents are trade (25% name nonEuropean locations) and manufacturing (20%) sectors.

page 58


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

3.3.2 Drivers The prime reason for investing in foreign subsidiaries or joint ventures is dominantly geographic: to be close to final customers 17%, or key business partners (to corporations that the enterprise is a supplier of) 12%. Main reason for having foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures abroad Proximity to final customers

17

Proximity as a supplier to a global enterprise

12

Lower total labour costs,

11

Lower taxes,

9

Less administrative and regulatory burdens,

8

Export regulations,

5

Access to finance,

5

DK/NA

32

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Q39. What is the main reason why you have foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures abroad? Base: those who have subsidiaries/joint ventures abroad

Labour costs (a constraint for about a third of EU SMEs, see section 2.3.2) is the third most frequently selected reason for engaging in foreign business partnerships (with 11% mentioning it). Lower taxes motivated 9% of SMEs that operate a foreign subsidiary or participate in a joint venture abroad. The hope of less red tape and lower administrative burdens was behind such foreign investments for less than one in ten companies, too (8%). Both the desire to operate under more favourable export regulations and easier access to finance was indicated as the most important reason by 5% of European SMEs. A quite significant proportion, approximately one third of the SME managers interviewed, did not want to- or could not comment on this question (e.g. because they did not participate in the decision, etc.). Apparently, the motivations to set up a foreign business are markedly different across various size classes. Large scale enterprises (as well as medium sized firms) create partnerships to get closer to final customers (43% and 45%, respectively, versus 23% and 20% among small and micro SMEs). While small and micro enterprises are more likely to indicate the proximity of the corporation(s) they are suppliers of (14% of both, compared to 9% of medium sized firms). Looking at the various industries, the proximity to final customers is the most important reason for setting up foreign business partnerships for SMEs in community, social and personal services (36%) and in business services sectors (22%). On the other hand, proximity to the large-scale enterprise they supply is the most frequent reason for those in healthcare (28%) Lower labour costs are more important for the medium sized SMEs with 50-249 persons employed (14%), is relatively less widespread reason among large scale enterprises for setting up foreign business partnerships (5%), and it is the most important driver in the construction industry (for 17% of SMEs in that sector). Lower taxes are more important to the micro enterprises (10%) than other SMEs. Less red tape is not at all a driving force for large scale enterprises (21% indicated this as the key reason to invest in foreign partnerships). Better access to finance was indicated most often by small SMEs (9%).

Analytical Report, page 59


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

SME Activity sector

Proximity to final customers

Proximity as a supplier to a global large-scaled enterprise

Lower total labour costs,

Lower taxes,

Less administrative and regulatory burdens,

Export regulations,

Access to finance,

Size class

Drivers of setting up foreign business partnerships, % EU27

DK/NA

EU27 SMEs

17,4

11,8

11,2

9,2

8,3

5,3

4,7

32,2

1-9 persons employed

19,5

14,3

10,8

9,5

7,4

4,1

2,6

31,7

10-49 persons employed

22,5

14,3

7,4

4,1

9,6

1,6

9,4

31,3 16,3

50-249 persons employed

44,5

8,9

14,1

4,9

7,9

1,0

2,4

250+ persons employed

43,3

14,2

5,2

4,3

1,6

4,7

0,9

26,0

D. Manufacturing

9,8

7,2

12,6

0,6

18,1

14,5

1,9

35,4

F. Construction

20,6

7,2

16,8

7,3

4,6

0,0

8,0

35,5

G. Wholesale and retail

16,7

16,2

16,0

11,5

5,0

2,3

4,9

27,3

H. Hotels and restaurants

9,8

14,0

0,2

8,8

18,5

21,7

7,5

19,5

I. Transport, storage and communication

21,0

8,8

13,0

4,2

5,3

7,3

9,0

31,5

J. Financial intermediation

13,2

16,9

7,6

8,8

4,8

0,1

5,4

43,2

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

22,4

8,3

6,7

13,2

7,4

1,2

1,5

39,3

N. Health and social work

6,9

27,7

11,3

18,7

11,2

5,9

0,0

18,2

O. Other community, social and personal service

35,7

4,2

2,8

11,6

2,8

0,0

9,0

33,9

Due to low sub-sample sizes we do not analyse the results by country, but Table 44a in the Annex has the frequency distribution of the responses by country breakdown as well.

page 60


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

3.3.3 Effect on employment Foreign business partnerships in most cases do not affect employment in the country of the SME (49% confirm this option). If they do, it is reportedly more likely to increase employment (according to 18% of SMEs involved in such partnerships) than to decrease it (3%). Three out of 10 managers of SMEs engaged in foreign business partnerships did not have a clear view on this question.

Effect of foreign business partnerships on employment They increased it They did not affect it They decreased it DK/NA

31

18

3 Annex Table 45b confirms that this is 49 the case in every business segment. Relatively speaking, medium-sized enterprises report vanishing workplaces due to foreign Q40. Did your foreign subsidiaries or joint ventures affect the employment of your partnerships in highest numbers enterprise in [COUNTRY]? % EU27 (12%), but even in this segment, more Base: those who have subsidiaries/joint ventures abroad managers confirm the opposite (23% say those partnerships increased employment in their country, too), and the majority do not see any particular effect (57%). Particularly LSEs see a positive effect of foreign partnerships on domestic employment: 34% say that their number of domestic employees has grown as a result of foreign partnerships versus 18% among SMEs.

Again, the low number of cases prevents a more detailed analysis of this question.

Analytical Report, page 61


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

4. Competition Business competition increasing in Europe according to the reports of the SMEs interviewed. The survey also investigated strategies businesses take to keep up with this trend.

4.1 Coping with intensified competition European SMEs believe that competition in their markets has increased over the past two years. 60% of managers stated that competition has recently intensified. Three in 10 SMEs felt that there was no significant change in this respect, while 5% reported a decrease in the level of competition. DK/NA Decreased Remained about the same Increased

Competition within the market in the last two years 100

1 9

6 11

11 13

3 5 23

17

3 23

75

6

5

7

7

7

7

6

6

7

3

7

5

8

2 10

23 25 25 24 22 25 23 26 26 30 25 26 27 23

14 34 19

6

5

6

5

7

5

11

6

7

7

8 5

4 29 31 31 33

27 32 26 34 35

28 36 38

38

50 85 81

25

75 73 72 72 69 69 68 67 67 67 67 66 66 65 65 65 64 63 63 62 60 60 5 9 5 9 58 58 58 57 54 53 51 50

44

FR

UK

BE

DK

IC

SE

NO

EU15

LV

NL

EU25

EU27

ES

LU

EE

DE

HU

IE

PT

IT

CZ

LT

AT

CY

NMS10

PL

NMS12

SI

FI

BG

SK

RO

EL

TR

MT

0

Q41. Has competition within the markets of your enterprise altogether decreased or increased during the last two years? Base: SMEs, % by country

Businesses in Malta feel the intensification of competition the strongest (85% of all SMEs), followed by small and medium sized enterprises in Greece (81%) and Turkey (75%). Slovakia (73%), Romania and Bulgaria (72-72%) come next in the ranking. Overall, SME managers in the new Member States are more likely to report intensified competition (67%) than their colleagues in the old Member States are (58%). Even in countries with the highest percentages reporting no change – or a decrease – in the level of competition, there are still more SME managers who see an intensified competition (UK: 50%, France: 44% or Denmark: 51%). In each European economy, the majority of managers have the impression that competition has recently increased. As Table 46b in the Annex shows, the perception of increased competition is even more widespread among LSEs. More than seven out of 10 LSEs report an intensified competition (73%), compared to 60% in the SME sector. The perception of increased competition is dominant in each industry sector, but it is most widespread among SMEs in trade (65%), transportation/logistics/communication (65%) and the financial (64%) sectors. Reports of decreasing competition came in highest numbers from the hospitality sector (8%), while no change was reported most frequently by construction companies (37%). Still, in each sector, the majority perceive markets as becoming more competitive.

page 62


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

The survey asked managers about their strategies for coping with increased competition, using the following question: If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? (yes / no / DK/NA) - reduce costs, - form strategic partnerships, - reduce prices, - increase quality, - increase product differentiation/ look for market niches, - look for (other) foreign markets, - increase working hours, - reduce production - increase marketing activity The question was asked of all respondents, regardless of their perception of market trends. In response to tighter competition, the primary strategy of European SMEs is to put more effort into their products and marketing. 64% would improve their product (or service) quality, 62% would increase product differentiation, and 61% would increase marketing efforts in response to increased competition. Reactions to a tighter competition / profit margin decrease

No

Yes

increase quality,

31

increase product differentiation/ look for market niches,

33

62

increase marketing activity

34

61

reduce costs,

41

forming strategic partnerships,

38

59

increase working hours,

68

look for (other) foreign markets,

70

100

53

56

reduce prices,

reduce production

64

36 28 26

80 80

11 60

40

20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Q42. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? Base: SMEs,%, EU-27

Cutting costs is the fourth most popular strategy adopted by SMEs keeping an effort to keep up with tighter competition, and the last one confirmed by the majority of SMEs interviewed (53%). Forming alliances is a solution for 38%, the reduction of prices, for 36% of respondents. Slightly over a quarter of European SMEs would opt for increasing working hours if they faced stronger competition (28%), or would look for new markets abroad (26%). Finally, only 11% would consider cutting production if competition became tighter. LSEs are more likely to adapt each but one strategy to cope with competition compared to SMEs: LSEs are not more inclined than SMEs to increase working hours (See Annex Tables 46b, 47b). The general pattern is very solid across various types of SME: in all but one industry sectors, the same three strategies are mentioned the most often. The exceptions are the transport/logistics/

Analytical Report, page 63


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

communication and the hospitality sectors, where cost cutting is the second most widely mentioned strategy when facing shrinking margins. Even the relative importance of the top strategies is more or less consistent across the various industry sectors. Only in trade do we find “increased marketing activity” at the top of the list of the strategies.

4.1.1 Increasing quality This is the most frequently mentioned strategy overall, and it is a particularly popular response in Estonia (86%), Greece (83%), Slovakia (81%), Turkey (80%), Romania (79%), and Bulgaria (78%). It is the most important strategy in a number of countries: Belgium, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Hungary, the Netherlands, Slovakia, and Bulgaria. On the other hand, improving product or service quality seems to be more difficult (or perceived to be less effective) for regaining profits and market success in Spain (48% mention this as a feasible strategy), Denmark (53%), Sweden (57%), France (58%), and Luxembourg (57%). Reactions to a tighter competition / profit margin decrease:

Increase quality 100%

4

4

5

5

9

12 15 17

75%

6

5

Yes 2

6

3

5

3

4

6

2

7

10

8

5

7

15 17 2 2 19 2 2 22 24 25 23 27 24 21 24 27 25

12 23

3

5

4

5

9

3

5

No 11

8

3

DK/NA 7

33 31 32 31 28 34 33 27 32 38 35

11

7

11

6

3 3 3 6 3 6 46

50%

25%

86 83 81 80 7 9 7 8 7 6 7 5 7 5 7 3 7 3 7 2 7 1 7 1 7 0 7 0 69 68 68 65 65 64 64 64 63 63 63 62 60 5 9 5 8 5 7 5 7 5 3 48

ES

SE

DK

FR

LU

PT

NO

HU

EU15

BE

LV

UK

EU25

DE

EU27

NL

CY

MT

CZ

AT

IT

NMS10

NMS12

SI

PL

LT

IS

IE

FI

BG

RO

SK

TR

EL

EE

0%

Q42. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? d) Increase quality Base: SMEs, % by country

Larger enterprises are somewhat more confident that improving product or service quality is a useful strategy for keeping up with tightening market demands (71% for LSEs versus 64% for SMEs). But SMEs in each size segment generally agree that this is the primary strategy for remaining successful in worsening conditions. Of the industry sectors, hospitality believes most firmly in the strategy of service/product improvement (72%), while SMEs in the construction (62%) and transportation (62%) industries are slightly less likely to mention this strategy.

page 64


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

4.1.2 Increasing marketing activity This is the second most frequently mentioned strategy overall. In a large number of countries it is also the most important strategy: these are Turkey, Greece, Slovenia, Romania, Iceland, Latvia, Ireland, and Finland. It is mentioned as a strategy in proportions way above the average in Turkey (83%), Greece (82%), Slovenia and Romania (both 82%). On the other hand, increasing marketing seems to be the least adequate in the Czech Republic (48% mention this as a strategy), Luxembourg (42%) and especially in France (39%). Reactions to a tighter competition / profit margin decrease:

Increase marketing activity 100%

3

2

1

5

5

14 16 18 13 15

75%

10

2

3

8

3

6

Yes 2

7

6

4

2

5

3

6

12 2 1 2 2 19 2 4 2 3 2 6 2 2 27 30 32 30 32 31

12

6

5

5

4

7

11

8

No 3

3

4

DK/NA 10 10

7

34 34 35 32 24 32 3 0 3 2 40 3 9 40 3 6 3 9 45

12

7

47 5 4

50%

25%

83 82 82 82 80 7 9 77 75 74 73 72 72 7 1 67 66 65 65 64 64 64 62 61 61 61 61 60 60 5 8 5 7 5 5 5 5 5 1 48

42 3 9

FR

CZ

LU

CY

DK

IT

PT

BE

BG

SE

HU

EU15

EU25

ES

EU27

NL

LV

NMS10

NMS12

SK

DE

AT

NO

EE

UK

PL

FI

MT

IE

IS

LT

SI

RO

EL

TR

0%

Q42. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? i) Increase marketing activity Base: SMEs, % by country

SMEs in trade are most likely to rely on increased marketing (68%), while those in the transport/communication sector and in construction sector (both 54%) are the least likely. Still, even in these sectors, many SMEs would pursue this strategy.

Analytical Report, page 65


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

4.1.3 Increasing product differentiation Adjusting products and services to better differentiate them from the competitions’ and to target unsatisfied market demand is a sophisticated strategy in fighting increased competition. Nevertheless, it is widely indicated as one of the primary strategies to follow in competitive markets. This is the most important strategy in a several countries, such as Germany, Ireland, Lithuania, Austria, Portugal, Sweden and the UK. It is mentioned particularly often in Ireland (81%), Turkey (79%), Lithuania (79%) and Finland (77%). This strategy is least popular in Luxembourg (34%), Denmark, Cyprus (4242%) and Spain (45%). Reactions to a tighter competition / profit margin decrease:

Increase product differentiation/ look for market niches 100%

5

4

4

14 17 17

3 21

75%

5

7

14

9

1

3

3

7

9

6

6

6

10

7

7

2

6

6

6

12 12

Yes 11

4

No 7

30 28 29 22 21 26 24 28 29 31 36 33 33 33 16 2 2 38 27 30 31 27 27 31 40

16

33

DK/NA

10 10

7

19

3 9 43 47 39

8

13

50 52

50%

25%

81 7 9 7 9 7 7 7 3 7 3 7 0 7 0 69 69 68 68 68 66 65 63 63 63 62 62 62 61 61 61 61 5 9 5 8

53 51 51 46 45 42 42

34

CY

LU

ES

DK

CZ

BE

FR

NL

IS

LV

EL

HU

EU15

EU25

IT

EU27

NMS10

SE

NMS12

PT

SK

BG

NO

DE

RO

SI

PL

AT

EE

MT

FI

UK

TR

IE

LT

0%

Q42. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? e) Increase product differentiation/ look for market niches Base: SMEs, % by country

The relationship between enterprise size and the likelihood of choosing this strategy is almost linear. The LSEs are the most able and willing to use this strategy (70%), whereas 62% of SMEs use it. Of industry sectors, manufacturing (65%) and trade (66%) are the ones most likely to use product differentiation and searching for market niches to keep up with increased competition, while just about half of those working in transport/communication (52%) and healthcare (55%) choose this option.

page 66


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

4.1.4 Reducing costs Cost cutting is the fourth most popular strategy overall. However, it is evaluated quite differently in different economies. Cost reduction is the preferred strategy of most SME in Cyprus (72%), Malta (70%), Iceland and Ireland (69%-69%)). Less than half of SME prefer this strategy in Latvia (29%), the Netherlands (41%), Spain (45%), Italy (45%), Lithuania (45%), Luxembourg (48%) and Belgium (49%). There are only a few countries where cost cutting is the most frequently mentioned strategy: these are Denmark and Cyprus. Reactions to a tighter competition / profit margin decrease: Reduce costs Yes 100%

75%

5

8

7

3

2

3

4

2

4 10 8

23 22 24 28 31 31 31 33 31

2

9

8

2

36 28 30 3 0 3 2 40

12

31

5

6

6

6

6

6

8

6

6

6

7

No

10 12

7

DK/NA 10

6

3

3 8 3 9 3 9 41 41 42 40 42 42 43 43 41 52 40 47 45 49

15

4

44 67

50%

25%

7 2 7 0 69 69 67 66 66 65 64 62 62 62 61 60 5 8 5 7 5 6 5 6 5 4 5 3 5 3 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 1 5 0 49 48 46 45 45 45 41

29

LV

IT

NL

ES

FR

LT

LU

CZ

BE

SK

PT

BG

RO

EU15

EU25

UK

EU27

NMS12

NMS10

PL

DK

NO

SI

AT

SE

HU

FI

EE

EL

DE

TR

IS

IE

CY

MT

0%

Q42. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? a) Reduce costs Base : SMEs, % by country

Cost cutting is a strategy favoured especially by LSE (68%), much more than by the SME sector (53%). The variations across industries are relatively modest, ranging from 60% in hospitality to 45% in healthcare.

Analytical Report, page 67


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

4.1.5 Forming strategic partnerships Seeking cooperation and thereby obtaining increased efficiency in marketing, supply, and logistics, etc. is a viable strategy for approximately four in ten European Union SMEs. This approach is most favoured by SMEs in Finland (70%), Lithuania (66%), Norway (64%), and Greece (61%). The fewest SMEs that name this as an applicable strategy are in Malta (29%), Slovakia (32%), the UK (33%), and France (33%). Reactions to a tighter competition / profit margin decrease:

Forming strategic partnerships 100%

4 26

75%

7

10

3

6

8

26 26 36 34 34

9

10

7

2

6

2

9

Yes 7

6

8

12

7

6

12

7

17

6

6

6

10 10

No 3

10

5

DK/NA 9

7

3

5

3 8 3 8 43 5 1 47 54 45 52 53 51 55 56 57 57 61 48 5 3 49 5 5 45 53 53 5 5 60 5 8 5 9 63 63

13

58

50%

25%

7 0 66 64 61 60 58 54 5 1 5 0 48 46 45 44 41 41 41 40 3 9 3 9 3 9 3 9 3 8 3 8 3 8 3 7 3 7 3 7 3 6 3 5 35 34 33 33 32 29

SK

MT

FR

UK

IE

CZ

IT

ES

SE

BE

EU15

EU25

NL

EU27

AT

PL

LU

NMS10

LV

DK

PT

DE

NMS12

HU

SI

BG

IS

CY

EE

RO

EL

TR

NO

FI

LT

0%

Q42. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? b) Forming strategic partnerships Base: SMEs, % by country

Similarly to other possible strategies for coping with increased competition, this one is also more likely to be selected by larger companies. More than half of LSEs (52%) are inclined to look for cooperation to overcome such difficulties, while only 38% of SMEs would select such a strategy. Among the various industry sectors, financial intermediation (45%) and business services (43%) are the most likely, while construction (32%) and hospitality (28%) are the least likely to see strategic partnerships as a cure for the negative effects of increased competition.

page 68


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

4.1.6 Reducing prices Decreasing prices can be a risky strategy in the longer term; accordingly, relatively fewer SMEs see this as a possible strategy for combating market competition. Still, this approach is favoured by at least half of the SMEs in Poland (57%), Turkey (58%), Ireland (54%), Greece (54%), Bulgaria (54%), and Romania (49%). The lowest levels of price flexibility were detected in Austria (21%), Norway (22%), Finland (24%), and Latvia (24%). Price reduction did not make the top three strategies in any country surveyed. Reactions to a tighter competition / profit margin decrease:

Reduce prices 100%

75%

4

3

3

3

2

3 8 40 43 43 44

Yes 7

5

5

5

5

7

1

4

8

5

6

5

5

5

44 48 49 49 5 1 5 1 5 5 5 8 5 2 5 6 5 8 5 9 60 60

11

11

8

6

5

7

7

3

No 8

7

3

DK/NA 14

5 4 5 4 5 8 61 61 60 63 67 62 65 7 0

60

4

4

72 72

9

7

69 7 2

50%

25%

58 57 54 54 54

49 47 46 45 45 42 41 40 40 3 9 37 36 36 35 35 35 34 34 34 33 31 30 30 28 27 26 24 24 22 21

AT

FI

NO

LV

NL

SE

DE

IT

HU

EE

FR

IS

EU15

BE

DK

ES

LU

EU25

LT

EU27

CY

SI

MT

CZ

UK

SK

PT

NMS10

NMS12

IE

RO

EL

PL

BG

TR

0%

Q42. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? c) Reduce prices Base: SMEs, % by country

Of the various business sectors, trade emerges as the most willing to decrease prices (45%), followed by manufacturing (40%). The least likely to select this strategy are the financial (24%) and healthcare (21%) sectors.

Analytical Report, page 69


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

4.1.7 Increasing working hours Increasing working hours is not a popular response to tighter competition: only slightly over a quarter of European SMEs would use this strategy. It is mentioned in proportions way above the average in Turkey (47%), Greece (45%), Slovenia (42%), and Bulgaria (40%). On the other hand, increasing working hours seems to be a measure less adequate – or possible –in Latvia (12%), the Netherlands (18%) and Estonia (18%). Reactions to a tighter competition / profit margin decrease:

100%

75%

3

3

1

2

2

2

50 52 57 5 7 61 63

50%

25%

7

9

3

4

Yes 6

4

8

6

4

4

4

3

6

5

3

9

10

11

9

6

5

No 5

3

5

DK/NA 7

7

6

5 9 5 8 64 66 64 63 67 66 68 68 68 69 68 69 7 1 65 64 64 66 69 7 1 7 2 7 5 7 3 7 3 7 5 7 6

14

69

47 45 42 40 3 7 36 34 33 33 30 30 30 29 29 29 28 28 28 27 26 26 26 26 26 25 25 25 23 23 22 20 18 18 18

EE

NL

AT

HU

IT

ES

LT

CZ

NMS10

LU

NO

BE

DK

PL

IS

NMS12

FI

EU25

PT

EU27

FR

CY

EU15

SK

RO

UK

MT

IE

SE

DE

SI

BG

EL

TR

0%

3

85

12

LV

Increase working hours

Q42. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? g) Increase working hours Base: SMes, % by country

LSEs are less inclined than SMEs to increase working hours (20% vs. 28%, respectively) in response to increased competition. The variation between industry sectors remains modest. The most likely to mention increasing working hours were SMEs in financial intermediation (32%), business services (32%) and manufacturing (29%); the least likely to implement such measures were those in the personal service sector (23%).

page 70


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

4.1.8 Looking for new foreign markets While it might seem obvious that market difficulties can motivate players to look for new markets elsewhere, in most cases, the nature of the business and/or the company culture prevent such a move. Still, in some countries, the (at least relative) majority of managers consider entering new foreign markets to be a real option. Such countries are Turkey (67%), Lithuania (57%), Romania, Malta, Estonia and Greece (all 49%). The fewest SMEs indicating this as an applicable strategy were found in the Czech Republic (17%), Sweden (17%), Germany (18%) and Hungary (21%). Reactions to a tighter competition / profit margin decrease:

Look for (other) foreign markets 100%

75%

5 29

3

41

6 11

45

6

6

8

3

41 46 46 48 5 7

12

51

1

62

6 10 9

60

4

Yes 3

5

3

6

5 8 60 66 69 67 69 67

12

61

3

7

3

5

5

5

6

7

No 4

9

7 0 66 7 1 7 0 7 0 7 0 7 0 68 7 2 68

50% 67

25%

57

14

64

DK/NA 4

74

13

66

2

80

8

6

75 78

49 49 49 49 44 40 3 7 3 7 34 32 31 31 28 28 28 27 27 27 27 26 26 25 25 25 25 25 24 2 2 2 2 2 1 18 17 17

CZ

SE

DE

IT

HU

NL

LV

NO

AT

NMS10

EU15

EU25

UK

EU27

SK

FR

DK

PL

NMS12

FI

ES

IS

PT

CY

SI

BG

IE

LU

BE

EL

EE

MT

LT

RO

TR

0%

Q42. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? f) Look for (other) foreign markets Base : SMEs, % by country

The relationship between the size of the enterprise and the likelihood of choosing this particular strategy is very obvious. The LSEs are the most able and willing to enter new foreign markets (43%), whereas only 26% of SMEs are. Of all industry sectors, manufacturers are by far the most inclined to look for new foreign markets to keep up with increased competition (34%), while only 11% in the healthcare sector are.

Analytical Report, page 71


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

4.1.9 Reducing production Reducing production is seen as a last resort in coping with competition; very few SMEs consider this a viable strategy. The countries where relatively the most managers indicate this strategy are Iceland (25%), Belgium (22%), Turkey (22%) and Portugal (21%). This was selected least often as a strategy by SMEs in the Netherlands, Bulgaria, Poland and Germany (all 6%). In 13 Member States, only 10% or less of the managers would choose this strategy. Reactions to a tighter competition / profit margin decrease:

Reduce production 1 1 11 8 10 12 9

7

13

Yes 1 4 16 1 1 19 11

8

7

75%

9

4 20

12

6

11

6

8

9

No 9

7

11

DK/NA 6

10

5

2 1 17

51

65 67 7 1 69 70 74 76 70 7 5 7 8 80 7 9 7 0 68 7 5 67

80 80 86 70

79

85

81 86 84 84 84 86 82 87 84 89

73 78

7

6

6

6

6

SK

PL

NL

BG

7

DE

7

LV

8

RO

8

CZ

8

NMS

8

IT

8

NMS

FI

11 10 10 10

EE

MT

ES

EU15

UK

EL

NO

LT

SE

DK

IE

LU

FR

CY

PT

TR

IC

BE

11 11

HU

16 15 15 14 14 13 13 12 12

AT

25 22 22 21 18 18 18 17

0%

SI

38

25%

EU27

50%

9

9

EU25

100%

Q42. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? h) Reduce production Base: SMEs, % by country

Again, there is no clear pattern by enterprise size; the LSEs (13%) and the SMEs (11%) are almost equally unlikely to reduce production in the face of increased competition. Of the various industries, manufacturing is the most likely to select this possibility; almost one fifth indicate this option (20%). It is the least often mentioned in healthcare 3% and in financial intermediation 8%.

page 72


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

4.2 The marketing budget The Enterprise Observatory asked SMEs about the amount of money they spend annually20 on marketing21. Half of the SMEs decided not to disclose the figure (50% – ranging from 83% in Spain to 18% in Finland) while 12% do not spend on marketing at all. Looking at the responses among the rest of the enterprises, we find that on average, European SMEs spend 3,4% of their annual turnover on marketing. Marketing expenditures are significantly higher in the pre-2004 EU than in the new Member States. On average, EU-15 companies spend 3,7% of their annual turnover on promoting their products, while enterprises in the new Member States spend on average 3,0%. In absolute terms, European SMEs spend about 57 200 euro annually on marketing.

1,9

BG

PT

2,2

2,1

FR

HU

2,6

2,3

CZ

2,7

2,6

SE

SK

2,9

2,9

NMS10

2,9

CY

IT

3,0

LT

3,3

3,0

PL

NMS12

3,5

3,4

NO

EU27

3,6

3,6

EE

EU25

DK

3,6

3,6

DE

3,7

3,7

IS

IE

EU15

3,8

3,7

EL

4,1

3,9

AT

UK

4,5

4,2

SI

NL

4,5

RO

5,0

4,9

FI

LV

5,5

LU

MT

ES

BE

TR

5,1

6,3

9,5

9,0

Proportion of revenue spent on marketing

Q6. What is the expected turnover (annual sales) of your enterprise in 2006? Q43. Could you please indicate your approximate annual amount of marketing costs? Base: those SMEs who gave their turnover and marketing costs, Q43/Q6, average, by country

Turkish companies devote relatively the highest percentage of their turnover to advertising their products and services: reportedly, 9,5% of their turnover is spent on marketing. Turkish SMEs are followed by businesses in Spain (9%), Belgium (6,3%), Luxembourg (5,5%), and Malta (5,1%). On the other hand, a very low proportion of yearly income is spent on marketing in Hungary and Bulgaria and Portugal (around 2 percent in each country). Marketing is obviously one of the primary tools for keeping up with increasing competition. We investigated whether or not there was a connection between the perception of increased competition (see section 4) and the relative size of the marketing budget in each country. We found no significant correlation between the two factors, indicating that the size of the marketing budget is a matter of overall business strategy or culture, rather than an ad-hoc response to the changing market landscape.

20

The amount figures were collected in national currency, and where it was different, the amounts were recalculated to euro. The exchange rates are provided in the Technical note in the Annex 21 As indicated in Chapter 1, the figure amounts reported over the telephone suffer from a certain bias. While on paper forms, managers have time to think it over and are able to find assistance in answering the questions related to their business data (turnover, exports, etc.), over the telephone they are very reluctant to give a top-ofmind figure about their most sensitive business data. Also, on-the-fly imputing of exact amounts has an additional potential for mistakes, especially errors related to the order of magnitude of the figures. While Gallup thoroughly checked and corrected the second problem, the issue that there is sometimes enormous reluctance in reporting figure amounts remains a problem in this survey.

Analytical Report, page 73


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Marketing budget as % of annual turnover (% EU27)

Size class

EU27 SME

SME Activity sector

Obviously, the size of the SMEs have an effect on the proportion of marketing costs, the economy of scales has an effect on relative expenditure: while large scaled enterprises spend nominally much more on marketing than micro enterprises, the SMEs are more burdened by the amount spent on promoting themselves and their products, as they spend 3,6% of their annual income versus 1,7% among LSEs companies.

Proportion of income spent on marketing, in % 3,6

1-9 persons employed

3,6

10-49 persons employed

2,8

50-249 persons employed

1,9

250+ persons employed

1,7

D. Manufacturing

3,0

F. Construction

2,7

G. Wholesale and retail

3,2

H. Hotels and restaurants

4,4

I. Transport, storage and communication

2,6

Proportionally, SMEs in the business J. Financial intermediation 3,2 services sector spend most on K. Real estate, renting and business activities 5,0 marketing (5,0% of their annual N. Health and social work 2,6 turnover)and marketing costs are O. Other community, social and personal service 4,6 relatively massive in the hospitality, and personal services sectors as well (4,6% and 4,4%). Healthcare (2,6%) and transport, storage and communication companies (2,6%) spend proportionally the least on marketing.

page 74


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

5. Innovation The survey asked managers about the significance of innovation in their business, and about their perceptions of the main burdens they face.

5.1 Income from innovation About every tenth euro spent with European SMEs is spent on a new or significantly improved product or service. But the proportion of innovative SMEs differs from country to country. The graph below shows the country-by-country proportion of companies who either told interviewers that zero percent of their turnover can be attributed to innovation, or spontaneously stated that they have not had any new or improved products or services in the past two years. Almost four in 10 SMEs in Europe say that they do not have new products or that they do not have income from new products (37%). Such SMEs (with no recent innovations) were found in greatest proportions in Latvia, where almost two thirds of managers reported no innovation (64%) as well as in Bulgaria (63%) and Hungary (56%).“No innovation” was reported the least often in Austria, Slovenia, Lithuania and Romania (23%-22%). Still, we find more firms in the old Member States than in the new Member States with no income from innovation (37% vs. 31%) No revenue from innovation 100

75

50

25

64 63

56

46 46 46 44 42 40 40 37 37 37 37 37 35 34 34 34 34 34 34 33 32 31 29 29 29 28 27 26 23 23 22 22

LV BG HU DK ES IT CY NO FR PT IS EU15 LU EU27 EU25 SK NMS12 SE NL BE NMS10 DE MT EE EL CZ TR FI IE UK PL LT RO SI AT

0

Q51. Could you please estimate the percent of turnover (annual sales) coming from new or significantly improved products or services in the last two years? Base: SMEs, % of „no new or improved products”, by country

The larger an enterprise, the more likely it is to capitalize on innovation. While 38% of micro firms (and 37% of SMEs in general) can not report any turnover from improved products or services, the similar proportion among LSEs is 24%. The lack of innovation – at least on the product level – is the highest in the transport sector (46%) and in construction (42%). It is of course hard to interpret this question for the trade sector, as most retailers sell new or significantly improved products without any innovative activity (if the products have been improved by the manufacturers or if retailers have broadened their sales portfolio, then there will clearly be sales income from improved products). Accordingly, besides the manufacturing sector trade is where we find the fewest managers claiming that they have no income from innovative products (both 31%). A surprisingly high proportion of SMEs leaders were unable or unwilling to estimate the percentage of turnover from improved products or services: one third on EU-27 level (34%), and approximately half in Belgium (55%), Luxembourg (50%), and the Netherlands (50% – see Annex Table 50a).

Analytical Report, page 75


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

7

6

6

BE

DK

BG

7

CY

7

MT

FR

9

8

NL

LV

10

9

LU

11

SE

10

EU15

ES

11

11

IT

DE

12

12

EU25

12

12

IS

FI

12

12

CZ

EU27

13

SK

13

PT

AT

13

13

UK

HU

15

14

NMS12

15

15

NO

NMS10

16

16

IE

EL

17

16

PL

LT

19

18

EE

SI

RO

TR

21

24

Percent of turnover coming from new/improved products/services

Q51. Could you please estimate the percent of turnover (annual sales) coming from new or significantly improved products or services in the last two years? Base_ SMEs, averages, by country (lack of improved products are treated as 0%)

An average 12% of all turnover from European SMEs comes from the sale of new or improved products and services22. This proportion is higher in the new Member States (15%), although we have also seen that slightly more SMEs in these countries claim not to have such income at all. It should come as no surprise then that the ranking of the economies most reliant on incomes from innovative – or at least new – products is lead by some of the new Member States: Slovenia (where 24% of the turnover is generated from innovative Innovation in the various size segments products and services), Romania (21%), (%, EU27) Estonia (19%), Turkey (18%) and Poland % of turnover % no from new or (17%). income Among the old Member States, the highest proportion of “innovative income” was reported from Greece and Ireland (1616%). The lowest proportion of income attributed to new or enhanced products and services was found in Bulgaria and Denmark (both 6%). While the lack of innovation is much more characteristic of micro-enterprises, the reported proportion of income from innovative products/services does not differ very much by enterprise size. This indicates higher “innovative incomes” for those smaller firms who do have innovative products/services.

improved products/ services

from innovation

12

37

1-9 persons employed

12

38

10-49 persons employed

13

30

50-249 persons employed

12

27

250+ persons employed

11

24

EU27 SME COMPANY SIZE

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

13

31

F. Construction

10

42

G. Wholesale and retail

13

31

H. Hotels and restaurants I. Transport, storage and communication J. Financial intermediation K. Real estate, renting and business activities N. Health and social work O. Other community, social and personal service

6

40

10

46

10

39

13

39

7

41

Only 6% of the total turnover in the 14 hospitality and 7% in healthcare sectors come from enhanced or new products and services. This proportion is considerably higher in trade (13% with the previously discussed interpretation problem), manufacturing (13%) and personal services (14%).

22

This average does not take into account the different turnover of the companies, it provides an average proportion based on the individual results of each enterprise interviewed

page 76

36


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

5.2 Constraints of innovation The most prominent finding of course is that a large proportion of SMEs just do not plan to introduce innovations to their products or technology (38%). Beyond that, there is no single constraint on innovation dominant at the EU level. On average, SMEs regard four factors as being about equally important. An additional 15% do not have a clear opinion about such constraints – possibly because they do not see any, or because they are only modestly interested in innovation. Main constraint for innovation activities Problems with access to finance, other than interest rates Too expensive human resources

9

Lack of skilled human resources

8

Lack of market demand for innovation

8

10

High interest rates

6

Lack of ability to use new technologies

3

Hard to protect intellectual property

3

Did not plan to innovate

38

DK/NA

15 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Q52. What was the main constraint for your innovation activities in the last two years? Please consider constraints of innovation regarding products and services as well as production technology? Base : SMEs, %, EU-27

Almost one in 10 managers in the EU says that problematic access to finance (10%), scarcity of skilled labour (9%) the lack of market demand (8%) and expensive human resources (8%), are the key challenges to their innovation plans. Overall, human resources seem to be the more important. 17% complain either about the scarcity or the cost of labour, while a little less, 16% are troubled by high interest rates and other problems with access to finance. (High interest rates were indicated by 6%). Concerns about the lack of ability to use new technologies and worries related to the protection of intellectual property are key issues only for a few SMEs in Europe (both were mentioned by 3%). As the table on the next page shows, these patterns are relatively stable across the various enterprise size classes, only the relative weights of the key reasons are slightly different. Access to finance is less of a problem for larger enterprises, especially for LSEs. LSEs are more likely to suffer from human resource problems rather than from the lack of funds to innovate. In fact, it is only the LSE segment where the lack of a market demand for improved products and technologies is a more significant barrier than is the access to finance. Regarding the main obstacle to innovation, there is only slight variation across the various industries as well. Differences remain very modest, but in the transport and hospitality sectors, access to finance seems to be slightly more important than elsewhere. The lack and cost of manpower is the main obstacle in the construction sector. The protection of intellectual property is a burden mentioned most frequently in the healthcare sector (6% selected this as the most important barrier to innovation), while the lack of ability to use new technologies is a constraint most frequently indicated by financial sector (5%).

Analytical Report, page 77


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Human resource problems (scarcity + cost)

Problems with access to finance (high interest rates + other problems)

Lack of market demand for innovation

Other constraint

Did not plan to innovate

DK/NA

Constraints to innovation, %, EU-27

17

16

9

6

38

15

1-9 persons employed

16

16

9

6

39

15

10-49 persons employed

24

18

9

6

28

16

50-249 persons employed

26

12

11

8

27

17

250+ persons employed

25

10

12

6

23

26

EU27 SME COMPANY SIZE

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

18

18

9

8

33

15

F. Construction

21

15

9

3

39

14

G. Wholesale and retail

17

17

9

5

37

16

H. Hotels and restaurants

19

21

6

5

34

16

I. Transport, storage and communication

14

21

6

4

42

13

J. Financial intermediation K. Real estate, renting and business activities N. Health and social work O. Other community, social and personal service

14

11

9

6

43

18

15

14

9

7

39

16

18

15

8

9

36

14

20

19

7

4

41

9

Looking at the key problem areas by country reveals very distinct patterns: the prominent problems differ from country to country. In several countries, the main problem lies in the accessibility and affordability of labour; almost half of SMEs are troubled by this factor in Latvia (48%) and Estonia (45%). In these countries, it is dominantly the lack of the necessary workforce that troubles enterprises (see also Annex Table 51a.). In Finland, where human resource problems are also unusually important obstacles to innovation (39%), the availability and cost of labour are about equally important. Main constraints for innovation activities

Human resource problems (availability and cost) 60 48

45

26

20

24 22 22 22 22 20 20 19 19 18 18 17 17 17 17 17 17 16 15 14 14 13 13

10

11 10

9

9

8

BG

29 28

30

HU

39

40

NL

50

5

FR

IC

LU

ES

DK

MT

PT

SK

CY

BE

EU15

EU25

EU27

NMS12

IT

NMS10

CZ

PL

SE

DE

TR

SI

NO

RO

EL

UK

IE

AT

FI

LV

EE

LT

0

Q52. What was the main constraint for your innovation activities in the last two years? Please consider constraints of innovation regarding products and services as well as production technology? b) Too expensive human resources c) Lack of skilled human resources Base : SMEs % mentioned any of these as the main constraint by country

Human resource problems pose much less of a constraint to innovation in France (5%), Bulgaria (8%), Hungary and the Netherlands (9% both) and Iceland (10%).

page 78


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

The second key problem area is related to the problems with financing innovation projects. Managers were most likely to report that innovation in their enterprise was constrained by expensive or limited financing opportunities in Turkey (31%), Ireland (25%), the UK (24%), Romania (24%), Portugal (23%), Hungary (23%) and Poland (22%). Concerns related to financing innovation are the least widespread in the Nordic region, and particularly in the following countries: Denmark (4%), Sweden (9%) and Finland (10%), but also in Luxembourg (10%). Main constraints for innovation activities 60

Problems with financing (interest rates and access)

50 40 31

30

25 25 24 23 23 22

20

19 19 18 18 17 16 16 16 16 16 15 14 14 14 13 13 13 13 12 12 11

11

11

10

11 10 10

9 4

SE

DK

FI

LU

NL

CZ

LV

FR

LT

NO

ES

AT

EE

CY

IT

BG

DE

MT

BE

EU15

EU25

SI

EU27

EL

SK

IC

NMS10

PL

NMS12

PT

HU

RO

IE

UK

TR

0

Q52. What was the main constraint for your innovation activities in the last two years? Please consider constraints of innovation regarding products and services as well as production technology? d) High interest rates e) Problems with access to finance, other than interest rates Base: SMEs, % mentioned any of these as the main constraint by country

A certain level of market sophistication can be a driving force for innovation. Market demand might compel enterprises to improve products and services, while the lack of such a demand can leave enterprises without motivation to enhance their offering. The lack of market demand is the third most frequently mentioned barrier to innovation, and there is much less variation in this regard than in the previous two areas. Main constraints for innovation activities

Lack of market demand for innovation 60 50 40 30 20

15 11

10

11

11

11 10

9

9

9

9

9

9

8

8

8

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

6

6

6

6

6

6

5

5

5

4

4

EL DE MT IE FI UK IT TR IS EU15 PT EU25 EU27 LU SE CZ FR PL BG DK NMS10 NMS12 AT EE ES RO SI NO CY NL HU LT BE LV SK

0

Q52. What was the main constraint for your innovation activities in the last two years? Please consider constraints of innovation regarding products and services as well as production technology? g) Lack of market demand for innovation Base : SMEs, % mentioned as the main constraint, by country

Analytical Report, page 79


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Greek managers are most likely to mention this problem (15%), followed by German, Irish, Maltese and Finnish SMEs (all 11%). The problem poses least of an obstacle to innovation in Slovakia and Latvia (4-4%). Regarding the less important reasons, the lack of ability to use new technologies was seen as a barrier to innovation most frequently in Turkey (10%), Ireland (6%) and Greece (5%). In Finland and Bulgaria, this was seen as an obstacle by less than 1% of managers. Worries related to the protection of intellectual property rights, and accordingly, the potential financial return on innovation, are relatively the most widespread in Finland (5%) and Germany (4%). This factor is perceived as the least important obstacle in Estonia and Bulgaria (less than 1%).

5.3 Energy efficiency Two of the key global concerns, and consequently two of the primary action areas of the EU and the Commission, are the related issues of energy (conservation) and climate change. The overall picture is surprisingly unfavourable: close to two thirds of SMEs operating in the EU do not even have simple rules or devices for saving energy (63%). Less than three in 10 SMEs (29%) have instituted some measures for preserving energy and resources at their enterprise. Only 4% of EU SMEs have a comprehensive system in place for energy efficiency (environment management system, EMS). Energy efficiency Yes, simple rules or devices to save energy

Yes, complex energy saving systems

No

DK/NA

100

75

41

45

57 56

56 59 52 66 67 67 67 69 51 62 63 63 69 7 1 69 69 7 1 7 3 7 4

7

50

25

46 49 52

10 50

4

3

6

3

3

5

5

7 9 7 9 7 9 81 69 7 3 7 3 81 69

2

5 4 4 4 3 3 5 5 3 3 4 6 5 2 4 4 4 4 43 43 39 39 40 41 34 34 37 5 5 6 2 1 3 33 30 30 29 30 29 26 26 26 26 24 23 23 25 22 21 21 19 16 16 15 18 18 15

1 15

SE LU CZ UK BE SI IE PT NO FI FR EU15 EU25 EU27 MT BG ES LT NMS10 NMS12 DE AT DK HU EL IT NL RO EE CY LV PL IS SK TR

0

Q54. Does the enterprise use an environmental management system or any other measures to save energy and resources? Base : SMEs, % by country

Most energy-conscious SMEs were found in Sweden (with over half of them having some measures for saving energy, and 7% even operating a comprehensive environmental management system). Almost half of enterprises have taken some measures to preserve energy in Luxembourg (49% take any action, and within that, 10% operate an EMS) and in the Czech Republic (47%, 4% EMS). Obviously, the various enterprise size classes have different attitudes towards energy saving: while seven out of 10 micro enterprises just do not care, this proportion goes down to 57% among small-, 44% among medium-sized enterprises, and 30% among LSEs (see Annex Table 52b). In fact, one third of the SMEs in Europe operate by rules that aim to save energy, the similar proportion is the double among LSEs. Among large scaled enterprises 19% also confirm operating an EMS. The top three energy-conscious sectors are the hospitality sector (with 39% of enterprises applying some energy efficient solution), healthcare (35%) and the transport/logistics/communication sector (34%). While 6% of enterprises belonging to the transport industry use a sophisticated EMS, this is much less prevalent in the hospitality sector (3%).

page 80


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

6. Human resources As we discussed in Chapter 2, the (lack of) access to skilled labour and the cost of labour are very – and nearly equally – important constraints in European economies. This final chapter of the report takes a closer look at the composition of the existing workforce; at the availability of the necessary human resources; and at strategies for finding them.

6.1 Composition of workforce 6.1.1 Geographic origin The geographic origin of the workforce indicates not only how the principle of the free movement of labour is functioning within the European Union. It also gives an idea of the mobility of the workforce in the countries of Europe – at least in those covered in the current survey. In order to clarify the geographic origins of the workforce, we asked top decision makers of European SMEs23 the following question: What is the geographic origin of the existing labour force at your firm/location? That is, what percentage of the staff at your location comes from your region within [COUNTRY], from [COUNTRY] but not from your region, other EU countries, non-EU countries? The replies show that SMEs in Europe employ a dominantly local workforce (on EU-27 level24, 89% of the labour force comes from the region of the enterprise), some of the labourers come from regions of the country other than where the enterprise operates (7%), and only 4% of workers come from abroad. Geographic origin of existing labour force at your firm/location

Non-EU countries Other EU countries Same country, but other region Same region

100

0 2

0 3

0 5

0 6

0 6

01 5

1 5

1 2 4

0 8

0 9

0 3 6

1 3 5

1 2 6

0 9

01 8

2 1 6

1 2 7

1 10

2 2 7

2 2 7

3 5 5

3 7 2

2 2 8

1 12

51 8

2 1 11

4 4 6

3 4 9

3 8 6

3 2 11

2 2 2 3 13 15

25

2 2

3

19 3 2 3 9

75

50

6 7

98 97 94 93 93 93 93 93 92 91 91 91 91 91 91 90 90 90 89 88 88 88 88 87 87 86 86 84 84 83 82 81

21 70

64 37

HU BG PL NMS12 NMS10 SK DK SE RO EE NO UK DE CZ LV IT SI LT EU27 EU25 AT IS EU15 FI EL NL FR CY IE ES TR PT BE MT LU

0

Q61. What is the geographic origin of existing labour force at your firm/location? That is, what percentage of staff at your location comes from your region within [COUNTRY], from [COUNTRY] but not from your region, other EU countries, non-EU countries? Base: SMEs, % by country, question was not asked from 1-person firms

23

The question was not asked of self-employed persons, for obvious reasons. This average does not take into account the different size of the companies, it provides an average proportion based on the individual results of each enterprise interviewed

24

Analytical Report, page 81


The Gallup Organization

Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

This picture shows a relatively sedentary European workforce, and a limited possibility for hiring (or limited willingness to hire) non-local - let alone foreign - labour. An extremely high proportion of local workforce was detected in the new Member States, where 93% of all workers came from the region where the employer operates. Consequently, the countries with the highest ratios of local workers were some of the new Member States: Hungary (98%), Bulgaria (97%), Poland (94%) and Slovakia (93%). The other end of this ranking is not very easy to interpret: we find that the two smallest EU countries have the highest proportions of workers coming “from another region” within the country (Malta: 32%, Luxembourg: 21%). Due to the sizes of these countries, the meaning of “region” can be quite different from that in larger Member States. Besides these small countries, we find several others where at least ten percent of the workers are hired from other parts of the country: Belgium (19%), Portugal (15%), Turkey (13%), Finland (12%), Spain (11%), the Netherlands (11%), and Lithuania (10%). The proportion of workers coming from “other EU countries” is by far the highest in Luxembourg (39%), and we find relatively significant proportions in Ireland (8%), Belgium25 (7%) as well as in a non-EU country, Iceland (7%). There are six other economies where at least 3 percent of labourers come from other EU countries, starting with Austria (5%) and Cyprus (4%). Of the four percent of foreign workers on the EU-27 level, slightly more people are from non-EU countries (2,1%, if we add the decimal) than from elsewhere in the EU (1,9%). In 13 Member States, more foreign workers come from non-EU countries than from elsewhere in the EU. This is especially so in Greece, where only 16% of foreign workers are EU citizens, but it is also the case in Hungary (25%) and Latvia (30%)26. On the other hand, three quarters or more of foreign workers are from “other EU countries” in Luxembourg (86%), Ireland and Iceland (both 71%), Norway (68%) and Slovakia, (67%).

25

Please note that the survey only covered privately owned enterprises, therefore a lot of EU-foreign workers that are active in as civil servants or similar positions in non-private enterprises are not included in this figure 26 although these differences are very small in absolute terms

page 82


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

SME Activity sector

Size class

Geographic origin of workforce (% EU27) Same region

Same country, but other region

Other EU countries

Non-EU countries

EU27 SME

89

7

2

2

2-9 persons employed

91

7

1

1

10-49 persons employed

86

9

2

3

50-249 persons employed

84

10

4

2

250+ persons employed

77

17

5

3

D. Manufacturing

90

7

1

2

F. Construction

89

6

2

3

G. Wholesale and retail

91

6

2

1

H. Hotels and restaurants

81

10

4

5

I. Transport, storage and communication

90

6

2

2

J. Financial intermediation

91

7

1

1

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

87

10

2

2

N. Health and social work

89

9

1

2

O. Other community, social and personal service

86

7

2

5

As the table above suggests, the larger the firm, the more likely it is to hire non-local labour: while 89% of workforce in the SMEs employing more than one person is local, only 77% of workers in LSEs are working where they normally live. LSEs are also the most likely to employ people from other EU countries: 5% of their workforce comes from different EU Member States. Employing foreign persons is by far the most frequent in the hospitality sector, where 11% of the workforce comes from abroad (4%from the EU and 5% from elsewhere).

6.1.2 Educational attainment It is now common sense that we live in knowledge-based economies, where a very important attribute of the workforce is educational attainment. This survey investigated workers’ levels of education in European enterprises. We asked the following questions: What is the educational attainment level of your employees? What percentage of your staff has the following as their highest level of education? − − −

a postgraduate exam such as a doctorate a diploma from a university or another higher educational institution a final secondary school exam

In the European Union, a quarter of persons employed at SMEs27 have completed some kind of tertiary education (4% of workers have a postgraduate degree, and 22% possess a university diploma or equivalent). Another 54% have completed a secondary school. The remaining 19% of employees must therefore have lower educational attainment. The graph below rank orders the countries of the surveyed area in terms of the proportion of persons employed who have completed some higher education.

27

Again, this is an average that does not take into account the different size of the companies.

Analytical Report, page 83


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Educational attainment level of employees

final secondary school exam diploma from a university or another higher education institution postgraduate exam such as a doctorate

100

75

63 43 48

51

60 42 5 0 5 4

50 42

25

3

15

57 54

46 48

58 47 44

68

59 45

54 54

64

5 6 61

60 63 63 49 5 6

55

45 45 34

39

6

21 37 32 33 3 6 3 2 3 4 32 3 0 3 3 2 8 27 2 4 29 25 22 21 23 20 20 2 2 18 2 0 18 16 13 8 7 4 4 4 2 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 5 3 4 2 4 1 1 1 4 6 1

16 16

16

5

2

3

56 36

11 5

11 4

11 2

LT LV IE RO PL NL LU SI HU EE NO IS NMS12 BG NMS10 FR UK BE ES EU27 EU25 SE EU15 EL TR CY SK MT DE FI PT DK CZ AT IT

0

13

49

33

40

Q64. What is the educational attainment level of your employees? What percentage of your staff does have any of the following as their highest level of education? Base : SMES, % by country, question was not asked from 1-person firms

According to reports from managers, Lithuania and Latvia can be the proudest of their workforce’s education level: of the workers employed by private enterprises have 55% and 52%, respectively, completed some tertiary education. (In the not too distant past, in the Soviet-type educational system “secondary” education was compulsory for every Soviet citizen, and a variety of education forms were classified as higher education; “VUZ”.) 48% of Irish, 45% of Romanian, 41 % of Polish, and 40% of Dutch employees have completed a degree at an institution of higher education. According to managers’ testimonies, only 13% of Italian and 15% of Austrian, and 16% of Czech workers have similar levels of educational attainment. However, a certain proportion of these differences might be attributed to the very different educational systems that are in place now, or that were in place earlier. Educational attainment of the workforce (% EU27) postgraduate 4

higher education 22

completed secondary 54

[less] 19

1-9 persons employed

4

23

55

18

10-49 persons employed

4

17

59

19

50-249 persons employed

4

17

59

20

SME Activity sector

Size class

EU27 SME

250+ persons employed

6

21

56

17

D. Manufacturing

2

14

54

30

F. Construction

2

14

56

27

G. Wholesale and retail

3

20

61

16

H. Hotels and restaurants

2

12

58

28

I. Transport, storage and communication

2

15

58

26

J. Financial intermediation

6

36

49

9

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

7

35

45

13

N. Health and social work

12

27

50

11

O. Other community, social and personal service

4

19

60

16

It is noteworthy that we do not see significant (or any) difference between the various size segments: the four categories used in the analysis replicate the result measured on the EU-27 level. There are, on the other hand, clear differences in the educational level of workers in the various industry sectors. The proportion of those workers who did not complete a secondary school is the highest in manufacturing (30%), hospitality (28%) and construction (27%). The highest level of educational attainment was recorded in enterprises that are active in financial intermediation (36% of persons employed completed at least some higher education), business services (35%) and healthcare (27%).

page 84


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Nominally, we found the largest proportion of co-workers with postgraduate degrees in healthcare, although we suspect that the “doctor” diplomas in that industry do not mean doctoral level studies in most instances, instead, they cover the medical doctor diplomas.

Analytical Report, page 85


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

6.2 Human resource problems Finding and hiring the appropriate workforce is a challenge for many SMEs in Europe. Especially in the new Member States, a significant number of jobs are unfilled. This section discusses this problem and reports on strategies to cope with the problem.

6.2.1 Unfilled vacancies For analytical purposes, we calculated the estimated proportion of unfilled jobs by dividing the average number of unfilled vacancies in 2006 by the sum of the unfilled vacancies and the number of persons employed for each SME. In the EU27 countries, about 5% of all SME jobs remained unfilled last year. Unfilled vacancies as percentage of all jobs

4,0

3,5

2,9 IT

UK

LU

4,0

FR

BG

4,3

4,1

PT

4,6

SE

4,5

5,1

4,9

DK

EU25

IE

5,1

ES

EU15

5,2

5,1

DE

5,3

5,2

BE

EU27

AT

5,4

5,3

CZ

5

HU

5,7

5,6

NL

6,1

5,8

CY

NO

7,1

7,0

IS

FI

7,9

7,7

MT

SI

8,7

8,4

SK

LV

NMS10

10,4

10,3

PL

10

NMS12

10,9

10,7

EL

14,6 TR

12,3

14,6

15

RO

20

19,8

25

EE

LT

0

Q65. How many job vacancies did you have in your enterprise on average in 2006 that you could not fill in? Base : SMEs, % by country, question was not asked from 1-person firms

Proportion of jobs unfilled (%, EU27)

SME Activity sector

Size class

% EU27 SME

5,3

2-9 persons employed

5,5

10-49 persons employed

4,2

50-249 persons employed

2,3

250+ persons employed

1,3

D. Manufacturing

4,9

F. Construction

7,8

G. Wholesale and retail

4,7

H. Hotels and restaurants

4,9

I. Transport, storage and communication

6,3

J. Financial intermediation

6,1

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

4,9

N. Health and social work

2,8

O. Other community, social and personal service

6,1

page 86

Filling up vacancies with the appropriate candidates seems to be more of a challenge in the new Member States than in the old ones. 9% of the job openings remained vacant in the new Member States in 2006. Finding the appropriate co-workers appears to be a real struggle in Lithuania (20%), Romania (15%), Turkey (15%), Estonia (12%), Greece (11%) and Poland (11%). Slovakia and Latvia stand out as well, with 10-10% of jobs being reportedly unfilled. While recruitment problems seem to be quite evenly spread across industry sectors (SMEs in the healthcare sector appear to be more able and construction sector less able than others to find workers), the differences between size categories are very clear. The larger an is an enterprise, the less likely it is to suffer from recruitment problems. Allegedly, 6% of all available jobs are unfilled in the micro micro-enterprise segment (among LSEs slightly over 1% of openings remained unfilled).


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

6.2.2 Recruiting problems The survey asked SMEs about their key recruiting challenges, using the following question (the last two answer categories were not presented to the person interviewed): What is your main recruiting problem? − Scarcity of skilled labour force − Scarcity of non-skilled labour force − Low image of profession/sector/type of enterprise − Wage levels too expensive − Unpleasant work or working conditions − [no problem with recruiting] − [DK/NA] No recruitment problem 100 80 60

63 60

56

51 51 51 51 50 48 47 47 47 47 46 46 46 46 46 44 43 43 43 42

40

39 39 38 38 38 35

30 28 27

23 22

20

18

BG HU DK LU PT CY ES IT NL FR EU15 EU27 EU25 SE LV NMS12 BE NMS10 CZ SK PL DE UK SI EL IS AT NO RO IE FI MT TR EE LT

0

Q63. What is your main recruiting problem? Base : SMEs , % [no recruiting problem] shown by country, question was not asked from 1-person firms

First of all, almost half of European SMEs say they have no recruitment problems (47%). This is true especially of micro enterprises (49%) and of (privately owned) SMEs in the healthcare (55%), financial (52%) and business services sectors (51%). The sense that there are no recruiting problems is most widespread among SMEs in Bulgaria (63%) and Hungary (60%), and the least typical in Lithuania (18%).

Looking at those who have problems filling their job vacancies, these SMEs are primarily complaining about the scarce availability of a skilled workforce. 28% of SMEs in the EU indicate that this is their primary concern in recruiting. If we add the problem of the limited availability of unskilled labour (5%), we find that one third of European SMEs are struggling with finding the necessary human resources. The second most widespread complaint is the high wage levels expected by candidates. However, this concern is significantly less prevalent: 11% of managers

Recruiting problems, EU27 DK/NA; 5 Scarcity of skilled labour force; 28

Scarcity of non-skilled labour force; 5

No problem with recruiting; 47

Low image of profession/sector/type of enterprise; 3

Unpleasant work or working conditions; 2

Wage levels too expensive; 11

Q63. What is your main recruiting problem? Base : SMEs, %, EU-27, question was not asked from 1-person firms

Analytical Report, page 87


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

mentioned it. Finally, some managers indicate that their key recruitment problem is somehow “their own fault”, related either to the unattractive nature of their business (3%) or to the unpleasant working conditions they are able to offer (2%). As the graph below indicates, in all but one European economy, the scarcity of labour is a more significant problem than high wage levels (the exception is Hungary). However, there is a relatively wide range of opinions across the EU regarding this issue. The lack of appropriate labour is most striking in some of the new Member States. 56% of SMEs consider this their primary recruitment problem in Lithuania, 53% in Estonia, and 48% in Romania. In Hungary (15%), on the other hand, this problem seems less significant, and is outscored by the problem of high wage demands by candidates. SMEs in Belgium (22%) and the Netherlands (22%) are also among the least likely to face a shortage of appropriate labour. Main recruiting problem (the two most frequently mentioned difficulties) 100

scarcity of labour (skilled + unskilled)

75 56

53

50

25

15

wage levels

49 48 46 46 46 46 45 43 42 42 41 40

11

13

10

7

6

12 13 5

6

8

5

8

36 35 35 34 34 33 33 32 32 32 31 30 30 29 29 29 29 9

7

7

11 12

6

12 5

11

11

11

8

12 10

16

26

22 22

14 3

6

5

9

10

22 15

LT EE FI RO MT NO LV TR IE EL PL SK SI AT IS ES NMS12 NMS10 FR UK PT EU27 EU25 EU15 LU CZ SE DE IT BG DK CY NL BE HU

0

Q63. What is your main recruiting problem? Base: SMEs, % by country, question was not asked from 1-person firms

The other obstacle on the labour market mentioned relatively frequently is high wage levels that complicate the hiring of the desired personnel. This concern was indicated most frequently, as mentioned earlier, in Hungary (22%), Germany (16%), Lithuania (15%), Ireland (13%) and Turkey (12%). On the other hand, excessive wage demands are rarely a concern in Bulgaria (3%), Portugal, Cyprus, Latvia and Slovakia (all 5%). The low image of the job or sector is a constraint mentioned rarely in most European economies. Still, at least five percent of SMEs claimed that this was their primary recruiting problem in Ireland (10%), Turkey (8%), Sweden (7%), Malta (6%), Cyprus (5%), Finland (5%), Austria (5%) and Norway (5%). Unpleasant working conditions affect the hiring abilities of only a few SMEs significantly. At least five percent of SMEs considered this their main concern in – again – Turkey (8%), Belgium (5%), Estonia (5%), Slovenia (5%) and Luxembourg (5%). Annex Table 58a has further details on the results in various countries. Looking at the different SME segments, the (lack of) availability of the necessary labour force is the prime concern everywhere. This is especially the case in the small and medium enterprise segment, and particularly with regard to skilled labour (40% and 43% in these two categories, respectively, named the scarcity of skilled labour as their most pressing recruiting problem). 35% of SMEs in the manufacturing industry and 39% of firms in construction suffer the most from the lack of a skilled workforce. Those in the financial (19%), healthcare (20%) and personal services sector (21%) report this problem the least often. For the smallest SMEs, wage levels seem to be the most important problem. 11% of micro enterprises declared that this was their most challenging recruiting issue, versus 7% of large scaled enterprises.

page 88


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

On the other hand, LSEs are more likely to face recruiting problems due to the quality of jobs they are able to offer (6% vs. 2% among SMEs). The problem of prohibitively high wage demands is the most pronounced in the community, social and personal services sector (16%), as well in business, transport/storage/communication and the financial sectors (12% both). High wages are seen as the least problematic in the construction and hospitality industry (8-8%). These two sectors, on the other hand, are among the most likely to face a shortage of unskilled labour (this is the main concern for 7% and 8%, respectively). Unpleasant working conditions are also reported to be a key problem most of all in the hospitality industry (7%). The healthcare industry suffers most from the bad image of the sector/profession (7%); this problem almost as widespread– interestingly – in the financial sector and the hospitality industry (6%).

Analytical Report, page 89


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

6.2.3 Recruitment strategies Managers were asked about their preferred recruiting strategies with regard to the most difficult to reach employee groups. Due to the dominance of micro- and small enterprises in the sample the picture we see here reflects the rather informal recruiting channels these smaller companies often use to recruit their most difficult-to-find personnel. This means primarily private contacts. Most SMEs in the EU (33%) use private contacts; additionally, 9% find their “difficult-to-find employees” through spontaneous applications. Recruiting strategies Through private contacts

33

Through newspaper

13

Through public labour market institutions

11 9

Through spontaneous applications Through private labour market institutions

7

DK/NA

4

24

No problem with recruiting 0

25

50

Q62. Thinking of the employees who are difficult to recruit for your company, what is your main approach to find them? Base : SMEs, %, EU27, question was not asked from 1-person firms

Obviously, recruiting strategies are very different for larger enterprises. 63% of companies with at least 250 persons employed use formal recruitment channels (especially newspaper advertisements: 31%) to find the employees they consider most difficult to recruit. But formal recruiting methods also dominate in the small- and medium-sized SME segment (the majority, 45% and 56% mention those, respectively). When looking at industry sectors, however, informal methods are the Recruiting strategies in the various size segments (%, EU27) dominant strategy for recruiting key personnel in all sectors. LSEs are more likely than SMEs to rely on the services of public employment agencies (17% vs. 11% among SMEs, see Annex Table 57b).

page 90

Informal

Formal

2-9 persons employed

43

29

10-49 persons employed

41

45

50-249 persons employed

29

56

250+ persons employed

20

63


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

For each of the countries surveyed, the following table shows the different frequencies (of mentioned responses) for the various methods of recruiting key personnel. Looking at the top three answers in each country, we find that private contacts are among the top three methods in all countries. In fact, in 27 of the 30 countries is the most frequently mentioned recruiting strategy for hiring difficult-to-access personnel. The 3 countries where the most often mentioned strategy was not private contacts were Belgium, France and Ireland where spontaneous applications, public labour marker institutions and newspaper advertisement were mentioned most frequently. Recruiting strategy (Most frequently mentioned responses by country, %) BE

CZ

DK

spontaneous applications

16

private contacts

33

private contacts

28

public labour market inst.

13

public labour market inst.

14

newspaper

16

private contacts

12

newspaper

8

spontaneous applications

8

DE

EE

EL

private contacts

38

private contacts

54

private contacts

52

newspaper

13

newspaper

17

newspaper

17

public labour market inst.

10

private labour market inst.

6

private labour market inst.

10

ES

FR

IE

private contacts

24

public labour market inst.

19

newspaper

36

public labour market inst.

17

private contacts

19

private contacts

28

newspaper

11

spontaneous applications

12

spontaneous applications

11

IT

CY

LV

private contacts

46

private contacts

23

private contacts

51

spontaneous applications

12

newspaper

13

newspaper

14

newspaper

8

public labour market inst.

10

public labour market inst.

7

LT

LU

HU

private contacts

40

private contacts

20

private contacts

37

newspaper

16

spontaneous applications

18

newspaper

9

public labour market inst.

14

public labour market inst.

16

public labour market inst.

9

MT

NL

AT

private contacts

28

private contacts

26

private contacts

32

newspaper

27

private labour market inst.

10

newspaper

19

public labour market inst.

21

newspaper

10

public labour market inst.

19

PL

PT

SI

private contacts

38

private contacts

16

private contacts

42

newspaper

13

spontaneous applications

16

public labour market inst.

23

public labour market inst.

12

newspaper

15

newspaper

10

SK

FI

SE

private contacts

46

private contacts

40

newspaper

15

public labour market inst.

20

public labour market inst.

9

public labour market inst.

11

newspaper

13

spontaneous applications

6

UK

private contacts

51

BG

RO

private contacts

31

private contacts

52

private contacts

29

newspaper

29

newspaper

8

newspaper

26

spontaneous applications

10

public labour market inst.

5

spontaneous applications

9

TR

NO

IC

private contacts

41

private contacts

38

private contacts

44

newspaper

24

newspaper

18

newspaper

14

spontaneous applications

8

public labour market inst.

13

public labour market inst.

8

Analytical Report, page 91


The Gallup Organization

Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Newspapers and public labour agencies appear very frequently in the top three recruiting methods in every country. There are only 4 countries where newspaper ads are not among the three key recruiting strategies: Belgium, France, Sweden and Luxembourg. Labour offices fail to make the top three in a number of countries: Denmark, Estonia, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, United Kingdom, Romania and Turkey. Private employment agencies are among the most important channels only in Estonia, Greece and the Netherlands. Spontaneous applications are a frequent method especially in Turkey, Romania, Portugal, France, Italy, Ireland, United Kingdom, Denmark, Sweden, Belgium and Luxemburg.

page 92


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Flash EB Series #196

Observatory of European SMEs

Annex Tables & Survey Details

THE GALLUP ORGANIZATION

Annex, page 93


The Gallup Organization

Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Annex tables Table 1a. Type of enterprise .................................................................................................................. 98 Table 1b. Type of enterprise................................................................................................................ 100 Table 2a. Number of employees in 2005............................................................................................. 101 Table 2b. Number of employees in 2005 ............................................................................................ 102 Table 3a. Number of employees in 2006............................................................................................. 103 Table 3b. Number of employees in 2006 ............................................................................................ 104 Table 4a. Anticipated change in number of employees for 2007 ........................................................ 105 Table 4b. Anticipated change in number of employees for 2007 ........................................................ 107 Table 5a. 2005 turnover....................................................................................................................... 108 Table 5b. 2005 turnover ...................................................................................................................... 110 Table 6a. 2006 turnover....................................................................................................................... 111 Table 6b. 2006turnover ....................................................................................................................... 113 Table 7a. Anticipated change in turnover for 2007 ............................................................................. 114 Table 7b. Anticipated change in turnover for 2007 ............................................................................. 116 Table 8a. Crafts sector ......................................................................................................................... 117 Table 8b. Crafts sector......................................................................................................................... 118 Table 9a. Constraints encountered: Limited access to finance ............................................................ 119 Table 9b. Constraints encountered: Limited access to finance ........................................................... 120 Table 10a. Constraints encountered: Labour force too expensive....................................................... 121 Table 10b. Constraints encountered: Labour force too expensive ...................................................... 122 Table 11a. Constraints encountered: Lack of skilled labour ............................................................... 123 Table 11b. Constraints encountered: Lack of skilled labour ............................................................... 124 Table 12a. Constraints encountered: Implementing new technology.................................................. 125 Table 12b. Constraints encountered: Implementing new technology ................................................. 126 Table 13a. Constraints encountered: Implementing new forms of organisation ................................. 127 Table 13b. Constraints encountered: Implementing new forms of organisation ................................. 128 Table 14a. Constraints encountered: Lack of quality management..................................................... 129 Table 14b. Constraints encountered: Lack of quality management .................................................... 130 Table 15a. Constraints encountered: Problems with administrative regulations................................. 131 Table 15b. Constraints encountered: Problems with administrative regulations ................................ 132 Table 16a. Constraints encountered: Problems with infrastructure ..................................................... 133 Table 16b. Constraints encountered: Problems with infrastructure .................................................... 134 Table 17a. Constraints encountered: Reduced purchasing power of customers ................................. 135 Table 17b. Constraints encountered: Reduced purchasing power of customers ................................. 136 Table 18a. Constraint change: Limited access to finance .................................................................. 137 Table 18b. Constraint change: Limited access to finance .................................................................. 139 Table 19a. Constraint change: Labour force too expensive ............................................................... 140 page 94


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 19b. Constraint change: Labour force too expensive ............................................................... 142 Table 20a. Constraint change: Lack of skilled labour ........................................................................ 143 Table 20b. Constraint change: Lack of skilled labour ........................................................................ 145 Table 21a. Constraint change: Implementing new technology .......................................................... 146 Table 21b. Constraint change: Implementing new technology .......................................................... 148 Table 22a. Constraint change: Implementing new forms of organisation .......................................... 149 Table 22b. Constraint change: Implementing new forms of organisation ......................................... 151 Table 23a. Constraint change: Lack of quality management ............................................................. 152 Table 23b. Constraint change: Lack of quality management ............................................................. 154 Table 24a. Constraint change: Problems with administrative regulations ......................................... 155 Table 24b. Constraint change: Problems with administrative regulations ......................................... 157 Table 25a. Constraint change: Problems with infrastructure ............................................................. 158 Table 25b. Constraint change: Problems with infrastructure ............................................................. 160 Table 26a. Constraint change: Problems with the purchasing power of customers ........................... 161 Table 26b. Constraint change: Problems with the purchasing power of customers ........................... 163 Table 27a. Cause of decreased constraints due to regulations ............................................................ 164 Table 27b. Cause of decreased constraints due to regulations ............................................................ 166 Table 28a. Appropriate business regulations....................................................................................... 167 Table 28b. Appropriate business regulations ...................................................................................... 169 Table 29a. Administrative burden in man-days .................................................................................. 170 Table 29b. Administrative burden in man-days .................................................................................. 172 Table 30a. Internal Market: No border controls any more .................................................................. 173 Table 30b. Internal Market: No border controls any more .................................................................. 175 Table 31a. Internal Market: Same currency in most of the Member States ........................................ 176 Table 31b. Internal Market: Same currency in most of the Member States ........................................ 178 Table 32a. Internal Market: Hire workers from other EU countries ................................................... 179 Table 32b. Internal Market: Hire workers from other EU countries ................................................... 181 Table 33a. Internal Market: Single Market legislation ........................................................................ 182 Table 33b. Internal Market: Single Market legislation ....................................................................... 184 Table 34a. Benefit of EU standards replace national regulations........................................................ 185 Table 34b. Benefit of EU standards replace national regulations ....................................................... 186 Table 35a. Amount of exports, 2005 ................................................................................................... 187 Table 35b. Amount of exports, 2005 ................................................................................................... 188 Table 36a. Amount of exports, 2006 ................................................................................................... 189 Table 36b. Amount of exports, 2006 ................................................................................................... 191 Table 37a. Anticipated change in exports for 2007 ............................................................................. 192 Table 37b. Anticipated change in exports for 2007 ............................................................................ 194 Table 38a. Anticipated increase of exports for 2007 ........................................................................... 195 Table 38b. Anticipated increase of exports for 2007 .......................................................................... 196 Table 39a. Anticipated decrease of exports for 2007 .......................................................................... 197

Annex, page 95


The Gallup Organization

Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Table 39b. Anticipated decrease of exports for 2007 .......................................................................... 198 Table 40a. Constraints to exporting .................................................................................................... 199 Table 40b. Constraints to exporting .................................................................................................... 201 Table 41a. Inputs purchased abroad .................................................................................................... 202 Table 41b. Inputs purchased abroad .................................................................................................... 203 Table 42a. Turnover created in foreign subsidiaries ........................................................................... 204 Table 42b. Turnover created in foreign subsidiaries ........................................................................... 206 Table 43a. Turnover created in joint ventures abroad ........................................................................ 207 Table 43b. Turnover created in joint ventures abroad ........................................................................ 209 Table 44a. Reason for having foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures...................................................... 210 Table 44b. Reason for having foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures ..................................................... 211 Table 45a. Foreign subsidiaries or joint ventures affecting the home country employment .............. 212 Table 45b. Foreign subsidiaries or joint ventures affecting the home country employment ............. 213 Table 46a. Intensity of competition .................................................................................................... 214 Table 46b. Intensity of competition ................................................................................................... 216 Table 47a. Strategies in increased competition and shrinking margins ............................................. 217 Table 47b. Strategies in increased competition and shrinking margins ............................................. 218 Table 48a. Strategies in increased competition and shrinking margins ............................................. 219 Table 48b. Strategies in increased competition and shrinking margins ............................................. 221 Table 49a. Annual marketing budget ................................................................................................. 222 Table 49b. Annual marketing budget ................................................................................................. 223 Table 50a. Turnover from innovation ................................................................................................ 224 Table 50b. Turnover from innovation ................................................................................................ 226 Table 51a. Main constraint for innovation activities .......................................................................... 227 Table 51b. Main constraint for innovation activities.......................................................................... 228 Table 52a. Measures to save energy and resources ............................................................................ 229 Table 52b. Measures to save energy and resources ............................................................................ 231 Table 53a. Geographic origin of labour force - own region .............................................................. 232 Table 53b. Geographic origin of labour force - own region .............................................................. 233 Table 54a. Geographic origin of labour force - own country, other region....................................... 234 Table 54b. Geographic origin of labour force - own country, other region ...................................... 235 Table 55a. Geographic origin of labour force - other EU countries ................................................... 236 Table 55b. Geographic origin of labour force - other EU countries................................................... 237 Table 56a. Geographic origin of labour force - non-EU countries ..................................................... 238 Table 56b. Geographic origin of labour force - non-EU countries .................................................... 239 Table 57a. Recruitment strategies ...................................................................................................... 240 Table 57b. Recruitment strategies ...................................................................................................... 242 Table 58a. Main recruiting problem ................................................................................................... 243 Table 58b. Main recruiting problem................................................................................................... 245 Table 59a. Unfilled job vacancies in 2006 ......................................................................................... 246 page 96


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 59b. Unfilled job vacancies in 2006 ......................................................................................... 247 Table 60a. Educational attainment of employees - postgraduate degree ........................................... 248 Table 60b. Educational attainment of employees - postgraduate degree ........................................... 249 Table 61a. Educational attainment of employees - university degree ................................................ 250 Table 61b. Educational attainment of employees - university degree ................................................ 251 Table 62a. Educational attainment of employees - secondary school ................................................ 252 Table 62b. Educational attainment of employees - secondary school ................................................ 253

Annex, page 97


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 1a. Type of enterprise Question Q1. How would you characterise your enterprise? Is it... Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% an independent enterprise

%a subsidiary of another enterprise

% a non profit enterprise: foundations, associations, semigovernment

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

page 98

EU27

14683

91,7

4,8

2,6

0,8

EU25

13318

91,6

4,9

2,6

0,9

EU15

9239

91,1

5,3

2,7

1

NMS12

5890

94,6

2,9

2,3

0,3

NMS10

4525

94.1

3.1

2.6

0.3

Belgium

446

86,2

7,6

4

2,1

Czech Rep.

480

95,9

0,7

2,9

0,5

Denmark

472

81,3

7,2

10,3

1,2

Germany

901

94,5

3,9

0,9

0,7

Estonia

290

94,6

5,4

0

0

Greece

460

94,5

3,3

2,2

0

Spain

921

90,8

8,3

0,7

0,2

France

885

87

7,1

2,4

3,5

Ireland

553

90,9

4,5

4,6

0

Italy

875

94,3

4,3

1,4

0

Cyprus

296

91,6

5,3

3

0

Latvia

298

87,3

5,3

6,6

0,9

Lithuania

296

92,1

5,6

1,6

0,7

Luxembourg

313

83

9,6

5,5

1,9

Hungary

481

91,2

1,6

7,2

0,1

Malta

302

89,2

7,7

3,1

0

Netherlands

549

91,7

6,3

1,8

0,1

Austria

568

90,8

4,3

4,3

0,6

Poland

866

94,9

4,5

0,4

0,2

Portugal

484

95,9

0,9

2,2

0,9

Slovenia

299

92,6

5,3

2,2

0

Slovakia

471

94,2

4

1,1

0,7

Finland

469

85,5

6,3

7,9

0,3

Sweden

478

77,7

8,1

13,4

0,8

United Kingdom

865

90,3

4,1

4,7

0,9

Bulgaria

478

98

2

0

0

Romania

887

96,9

2,3

0,7

0,1

Iceland

288

91

8,4

0,6

0

Norway

454

73,9

14,9

10,8

0,4


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

914

The Gallup Organization

95,5

3,6

0,5

0,4

Annex, page 99


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 1b. Type of enterprise Question Q1. How would you characterise your enterprise? Is it... Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% an independent enterprise

% a subsidiary of another enterprise

% a non profit enterprise: foundations, associations, semigovernment

14683

91,7

4,8

2,6

0,8

1-9

13121

93,2

4,1

2,4

0,4

10-49

1225

86,4

8,8

4

0,7

50-249

201

73,8

19,5

6,5

0,2

250+

47

58,8

27,3

13,7

0,2

D. Manufacturing

1857

94,2

4,7

0,4

0,6

F. Construction

1577

96,1

2,6

0,6

0,7

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

92,9

5,5

0,9

0,7

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

91,1

3,5

3,4

2,1

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

89,9

6,4

3,1

0,6

J. Financial intermediation

693

80

14,2

4,5

1,2

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

93

4,2

2,2

0,6

N. Health and social work

696

90,4

1,4

6,7

1,4

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

79,6

3,8

15,5

1,1

EU27

% DK/NA

PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 100


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 2a. Number of persons employed in 2005 Question Q3. How many persons, including part time workers, were employed in your enterprise on average in 2005: WRITE IN number of people employed: Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) Total N

% 1-9

% 10-49

% 50-249

% 250+

% DK/NA

COUNTRY EU27

14683

84,7

7,9

1,3

0

6

EU25

13318

84,8

7,9

1,3

0

6

EU15

9239

84,2

8,5

1,3

0

6

NMS12

5890

87,3

5,1

1,2

0

6,4

NMS10

4525

88

4.5

1.1

0

6.5

Belgium

446

68,3

6,6

0,9

0

24,2

Czech Rep.

480

88,6

3,9

0,7

0

6,9

Denmark

472

85,4

10,6

1,9

0

2

Germany

901

82,1

13,9

2,2

0

1,8

Estonia

290

78,4

16,4

2,8

0

2,4

Greece

460

94,1

3,5

0,6

0

1,8

Spain

921

86,4

6,6

0,8

0

6,2

France

885

77,9

6,3

1,3

0

14,5

Ireland

553

87,6

7,2

1,4

0

3,7

Italy

875

92,1

4,9

0,5

0

2,5

Cyprus

296

92,9

5,5

0,3

0

1,2

Latvia

298

78,4

13,5

3

0

5

Lithuania

296

58,1

12,2

1,7

0

27,9

Luxembourg

313

80,4

10,5

1,5

0

7,7

Hungary

481

88,4

4,3

0,8

0

6,4

Malta

302

83

9,9

2,4

0

4,7

Netherlands

549

79,9

9,8

1,6

0

8,8

Austria

568

84,7

11,2

1,6

0

2,4

Poland

866

90,6

2,6

0,9

0

6

Portugal

484

85,2

6,5

1,2

0

7,1

Slovenia

299

90,6

5,5

2,8

0

1,1

Slovakia

471

67,8

18,7

5,2

0

8,3

Finland

469

91,9

6,3

1,3

0

0,5

Sweden

478

88,7

7,3

1,5

0

2,4

United Kingdom

865

82,1

11,3

1,8

0

4,9

Bulgaria

478

86,8

7,2

1,4

0

4,6

Romania

887

81,2

9,5

2,2

0

7,1

Iceland

288

82,4

15,2

2,3

0

0,2

Norway

454

89,8

7,7

1,3

0

1,2

Turkey

914

88,3

3,3

0,1

0

8,4

Annex, page 101


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 2b. Number of persons employed in 2005 Question Q3. How many persons, including part time workers, were employed in your enterprise on average in 2005: WRITE IN number of people employed: Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% 1-9

% 10-49

% 50-249

% 250+

% DK/NA

14683

84,7

7,9

1,3

0

6

1-9

13121

100

0

0

0

0

10-49

1225

0

100

0

0

0

50-249

201

0

0

100

0

0

250+

47

0

0

0

100

0

D. Manufacturing

1857

80,5

11,8

3

0

4,8

F. Construction

1577

83,4

9,1

0,9

0

6,6

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

88,5

6,3

0,9

0

4,3

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

73,6

11,1

1

0

14,3

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

83,7

8,3

1,5

0

6,5

J. Financial intermediation

693

90,7

5,6

0,9

0

2,9

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

86,1

6,6

0,9

0

6,3

N. Health and social work

696

85,8

8,7

1,8

0

3,6

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

83,2

6,3

1,7

0

8,8

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 102


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 3a. Number of persons employed in 2006 Question Q4. How many persons, including part time workers, were employed in your enterprise on average in 2006: WRITE IN number of people employed: Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) Total N

% 1-9

% 10-49

% 50-249

% 250+

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

83.7

10.4

1.5

0

4.4

EU25

13318

83.8

10.3

1.5

0

4.4

EU15

9239

83.4

10.6

1.5

0

4.5

NMS12

5890

85.1

9.1

1.5

0.1

4.2

NMS10

4525

85.9

8.4

1.3

0.1

4.2

Belgium

446

65.3

9.6

2.6

0

22.5

Czech Rep.

480

85.2

7.1

1.2

0.5

6

Denmark

472

83.7

12

2.7

0

1.7

Germany

901

82.1

14.4

2.5

0

1.1

Estonia

290

71.9

22.8

3.6

0.1

1.6

Greece

460

90.2

7.9

1

0

0.8

Spain

921

87.6

7.4

0.8

0

4.1

France

885

77.7

8.7

1.4

0

12.2

Ireland

553

83.8

13

1.4

0.1

1.8

Italy

875

88.7

8.6

0.5

0

2.1

Cyprus

296

90.7

8.6

0.4

0

0.3

Latvia

298

73.2

21

3.2

0

2.6

Lithuania

296

64.2

12.8

2.1

0

20.9

Luxembourg

313

76.3

16.4

1.7

0

5.5

Hungary

481

87.2

7

1

0

4.9

Malta

302

75.3

16.2

2.2

0.1

6.2

Netherlands

549

81

11.6

2.3

0

5

Austria

568

82

14

1.9

0

2

Poland

866

88.9

7.7

0.9

0

2.5

Portugal

484

86.2

8.4

1.5

0

3.9

Slovenia

299

85.5

10.4

2.7

0.1

1.4

Slovakia

471

69.2

20.1

6.1

0

4.6

Finland

469

89.7

8.6

1.6

0

0

Sweden

478

89.1

8.2

1.7

0

0.9

United Kingdom

865

81.7

13.5

1.9

0

3

Bulgaria

478

83

12.3

1.6

0

3.1

Romania

887

78.5

13.3

3.1

0.2

5

Iceland

288

79.8

16.9

3.1

0.1

0.2

Norway

454

86.3

11.5

1.7

0

0.4

Turkey

914

87.2

7

0.3

0

5.5

COUNTRY

Annex, page 103


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 3b. Number of persons employed in 2006 Question Q4. How many persons, including part time workers, were employed in your enterprise on average in 2006: WRITE IN number of people employed: Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise Total N

% 1-9

% 10-49

% 50-249

% 250+

% DK/NA

14683

83.7

10.4

1.5

0

4.4

1-9

13121

96.5

2.9

0.1

0

0.6

10-49

1225

3.8

93.7

2.1

0

0.4

50-249

201

0.6

2.3

95.8

1

0.3

250+

47

0.2

0.2

3.8

94.1

1.8

3.2

0.2

3.3

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

page 104

1857

79.2

14.1

F. Construction

1577

82.2

11.7

1

0

5.1

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

87.2

8.8

1

0

3.1

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

78.7

13.3

1.2

0

6.7

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

82.1

11.3

1.8

0

4.8

J. Financial intermediation

693

89.7

7.2

1.1

0

2

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

84.9

7.9

1.4

0

5.8

N. Health and social work

696

84.3

10.9

1.9

0

3

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

76.5

14.6

1.9

0

7


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 4a. Anticipated change in number of employees for 2007 Question Q5. What are your expectations regarding the number of employees in your enterprise in 2007? Will it increase, remain unchanged, or will decrease? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% Will increase

% Will remain about the same

% Will decrease

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

18,4

67,3

9,7

4,6

EU25

13318

17,8

67,9

9,7

4,5

EU15

9239

15,9

69,6

10,2

4,3

NMS12

5890

30,4

56,6

6,9

6

NMS10

4525

28.5

58.7

7.1

5.8

Belgium

446

22,3

60,1

3,9

13,7

Czech Rep.

480

15,2

72,6

8,3

3,9

Denmark

472

20,8

71,7

6,1

1,4

Germany

901

14,4

73,4

11,1

1

Estonia

290

39,2

49,7

6,7

4,4

Greece

460

34,5

54,2

6,4

4,9

Spain

921

21,5

72,1

3,4

3

France

885

16,6

69,1

2,4

11,9

Ireland

553

3,8

68,3

25,5

2,4

Italy

875

17,4

68,5

9,2

4,9

Cyprus

296

12,5

78,1

6,6

2,8

Latvia

298

36,5

56,3

5,9

1,3

Lithuania

296

46,3

46,1

3,2

4,3

Luxembourg

313

32,7

57,1

6,1

4

Hungary

481

15,7

64,8

16,1

3,4

Malta

302

26,8

56

14,1

3,1

Netherlands

549

27,3

65,3

5,4

2

Austria

568

16,7

72,3

8,6

2,4

Poland

866

41

47,5

2,7

8,8

Portugal

484

17

67

12,7

3,3

Slovenia

299

37,9

57,1

3,7

1,3

Slovakia

471

26,7

63,7

5

4,6

Finland

469

20,9

74,3

3,9

0,9

Sweden

478

19,4

73

6,5

1,2

United Kingdom

865

6,5

69,5

22,4

1,6

Bulgaria

478

33

54,6

6,3

6,2

Romania

887

47,5

38,4

6,2

7,9

Iceland

288

29,7

62,1

6

2,2

Norway

454

29,7

63,1

6,7

0,5

COUNTRY

Annex, page 105


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 106

914

37

50,3

7,6

5


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 4b. Anticipated change in number of employees for 2007 Question Q5. What are your expectations regarding the number of employees in your enterprise in 2007? Will it increase, remain unchanged, or will decrease? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

EU27

Total N

% Will increase

% Will remain about the same

14683

18,4

67,3

% Will decrease

% DK/NA

9,7

4,6

PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

13121

17,8

69,8

9,3

3,1

10-49

1225

21,3

63,1

13,2

2,3

50-249

201

25,4

52,1

19,5

2,9

250+

47

29

47,1

21,1

2,8

D. Manufacturing

1857

20,2

64,8

10,2

4,7

F. Construction

1577

19,7

66,9

9

4,4

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

17,8

67,7

10,2

4,3

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

15,6

69,3

7,9

7,2

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

20,1

65,7

10,5

3,7

J. Financial intermediation

693

23,3

65,5

9,1

2,2

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

17,9

67,9

9

5,2

N. Health and social work

696

12,6

76,4

9,3

1,7

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

20,3

62,4

11,7

5,5

NACE SECTOR

Annex, page 107


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 5a. 2005 turnover Question Q7.What was the turnover, that is the annual sales, of your enterprise in 2005 Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated

% 150K to 500K EUR

% 500K to 1 Million EUR

% 1 Million to 2 Million EUR

14683

12,5

13,5

7,6

5,5

4

2,6

54,2

EU25

13318

12

13,5

7,8

5,6

4,1

2,7

54,3

EU15

9239

10

13,5

7,9

6,1

4,5

3

55,1

NMS12

5890

24,5

13,5

6,6

2,6

1,6

1,1

50,1

NMS10

4525

22.8

13.9

7.3

2.9

1.7

1.3

50.1

Belgium

446

2,9

4,9

3,5

2,6

2,4

4,8

78,8

Czech Rep.

480

28,1

15,9

4,5

1,6

0,4

1,3

48,1

Denmark

472

13,1

25

11,8

9,6

4,2

4,2

32,2

Germany

901

17,9

15,7

6

3,9

3,6

3

50

Estonia

290

34,5

17,9

13,5

7,6

3,4

3,8

19,3

Greece

460

10,4

26,5

12,3

13,8

8,7

1,4

26,9

Spain

921

6

8,3

4

2,2

2,5

1,9

75,2

France

885

3,6

8

5,7

5,8

4,2

1,5

71,2

Ireland

553

7,1

13,7

8,6

6,9

4,9

4,8

54,1

Italy

875

5,6

13,5

11,9

8,9

7,4

3,6

49,1

Cyprus

296

29,2

13,4

5

0,8

1,5

1,8

48,2

Latvia

298

39,4

12,9

7,7

1,7

1,1

1,2

36,1

Lithuania

296

22,4

14,6

6

6,1

5,6

1

44,4

Luxembourg

313

3,4

5,5

3,3

3,2

4

2,2

78,5

Hungary

481

36,6

16,8

6,4

2,9

0,7

0,3

36,3

Malta

302

7,9

20,4

8,8

3,9

4,3

3,6

51,1

Netherlands

549

18,7

15,5

4,3

5,9

6,5

3,9

45,3

Austria

568

7,1

17,7

10,1

7

4,8

2,1

51

Poland

866

11,3

10,8

9,1

3,4

2,3

1,4

61,8

Portugal

484

12,9

19,8

7,3

2,5

1,5

0,7

55,4

Slovenia

299

32,7

25,8

11,5

4,4

4,1

2,7

18,8

Slovakia

471

33,8

11,3

6

3,4

4

2,6

38,8

Finland

469

11,4

20,3

20,7

17,6

11,6

2,2

16,1

Sweden

478

14,2

35

14,6

8,7

6,2

7,5

13,8

UK

865

13,9

13,7

8,4

7,1

3,6

3,5

49,9

Bulgaria

478

37,8

3,3

1,4

0,9

0,3

0,2

56

Romania

887

31,5

15,8

3,4

1,3

1,6

0,3

46,2

% DK/NA

% less than 150K EUR

EU27

%2 Million to 5 Million EUR % more than 5 Million EUR

Total N

otherwise

COUNTRY

page 108


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Iceland

288

11,8

23,2

11,9

4,7

9,5

6,7

32,3

Norway

454

20,6

27,6

14,8

6,5

7,8

4,5

18,1

Turkey

947

25,6

9,2

2,4

1,3

1

0,4

60,1

Annex, page 109


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 5b. 2005 turnover Question Q7.What was the turnover, that is the annual sales, of your enterprise in 2005

Total N

% less than 150K EUR

% 150K to 500K EUR

% 500K to 1 Million EUR

% 1 Million to 2 Million EUR

%2 Million to 5 Million EUR

% more than 5 Million EUR

% DK/NA

Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

14683

12,5

13,5

7,6

5,5

4

2,6

54,2

1-9

13121

14

15

8

5,1

3,2

1,5

53,1

10-49

1225

1,6

7,1

8,8

12,9

14

9,5

46,1

50-249

201

0,5

1,4

1,3

4,4

12,1

40,8

39,5

250+

47

0

0,5

0,1

1

3,6

60

34,9

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 110

D. Manufacturing

1857

11,8

14

8,8

5,4

4,9

3,5

51,6

F. Construction

1577

11,2

15,1

10,9

7,1

3,9

2,1

49,6

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

7,5

12,2

10

9,3

7,3

4,6

49,2

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

14,6

13,5

4,4

3,2

2,1

0,4

61,8

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

12,5

12,4

9,1

3,7

2,1

2,1

58,1

J. Financial intermediation

693

19,4

14,7

5,1

6,2

4,8

2,3

47,4

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

16,1

14,5

5,5

2,7

1,8

1,9

57,5

N. Health and social work

696

19,1

14,4

3,8

1,9

1,4

0,3

59,3

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

12,7

10,1

3,5

2,3

1,3

0,8

69,3


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 6a. 2006 turnover Question Q6. What is the expected turnover (annual sales) of your enterprise in 2006? - WRITE IN answer in [NATIONAL CURRENCY]: Basis: all enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% less than 150.000 EUR

% 150.000500.000 EUR

% 500.0001.000.000 EUR

% 1.000.0002.000.000 EUR

% 2.000.0005.000.000 EUR

% 5.000.000 EUR +

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

12,8

13,9

7,6

5,8

4,6

2,9

52,4

EU25

13318

12,3

13,9

7,7

5,9

4,7

3

52,6

EU15

9239

10,2

13,7

7,8

6,3

5,2

3,2

53,6

NMS12

5890

25,4

14,7

6,6

3,6

1,8

1,3

46,6

NMS12

5890

25.4

14.7

6.6

3.6

1.8

1.3

46.6

Belgium

446

3,2

6,9

2,9

2,1

2,4

4,8

77,7

Czech Rep.

480

28,8

17,4

4,2

2,7

0,4

1,3

45,1

Denmark

472

12,8

26,4

12

7,4

5,1

4,9

31,4

Germany

901

18,2

16,5

6,6

3,6

4

3,3

47,7

Estonia

290

34,5

14,3

12,1

10,1

4,7

5

19,2

Greece

460

12,2

21,5

17,1

11,5

9,9

2,7

25,1

Spain

921

5,9

8,2

4,4

2,4

2,5

2,6

74,1

France

885

3,5

8,1

5

5,7

4,3

1,2

72,1

Ireland

553

6,2

12,8

10,1

6,4

6,3

6

52,1

Italy

875

6,4

13

10,5

9,3

8,2

3,7

48,9

Cyprus

296

29,4

14,2

6

0,9

1

1,8

46,8

Latvia

298

42,3

14,6

7

3,3

1,4

0,8

30,8

Lithuania

296

23,6

16,2

7,7

7,5

7,3

1,6

36,1

Luxembourg

313

4

7,8

3,5

5,2

4,7

2

72,6

Hungary

481

37

18,7

6,2

2,7

1,4

0,3

33,8

Malta

302

5,4

22,2

7,9

5,3

4,6

3,4

51,2

Netherlands

549

19,8

17,6

3,5

5,1

7,6

5

41,5

Austria

568

6,8

18,5

9,4

7,6

5

2,2

50,6

Poland

866

13,2

11,4

9

4,9

2,7

1,8

57

Portugal

484

15,1

20,4

7,1

2,8

1,8

0,6

52,2

Slovenia

299

29,8

32,1

8,1

5,3

3,2

2,9

18,6

Slovakia

471

33,9

11,8

7,5

4

4,3

3,2

35,2

Finland

469

9,3

20,4

20,7

17,4

12,9

2,2

17,1

Sweden

478

12,5

35

16,6

9,4

7,3

7,1

12

UK

865

13,6

14,2

8,5

8,2

5

4

46,4

Bulgaria

478

38,4

7,3

1,3

1

0,3

0,4

51,3

Romania

887

31,3

14,8

5,1

2

1,4

0,5

44,9

Iceland

288

11,5

24

11,2

7,1

9

8

29,3

Norway

454

22,3

29,1

15,5

8,5

8,1

5,8

10,7

COUNTRY

Annex, page 111


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 112

914

25,9

12,7

3,2

2,9

1,1

0,2

54


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 6b. 2006turnover Question Q6. What is the expected turnover (annual sales) of your enterprise in 2006? - WRITE IN answer in [NATIONAL CURRENCY]: Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% less than 150.00 0 EUR

% 150.000 500.00 0 EUR

% 500.0001.000.00 0 EUR

% 1.000.000 2.000.00 0 EUR

% 2.000.000 5.000.000 EUR

% 5.000.00 0 EUR +

% DK/N A

1468 3

12,8

13,9

7,6

5,8

4,6

2,9

52,4

1-9

13121

14,1

15,4

7,9

5,4

3,8

1,7

51,6

10-49

1225

1,6

6,8

8,2

14,1

14,6

10,2

44,4

50-249

201

0,6

1

1,4

3,6

11,7

41,6

40,2

250+

47

0

0,5

0

0,9

2,7

55,7

40,1

1857

12,7

14

10,2

4,7

5,4

4

49,1

F. Construction

1577

12,4

14,6

10,9

7,4

4,7

2,6

47,4

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

7,7

12,2

8,9

9,5

8,3

4,8

48,5

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

14

14,6

4,7

4,8

2,7

0,3

59

I. Transport, storage and communicatio n

817

11,4

13

10,5

4,3

2,3

2,3

56,2

J. Financial intermediatio n

693

18,2

15,1

5,4

6,4

5,2

2,6

47

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

16,7

15,9

5,1

3,6

2

2

54,7

N. Health and social work

696

19,4

14,4

4,5

1,4

1,2

0,4

58,8

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

13,7

10,1

3,5

2

1,3

1,8

67,6

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturin g

Annex, page 113


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 7a. Anticipated change in turnover for 2007 Question Q8. What do you expect regarding the yearly turnover in 2007 compared to 2006? The turnover of your enterprise in 2007 will Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% Increase

% Remain about the same

% Decrease

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

41

34,8

11,9

12,3

EU25

13318

40,5

35,2

12

12,3

EU15

9239

39,4

36,3

12

12,3

NMS12

5890

48,4

27,9

11,7

12

NMS10

4525

46.9

29.3

11.9

11.9

Belgium

446

39,3

29,7

5,2

25,8

Czech Rep.

480

34,8

35,9

12,1

17,2

Denmark

472

43,8

41,5

6,9

7,9

Germany

901

30,6

42,9

22,2

4,3

Estonia

290

60,1

26,7

4,7

8,4

Greece

460

59,6

27,3

5,7

7,4

Spain

921

49

38,9

5,6

6,5

France

885

30

26

5,7

38,4

Ireland

553

62,6

23,7

7,3

6,4

Italy

875

33,5

38,7

15,4

12,4

Cyprus

296

29,8

31,1

13,9

25,3

Latvia

298

59,8

28,1

4,4

7,7

Lithuania

296

59,5

27,3

5,8

7,3

Luxembourg

313

51,7

26,8

4,8

16,7

Hungary

481

26,2

28,7

32,1

13

Malta

302

38

28,5

21

12,5

Netherlands

549

49,5

32,6

6,5

11,4

Austria

568

35

45,8

9

10,2

Poland

866

62,4

25

4,1

8,6

Portugal

484

30,1

35,3

24,6

10,1

Slovenia

299

56

35,9

2,3

5,9

Slovakia

471

44,6

34,9

9,1

11,4

Finland

469

50,8

38,8

5,2

5,2

Sweden

478

42,6

43,1

9,1

5,2

United Kingdom

865

49,6

34,8

10,5

5,1

Bulgaria

478

42,2

26,1

16,6

15,1

Romania

887

67,9

14,8

6,2

11,1

Iceland

288

51,2

35,4

6,9

6,5

Norway

454

51,9

35,4

6,1

6,7

COUNTRY

page 114


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

914

The Gallup Organization

45,5

24,6

18,9

11

Annex, page 115


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 7b. Anticipated change in turnover for 2007 Question Q8. What do you expect regarding the yearly turnover in 2007 compared to 2006? The turnover of your enterprise in 2007 will Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Increase

% Remain about the same

% Decrease

% DK/NA

14683

41

34,8

11,9

12,3

1-9

13121

39,8

36

12,8

11,4

10-49

1225

47,5

35,9

8,4

8,2

50-249

201

56,5

28,2

7,9

7,4

250+

47

57,6

25,1

4,7

12,5

D. Manufacturing

1857

37,9

33,9

12,4

15,8

F. Construction

1577

38,5

38,2

10,9

12,3

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

41,6

36,2

12,4

9,8

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

38,4

34,3

12,6

14,8

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

43,2

35,6

9,8

11,4

J. Financial intermediation

693

46,6

31,9

12,2

9,4

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

44,2

32,5

9,8

13,4

N. Health and social work

696

34,3

41,4

13,8

10,4

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

39,1

28,5

19

13,4

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 116


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 8a. Crafts sector Question Q10. Does your enterprise belong to the crafts sector? - Do you think that your enterprise belongs to the crafts sector of your country? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise Total N

% Yes

% No

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

27,9

67,7

4,4

EU25

13318

28,2

67,4

4,4

EU15

9239

29,9

65,2

4,9

NMS12

5890

18,7

79,4

2

NMS10

4525

18.9

79.4

1.7

Belgium

446

19,2

67,5

13,3

Czech Rep.

480

33

64,9

2,1

Denmark

472

30,6

66,3

3,1

Germany

901

28,4

71

0,7

Estonia

290

29,1

69,3

1,6

Greece

460

29,1

70,3

0,6

Spain

921

16,7

83,1

0,2

France

885

51

38,6

10,4

Ireland

553

32,7

58,9

8,3

Italy

875

29,2

70,1

0,7

Cyprus

296

20,8

78,8

0,4

Latvia

298

22,1

76,5

1,5

Lithuania

296

13,1

78,1

8,8

Luxembourg

313

32,5

64,3

3,1

Hungary

481

5,7

92,7

1,6

Malta

302

30,4

69,2

0,4

Netherlands

549

31,8

64,7

3,5

Austria

568

26

72,9

1,1

Poland

866

14,7

83,7

1,6

Portugal

484

20,4

76,7

2,9

Slovenia

299

24,9

74,8

0,4

Slovakia

471

27,3

72,2

0,5

Finland

469

16,6

80

3,4

Sweden

478

26

69,8

4,2

United Kingdom

865

29,6

58,6

11,8

Bulgaria

478

15,5

84,1

0,4

Romania

887

18,9

76,2

5

Iceland

288

33,1

63,8

3,1

Norway

454

16,9

81,9

1,2

Turkey

914

52

45

3,1

COUNTRY

Annex, page 117


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 8b. Crafts sector Question Q10. Does your enterprise belong to the crafts sector? - Do you think that your enterprise belongs to the crafts sector of your country? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Yes

% No

% DK/NA

14683

27,9

67,7

4,4

1-9

13121

28,5

68,7

2,8

10-49

1225

25,6

69,9

4,5

50-249

201

19,8

75,8

4,4

250+

47

13,2

81,6

5,2

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 118

D. Manufacturing

1857

57,4

38,9

3,6

F. Construction

1577

46,6

49,3

4,1

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

22,6

73,8

3,6

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

24,6

66,1

9,3

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

24,9

70,4

4,7

J. Financial intermediation

693

9,1

86,9

4

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

16,4

79,3

4,3

N. Health and social work

696

11,5

82,8

5,7

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

34,1

62,4

3,5


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 9a. Constraints encountered: Limited access to finance Question Q21_A. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Limited access to finance Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

21,1

70,9

5,8

2,2

EU25

13318

21,1

71,1

5,7

2,1

EU15

9239

20,3

72,2

5,5

2

NMS12

5890

25,2

64,9

7,1

2,8

NMS10

4525

25.8

64.8

6.7

2.7

Belgium

446

28,8

65

1,5

4,7

Czech Rep.

480

22,5

69,7

1,1

6,7

Denmark

472

9

83,9

5,7

1,4

Germany

901

22,9

59,1

17

1,1

Estonia

290

11,5

78,8

0,7

9,1

Greece

460

24,8

64,8

10,4

0

Spain

921

11,2

77,1

7,4

4,3

France

885

21,1

74

2,7

2,1

Ireland

553

17,6

81,7

0

0,6

Italy

875

24,6

72,3

2,5

0,6

Cyprus

296

19,8

71,3

7,7

1,2

Latvia

298

20,4

67,2

9,8

2,5

Lithuania

296

27,9

65,6

4,7

1,8

Luxembourg

313

22,5

66,1

3,3

8,2

Hungary

481

28,9

60,6

9,3

1,2

Malta

302

34,7

60,1

1,9

3,3

Netherlands

549

13,7

77,3

3

6

Austria

568

17

73,5

7

2,5

Poland

866

26,9

62,5

9,5

1,1

Portugal

484

23,9

67,8

3,7

4,7

Slovenia

299

21,9

72,2

5,8

0,1

Slovakia

471

26,9

67,7

2,2

3,1

Finland

469

6,9

87,1

4,3

1,7

Sweden

478

21,2

70,9

5,6

2,2

United Kingdom

865

18,9

79

0,6

1,6

Bulgaria

478

20,9

64,7

11,1

3,3

Romania

887

22,2

66,5

8,6

2,7

Iceland

288

21,1

76,8

0,9

1,2

Norway

454

18,1

79,3

2,6

0

Turkey

914

45,3

48,1

3,5

3,1

COUNTRY

Annex, page 119


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 9b. Constraints encountered: Limited access to finance Question Q21_A. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Limited access to finance Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

14683

21,1

70,9

5,8

2,2

1-9

13121

20,3

72,4

5,5

1,8

10-49

1225

19,6

69,8

7,9

2,6

50-249

201

17,6

69,6

9,3

3,4

250+

47

15,5

72,9

9,2

2,4

D. Manufacturing

1857

23,4

69,6

4,9

2,2

F. Construction

1577

22,4

69

6,2

2,3

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

19,9

73,3

4,8

2

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

23,3

67,2

5,9

3,6

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

25,3

66,8

5,7

2,2

J. Financial intermediation

693

15,2

75,5

6,9

2,4

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

16,6

76

5,8

1,7

N. Health and social work

696

25,8

59,4

12,5

2,4

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

32,5

60,3

5,3

1,9

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 120


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 10a. Constraints encountered: Labour force too expensive Question Q21_B. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Labour force too expensive Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

COUNTRY EU27

14683

33

62,5

3,3

1,2

EU25

13318

33,4

62,1

3,2

1,2

EU15

9239

31,8

63,7

3,3

1,1

NMS12

5890

38,7

56,6

3,1

1,6

NMS10

4525

42.6

53.1

2.7

1.6

Belgium

446

46,2

49,4

2,1

2,3

Czech Rep.

480

43,2

51,9

1,8

3,1

Denmark

472

17,9

75,1

5,8

1,2

Germany

901

32,5

59,2

7,7

0,5

Estonia

290

28,2

71,1

0

0,7

Greece

460

32,7

62,7

2,8

1,8

Spain

921

23,2

68

6,8

2

France

885

28,6

69,5

1

0,9

Ireland

553

36,4

62,5

0,5

0,6

Italy

875

45

52,7

2

0,4

Cyprus

296

34,9

53,3

9,6

2,2

Latvia

298

23

72

4,8

0,1

Lithuania

296

38

57,5

3,2

1,4

Luxembourg

313

23

68,3

3,7

5

Hungary

481

70,9

25,7

3,3

0

Malta

302

42,6

50

2,4

5

Netherlands

549

15,5

75,4

3,1

6

Austria

568

34,1

61,4

2,3

2,2

Poland

866

32,8

63

2,9

1,3

Portugal

484

33,2

62,8

2,5

1,5

Slovenia

299

39,4

56,5

2,1

2

Slovakia

471

24,5

72,1

1,5

1,9

Finland

469

37

61,7

0,7

0,6

Sweden

478

41,4

52,5

3,7

2,4

United Kingdom

865

24,5

73,5

1,1

0,9

Bulgaria

478

10

84,5

5,1

0,5

Romania

887

19,4

72,5

6,1

2,1

Iceland

288

17,6

81,2

0

1,2

Norway

454

19,1

79

1,4

0,5

Turkey

914

61,1

37,1

1,1

0,7 Annex, page 121


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 10b. Constraints encountered: Labour force too expensive Question Q21_B. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Labour force too expensive Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

14683

33

62,5

3,3

1,2

1-9

13121

32,4

63,2

3,4

1

10-49

1225

33,1

63,1

2,7

1,1

50-249

201

32

61,8

4,6

1,6

250+

47

26,8

63,1

5,6

4,6

D. Manufacturing

1857

36,6

59

3

1,3

F. Construction

1577

37,2

58,8

3

0,9

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

32,9

64,1

2

1

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

39,6

54,6

4,1

1,7

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

38,6

57,1

3,8

0,6

J. Financial intermediation

693

17,8

74,6

5,5

2,1

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

28,1

66,9

3,6

1,5

N. Health and social work

696

25,9

66,5

6,6

0,9

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

42

53,6

3,5

1

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 122


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 11a. Constraints encountered: Lack of skilled labour Question Q21_C. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Lack of skilled labour Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

34,8

61,1

3,3

0,8

34,6

61,3

3,3

0,8

9239

33,8

62,2

3,2

0,7

NMS12

5890

39,3

55,6

3,9

1,1

NMS10

4525

38.7

56.3

3.9

1.1

Belgium

446

41,7

53,8

2,4

2,2

Czech Rep.

480

40,7

55,4

2,5

1,4

Denmark

472

29,9

62,1

6

2

Germany

901

26,1

66,1

7,5

0,3

Estonia

290

59,6

40

0

0,4

Greece

460

53,8

39,6

6,5

0

Spain

921

36,6

56

6,3

1,2

France

885

40,4

58,7

0,7

0,2

Ireland

553

31,5

66,8

0,9

0,8

Italy

875

36,9

61,4

1,5

0,2

Cyprus

296

35,4

55,3

8,6

0,7

Latvia

298

46,7

50,5

2,8

0

Lithuania

296

72,3

23,9

3,9

0

Luxembourg

313

35,9

56,2

4,4

3,4

Hungary

481

22

70,6

6,3

1,1

Malta

302

41,8

47,9

3,1

7,2

Netherlands

549

19,5

71,3

2,5

6,7

Austria

568

33,5

62,5

1,9

2,1

Poland

866

42,3

52,7

4,1

0,9

Portugal

484

42

55,2

1,9

0,9

Slovenia

299

40,2

59,2

0,6

0

Slovakia

471

44,2

53,4

1,4

1

Finland

469

50,6

48,6

0,5

0,3

Sweden

478

33,1

62,5

3,1

1,4

United Kingdom

865

27,9

70,2

1,5

0,4

Bulgaria

478

27,9

66

4,8

1,4

Romania

887

53,1

42,2

3,4

1,3

Iceland

288

40

58,2

1,2

0,7

Norway

454

39,2

57,3

3

0,5

Turkey

914

59,7

37,9

1,2

1,2

Total N

% Yes

EU27

14683

EU25

13318

EU15

COUNTRY

Annex, page 123


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 11b. Constraints encountered: Lack of skilled labour Question Q21_C. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Lack of skilled labour Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

14683

34,8

61,1

3,3

0,8

1-9

13121

33

62,9

3,5

0,6

10-49

1225

43,7

53,7

1,8

0,8

50-249

201

46,1

48,7

4,1

1,1

250+

47

41,8

52,9

3,6

1,8

D. Manufacturing

1857

44,6

52,2

2,8

0,4

F. Construction

1577

50,3

46,2

2,8

0,7

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

32,1

64,9

2,4

0,6

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

41,2

55,5

2,6

0,7

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

35,8

60,2

3,5

0,4

J. Financial intermediation

693

25

68,6

5

1,4

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

27,3

68

3,5

1,2

N. Health and social work

696

21,2

70,1

8

0,8

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

36,1

58,2

4,8

0,9

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 124


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 12a. Constraints encountered: Implementing new technology Question Q21_D. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Implementing new technology Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) % No such constraint

% DK/NA

77

5

1,1

77,2

4,9

1

77,9

4,3

1

17,4

72,5

8,6

1,4

4525

17.1

73.3

8.6

1.1

Belgium

446

22,7

72,2

1,7

3,4

Czech Rep.

480

21,5

72,4

3,7

2,3

Denmark

472

17,1

72,3

9,3

1,2

Germany

901

12,1

77,5

10,1

0,4

Estonia

290

14,8

83,2

0,7

1,3

Greece

460

19,2

74,9

5,8

0

Spain

921

18,5

73,1

6,9

1,5

France

885

19,8

76,4

2,9

0,9

Ireland

553

14,2

84,6

1,1

0

Italy

875

14,8

83,1

1,7

0,4

Cyprus

296

22,7

68,4

7,9

0,9

Latvia

298

21,9

73

5,1

0

Lithuania

296

25,1

67,3

6,6

1

Luxembourg

313

14,2

73,3

8,6

3,8

Hungary

481

19,9

69,2

10,3

0,6

Malta

302

17,3

75,8

0,9

5,9

Netherlands

549

17,5

72,3

3,2

7

Austria

568

9

86,4

3,3

1,3

Poland

866

11,8

75,5

12,2

0,6

Portugal

484

30,8

65,6

2,1

1,5

Slovenia

299

21,3

77,8

0,8

0

Slovakia

471

22,9

72,8

3,4

0,9

Finland

469

14,9

83,9

0,8

0,4

Sweden

478

11,3

83,2

3,8

1,7

United Kingdom

865

17,7

79,5

2,1

0,6

Bulgaria

478

8,7

74,9

12,6

3,8

Romania

887

26,7

63,7

6,1

3,4

Iceland

288

8,6

90,2

0

1,2

Norway

454

13,2

82,7

3,3

0,8

Turkey

914

35,3

62,8

1,2

0,7

Total N

% Yes

EU27

14683

16,9

EU25

13318

16,9

EU15

9239

16,8

NMS12

5890

NMS10

% No

COUNTRY

Annex, page 125


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 12b. Constraints encountered: Implementing new technology Question Q21_D. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Implementing new technology Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated

otherwise

EU27

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

14683

16,9

77

5

1,1

PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

13121

16

78,1

5

0,9

10-49

1225

15,4

78,8

4,8

1

50-249

201

17,7

75,7

5,4

1,2

250+

47

21

70,2

6,3

2,6

D. Manufacturing

1857

17,6

77,5

4,1

0,9

F. Construction

1577

16,4

76,9

5,9

0,8

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

18,1

76,4

4,6

0,9

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

19,3

73,6

5,6

1,5

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

14,7

78,7

5,3

1,3

J. Financial intermediation

693

18,1

73,9

6,9

1,2

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

16,4

77,9

4,4

1,3

N. Health and social work

696

16,8

73,4

9

0,8

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

10,9

84,1

3,9

1,1

NACE SECTOR

page 126


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 13a. Constraints encountered: Implementing new forms of organisation Question Q21_E. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Implementing new forms of organisation Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

COUNTRY EU27

14683

15,5

78,1

4,9

1,5

EU25

13318

15,5

78,2

4,8

1,5

EU15

9239

16,4

78

4,3

1,2

NMS12

5890

10,8

78,7

7,5

3

NMS10

4525

10.4

79.2

7.5

3

Belgium

446

25,7

69,5

1,4

3,4

Czech Rep.

480

14,2

77,1

2,8

5,9

Denmark

472

7

74,8

15,4

2,8

Germany

901

10,7

78,5

10,2

0,6

Estonia

290

11,8

82,9

0,7

4,5

Greece

460

24,1

69,5

4,6

1,8

Spain

921

15,6

76,2

6,5

1,7

France

885

19,6

77,4

2,5

0,5

Ireland

553

12,7

83,3

1,9

2,2

Italy

875

19,9

77,7

2,1

0,3

Cyprus

296

18,7

69,7

8,1

3,4

Latvia

298

12,3

81,1

5,7

0,9

Lithuania

296

13,3

81

3,7

2

Luxembourg

313

12,6

75,2

7,1

5

Hungary

481

6,9

76,7

12,8

3,7

Malta

302

16,3

70,9

1,8

11

Netherlands

549

9,9

79,9

3,2

7,1

Austria

568

10,9

84,5

3,6

0,9

Poland

866

8,1

81,5

9,3

1,1

Portugal

484

25,5

69,7

1,7

3,1

Slovenia

299

16,9

82,9

0,2

0

Slovakia

471

17,8

79,2

1,8

1,2

Finland

469

9,6

85,7

2

2,7

Sweden

478

7,5

84

5,9

2,6

United Kingdom

865

15,8

81,2

2

1

Bulgaria

478

7,1

78,3

10,9

3,7

Romania

887

16,5

74,2

5,9

3,4

Iceland

288

17,3

80,9

0

1,8

Norway

454

7,7

87,4

4,1

0,8

Turkey

914

39,4

57,2

1,5

1,9 Annex, page 127


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 13b. Constraints encountered: Implementing new forms of organisation Question Q21_E. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Implementing new forms of organisation Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

14683

15,5

78,1

4,9

1,5

1-9

13121

13,9

79,7

5

1,4

10-49

1225

17,2

76,9

4,4

1,5

50-249

201

20,3

73

5

1,7

250+

47

25,5

67,3

4,6

2,5

D. Manufacturing

1857

13,7

81,3

3,5

1,5

F. Construction

1577

15

77,8

5,6

1,5

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

16,7

77,2

4,6

1,6

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

18,1

74,7

5

2,2

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

14,5

80,2

4,4

0,9

J. Financial intermediation

693

13,8

77,7

6,9

1,6

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

13,3

80,8

4,4

1,5

N. Health and social work

696

16,8

72,6

9,1

1,5

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

21,1

72,7

4,9

1,3

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 128


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 14a. Constraints encountered: Lack of quality management Question Q21_F. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Lack of quality management Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

% No

% No such constraint

11

82,1

5,4

1,5

11

82,3

5,3

1,4

9239

11

83,5

4,4

1,1

NMS12

5890

11,3

75,6

10

3,1

NMS10

4525

10.9

75.9

10.2

3.1

Belgium

446

19,2

76,8

1,4

2,7

Czech Rep.

480

11,2

76,8

5,7

6,4

Denmark

472

7,1

78,3

12,7

1,9

Germany

901

5,9

82,8

10,2

1,1

Estonia

290

19,3

74,9

0

5,7

Greece

460

18,5

63,2

14

4,3

Spain

921

12,3

78,8

7

1,9

France

885

13,8

81,2

4,7

0,3

Ireland

553

11,9

87,2

0,9

0

Italy

875

11

87

1,7

0,3

Cyprus

296

6,8

79,6

11,1

2,6

Latvia

298

15,6

79,6

4,7

0,1

Lithuania

296

30,5

60,9

5

3,7

Luxembourg

313

8

77,9

9,1

5

Hungary

481

11,5

72,6

13,2

2,7

Malta

302

15,1

79,5

0,1

5,3

Netherlands

549

7

84,4

2,7

5,8

Austria

568

7,6

88

2,4

2

Poland

866

7,9

77,1

13,8

1,3

Portugal

484

13,1

83,5

1,2

2,3

Slovenia

299

24,3

70,5

1,3

3,9

Slovakia

471

18,3

78,9

1,6

1,1

Finland

469

11,1

83,6

0,6

4,6

Sweden

478

9,3

88,1

1,2

1,4

United Kingdom

865

11,1

87,4

1,1

0,5

Bulgaria

478

3,5

82,5

12,4

1,6

Romania

887

20,7

68,2

6,5

4,6

Iceland

288

17,6

78,5

0,6

3,3

Norway

454

10,9

85,4

2,3

1,4

Turkey

914

37,1

59,3

1,8

1,8

Total N

% Yes

EU27

14683

EU25

13318

EU15

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

Annex, page 129


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 14b. Constraints encountered: Lack of quality management Question Q21_F. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Lack of quality management Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

14683

11

82,1

5,4

1,5

1-9

13121

9,7

83,5

5,5

1,3

10-49

1225

11,7

82

4,7

1,5

50-249

201

15,8

77,1

5,6

1,5

250+

47

16,2

73,4

6,9

3,5

D. Manufacturing

1857

12,8

81,9

4,2

1,1

F. Construction

1577

13,5

79,9

5,2

1,4

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

10,8

82,9

4,9

1,4

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

16

76,6

6,3

1,1

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

9,2

84,5

4,5

1,8

J. Financial intermediation

693

7,9

83,9

6,9

1,2

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

8,2

84,4

5,5

1,9

N. Health and social work

696

9,9

78,5

10,2

1,4

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

13,9

80,2

4,3

1,7

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 130


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 15a. Constraints encountered: Problems with administrative regulations Question Q21_G. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Problems with administrative regulations Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

36,2

60,4

2,4

1

EU25

13318

36,3

60,3

2,4

1

EU15

9239

34,4

62,3

2,5

0,8

NMS12

5890

44,8

51

2,2

2

NMS10

4525

47

49.4

1.7

1.9

Belgium

446

38,2

59,2

0,4

2,2

Czech Rep.

480

54,4

41,9

0,1

3,5

Denmark

472

25,7

68,7

4

1,6

Germany

901

44

50,1

5,5

0,4

Estonia

290

24

72

1,5

2,4

Greece

460

28,8

67,8

1,3

2,1

Spain

921

10,6

80,8

7,1

1,5

France

885

36,7

62

0,4

0,8

Ireland

553

28,3

70,6

0,4

0,7

Italy

875

45,4

52,7

1,7

0,2

Cyprus

296

16,5

78,9

4,4

0,3

Latvia

298

12,6

81,5

3,8

2,1

Lithuania

296

25,2

70,2

2,1

2,5

Luxembourg

313

22,1

66,3

6,6

4,9

Hungary

481

55,1

36,3

7,2

1,4

Malta

302

42,9

54,3

0,1

2,7

Netherlands

549

30,5

62,3

2,4

4,8

Austria

568

31,5

65,6

1,4

1,5

Poland

866

42

56,5

0,4

1,1

Portugal

484

22,9

73,7

1,1

2,3

Slovenia

299

46,5

50,9

0

2,5

Slovakia

471

52,4

46,4

0,4

0,7

Finland

469

16,7

82

0,9

0,5

Sweden

478

27,9

70,4

0,7

1

United Kingdom

865

33,8

65,8

0,4

0

Bulgaria

478

40,9

54,7

2,7

1,8

Romania

887

26,7

64,3

5,8

3,2

Iceland

288

19,2

78,3

0,6

1,9

Norway

454

14,8

82,8

1,4

1

Turkey

914

27,9

69,2

1,8

1,1

COUNTRY

Annex, page 131


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 15b. Constraints encountered: Problems with administrative regulations Question Q21_G. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Problems with administrative regulations Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

14683

36,2

60,4

2,4

1

1-9

13121

35,2

61,5

2,5

0,8

10-49

1225

38,3

58,2

2,2

1,4

50-249

201

40,4

54,8

3,3

1,5

250+

47

37,6

56,5

4,1

1,9

D. Manufacturing

1857

36,2

60,7

2,1

1

F. Construction

1577

38,5

58,9

1,9

0,7

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

35,4

61,9

1,7

1

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

39,8

56,7

2,2

1,3

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

36,4

60,3

2,6

0,7

J. Financial intermediation

693

34,4

60,4

4

1,2

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

34,3

61,5

3

1,2

N. Health and social work

696

43,1

51,3

4,4

1,2

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

33,8

63,1

2,4

0,7

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 132


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 16a. Constraints encountered: Problems with infrastructure Question Q21_H. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Problems with infrastructure e.g. road, gas, electricity, communication, etc. Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

22,9

73,6

2,8

0,6

EU25

13318

22,5

74,1

2,8

0,6

EU15

9239

20,5

76,1

2,8

0,6

NMS12

5890

34,2

61,8

3,2

0,9

NMS10

4525

33.5

62.6

3

0.8

Belgium

446

22,8

74,6

0,4

2,2

Czech Rep.

480

34,1

61,2

2,5

2,2

Denmark

472

11,6

81,6

5

1,8

Germany

901

22,9

69,6

7,2

0,3

Estonia

290

17,8

81,8

0

0,4

Greece

460

47,2

51,6

0

1,3

Spain

921

15,4

76,7

6,5

1,4

France

885

16,6

81,4

1,6

0,5

Ireland

553

41,3

58,7

0

0

Italy

875

21,1

77,4

1,5

0

Cyprus

296

17,9

74,3

7,5

0,3

Latvia

298

25,9

70,1

3,8

0,2

Lithuania

296

23,3

75

0,9

0,8

Luxembourg

313

13,9

77,9

3,7

4,5

Hungary

481

30

62,4

7,5

0

Malta

302

45,5

51,8

0,9

1,8

Netherlands

549

22,2

72,5

1,9

3,4

Austria

568

16,8

81,4

1,4

0,4

Poland

866

36

61,7

1,7

0,5

Portugal

484

26,1

71,3

1,1

1,5

Slovenia

299

32,3

66,8

0,9

0,1

Slovakia

471

31,7

66,7

1,4

0,2

Finland

469

8,9

89,3

1,4

0,4

Sweden

478

15

83,7

1

0,3

United Kingdom

865

21,5

78,2

0,3

0

Bulgaria

478

39,3

57,5

2,9

0,3

Romania

887

37,8

56,1

4,8

1,4

Iceland

288

15,7

82,9

1,3

0,2

Norway

454

18,6

79,2

2,2

0

Turkey

914

39,9

58,1

1,4

0,6

COUNTRY

Annex, page 133


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 16b. Constraints encountered: Problems with infrastructure Question Q21_H. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Problems with infrastructure e.g. road, gas, electricity, communication, etc. Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

14683

22,9

73,6

2,8

0,6

1-9

13121

22

74,8

2,8

0,5

10-49

1225

22,8

72,8

3,6

0,8

50-249

201

24,3

71,2

3,7

0,7

250+

47

22,9

71,3

4,5

1,2

D. Manufacturing

1857

22,3

75

2,3

0,4

F. Construction

1577

21,8

75,2

2,4

0,6

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

25,8

71,2

2,4

0,6

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

29,9

67,9

1,8

0,4

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

32,8

64,2

2,8

0,3

J. Financial intermediation

693

16,9

78,1

4,3

0,7

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

16,6

79,2

3,4

0,9

N. Health and social work

696

22

70,9

6,3

0,8

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

24,3

72,8

2,4

0,4

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 134


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 17a. Constraints encountered: Reduced purchasing power of customers Question Q21_I. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Problems with the purchasing power of customers Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

45,5

50,9

2,2

1,3

EU25

13318

45,2

51,3

2,2

1,3

EU15

9239

44,3

52,3

2,4

1,1

NMS12

5890

51,6

44,4

1,6

2,4

NMS10

4525

50.3

45.7

1.5

2.4

Belgium

446

52

41,2

2,4

4,4

Czech Rep.

480

54

42,1

0,2

3,7

Denmark

472

12,8

77,7

6,9

2,7

Germany

901

61,3

34,6

3,8

0,2

Estonia

290

36,3

62,2

0

1,6

Greece

460

77,3

22,4

0,2

0,1

Spain

921

33,3

59

6,4

1,2

France

885

48,7

50,6

0,4

0,4

Ireland

553

24,7

72,7

0,7

1,9

Italy

875

53,5

44,4

1,7

0,5

Cyprus

296

49,1

48

2,2

0,7

Latvia

298

39,7

58

2,3

0

Lithuania

296

47,7

47,7

1,4

3,2

Luxembourg

313

34,1

55,7

4,2

6

Hungary

481

64,8

27,8

4,5

2,9

Malta

302

65,7

26,5

2,5

5,3

Netherlands

549

30

63,1

2,6

4,3

Austria

568

54,7

43,5

1,6

0,3

Poland

866

42,1

55

1,1

1,8

Portugal

484

73,5

23,9

1,2

1,3

Slovenia

299

44,5

54,2

1,1

0,2

Slovakia

471

53,8

44,8

0,3

1,2

Finland

469

29,1

69,9

0,7

0,3

Sweden

478

25,8

70,4

1,8

2

United Kingdom

865

22,6

74,6

1

1,8

Bulgaria

478

58,1

40,4

0,9

0,5

Romania

887

59,5

34,5

2,8

3,2

Iceland

288

24,2

74,2

0,6

1

Norway

454

12,8

82,2

4,2

0,8

Turkey

914

72,9

25,9

0,3

0,9

COUNTRY

Annex, page 135


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 17b. Constraints encountered: Reduced purchasing power of customers Question Q21_I. Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? - Problems with the purchasing power of customers Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Yes

% No

% No such constraint

% DK/NA

14683

45,5

50,9

2,2

1,3

1-9

13121

46

50,8

2,1

1,2

10-49

1225

40,9

55,3

2,7

1,1

50-249

201

37,7

56,9

3,8

1,6

250+

47

28,9

63,7

2,7

4,7

D. Manufacturing

1857

48,5

48,4

1,9

1,2

F. Construction

1577

42,2

55,4

1

1,4

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

52,9

44,7

1,1

1,3

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

46,7

50,6

1,7

1,1

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

38

58,3

2,8

0,9

J. Financial intermediation

693

41,6

52,2

4,2

2

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

39,9

55,3

3,4

1,4

N. Health and social work

696

41,1

52

5,3

1,6

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

45

52

2

1

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 136


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 18a. Constraint change: Limited access to finance Question Q22_A. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Limited access to finance Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

EU27

3101

13,6

39,8

44,4

2,1

EU25

2811

13,5

39,7

44,7

2,1

EU15

1872

13,3

38,6

46,2

1,8

NMS12

1483

14,9

44,3

37,6

3,2

NMS10

1167

14.4

44.4

37.9

3.3

Belgium

128

1,8

28,2

69,6

0,4

Czech Rep.

108

13,5

45,4

35,4

5,7

Denmark

42

19,5

58,3

16,2

6

Germany

206

20,1

45

33,3

1,6

Estonia

33

12,9

63,9

23,1

0

Greece

114

24,7

40,8

24,3

10,2

Spain

103

9,6

37,3

49,2

4

France

187

3,1

20,3

76,5

0,2

Ireland

97

21,1

55,6

23,3

0

Italy

215

9,8

31,6

57,3

1,3

Cyprus

58

12,6

47,1

40,2

0,1

Latvia

61

13,9

49,2

26,2

10,6

Lithuania

83

16,7

51,7

24,5

7,1

Luxembourg

70

0,2

29,6

59,8

10,4

Hungary

139

13,1

30,5

56,3

0,1

Malta

105

5,1

25,8

67

2,1

Netherlands

75

32,7

37

27,4

3

Austria

97

28

30,9

40,7

0,4

Poland

233

14,8

50

31,7

3,5

Portugal

116

20

46,2

33,1

0,8

Slovenia

66

23,4

43,7

27,2

5,7

Slovakia

127

20,5

49,4

30,1

0

Finland

33

11,3

56,1

32,1

0,6

Sweden

101

18

50,7

28,5

2,8

United Kingdom

164

16,7

54,4

26,5

2,4

Bulgaria

100

8,5

55,8

35,1

0,7

Romania

197

24,5

36,1

35,7

3,8

Iceland

61

19,6

62,6

17,1

0,7

Norway

82

20,7

39,1

32,8

7,4

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

Annex, page 137


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 138

414

29,1

30,7

39,6

0,6


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 18b. Constraint change: Limited access to finance Question Q22_A. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Limited access to finance Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

3101

13,6

39,8

44,4

2,1

1-9

2660

14,4

42,3

41,2

2,1

10-49

240

15,5

39,9

41,7

2,9

50-249

35

14,7

35,8

46,8

2,7

250+

7

26,1

39,6

34,1

0,3

D. Manufacturing

434

13,3

41

42,9

2,9

F. Construction

354

15,5

35,2

46,9

2,4

G. Wholesale and retail

789

14,6

43,1

40,7

1,5

H. Hotels and restaurants

255

14

38,8

45,7

1,4

I. Transport, storage and communication

206

13,1

35,7

50,1

1,1

J. Financial intermediation

106

14

28,3

50

7,7

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

536

11,5

47,1

40,7

0,7

N. Health and social work

180

13,2

33,4

49,2

4,3

O. Other community, social and personal service

242

13,4

31,7

52,1

2,8

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

Annex, page 139


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 19a. Constraint change: Labour force too expensive Question Q22_B. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Labour force too expensive Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

page 140

EU27

4845

4,8

36,3

57,3

1,6

EU25

4455

4,8

36,3

57,4

1,5

EU15

2938

5,2

38

55,3

1,4

NMS12

2278

3,1

29,6

65,2

2,1

NMS10

1928

2.8

29.2

66

2

Belgium

206

2,2

31,9

63,9

2,1

Czech Rep.

207

3,8

33,9

59

3,3

Denmark

85

7,1

51,4

38,5

3

Germany

293

7,8

50,6

39,9

1,7

Estonia

82

0,3

16

83,5

0,2

Greece

150

6,9

39,9

53,3

0

Spain

214

7,6

36,8

53,9

1,7

France

253

2,4

24,3

73,1

0,3

Ireland

201

9,9

20,3

67

2,8

Italy

393

3,5

31,6

64,3

0,5

Cyprus

103

0,3

36,4

56,1

7,2

Latvia

68

0,2

28

71,1

0,7

Lithuania

112

1

20,3

78,7

0

Luxembourg

72

0,7

31,4

54,5

13,5

Hungary

341

0,6

10,7

87,7

1

Malta

129

3,9

22,6

69

4,5

Netherlands

85

7,1

32,1

53,7

7

Austria

193

8,4

38,7

51,4

1,6

Poland

284

4,2

41,2

52,9

1,8

Portugal

161

9,9

48,2

39

2,9

Slovenia

118

3,4

59

37,6

0

Slovakia

115

6,6

40,6

50,8

2

Finland

174

2,2

46,6

49,6

1,5

Sweden

198

3,9

59,9

32,3

3,9

United Kingdom

212

5,9

42,5

49,3

2,3

Bulgaria

48

0,9

31,8

55,5

11,8

Romania

172

9,7

35,7

52,6

2,1

Iceland

51

5

34,5

60,6

0

Norway

87

5,6

26,4

66

1,9


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

558

The Gallup Organization

13

38,6

48,4

0

Annex, page 141


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 19b. Constraint change: Labour force too expensive Question Q22_B. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Labour force too expensive Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

4845

4,8

36,3

57,3

1,6

1-9

4257

5

38

55,5

1,6

10-49

405

5,7

36,9

56,7

0,7

50-249

64

6,1

33,5

59,4

1

250+

13

8,7

38,6

50,4

2,3

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 142

D. Manufacturing

680

6,3

35,8

56,3

1,7

F. Construction

587

4,8

35,5

58,5

1,2

G. Wholesale and retail

1305

3,9

37,7

57

1,4

H. Hotels and restaurants

432

3,4

27,6

66,6

2,4

I. Transport, storage and communication

315

1,6

39,6

55,1

3,7

J. Financial intermediation

124

6,7

32

61,3

0,1

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

909

7,4

36

55,8

0,9

N. Health and social work

181

2,7

48,7

48,6

0

O. Other community, social and personal service

313

3,5

37,6

56,1

2,8


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 20a. Constraint change: Lack of skilled labour Question Q22_C. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Lack of skilled labour Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

COUNTRY EU27

5108

7,9

39,2

50,9

2,1

EU25

4604

7,8

39

51,1

2,1

EU15

3126

7,7

39,5

51

1,8

NMS12

2316

8,7

38,1

50,1

3,2

NMS10

1750

8.3

36.9

51.5

3.4

Belgium

186

4,1

33,9

61,9

0,1

Czech Rep.

195

6

45,6

40,2

8,1

Denmark

141

3,3

40,5

54,1

2,1

Germany

235

9,5

47,4

40,7

2,3

Estonia

173

3,7

28,6

65,3

2,5

Greece

248

16

54,6

28,5

0,9

Spain

337

11

37,1

50,9

1,1

France

358

1,2

23,4

71,3

4

Ireland

174

15,9

35,7

45,3

3,1

Italy

323

4,7

34,9

59,4

0,9

Cyprus

105

14,6

41,4

36,9

7,1

Latvia

139

1,8

30,4

67,7

0

Lithuania

214

8,5

23,6

67,7

0,2

Luxembourg

113

3,7

42,4

46,2

7,8

Hungary

106

5,7

37,8

56,1

0,4

Malta

126

10,3

23,6

59,9

6,2

Netherlands

107

5,9

41,1

45,5

7,5

Austria

191

11,3

45,6

43

0

Poland

367

10,5

31,1

56,6

1,8

Portugal

203

7,4

57,7

31,4

3,4

Slovenia

120

7,5

55,8

34,8

1,8

Slovakia

208

6,8

47,7

43,1

2,3

Finland

237

3,4

54,6

40,8

1,2

Sweden

158

4,1

58

35,7

2,3

United Kingdom

241

13,8

46,9

38,5

0,7

Bulgaria

133

2,5

53,3

43,5

0,7

Romania

471

13,6

41,6

42,5

2,3

Iceland

115

4,9

50,8

43,9

0,5

Norway

178

5,1

47,4

45

2,6

Annex, page 143


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 144

545

14,3

36,6

48,5

0,6


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 20b. Constraint change: Lack of skilled labour Question Q22_C. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Lack of skilled labour Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

5108

7,9

39,2

50,9

2,1

4333

8,1

40,8

48,7

2,4

10-49

535

8

41,4

49,5

1,1

50-249

92

7,3

40,3

51,6

0,8

250+

20

7,9

36,2

54,2

1,6

D. Manufacturing

828

6,7

37,7

52,7

2,9

F. Construction

793

8

40,4

50,1

1,6

G. Wholesale and retail

1272

8

40,1

49,9

2

H. Hotels and restaurants

450

8,1

33,9

57,2

0,8

I. Transport, storage and communication

292

4,9

45,1

46,9

3,1

J. Financial intermediation

173

6,8

43,7

48,2

1,2

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

884

9,9

39,3

47,9

2,9

N. Health and social work

148

1

47

51,4

0,6

O. Other community, social and personal service

268

10,6

30,9

57,1

1,4

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

NACE SECTOR

Annex, page 145


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 21a. Constraint change: Implementing new technology Question Q22_D. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Implementing new technology Basis: asked if Q21_D=1

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

page 146

EU27

2487

7,3

42,3

47,7

2,6

EU25

2247

7,2

42,3

47,9

2,6

EU15

1555

7

40

50,6

2,4

NMS12

1027

8,8

52,9

34,6

3,6

NMS10

772

8.2

54.9

33.3

3.7

Belgium

101

0,4

23,9

75,2

0,5

Czech Rep.

103

5,1

55,7

32,1

7,1

Denmark

81

2,1

43,5

46,5

7,9

Germany

109

6,6

39,7

49,9

3,7

Estonia

43

1,8

51,3

45,1

1,8

Greece

88

14,6

61,6

23,5

0,3

Spain

170

8

38,4

51,6

2,1

France

175

2,2

30,2

65,9

1,8

Ireland

79

13

41,3

43,8

1,9

Italy

130

3,4

41,5

54

1

Cyprus

67

4,5

23,5

72

0

Latvia

65

5,4

62,3

28,8

3,5

Lithuania

74

11,1

51,5

36,3

1,1

Luxembourg

44

0,6

22,2

42,8

34,4

Hungary

96

2,2

45

50,6

2,2

Malta

52

3,6

35,9

57,2

3,3

Netherlands

96

12,3

34,4

49,2

4,1

Austria

51

1,5

45,2

48,5

4,8

Poland

102

14,2

62,8

21,3

1,6

Portugal

149

6,9

48,8

44,2

0

Slovenia

64

15,7

52,8

31,1

0,4

Slovakia

108

17,6

60,6

16,8

5,1

Finland

70

3,9

36,9

54,1

5,2

Sweden

54

7,7

63,4

28,4

0,4

United Kingdom

153

13,3

45

37,6

4,1

Bulgaria

42

3

54,1

42,9

0

Romania

237

13,9

40,8

40,9

4,3

Iceland

25

7,4

42,7

49

0,9

Norway

60

3,9

58,5

37,1

0,5


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

322

The Gallup Organization

17,4

36,4

45,2

1,1

Annex, page 147


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 21b. Constraint change: Implementing new technology Question Q22_D. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Implementing new technology Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

2487

7,3

42,3

47,7

2,6

2096

7,5

45,9

43,7

2,9

10-49

189

14,4

36,2

46,7

2,7

50-249

35

7,6

40,9

46,9

4,7

250+

10

10,8

35,2

53,1

0,9

D. Manufacturing

326

6,9

44,5

44,2

4,4

F. Construction

258

6,5

37,9

51,1

4,5

G. Wholesale and retail

717

9,4

44,8

43,6

2,3

H. Hotels and restaurants

211

4

38,4

55,9

1,7

I. Transport, storage and communication

120

3,6

45,5

48,5

2,5

J. Financial intermediation

125

4,5

39,8

55,2

0,4

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

531

7,2

41,9

48,8

2,1

N. Health and social work

117

3,7

48,2

47,1

1

O. Other community, social and personal service

81

17,3

30,3

47,3

5,1

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

NACE SECTOR

page 148


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 22a. Constraint change: Implementing new forms of organisation Question Q22_E. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Implementing new forms of organisation Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

EU27

2269

7,6

41,2

48,9

2,2

EU25

2067

7,4

41

49,3

2,2

EU15

1519

7,3

39,2

51,5

2

NMS12

633

10,3

56

30

3,7

NMS10

471

8.9

56.7

30.2

4.2

Belgium

115

7,7

28,3

58,4

5,6

Czech Rep.

68

4,7

49,7

35,2

10,4

Denmark

33

7,2

51,2

41,6

0

Germany

96

6,7

45,4

46,7

1,2

Estonia

34

4,6

36,3

51,3

7,8

Greece

111

23,5

50

23,5

3,1

Spain

143

8,9

39,6

48,3

3,2

France

173

4,4

23,7

71,1

0,8

Ireland

70

17,8

51

25,4

5,8

Italy

174

3,3

38,2

57,7

0,7

Cyprus

55

4,7

45,6

49,7

0

Latvia

37

16,5

51,9

29,8

1,8

Lithuania

39

18,4

51,8

27,8

2

Luxembourg

39

2,4

27

66,8

3,9

Hungary

33

0,3

52

47,7

0

Malta

49

5,4

29,5

57,1

8

Netherlands

54

15

17,3

57,5

10,2

Austria

62

9,1

28

58,9

3,9

Poland

70

13,7

68,9

17,4

0

Portugal

123

4,9

57,1

37,7

0,2

Slovenia

50

10,7

52,9

35,1

1,3

Slovakia

84

20,7

59,9

15,7

3,7

Finland

45

8,2

37,9

53,2

0,8

Sweden

36

2

62,1

35,2

0,6

United Kingdom

137

11,4

47,3

38,4

3

Bulgaria

34

10,3

71,9

17,1

0,7

Romania

146

18,8

47,1

32,6

1,6

Iceland

50

15,9

55,1

29,1

0

Norway

35

17,5

34,4

42,2

5,9

% Increased

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

Annex, page 149


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 150

361

15,1

44,1

37,3

3,5


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 22b. Constraint change: Implementing new forms of organisation Question Q22_E. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Implementing new forms of organisation Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

2269

7,6

41,2

48,9

2,2

1825

8,1

44,1

45,3

2,5

10-49

211

12,8

45,7

39,7

1,8

50-249

41

8,2

41,4

48,9

1,5

250+

12

12,9

39,9

44,9

2,3

D. Manufacturing

254

9,5

36,3

53,7

0,5

F. Construction

236

7,1

38,1

52,2

2,7

G. Wholesale and retail

661

5

50

42,6

2,4

H. Hotels and restaurants

198

4,2

39,5

53,1

3,2

I. Transport, storage and communication

119

5,7

45,2

47,1

1,9

J. Financial intermediation

96

3,8

34

62,1

0

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

432

11,1

39,2

45,8

3,9

N. Health and social work

117

10,8

38,7

49,7

0,8

O. Other community, social and personal service

157

12,8

27,8

58,8

0,6

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

NACE SECTOR

Annex, page 151


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 23a. Constraint change: Lack of quality management Question Q22_F. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Lack of quality management Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

EU27

1621

10,8

45,1

41,7

2,4

EU25

1460

10,7

44,7

42,3

2,4

EU15

1015

10,7

42

45,6

1,7

NMS12

666

11

59,6

23,8

5,6

NMS10

491

10.4

59.7

23.7

6.2

Belgium

85

2,9

29,8

67

0,2

Czech Rep.

54

0,6

71,6

18,6

9,3

Denmark

33

4,4

57,9

37,6

0

Germany

53

8,6

61,9

29,5

0

Estonia

56

16

49,1

34,9

0

Greece

85

34,3

39,6

16

10,2

Spain

113

13,2

45,9

38,2

2,7

France

122

8,7

12,5

78,5

0,4

Ireland

66

21,9

43,1

34,9

0,1

Italy

97

6

37,5

55,2

1,4

Cyprus

20

13,4

35,5

45,6

5,6

Latvia

47

2,9

49,6

41,3

6,2

Lithuania

90

20,9

60,2

16,7

2,2

Luxembourg

25

0

16,1

74,8

9,1

Hungary

55

11,4

49,8

36,8

2

Malta

46

8,3

36,1

55

0,5

Netherlands

39

15,7

44,8

33,4

6

Austria

43

19,6

51,9

23,5

5

Poland

68

16,9

58,5

17,4

7,2

Portugal

63

8,6

61,1

16,5

13,7

Slovenia

73

3,8

66,9

21

8,4

Slovakia

86

16,3

55,1

22,4

6,2

Finland

52

5,1

58,2

36,3

0,4

Sweden

44

16,4

66

16,6

1

United Kingdom

96

13,7

56,1

30,2

0

Bulgaria

17

1,3

77,6

21,2

0

Romania

184

15,4

57

24,9

2,8

Iceland

51

18,1

65,1

15,8

1

Norway

50

12,6

47,8

36,1

3,5

% Increased

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

page 152


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

339

The Gallup Organization

16,7

46,4

36,3

0,5

Annex, page 153


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 23b. Constraint change: Lack of quality management Question Q22_F. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Lack of quality management Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

1621

10,8

45,1

41,7

2,4

1-9

1272

12,1

50,1

35,1

2,7

10-49

144

13,7

47,7

36,1

2,4

50-249

32

20,3

37,1

41,6

1

250+

8

12,1

62,1

24,3

1,5

D. Manufacturing

238

12,2

44,7

39,3

3,9

F. Construction

213

8,3

48,1

41,1

2,5

G. Wholesale and retail

427

9,7

44,5

43,3

2,5

H. Hotels and restaurants

174

7,8

37,9

50

4,3

I. Transport, storage and communication

75

8,2

57,1

30,9

3,8

J. Financial intermediation

55

7,4

42,3

50,1

0,2

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

266

14,9

46,6

37,7

0,8

N. Health and social work

69

9,9

69,9

19,1

1,1

O. Other community, social and personal service

103

15,7

27,2

56,4

0,6

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 154


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 24a. Constraint change: Problems with administrative regulations Question Q22_G. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Problems with administrative regulations Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

EU27

5316

4

30,2

64,5

1,3

EU25

4835

3,9

30

64,9

1,3

EU15

3177

3,4

27,4

68

1,1

NMS12

2640

6

40,3

51,7

2

NMS10

2125

5.7

40.3

52

1.9

Belgium

170

0,2

28,9

68,3

2,6

Czech Rep.

261

4,2

38,2

55,4

2,3

Denmark

121

2,7

43,2

50,6

3,5

Germany

396

2,3

24,9

72

0,8

Estonia

70

4,3

50,1

45,6

0

Greece

133

18,8

40,2

35,3

5,7

Spain

98

11,9

53

34,1

1

France

325

1,4

24

73

1,6

Ireland

156

8,3

34,6

56,2

1

Italy

398

1,4

24,8

73,3

0,4

Cyprus

49

6,2

34,8

59

0

Latvia

38

8,1

64,6

27,3

0

Lithuania

75

12,5

53,8

29,9

3,7

Luxembourg

69

3,5

30,8

58,9

6,9

Hungary

265

3

15

80,6

1,4

Malta

130

5,3

28,4

64,8

1,5

Netherlands

167

11,3

35,4

47,4

5,9

Austria

179

0,6

35,5

62,9

1

Poland

363

7,7

55,3

34,8

2,2

Portugal

111

10,9

65,1

23,9

0,2

Slovenia

139

10,8

47,7

40,8

0,7

Slovakia

247

9,1

46,3

43,3

1,2

Finland

78

9,4

45

42,8

2,8

Sweden

133

4,8

46,5

46,7

2

United Kingdom

292

4,7

21,4

73,3

0,7

Bulgaria

195

2,1

39,3

57,7

0,9

Romania

237

13,6

41,2

40,7

4,5

Iceland

55

4,3

50,5

45,2

0

Norway

67

2,1

34,2

63,7

0

% Increased

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

Annex, page 155


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 156

255

11,6

57

31,4

0


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 24b. Constraint change: Problems with administrative regulations Question Q22_G. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Problems with administrative regulations Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

5316

4

30,2

64,5

1,3

1-9

4619

4,2

31,5

63

1,3

10-49

469

3,7

26,7

68,6

1

50-249

81

3,2

31,5

64,6

0,7

250+

18

2,9

41,3

54,6

1,2

D. Manufacturing

672

4,5

31,1

64

0,4

F. Construction

607

3,8

33,9

61,3

1,1

G. Wholesale and retail

1404

3,1

29,8

65,4

1,8

H. Hotels and restaurants

434

3,2

30,7

65,6

0,6

I. Transport, storage and communication

297

3,6

32

62,8

1,6

J. Financial intermediation

239

4,2

26,6

68,2

1

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

1111

4,1

29,6

64,4

1,9

N. Health and social work

300

4,8

22,8

71

1,4

O. Other community, social and personal service

251

8,3

32,9

58,1

0,7

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

Annex, page 157


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 25a. Constraint change: Problems with infrastructure Question Q22_H. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Problems with infrastructure e.g. road, gas, electricity, communication, etc. Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

page 158

EU27

3364

9,2

38,7

50,7

1,4

EU25

2998

8,9

38,7

51

1,4

EU15

1897

7,2

37,3

54,5

1

NMS12

2014

14,7

42,6

39,9

2,8

NMS10

1515

14.5

43.3

39.1

3

Belgium

102

2,2

22,8

70,8

4,2

Czech Rep.

164

11,3

49

32,4

7,3

Denmark

55

0

31,4

67,8

0,7

Germany

206

4,3

40,3

53,8

1,6

Estonia

52

18,8

31,7

49,1

0,3

Greece

217

24

53,8

20,7

1,6

Spain

142

12,8

44,5

41,9

0,8

France

147

4,9

25,2

69,5

0,4

Ireland

229

15,4

25,4

58,5

0,7

Italy

185

1,9

39,1

58,1

0,9

Cyprus

53

10,3

45,2

44,6

0

Latvia

77

11,5

53,4

35,1

0

Lithuania

69

16,3

60,1

22,9

0,8

Luxembourg

43

5,9

27,2

53,6

13,3

Hungary

144

5,8

32,1

62,1

0

Malta

137

7,6

19,8

72,4

0,2

Netherlands

122

7,7

18,5

72,5

1,4

Austria

96

6,9

41,7

48,1

3,3

Poland

312

20,5

43,7

33,7

2,1

Portugal

126

11,9

50,2

37,9

0

Slovenia

96

7,6

52,2

40

0,2

Slovakia

149

10,3

46

40,6

3,1

Finland

42

0,5

62,4

37,1

0

Sweden

72

11,6

57,6

28

2,8

United Kingdom

186

9,6

33,5

56,9

0

Bulgaria

188

6,7

32,4

60,9

0

Romania

335

22

43,3

32,2

2,4

Iceland

45

12

47,1

40,8

0

Norway

84

11,6

39,3

49,1

0


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

365

The Gallup Organization

14,3

47,6

37,6

0,5

Annex, page 159


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 25b. Constraint change: Problems with infrastructure Question Q22_H. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Problems with infrastructure e.g. road, gas, electricity, communication, etc. Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

3364

9,2

38,7

50,7

1,4

2887

9,6

40,7

48,3

1,4

10-49

279

9,3

40,6

49,4

0,7

50-249

49

9,1

38,2

51,7

1

250+

11

6,3

42,3

49,4

2

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

NACE SECTOR

page 160

D. Manufacturing

414

7

40,9

51,2

0,9

F. Construction

345

7,3

42,6

49,5

0,6

G. Wholesale and retail

1023

10,8

36,2

50,4

2,6

H. Hotels and restaurants

327

8,1

38,1

52,5

1,3

I. Transport, storage and communication

268

7,9

37,6

53,7

0,8

J. Financial intermediation

117

7,4

40,9

49,2

2,5

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

537

9,3

35,8

54,4

0,5

N. Health and social work

153

11,2

44,4

44,3

0,2

O. Other community, social and personal service

181

11,4

45,8

40,9

1,9


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 26a. Constraint change: Problems with the purchasing power of customers Question Q22_I. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Problems with the purchasing power of customers Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

EU27

6687

11,7

25,1

61,9

1,3

EU25

6019

11,5

25

62,2

1,3

EU15

4091

10,1

24

64,5

1,3

NMS12

3036

17,9

29,5

51,4

1,2

NMS10

2276

18.1

29.7

51

1.2

Belgium

232

3,5

24,8

71,6

0,1

Czech Rep.

259

19,6

32,2

45,9

2,3

Denmark

60

18,3

43,5

30,4

7,8

Germany

553

14,1

22,3

63

0,6

Estonia

105

23,5

49,9

26,6

0

Greece

356

6,2

19

72,3

2,4

Spain

307

10,6

37,3

49,7

2,4

France

431

1,4

15,3

81

2,4

Ireland

137

24,9

40,1

33,9

1,1

Italy

468

6,5

18,5

74

1,1

Cyprus

145

9,6

24,5

63,4

2,6

Latvia

118

19,1

19,3

61

0,6

Lithuania

141

23,8

41,8

33,7

0,7

Luxembourg

107

2,9

14

70,2

13

Hungary

312

14,7

19,7

64,4

1,2

Malta

199

3,3

19,5

76,3

0,9

Netherlands

165

24,5

26,5

45

3,9

Austria

310

15,7

23,6

60,2

0,5

Poland

365

20,3

31,6

48

0,1

Portugal

356

11,8

18,9

68,5

0,9

Slovenia

133

7,7

54

37,3

0,9

Slovakia

253

19,5

42,8

34,6

3,1

Finland

136

10

56,3

31,8

1,9

Sweden

123

14,1

54,5

27,4

4

United Kingdom

196

20,3

38

41

0,6

Bulgaria

278

8,5

22,4

69,1

0

Romania

527

22,1

32,9

42,9

2,1

Iceland

70

24,8

56,1

18,3

0,8

Norway

58

9,3

53,6

34

3,1

COUNTRY

Annex, page 161


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 162

666

26,1

26,3

46,8

0,8


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 26b. Constraint change: Problems with the purchasing power of customers Question Q22_I. How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Problems with the purchasing power of customers Basis: asked if this particular constraint was reported in the past two years

Total N

% Decreased

% Remained about the same

% Increased

% DK/NA

6687

11,7

25,1

61,9

1,3

1-9

6031

12,1

25

61,8

1,1

10-49

501

10,5

31,1

57,7

0,6

50-249

76

12,3

26,7

60,2

0,8

250+

14

10,6

24,7

64,1

0,5

D. Manufacturing

900

9,8

27,8

61,5

1

F. Construction

666

9,9

28,9

59,3

1,8

G. Wholesale and retail

2100

13,3

24,6

61,4

0,8

H. Hotels and restaurants

510

9,8

17

72

1,2

I. Transport, storage and communication

311

15

29,1

53,9

2

J. Financial intermediation

289

11,4

18,3

69,7

0,6

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

1291

11,6

25,2

61,1

2,1

N. Health and social work

286

9,8

37

51,3

1,8

O. Other community, social and personal service

335

11,7

17,8

69

1,5

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

Annex, page 163


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 27a. Cause of decreased constraints due to regulations

Total N

% Fewer regulatory obligations, or

% The regulations and their implementati on by the government have been simplified or

% Cheaper or easier communicati on through ICT (egovernment)

% DK/NA

Question Q23. You have answered that the constraints due to regulations have decreased, please indicate what you consider to be the cause. Was it due to Basis: asked if this particular constraint has decreased during the past two years

EU27

212

21,8

26,7

31,4

20,1

EU25

189

22,5

26,1

31,3

20,1

EU15

110

26

26,8

25,6

21,5

NMS12

158

12,9

26,4

43,6

17

NMS10 Belgium

122

13.8

24.2

45.4

16.7

0

52,4

19,3

0

28,3

Czech Rep.

11

2,8

1,9

75,5

19,8

Denmark

3

45,6

54,4

0

0

Germany

9

48,4

16,5

20,5

14,6

Estonia

3

68,9

3,9

27,1

0

Greece

25

13,6

32,6

39,8

14

Spain

12

2,6

23,6

31,4

42,4

France

5

65,9

28,9

3,1

2

Ireland

13

0

30,7

61,8

7,5

Italy

6

58,9

23,3

17,8

0

Cyprus

3

0,3

34

62,6

3,1

Latvia

3

0

4,7

0

95,3

Lithuania

9

12

10

64,1

13,9

Luxembourg

2

8,6

0

0

91,4

Hungary

8

0

61,1

38,4

0,4

Malta

7

0

42,3

43,1

14,5

Netherlands

19

0

29,4

39,2

31,4

Austria

1

0

30,4

0

69,6

Poland

28

22

23,4

38,5

16,2

Portugal

12

39,9

21,7

37,6

0,9

Slovenia

15

16,7

21,4

36,9

24,9

Slovakia

22

9,7

45,9

15,5

28,9

Finland

7

31,6

67,4

1

0

Sweden

6

29,2

0

63,1

7,7

United Kingdom

14

11,9

33,7

19,4

35,1

Bulgaria

4

0

49,1

30,8

20,1

Romania

32

8,9

38,9

33,2

19

Iceland

2

0

61,6

16,1

22,3

Norway

1

0

47,8

0

52,2

COUNTRY

page 164


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

29

13,8

The Gallup Organization

60,6

9,8

15,8

Annex, page 165


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 27b. Cause of decreased constraints due to regulations

Total N

% Fewer regulatory obligations, or

% The regulations and their implementatio n by the government have been simplified or

% Cheaper or easier communicatio n through ICT (egovernment)

% DK/NA

Question Q23. You have answered that the constraints due to regulations have decreased, please indicate what you consider to be the cause. Was it due to Basis: asked if this particular constraint has decreased during the past two years

212

21,8

26,7

31,4

20,1

192

23,3

25,5

32,8

18,3

10-49

17

7,4

21,1

36,5

34,9

50-249

3

23,7

33,7

25,1

17,5

250+

1

9,5

24,2

56,8

9,5

D. Manufacturing

30

27,6

34,6

19,7

18

F. Construction

23

14,7

25,1

24,2

36

G. Wholesale and retail

44

25,6

22,8

37,2

14,4

H. Hotels and restaurants

14

78,4

1,7

3,3

16,6

I. Transport, storage and communication

11

3,4

62,6

32,8

1,1

J. Financial intermediation

10

3,6

36,7

4,7

55

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

46

23,6

1,9

49,2

25,3

N. Health and social work

14

2,9

41,5

55,1

0,5

O. Other community, social and personal service

21

3,3

62,2

20,2

14,4

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

NACE SECTOR

page 166


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 28a. Appropriate business regulations Question Q24. Governments impose various regulations for businesses in order to achieve some goals, Do you think that the regulations that apply to your company are appropriate to achieve their goals, for instance the protection of the environment or the financing of the provision of general public services?

Total N

% Yes

% No the regulations go clearly too far

% No the regulations go slightly too far

% No the regulations could be more ambitious in order to achieve their goals

% DK/NA

Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

EU27

14683

28,6

27,4

16,7

12,2

15,1

EU25

13318

28,5

27,6

16,9

12,2

14,8

EU15

9239

29,2

27,6

17,4

11,9

13,9

NMS12

5890

25,9

26,1

13,4

14

20,6

NMS10 Belgium

4525

24.4

27.7

13.9

14

20

446

39

25,8

13

7,6

14,6

Czech Rep.

480

26,3

27,3

11,5

8,3

26,6

Denmark

472

38,3

22,1

12,7

8,8

18

Germany

901

14,8

33,5

22,8

20,2

8,6

Estonia

290

34,8

15,5

26,5

4,6

18,6

Greece

460

41,4

24,4

9,2

12,9

12,1

Spain

921

43,5

20,3

7

10,5

18,6

France

885

29,4

19,8

18

8,9

23,9

Ireland

553

55,9

15,3

9,2

15,6

4

Italy

875

20,8

37,6

21,1

11

9,5

Cyprus

296

37,7

11,6

3,4

22,4

24,8

Latvia

298

36,1

25,6

15,3

2,5

20,4

Lithuania

296

25,1

28,7

10,1

10,5

25,7

Luxembourg

313

47,3

17,1

16

10,1

9,6

Hungary

481

18,5

30,2

12,8

18,4

20

Malta

302

36,1

12,6

9,6

22,5

19,3

Netherlands

549

30,9

22,7

18

9,8

18,7

Austria

568

27,3

29,7

21,5

11

10,6

Poland

866

23,8

28,8

15

16,4

16

Portugal

484

28,5

31,2

12,3

9,9

18,2

Slovenia

299

23,7

22,7

13,4

20,9

19,3

Slovakia

471

33,7

21

25,4

3,7

16,2

Finland

469

69,2

5,4

18,8

1,4

5,2

Sweden

478

37

7,6

18,3

12,9

24,2

United Kingdom

865

33,3

27,7

17,7

10,5

10,8

Bulgaria

478

37

12,5

5,4

17,8

27,4

Romania

887

32,8

19,8

14,2

10,7

22,6

Iceland

288

63,8

9,8

4,7

5,7

15,9

Norway

454

26,4

17,5

20,9

11,3

24

COUNTRY

Annex, page 167


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 168

914

34,4

24,5

7

24,1

9,9


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 28b. Appropriate business regulations Question Q24. Governments impose various regulations for businesses in order to achieve some goals, Do you think that the regulations that apply to your company are appropriate to achieve their goals, for instance the protection of the environment or the financing of the provision of general public services?

Total N

% Yes

% No the regulations go clearly too far

% No the regulations go slightly too far

% No the regulations could be more ambitious in order to achieve their goals

% DK/NA

Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

14683

28,6

27,4

16,7

12,2

15,1

1-9

13121

28,1

27,9

16,7

12,6

14,7

10-49

1225

29

27,9

20,1

11,3

11,6

50-249

201

30

25,3

21,4

11,1

12,1

250+

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

47

34,6

26,2

16,5

9,2

13,6

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

1857

27,9

27

16,2

11,9

17

F. Construction

1577

28,6

30

18,2

11,6

11,6

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

28,2

26,3

16

13,4

16,1

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

28

33,2

16,3

11,4

11,1

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

25,2

32,4

16,6

11,4

14,5

J. Financial intermediation

693

26,3

25

20,7

12,5

15,5

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

29

25,9

17,2

12,3

15,5

N. Health and social work

696

29,6

28,1

14,7

10,9

16,6

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

37

21,7

15,8

11,1

14,4

Annex, page 169


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 29a. Administrative burden in man-days Question Q25. How many working days, that is man days, have been spent this year in total in your enterprise with administrative tasks directly related to the compliance with information requirements contained in legislation, such as the time and effort in filling out forms? - WRITE IN working days: Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

%0 working days

% 1-5 working days

% 6-10 working days

% 11-20 working days

% 21-50 working days

% 51200 working days

% 201+ working days

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

4,2

8,5

6,7

8,3

13,1

12,7

7

39,6

EU25

13318

4,2

8,6

6,8

8,3

13

12,6

7

39,5

EU15

9239

4,5

8,8

7,1

8,4

13

13

7,7

37,5

NMS12

5890

2,3

7,1

5,1

8,1

13,1

11,1

3,5

49,7

NMS10 Belgium

4525

2.5

7.6

5.1

8.2

12.8

10.5

3

50.4

446

2,4

4,5

4,8

5,2

13,2

11,1

7,9

51

Czech Rep.

480

0,9

10,7

4,2

6,8

15,3

15,5

4,5

42

Denmark

472

1,9

15,3

10,8

12,5

11,8

13,2

5,2

29,2

Germany

901

1,9

5,4

5,8

11

22,1

19,5

2,7

31,4

Estonia

290

7,5

35,5

4,6

5,4

13,9

2,6

0

30,5

Greece

460

9

3,5

5,4

8,4

16,4

13,4

3,3

40,7

Spain

921

2,9

7,8

5,4

5,4

5,1

13,1

20,3

39,9

France

885

12,3

8,4

3,9

3,5

7,9

14,2

4,9

44,8

Ireland

553

2,5

16,4

11

14,3

17,4

8,2

3,7

26,5

Italy

875

3,4

3,1

7,5

7,2

13,4

12

11,6

42

Cyprus

296

4,1

24,3

7,8

1,4

9,3

3,7

0,7

48,7

Latvia

298

1,3

8,5

10,4

8,7

19,8

19,1

4,1

28,1

Lithuania

296

1,5

3,4

6,4

6,2

11,2

7,4

0,5

63,5

Luxembourg

313

8,4

3,5

4,8

4,4

13,2

13,7

10,8

41,2

Hungary

481

5,4

8,2

6,4

10,1

18,6

11,6

1,7

38,1

Malta

302

0,9

12,1

7,2

5,7

9,8

10,2

3,3

50,9

Netherlands

549

3,7

17,3

7,8

10,8

14,4

17,3

4,4

24,4

Austria

568

2

13,5

10,1

8,5

12,4

7,8

2,9

42,9

Poland

866

2,3

5

4,9

8,9

8,4

6,1

1,6

62,8

Portugal

484

2,2

5,1

4,8

6,4

8,7

10,3

10,4

52

Slovenia

299

0,8

3,4

6,1

1,3

6,9

16,7

15,9

48,9

Slovakia

471

1,2

3,1

3

8,7

18

17,9

9,3

38,8

Finland

469

3,2

18,2

10,4

14

14,4

9,8

1

28,9

Sweden United Kingdom

478

7,6

10,7

5,9

8,1

10,8

11,7

2,4

42,6

865

3,9

17,2

11

12,5

14,2

8,7

3,9

28,5

Bulgaria

478

1,2

4,1

7,8

14,9

23,5

16,1

2,9

29,4

Romania

887

1,4

3,9

3,3

3,1

10,1

13,3

8,6

56,2

Iceland

288

4,5

23,6

12,5

8,5

12

6,3

0,9

31,6

Norway

454

7,9

25,4

9,5

9,5

16,5

8,2

0,9

22,1

COUNTRY

page 170


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

914

6,9

The Gallup Organization

6,7

5,2

5,5

4,9

4,6

2,8

63,5

Annex, page 171


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 29b. Administrative burden in man-days Question Q25. How many working days, that is man days, have been spent this year in total in your enterprise with administrative tasks directly related to the compliance with information requirements contained in legislation, such as the time and effort in filling out forms? - WRITE IN working days: Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise % 51200 working days 12,7

Total N

%0 working days

% 1-5 working days

% 6-10 working days

% 11-20 working days

% 21-50 working days

14683

4,2

8,5

6,7

8,3

13,1

1-9

13121

4,5

8,7

7,1

8,4

13,6

13

6,6

38,1

10-49

1225

1,7

7,8

5,3

8,9

12,7

13,1

12,1

38,4

50-249

201

0,7

4,1

4,4

7,6

11,6

13,2

12,6

45,8

250+

47

1

2,2

3

3,5

8,1

8,7

15,1

58,5

1857

4,6

8,7

6,4

7,5

11,2

12

5

44,5

F. Construction

1577

2,9

7,5

4,2

9,2

11,9

13,8

8,4

42,2

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

4

7,1

6,7

8,4

12,9

12,3

6,8

41,9

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

2,9

11,9

6,8

8,7

15,4

9,8

4,5

40

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

4,3

7,5

6,4

5,8

12,2

13,9

9

40,9

J. Financial intermediation

693

2,1

9,9

11,9

6,6

14,1

14,3

8,8

32,3

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

5,5

10,3

7

9,4

14,4

13

6,7

33,7

N. Health and social work

696

3,6

6,4

5,2

8

11,7

18,1

6,1

40,8

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

4,6

6,8

8,3

8

12,8

8,9

11

39,6

EU27

% 201+ working days

% DK/NA

7

39,6

PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

page 172


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 30a. Internal Market: No border controls any more Question Q26_A. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union: - No border controls any more? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% very important

% rather important

% rather not important

% not important at all

% does not do business elsewhere in the EU / not relevant

EU27

14683

19

13,4

10,3

20,5

34,2

2,6

EU25

13318

18,5

13,3

10,3

20,6

34,7

2,5

EU15

9239

18,1

13,4

10,8

21,3

33,8

2,5

NMS12

5890

23,2

13,2

7,7

16,8

36,2

2,9

NMS10 Belgium

4525

20.6

12.5

7.4

17

39.7

2.7

446

27,3

9,4

11,1

24,5

23,2

4,5

Czech Rep.

480

18,2

11,2

8,6

24,2

31,8

6

Denmark

472

9,9

15,3

18,3

34,7

19,9

1,9

Germany

901

10,8

8,9

19,1

17,5

42,6

1

Estonia

290

30,2

26,1

20,1

18,7

2,8

2

Greece

460

44,9

8,3

4,4

6,6

33,2

2,6

Spain

921

16,3

10,2

5,5

12,1

54,2

1,6

France

885

17,5

15,3

12,4

12,2

39,9

2,7

Ireland

553

39,5

21,9

11,1

18,4

8,5

0,7

Italy

875

16,4

16,6

7,5

20,5

35,1

3,8

Cyprus

296

27,6

14,2

7,7

15

17,3

18,2

Latvia

298

20,2

11,8

6,1

17,2

44,3

0,5

Lithuania

296

28,6

26,2

8,9

16,1

18,5

1,7

Luxembourg

313

24,3

15,3

17,5

23

10,2

9,8

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

Hungary

481

14,9

9,5

4,2

4,5

64,9

2

Malta

302

32,6

18

8,3

6

21,6

13,5

Netherlands

549

15,4

14,7

10,9

11,3

39,6

8,1

Austria

568

21,4

18,7

10,3

25,5

19,8

4,4

Poland

866

21,8

12,6

7,4

18,9

38,6

0,7

Portugal

484

25,1

24,6

21,7

16,7

8,1

3,8

Slovenia

299

38,8

23,5

12,7

14,1

10,6

0,4

Slovakia

471

29,3

18,1

8

15,8

27,4

1,3

Finland

469

24,1

14,4

12,9

17,8

30,6

0,2

Sweden

478

12,9

11,9

11,3

18,7

42,2

3

United Kingdom

865

22,4

13,5

8,1

39,5

14,9

1,6

Bulgaria

478

37,5

17,7

4,1

17

18,8

4,9

Romania

887

38,4

16,5

13,1

14,7

13,6

3,6

Iceland

288

11,3

13,7

8,5

43,1

15,3

8,1

Norway

454

10,9

9,5

9,9

18,9

50,2

0,6

Annex, page 173


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 174

914

31

25,7

11,7

19

4,7

7,9


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 30b. Internal Market: No border controls any more Question Q26_A. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union: - No border controls any more? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

EU27

Total N

% very important

% rather important

% rather not important

% not important at all

14683

19

13,4

10,3

20,5

% does not do business elsewhere in the EU / not relevant 34,2

% DK/NA

2,6

PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

13121

17,3

13,3

10,3

20,5

36

2,6

10-49

1225

21,3

13,9

11,9

23,8

26,9

2,2

50-249

201

22,1

18,3

13,1

19,5

24,4

2,7

250+

47

26,3

20,2

9,4

19,4

21,2

3,6

1857

21,2

17,7

12

16,8

29,9

2,3

F. Construction

1577

15,9

12,4

7,5

18,4

43,1

2,7

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

24,5

14,8

10

19,4

28,8

2,5

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

19,8

12,7

13,1

21,8

29,5

3,1

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

26,5

15,9

9

15,8

31,2

1,7

J. Financial intermediation

693

11,7

8,7

10

24,4

40,9

4,3

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

14,8

12,2

10,3

23,8

36,2

2,6

N. Health and social work

696

10,2

9,6

12,8

23,1

39,8

4,5

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

14,4

8,4

8,2

22,9

45,1

1

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

Annex, page 175


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 31a. Internal Market: Same currency in most of the Member States Question Q26_B. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union: - Same currency in most of the Member States? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% very important

% rather important

% rather not important

% not important at all

% does not do business elsewhere in the EU / not relevant

EU27

14683

26,4

15,3

8,7

15,8

31,7

2,1

EU25

13318

26

15,1

8,7

15,9

32,1

2,1

EU15

9239

26,4

14,8

9

16,7

31,2

1,9

NMS12

5890

26,4

17,6

7,5

11,4

33,7

3,3

NMS10 Belgium

4525

23.9

16.7

7.3

11.7

37.1

3.3

446

47,5

11

3,8

14,8

19,5

3,4

Czech Rep.

480

23,7

13,9

7,5

18,4

30,7

5,8

Denmark

472

21,7

13,7

16,6

27,2

18,8

2

Germany

901

18,7

12,4

13,7

12

42

1,3

Estonia

290

17,4

42,6

21

15,4

1,9

1,7

Greece

460

55,4

10,4

1,2

3,6

29,3

0,1

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

page 176

Spain

921

29,4

8,6

3,6

4,6

53,3

0,4

France

885

30,3

19

10,7

6,5

31,5

2

Ireland

553

57,5

25

5

8,7

3,8

0

Italy

875

28,7

16,4

7,3

11,3

32,6

3,7

Cyprus

296

41,1

11,7

5,8

10,9

15

15,5

Latvia

298

19,8

12,3

7,7

16,2

42,9

1,1

Lithuania

296

22,8

21,5

17,5

17,9

17,6

2,6

Luxembourg

313

46,8

13,7

11,5

11,1

8,5

8,4

Hungary

481

16

12,1

4,3

2,8

63

1,8

Malta

302

43,1

23,6

9,1

2,1

17,4

4,7

Netherlands

549

29,8

18

2,9

7

36,3

6

Austria

568

41,7

16,4

6,7

13,1

18,1

3,9

Poland

866

26,3

18,1

7,3

11,4

34,7

2,2

Portugal

484

45,4

22,6

13,7

7,2

7,6

3,5

Slovenia

299

32,6

37,9

9,8

9,8

7,2

2,7

Slovakia

471

25,9

23,5

10,7

14,1

23,4

2,4

Finland

469

34,5

18,2

6,5

11,3

29,4

0,1

Sweden

478

15

17,6

10,7

14,3

41,6

0,9

United Kingdom

865

15,9

14,8

10,4

44,8

13,4

0,8

Bulgaria

478

35,6

24,2

10,9

8,7

14,8

5,8

Romania

887

44,3

21,5

8

10,4

13,2

2,6

Iceland

288

24,6

20,8

8,4

26,1

8,9

11,3

Norway

454

11,7

15,7

7,7

18,8

45,3

0,8


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

914

29,5

The Gallup Organization

22,9

15,1

21

4,7

6,8

Annex, page 177


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 31b. Internal Market: Same currency in most of the Member States Question Q26_B. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union: - Same currency in most of the Member States? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

EU27

Total N

% very important

% rather important

% rather not important

% not important at all

14683

26,4

15,3

8,7

15,8

% does not do business elsewhere in the EU / not relevant 31,7

% DK/NA

2,1

PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

13121

25

15,2

8,8

15,6

33,3

2,1

10-49

1225

24,8

19,1

9,5

19,6

25,1

2

50-249

201

31

17,2

10,1

16,8

22,1

2,9

250+

47

35,5

21,8

7,5

14,4

18,6

2,2

1857

26,6

20

10

14,4

27

2

F. Construction

1577

20,2

13,3

7,5

15,7

40,9

2,3

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

32,1

15

8,9

14,9

27,1

1,9

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

32,1

13,8

9

17,5

24,7

2,9

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

29,3

16,6

9,7

12,8

29,7

2

J. Financial intermediation

693

19,6

15,1

6,4

18,8

38,1

2,1

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

24,8

15,8

8

16,3

33

2,1

N. Health and social work

696

16,8

11,9

10,5

19,6

36,6

4,5

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

19,2

11,1

9,5

15,3

44

1

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

page 178


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 32a. Internal Market: Hire workers from other EU countries Question Q26_C. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union: - Hire workers from other EU countries? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% very important

% rather important

% rather not important

% not important at all

% does not do business elsewhere in the EU / not relevant

EU27

14683

9,4

11,6

13

28,7

34,9

2,4

EU25

13318

9,5

11,6

13

28,4

35,3

2,3

EU15

9239

10

11,9

13,1

28,5

34,1

2,4

NMS12

5890

6,8

10,2

12,3

29,6

38,8

2,3

NMS10 Belgium

4525

6.6

9.9

12.3

27.5

41.6

2.1

446

21

9,2

5

33

25,4

6,5

Czech Rep.

480

6,5

6,9

10,6

37,8

34,2

3,9

Denmark

472

8,7

8,9

23,7

35

21,8

1,8

Germany

901

3,5

7,9

21,1

22,8

43,7

0,9

Estonia

290

4,3

13,1

37,5

40,1

3,9

1,1

Greece

460

14,4

9,5

17,3

20,9

34,2

3,7

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

Spain

921

15,2

10,9

6,4

12,8

53,9

0,9

France

885

13,8

14,2

11,9

16,4

41,2

2,5

Ireland

553

20

31,2

15,9

24,1

8,3

0,5

Italy

875

10,1

13,8

11,5

24,9

35,1

4,6

Cyprus

296

22,6

11,5

9,8

23,4

17,5

15,2

Latvia

298

5,9

8,4

5,5

39,5

39,6

1,2

Lithuania

296

7,7

14,8

12,4

36,8

25,5

2,8

Luxembourg

313

26,8

16,6

13,4

22,7

11,4

9,1

Hungary

481

1,5

3,7

12

12,7

68,7

1,5

Malta

302

17,6

17,5

20,9

17,2

19,3

7,5

Netherlands

549

7

11,3

11,2

20,1

42,4

8

Austria

568

12,6

11,9

15,5

35,7

21,3

3

Poland

866

8,6

13,8

12,1

25,8

38,9

0,8

Portugal

484

19,3

18,1

26,6

22,5

10,4

3,2

Slovenia

299

4,4

14,6

21,1

39,1

19,7

1

Slovakia

471

5,5

10,6

16

35

30,1

2,8

Finland

469

3,6

10,9

20

29,4

34

2,1

Sweden

478

5,3

9,7

12,3

27,8

43,4

1,5

United Kingdom

865

6,5

12

11,4

56,1

13,3

0,7

Bulgaria

478

2,3

9,4

4,5

46,5

33,4

3,9

Romania

887

11,6

13,3

17,6

38,4

15,6

3,5

Iceland

288

15,7

14,2

11

39,1

14,1

5,8

Norway

454

6,6

14,1

10,9

19,9

47,1

1,3

Annex, page 179


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 180

914

16,1

19,5

20,1

32,2

6,6

5,6


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 32b. Internal Market: Hire workers from other EU countries Question Q26_C. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union: - Hire workers from other EU countries? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

EU27

Total N

% very important

% rather important

% rather not important

% not important at all

14683

9,4

11,6

13

28,7

% does not do business elsewhere in the EU / not relevant 34,9

% DK/NA

2,4

PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

13121

7,7

11

12,6

29,5

36,9

2,3

10-49

1225

9,7

14,6

18,7

28,4

26,4

2,3

50-249

201

11,6

18,8

19,9

24

23,1

2,6

250+

47

14,5

16,1

20,8

21,4

23,1

4,1

1857

9,9

12,2

16,6

28,4

30,5

2,4

F. Construction

1577

9,7

11,1

10,6

23,6

42,3

2,7

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

8,5

12,1

13,9

31,6

31,9

2

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

16,1

15,4

14,5

22,5

28,6

3

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

10,8

12

13,2

28,6

33,8

1,6

J. Financial intermediation

693

4,5

11,3

10,5

29,5

41,7

2,5

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

8

11,4

11,5

30,9

35,7

2,4

N. Health and social work

696

7,7

9,5

12,5

28,7

37,9

3,8

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

14

4,9

10,6

23,9

44,9

1,6

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

Annex, page 181


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 33a. Internal Market: Single Market legislation Question Q26_D. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union: - Single Market legislation including harmonised technical standards? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% very important

% rather important

% rather not important

% not important at all

% does not do business elsewhere in the EU / not relevant

EU27

14683

20,4

18,4

9

15,4

32,8

4,1

EU25

13318

19,8

18,2

9

15,7

33,2

4

EU15

9239

19,1

18,2

9,5

16,9

32,5

3,9

NMS12

5890

26,2

19,4

6,5

8,4

34,3

5,1

NMS10 Belgium

4525

23.9

18.5

6.7

8.8

37.3

4.8

446

34,2

12,9

4,6

20,5

22,9

5

Czech Rep.

480

23,9

13,5

9,1

10,8

31,8

10,8

Denmark

472

19,3

16,4

19,3

20,3

20,9

3,8

Germany

901

16,2

15,5

13

12,3

41,8

1,2

Estonia

290

11,6

43,7

24,9

14,6

3

2,2

Greece

460

40,4

10,9

4,5

2,6

29,2

12,5

Spain

921

20,7

10,8

5,3

6,1

53,4

3,7

France

885

18,9

18,4

12,6

13,4

33,1

3,5

Ireland

553

28,1

31,4

14,8

18,3

6,2

1,1

Italy

875

19,8

19,4

7,2

14

34,4

5,1

Cyprus

296

26,6

13,7

8,4

14,7

18,2

18,4

Latvia

298

20,5

17

4,9

14,9

40,9

1,7

Lithuania

296

30

28,7

10

7,7

16,7

6,9

Luxembourg

313

27,6

18,1

11,8

17,2

11,9

13,4

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

page 182

Hungary

481

15

14,4

3,5

3

63

1,1

Malta

302

27,9

25,3

7,3

6,1

18,7

14,7

Netherlands

549

15,1

14,5

6,8

13,7

38,1

11,8

Austria

568

23,3

20,9

10,5

20,4

18,9

6

Poland

866

26,9

21,1

5,8

9,5

34,4

2,4

Portugal

484

31,5

32,8

13,8

5,7

8,1

8

Slovenia

299

34,9

32,6

9

12,6

8,2

2,7

Slovakia

471

27

24,4

10,5

9,9

23,2

5,1

Finland

469

16,5

19,5

14,5

15

29,9

4,5

Sweden

478

10,7

19

12,1

12,3

40,4

5,5

United Kingdom

865

14,7

22,7

8,9

35,8

15,7

2,3

Bulgaria

478

41

24,8

2,7

5

20,5

6

Romania

887

39

24,6

7,3

7

14,8

7,3

Iceland

288

25,3

24,1

9,7

19,7

9,9

11,3

Norway

454

13,6

19,3

6,6

15,3

42,7

2,5


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

914

25,4

The Gallup Organization

24,2

13,5

20,8

5

11,2

Annex, page 183


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 33b. Internal Market: Single Market legislation Question Q26_D. The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union: - Single Market legislation including harmonised technical standards? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise % does not do business elsewhere in the EU / not relevant 32,8

Total N

% very important

% rather important

% rather not important

% not important at all

14683

20,4

18,4

9

15,4

1-9

13121

18,9

18,6

8,7

15,4

34,3

4,1

10-49

1225

21,4

19,3

11,4

17,3

26,3

4,4

50-249

201

25,8

23

10,5

13,6

22,4

4,7

250+

47

28,5

29,3

7,9

9,3

20,1

5

1857

21,1

22

10,7

14,6

27,3

4,3

F. Construction

1577

18

16,6

7,2

13,5

41,5

3,1

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

23,5

20,3

7,8

14,8

29,7

3,9

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

21,9

15,8

10,4

18,6

29

4,3

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

25

19,2

10,5

12

29,5

3,8

J. Financial intermediation

693

11,8

15,7

8,8

19,3

37,9

6,5

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

19,4

17,1

9

17,7

32,7

4,1

N. Health and social work

696

12,6

17,9

11,6

12,7

39

6,2

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

18,9

14,4

7,8

13,3

43,3

2,3

EU27

% DK/NA

4,1

PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

page 184


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 34a. Benefit of EU standards replace national regulations Question Q27. Nowadays, technical standards and certain regulations are often decided at the EU level to avoid trade barriers. Do you see any benefit for your enterprise that EU standards replace national regulations, or not? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) Total N

% Yes

% not

% It depends

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

29,4

52

8,9

9,8

EU25

13318

29

52,6

8,6

9,8

EU15

9239

29,1

52,3

8,6

10

NMS12

5890

30,6

50,5

10,2

8,7

NMS10

4525

28.5

54.1

8.8

8.6

Belgium

446

32,7

41,9

11,7

13,7

Czech Rep.

480

15,7

57,8

9,9

16,6

Denmark

472

32,9

49,8

8,7

8,6

Germany

901

21,4

72,1

4,1

2,4

Estonia

290

39,7

30,4

10

19,9

Greece

460

41,5

43,6

7,9

7

Spain

921

28,2

38,2

12,8

20,8

France

885

23,9

41,1

15,2

19,7

Ireland

553

28,9

65,6

1,6

3,9

Italy

875

50,7

29,2

11,1

9

Cyprus

296

29,4

54

12,5

4,1

Latvia

298

18,6

63

10,8

7,5

Lithuania

296

33,4

36,2

13,7

16,7

Luxembourg

313

36,2

43,7

11,8

8,3

Hungary

481

21

65,6

6,5

6,8

Malta

302

43,4

35

13,1

8,4

Netherlands

549

26,9

49,4

8,4

15,3

Austria

568

21,9

68,5

5,7

3,9

Poland

866

37,9

49,6

8,2

4,2

Portugal

484

32,8

50

11,6

5,6

Slovenia

299

47,3

31,8

7,7

13,1

Slovakia

471

28,5

50,5

14,7

6,2

Finland

469

33,3

47,7

8,1

10,9

Sweden

478

25,9

56,6

5,5

12

United Kingdom

865

17,1

76,5

2,5

3,9

Bulgaria

478

39,2

32,6

22,5

5,7

Romania

887

45,8

27,2

15,3

11,6

Iceland

288

20,5

54,4

3,7

21,4

Norway

454

35,3

28,1

13,6

23,1

Turkey

914

49,9

35,4

13,4

1,3

COUNTRY

Annex, page 185


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 34b. Benefit of EU standards replace national regulations Question Q27. Nowadays, technical standards and certain regulations are often decided at the EU level to avoid trade barriers. Do you see any benefit for your enterprise that EU standards replace national regulations, or not? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise Total N

% Yes

% not

% It depends

% DK/NA

14683

29,4

52

8,9

9,8

1-9

13121

29,7

52,6

9,2

8,6

10-49

1225

30,4

55,1

7,8

6,7

50-249

201

35,6

50

7

7,4

250+

47

37,8

46,2

7,4

8,7

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 186

D. Manufacturing

1857

31,8

49,1

10,3

8,9

F. Construction

1577

25,5

54,2

8,6

11,6

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

33,8

48,4

8,4

9,3

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

25,1

54,9

7

13

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

29,6

51

12,3

7,1

J. Financial intermediation

693

30,3

54,8

7,4

7,5

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

26,4

53,5

9,8

10,2

N. Health and social work

696

26

58,5

7,1

8,4

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

28,7

54,9

6,1

10,3


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 35a. Amount of exports, 2005 Question Q31. How much turnover was generated by exports in your enterprise in 2005? - Answer in [NATIONAL CURRENCY]: Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) % 150K to 500K EUR

% 500K to 1 Million EUR

%1 Million to 2 Million EUR

%2 Million to 5 Million EUR

% more than 5 Million EUR

% DK/NA

Total N

% No export

% less than 150K EUR

EU27

14683

80.7

4.9

1

0.7

0.4

0.4

0.3

11.6

EU25

13318

80.6

4.9

1

0.7

0.4

0.4

0.3

11.7

EU15

9239

80.9

4.7

1

0.7

0.5

0.5

0.3

11.4

NMS12

5890

79.7

5.6

1.4

0.5

0.2

0.2

0.1

12.4

NMS10 Belgium

4525

78.6

5.9

1.5

0.5

0.2

0.2

0.1

13.2

446

67

3.6

1

1

1.1

0.8

0.2

25.3

Czech Rep.

480

79.6

5.3

0.6

0.6

0.1

0.1

0.1

13.6

Denmark

472

69.6

9.3

2.6

2.7

1

0.6

0.7

13.6

Germany

901

83.3

5.3

1.3

0.5

0.4

0.4

0.5

8.2

Estonia

290

67

13.9

3.8

1.3

2.4

0.7

0.4

10.5

Greece

460

85.8

7.3

0.2

0.7

0.1

0

0.1

5.7

Spain

921

86.2

1.7

0.3

0.2

0.4

0.1

0.1

11

France

885

76.1

2.7

1

1

0.6

0.7

0.1

17.9

Ireland

553

84.4

6.4

1.7

0.5

0.9

0.4

0.5

5.2

Italy

875

81

3.9

0.6

1

0.2

0.5

0.3

12.7

Cyprus

296

88.5

1.7

0.1

0

0.1

0

0.6

8.9

Latvia

298

83.2

7.8

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.2

0

8.2

Lithuania

296

65.6

12.4

1.8

0.5

0.2

0.6

0

18.9

Luxembourg

313

65.6

5.8

2

0.3

0.2

0.6

0.2

25.4

Hungary

481

84.3

7.2

1.8

0.1

0.2

0

0.1

6.3

Malta

302

64.4

4.2

1.8

0.1

0

0

0.1

29.4

Netherlands

549

68.7

6.7

0.2

1.3

1.8

1.5

0.9

18.8

Austria

568

64.2

8.2

2.5

1.1

0.7

1.1

0.4

21.9

Poland

866

76.3

4.6

1.7

0.4

0.1

0.2

0

16.5

Portugal

484

78.9

6.3

1.9

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.1

12.4

Slovenia

299

72.2

15.9

1.2

1.7

1.5

0.5

0.5

6.5

Slovakia

471

79.3

6.3

2.7

1.3

1

0.6

0.6

8.3

Finland

469

74.1

10.7

4.6

2

0.7

1.1

0.2

6.5

Sweden

478

80.4

9.8

2

1.1

0.3

1.1

0.9

4.3

United Kingdom

865

84.7

6.3

0.9

0.7

0.5

0.3

0.4

6.3

Bulgaria

478

91.4

1.7

1.9

0.1

0.2

0.2

0

4.6

Romania

887

83.2

5.1

1

0.5

0.1

0

0

10.1

Iceland

288

79.4

7.3

3.4

1.3

0.5

0.6

2.6

4.8

Norway

454

83.5

5.6

2.9

0.7

0.6

0.6

0.3

5.9

Turkey

914

78.3

5.7

1

0.3

0.1

0

0

14.6

COUNTRY

Annex, page 187


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 35b. Amount of exports, 2005 Question Q31. How much turnover was generated by exports in your enterprise in 2005? - Answer in [NATIONAL CURRENCY]: Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise % 150K to 500K EUR

% 500K to 1 Million EUR

%1 Million to 2 Million EUR

%2 Million to 5 Million EUR

% more than 5 Million EUR

% DK/NA

Total N

% No export

% less than 150K EUR

14683

80.7

4.9

1

0.7

0.4

0.4

0.3

11.6

1-9

13121

83

5.1

1

0.6

0.3

0.3

0.1

9.6

10-49

1225

74.5

5.3

2.1

1.7

1.5

1.5

1.1

12.1

50-249

201

61.8

2.8

3.9

2.8

2.4

4.9

7.1

14.4

250+

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

page 188

47

58.4

0.3

2.7

1.6

1.3

3.3

18.5

14

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

1857

68

8.2

2

1.5

0.7

1.1

0.5

17.8

F. Construction

1577

88.2

3.7

0.4

0.3

0

0

0

7.3

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

74.3

7

1.6

1.1

0.9

0.8

0.5

13.9

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

86.6

0.8

0.2

0

0.1

0

0

12.3

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

76

5.5

1.9

0.5

0.3

0.3

0.3

15.3

J. Financial intermediation

693

90.4

1.2

0

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.3

7.2

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

84.9

4

0.9

0.6

0.2

0.1

0.1

9.2

N. Health and social work

696

91.4

1.6

0

0.2

0

0

0

6.8

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

90

2.8

0.1

0

0

0

0.1

7


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 36a. Amount of exports, 2006 Question Q32. How much is the expected turnover from exports in 2006? - Answer in [NATIONAL CURRENCY]: Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) % 150K to 500K EUR

% 500K to 1 Million EUR

%1 Million to 2 Million EUR

%2 Million to 5 Million EUR

% more than 5 Million EUR

% DK/NA

Total N

% No export

% less than 150K EUR

EU27

14683

80.2

5

1.3

0.7

0.3

0.4

0.3

11.8

EU25

13318

80

5

1.3

0.7

0.3

0.4

0.3

11.9

EU15

9239

80.3

4.7

1.3

0.8

0.3

0.5

0.3

11.8

NMS12

5890

79.3

6.6

1.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.1

11.8

NMS10

4525

78.2

7.1

1.3

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

12.5

Belgium

446

66.9

3.4

1.2

1

1

0.8

0.3

25.4

Czech Rep.

480

80.3

6.4

1.4

0.6

0.1

0

0.1

11.1

Denmark

472

70

10.6

2.4

2.3

1

0.5

0.5

12.7

Germany

901

83.5

6.1

1.3

0.5

0.4

0.4

0.5

7.4

Estonia

290

65.5

15.1

4.2

1.1

0.5

0.5

0.4

12.7

Greece

460

84.6

7.3

0.7

1.9

0.2

0

0.1

5.3

Spain

921

86.8

1

0.2

0.1

0.3

0.2

0.1

11.2

France

885

76.6

2.4

1.3

1

0.4

0.7

0.1

17.6

Ireland

553

83

5.7

2.4

0.9

0.7

0.3

0.5

6.6

Italy

875

82.3

3.6

1.8

0.6

0.2

0.5

0.3

10.7

Cyprus

296

89.1

1.7

0.1

0

0.7

0

0.6

7.8

Latvia

298

85.8

6.2

1.2

0.2

0.3

0.1

0

6.2

Lithuania

296

65

14.5

2

0.2

0.2

0.6

0

17.4

Luxembourg

313

64.5

5.7

2.6

0.3

0.1

0

0.2

26.5

Hungary

481

84.1

7.1

2.3

0.2

0.1

0.1

0.1

6

Malta

302

65.1

4.2

3

0.2

0

0

0.2

27.3

Netherlands

549

67.1

8.3

0.8

1.3

1.4

1.6

1.2

18.3

Austria

568

64.8

8.7

2.5

1.5

0.1

1.6

0.4

20.6

Poland

866

75.4

6.4

0.7

0.2

0.3

0.2

0

16.7

Portugal

484

78.1

6.1

3.3

0.2

0.1

0.2

0.1

12

Slovenia

299

68

21.2

1.4

0.9

1.5

0.7

0.4

5.9

Slovakia

471

76.8

8.4

2.5

1.6

1

0.4

1

8.5

Finland

469

74.1

9.7

6.9

2

0.8

0.4

0.3

5.9

Sweden

478

81.2

9.5

1.8

1.4

0.4

1.1

0.9

3.7

United Kingdom

865

80.1

6.2

0.9

0.9

0.1

0.4

0.3

11.2

Bulgaria

478

88.8

3.1

1.8

0.3

0.1

0.1

0.1

5.7

Romania

887

84.2

3.9

1.5

0.5

0

0

0

9.9

Iceland

288

77.6

5.5

4.7

2.4

0.8

0.7

2.6

5.7

Norway

454

81.8

5.7

2.7

1.3

0.5

0.6

0.3

7

COUNTRY

Annex, page 189


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 190

914

78.4

3.9

1.2

0.2

0.1

0

0

16.2


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 36b. Amount of exports, 2006 Question Q32. How much is the expected turnover from exports in 2006? - Answer in [NATIONAL CURRENCY]: Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

EU27

Total N

% No export

% less than 150K EUR

14683

80.2

5

% 150K to 500K EUR

% 500K to 1 Million EUR

%1 Million to 2 Million EUR

%2 Million to 5 Million EUR

% more than 5 Million EUR

% DK/NA

1.3

0.7

0.3

0.4

0.3

11.8

PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

13121

82.4

5.2

1.3

0.6

0.2

0.3

0.1

9.9

10-49

1225

73.7

5

2.5

2

1.3

1.6

1

13

50-249

201

62.5

2.9

2.9

3.2

2.6

4.7

6.9

14.3

250+

47

56.7

0.4

2

2.7

1.6

3.2

19.4

14.1

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

1857

67.4

8.4

2.3

1.3

0.5

1

0.6

18.5

F. Construction

1577

87.4

3.5

0.7

0.3

0

0.1

0

8

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

74.4

7.1

2.3

1.1

0.6

0.9

0.5

13.1

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

86.3

0.8

0.2

0

0.1

0

0

12.6

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

74.7

6.7

1.6

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.2

16

J. Financial intermediation

693

90.7

1.5

0

0.5

0.3

0.2

0.3

6.5

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

83.5

4.3

0.8

0.7

0.2

0.1

0.1

10.2

N. Health and social work

696

89.4

2

0

0.2

0

0

0

8.5

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

91.3

2.2

0.6

0.1

0.1

0

0.1

5.6

Annex, page 191


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 37a. Anticipated change in exports for 2007 Question Q33. What is your expectation for 2007 regarding your enterprise’s turnover generated by exports? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% Will increase

% Will remain about the same

% Will decrease

% no exports are foreseen for 2007

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

8,3

13,9

1,4

70,8

5,5

EU25

13318

8,3

14,2

1,4

70,6

5,5

EU15

9239

7,6

15,4

1,4

70,3

5,2

NMS12

5890

11,7

6,8

1,1

73,3

7,2

NMS10

4525

12

7.4

1.1

72.3

7.1

Belgium

446

8,7

8,1

1,8

66,7

14,6

Czech Rep.

480

6,2

8,9

1,3

73,1

10,6

Denmark

472

16,5

14,8

0,8

62

5,9

Germany

901

6,1

12,5

1,5

77,2

2,7

Estonia

290

21,2

12,6

1

59,8

5,3

Greece

460

13,6

5,9

2,8

75,7

1,9

Spain

921

4,4

3,3

0,7

88,6

3

France

885

4

8,7

0,4

74,5

12,5

Ireland

553

18,1

29,1

2,5

47,8

2,5

Italy

875

7,6

7,4

1,1

79,9

4

Cyprus

296

2,8

1,1

1,5

89,2

5,4

Latvia

298

13

2,9

0,3

79,9

3,9

Lithuania

296

19,9

11,9

1,3

57,7

9,2

Luxembourg

313

11,8

11,9

2,1

64,2

10

Hungary

481

6,8

5,9

1,2

80

6,1

Malta

302

7,6

2,4

2

62,7

25,3

Netherlands

549

12,6

14,4

2,2

60,5

10,3

Austria

568

12,4

14

1,3

60,9

11,4

Poland

866

16,9

7,3

1

69,6

5,3

Portugal

484

9,4

9,2

4

74,6

2,8

Slovenia

299

22,5

10,7

0,5

63,7

2,6

Slovakia

471

13,4

7,4

2,2

68,2

8,8

Finland

469

12,2

14,6

1,4

67,2

4,7

Sweden

478

7,7

13,5

0,4

74,7

3,7

United Kingdom

865

10,5

41

2,3

43,1

3

Bulgaria

478

6,9

3,7

0,2

84

5,1

Romania

887

11,7

2,4

1

75,8

9,2

Iceland

288

15

6,9

1,7

73,8

2,7

Norway

454

10,8

8,4

1,3

77,1

2,4

COUNTRY

page 192


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

914

The Gallup Organization

15,1

3,9

1,9

63

16,1

Annex, page 193


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 37b. Anticipated change in exports for 2007 Question Q33. What is your expectation for 2007 regarding your enterprise’s turnover generated by exports? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Will increase

% Will remain about the same

14683

8,3

13,9

1,4

70,8

5,5

1-9

13121

7,6

13,7

1,4

73,4

3,9

10-49

1225

12,7

18,1

1,3

62,2

5,7

50-249

201

22

19,4

2,4

50,9

5,4

250+

47

25,8

20,8

3,1

44

6,4

1857

14,1

18,5

2,5

58,3

6,7

F. Construction

1577

5,2

11,3

0,7

78,5

4,4

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

11,4

16,1

1,6

65,5

5,3

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

3,9

8,8

0,7

78,6

8

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

8,6

16

1,3

68,4

5,8

J. Financial intermediation

693

5,8

7,5

0,4

82,1

4,3

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

7,2

14,9

1,3

71,1

5,5

N. Health and social work

696

2,3

10,8

0,8

81,6

4,5

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

3,6

6,4

1,3

84,2

4,5

EU27

% Will decrease

% no exports are foreseen for 2007

% DK/NA

PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

page 194


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 38a. Anticipated increase of exports for 2007 Question q33a. Could you, please estimate the expected increase of exports compared to 2006, in percent? Basis: ask if a change of export levels is anticipated Total N

%0-5

% 6 - 10

% 11 20

% 21 - 50

% 51 100

% 101+

% DK/NA

COUNTRY EU27

1225

9,4

18,4

17,7

14,4

11,8

1,1

27,2

EU25

1106

9,6

18,4

17,7

14,1

11,8

1,1

27,3

EU15

706

10,8

20,3

17,2

11,5

11,4

1,4

27,4

NMS12

689

5,3

12,5

19,3

23,1

13,1

0

26,7

NMS10

544

5.3

11.6

19.4

23.3

13.3

0

27

Belgium

39

1,4

16

15

11,5

16,6

0

39,5

Czech Rep.

30

3

2,3

32

26,4

2

0

34,3

Denmark

78

8,1

26,7

10,6

14,8

7,2

0

32,7

Germany

55

7

29,4

18,7

11,8

15

0

18

Estonia

62

2,1

22,7

19,5

6,1

12,5

0

37,2

Greece

63

9,4

27,9

26,1

1,1

10,3

0

25,1

Spain

41

9,2

8,5

25,6

15

4,8

0

37

France

35

10,8

10,3

15,6

1,9

7,2

0

54,2

Ireland

100

4,7

9,7

28,7

9,8

15,8

2,3

28,9

Italy

67

10,9

27,9

15,2

12,8

12

0

21,1

Cyprus

8

1

24,2

22,8

1,8

0

0

50,3

Latvia

39

15,3

8,6

19,9

19,9

15,7

0

20,6

Lithuania

59

2,8

27

34,9

16,2

5,6

0

13,5

Luxembourg

37

14,8

15

9,2

6,2

14,8

0

39,9

Hungary

33

6,5

6,7

10,9

11,6

24,2

0

40,2

Malta

23

2,5

11,8

10,3

17,5

18

0

39,8

Netherlands

69

12,8

9,1

21,4

3,4

24,8

0

28,6

Austria

71

10,6

22,6

21,1

9,5

17,3

0

18,9

Poland

146

4,9

12

17,8

26,1

14,8

0

24,2

Portugal

46

18

13,1

23,9

21,1

6,5

0

17,4

Slovenia

67

4,8

21,8

25,4

23

2,3

0

22,8

Slovakia

63

16,2

24

7,3

18,4

15,8

0

18,4

Finland

57

10,3

15,3

19,2

23,1

22,1

0

10

Sweden

37

27

11,4

19

19,8

1,8

0

21

United Kingdom

91

11,9

19,5

13,3

12

9,9

5

28,4

Bulgaria

33

0,9

25,2

22,5

25

6,3

0

20,3

Romania

104

6,1

16,3

17,6

20,6

13,4

0

25,9

Iceland

43

1,7

15,6

20

22,6

12,3

0

27,7

Norway

49

8,1

10,6

9,7

5,6

20

0

46,1

Turkey

138

0,3

8,3

20,3

27,6

20,5

0

23

Annex, page 195


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 38b. Anticipated increase of exports for 2007 Question q33a. Could you, please estimate the expected increase of exports compared to 2006, in percent? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise Total N 1225

%0-5 9,4

%610 18,4

% 11 20 17,7

% 21 50 14,4

% 51 100 11,8

% 101+ 1,1

% DK/NA 27,2

1000

8,3

18,2

17,4

15,1

13,3

1,2

26,4

10-49

155

12,5

26,1

18,7

14,4

6,7

1,2

20,4

50-249

44

16,5

26,3

12,5

16,2

6,5

0

22,2

250+

12

23,1

28,8

11,6

11,1

5,5

0

19,9

262

13

16,4

17,3

18,6

11,4

1,2

22

81

4,8

19,7

23,5

21,5

11,1

0

19,3

G. Wholesale and retail

453

7,7

17,7

21

15,4

11,2

1,3

25,7

H. Hotels and restaurants

43

18,6

27,7

16

2,1

1,8

0

33,7

I. Transport, storage and communication

70

4,5

19,4

12,3

14,4

6

5,5

37,9

J. Financial intermediation

40

19,5

16,3

17,3

4,9

21

0

21

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

233

8

22,5

13,6

9,2

14

0,1

32,6

N. Health and social work

16

7,2

4,4

9,4

5,8

35,6

0

37,6

O. Other community, social and personal service

27

14,1

4,7

6,9

16,6

9,7

0,3

47,7

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing F. Construction

page 196


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 39a. Anticipated decrease of exports for 2007 Question q33b. Could you, please estimate the expected decrease of exports compared to 2006, in percent? Basis: ask if a change of export levels is anticipated Total N

%0-5

% 6 - 10

% 11 - 20

% 21 50

% 51 100

% DK/NA

COUNTRY EU27

201

4,9

9,7

13

32,6

11,8

27,9

EU25

184

4,9

9,2

13,1

33

11,9

27,8

EU15

132

5,5

10,1

12,2

32,8

12,5

26,9

NMS12

63

1,2

7,3

18,2

31,5

7,5

34,3

NMS10

51

0.7

2.8

19.8

34.4

7.9

34.4

Belgium

8

0

0

0,9

75,2

0

24

Czech Rep.

6

0

1

2,4

53,4

0

43,1

Denmark

4

0

0

3,5

37,6

0

58,9

Germany

14

0

8,9

10,2

27,4

9,9

43,7

Estonia

3

0

0

0

80

0

20

Greece

13

0

0,1

21,5

57,5

0

20,8

Spain

6

3

0

46,5

47,6

0

3

France

3

2,8

69,9

8,4

8,1

2,8

8,1

Ireland

14

10,7

0

6,5

15,6

4,9

62,3

Italy

10

1,8

13,9

37,2

31,1

0,4

15,6

Cyprus

4

0

0

42,9

0

0

57,1

Latvia

1

16,5

0

0

83,5

0

0

Lithuania

4

0

8,5

10,3

76,4

0

4,7

Luxembourg

7

9,1

28,4

0

0

0

62,5

Hungary

6

0

1,9

8,6

33,4

0,6

55,4

Malta

6

24,3

0

11,1

24,3

40,2

0

Netherlands

12

4,6

0

14

36,1

0

45,3

Austria

7

0

9,2

0

10,3

19,3

61,2

Poland

9

0

0,9

38,5

21,5

19,1

20

Portugal

19

0

0,3

0,8

30,5

23,6

44,8

Slovenia

1

18,6

13,8

5,5

18,6

0

43,4

Slovakia

10

0

22

29,2

19,9

0

28,9

Finland

6

0

1,2

0

41,1

49,7

8,1

Sweden

2

0

0

0

100

0

0

20

14

11,1

0,6

28,7

23,8

21,8

Bulgaria

1

0

59,3

24,3

6,4

6,4

3,7

Romania

9

6,8

48,4

0

3,2

3,6

38

Iceland

5

0

3,8

0

80,3

0

15,9

Norway

6

0

0

0

0

0

100

Turkey

17

0

14

2,3

20,1

40,5

23,2

United Kingdom

Annex, page 197


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 39b. Anticipated decrease of exports for 2007 Question q33b. Could you, please estimate the expected decrease of exports compared to 2006, in percent? Basis: ask if a change of export levels is anticipated Total N

%0-5

% 6 - 10

% 11 20

% 21 50

% 51 100

% DK/NA

201

4,9

9,7

13

32,6

11,8

27,9

1-9

185

4,7

10,5

13,1

32,1

12,7

26,9

10-49

16

8,9

2,5

15

20,2

2

51,3

50-249

5

4,4

14,9

20,2

25,2

15,4

19,9

250+

1

5,8

22,9

11,6

52,2

4,5

3,1

D. Manufacturing

46

2,2

18,2

6,6

29,5

14,1

29,4

F. Construction

11

1,3

60

0

34

0

4,8

G. Wholesale and retail

65

0,9

6,8

19,8

32,6

2,7

37,2

H. Hotels and restaurants

8

58,9

0

0,9

6

6,1

28,2

I. Transport, storage and communication

11

0

0

49,4

26

11,7

12,9

J. Financial intermediation

3

0

0

0

14,2

0

85,8

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

42

8,1

0,3

10,9

45,8

22,8

12,1

N. Health and social work

5

0

0

0

10,4

0

89,6

O. Other community, social and personal service

10

0

0

1,9

35,6

42

20,6

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 198


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 40a. Constraints to exporting Question Q35. Looking at the last two years, what was the main constraint to exporting? Was it ...

Total N

% import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination

% lack of knowledge of foreign markets

% lack of management resources

% language problems

% different regulations in other EU countries

% regulations in non-EU countries

% lack of capital

% no constraints at all

% enterprise’s product/service is not suited to export

% DK/NA

Basis: ask only if exports are reported in 2005

EU27

1133

9,2

12,7

5,7

2,8

8,2

4,4

8,9

36,1

1,9

10

EU25

1035

9,2

12,7

5,8

2,8

8,1

4,4

8,9

36,5

2

9,8

EU15

710

9,6

13,1

6,5

2,9

7,7

3,5

7

37,4

1,7

10,5

NMS12

465

7,6

10,6

2,1

2,2

10,5

8,6

17,7

30,3

2,8

7,7

NMS10 Belgium

374

6.9

10.5

2.2

2.1

10

9

18.3

31.7

3.1

6.2

34

0,7

7

0

0,3

1,7

0,9

10,4

78

0,7

0,4

Czech Rep.

33

5,2

2,1

0,7

1,5

15,5

11,3

27,7

28,7

5,2

2,1

Denmark

79

5,1

3,3

9

6,2

9,3

2,1

6,9

38,3

6,3

13,6

Germany

76

11,3

12,2

8,7

5,2

14,3

8,1

8,4

26,8

0

5

COUNTRY

Estonia

65

0

23,5

7,1

0

19

11,3

3,7

29,7

0,3

5,5

Greece

39

14,4

29,7

0,2

6,9

1,7

0,9

0,3

23,4

0,3

22,1

Spain

26

7,4

10,8

10,4

4,4

3,7

4,8

14,5

31,5

0

12,5

France

54

11,2

6,8

4,6

0,2

1,2

1,6

5,1

59,6

0

9,8

Ireland

58

8,5

14,8

4,1

5,1

4,2

3

18,7

28,4

8,3

5

Italy

57

12,9

13,7

7,8

0

5,7

2,6

2,9

39,7

2,9

11,6

Cyprus

8

2

2,1

1

0

0,1

0,5

1

30,7

23,7

38,9

Latvia

26

14,1

11,1

8,6

8,6

11,8

4,9

8,1

18,9

0

13,8

Lithuania

46

1,7

16,5

1,2

6,1

9,4

6,7

12,5

27,3

0,3

18,2

Luxembourg

28

9,8

2,1

7,2

0,2

3,2

8,9

0

62

0,5

6

Hungary

0,7

0,1

6,8

9,3

19,6

44,5

4,3

8,7

45

4,9

1

Malta

19

13,2

12,4

1,3

0

0

0

9,5

36,9

0

26,7

Netherlands

69

3,7

7,8

3,3

4,7

18,6

5,4

3,2

43,3

3,8

6,3

Austria

79

3,3

9

4,8

6,7

6,4

3,7

10,5

43,4

2,4

9,7

Poland

62

8,1

18,4

2,6

3

10,4

8,8

15,9

26,1

2,7

4,1

Portugal

42

1,4

23,2

1,9

0,4

0,4

0,6

17,3

31,8

15,7

7,4

Slovenia

64

11,6

23,6

0,8

0,3

2,6

8,2

15,9

29,2

0

7,8

Slovakia

58

11,8

2

8,7

5,7

4,9

5

10,5

40,4

0

11

Finland

91

4,2

27,5

5,5

6,2

2,8

6,3

9,8

19,9

0,4

17,3

Sweden United Kingdom

73

2,7

9,3

1

4,8

2,6

10,9

5

44,5

2,5

16,8

78

11,7

16,4

7,8

2,8

9,9

0,3

7,2

29,9

0,7

13,3

Bulgaria

19

31,3

3,8

0

0

30,5

0

7,1

18,3

0

9

Romania

59

6,5

14,7

1,5

4,7

8,1

6,3

15,4

17,9

0,5

24,4

Iceland

46

2,7

2,1

0

0

4,1

3,8

4

59,8

0

23,3

Norway

48

5

10,2

8

1,6

8,5

0,6

4

43,8

5,3

13

Annex, page 199


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 200

65

15,8

18,5

0,4

7,8

5,1

3

21,8

19,1

3

5,6


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 40b. Constraints to exporting Question Q35. Looking at the last two years, what was the main constraint to exporting? Was it ...

Total N

% import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination

% lack of knowledge of foreign markets

% lack of management resources

% language problems

% different regulations in other EU countries

% regulations in non-EU countries

% lack of capital

% no constraints at all

% enterprise’s product/service is not suited to export

% DK/NA

Basis: ask only if exports are reported in 2005

1133

9,2

12,7

5,7

2,8

8,2

4,4

8,9

36,1

1,9

10

1-9

968

9,5

13,6

6,1

1,5

7,1

3,4

9,5

37,4

2

10

10-49

164

9,2

8,9

3,1

9,7

12,1

7,6

7,5

30

2

9,8

50-249

48

6,9

10,9

7,6

5,8

15,9

6,4

5,4

30,4

0,7

10,1

250+

13

7,9

10,8

5,4

0,2

7,5

6,8

3,8

39,7

0,7

17,4

263

6,6

14,6

4,4

3,2

4,5

5,1

8,7

41,3

1,1

10,7

75

9,5

22,4

5,3

0,5

9,4

11,1

0,6

27,6

4

9,5

G. Wholesale and retail

470

14,4

9,5

5,4

2,2

7,4

2,8

10, 5

35,6

1,7

10,4

H. Hotels and restaurants

12

0,8

1,5

4,1

6,9

42,7

1,3

12,7

11,1

0,1

18,9

I. Transport, storage and communication

72

2,8

3,1

1

5,1

9,8

6

23, 6

37,1

2,4

9,2

J. Financial intermediation

17

3,4

8,3

2,3

5,2

15,3

4,3

0

24

0,2

37

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

190

5,2

17,8

7,8

3,4

12,8

4,5

4,5

36,3

3,4

4,3

N. Health and social work

12

0

0,5

3,7

0

1,1

3,5

1,1

46,3

0

43,8

O. Other community, social and personal service

22

0,5

29,1

28,6

3,3

0,3

3,3

7,6

25,9

0

1,5

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing F. Construction

Annex, page 201


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 41a. Inputs purchased abroad Question q36.What percentage of your inputs, - including capital, energy and raw materials, but NOT including labour - is purchased abroad Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) % 1-5

% 610

% 1120

% 2140

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

50,4

5,3

3,4

2,8

3,6

2,8

2,6

3,2

26

50,3

5,4

3,5

2,7

3,6

2,7

2,5

3,1

26,1

9239

48,8

5,7

3,5

2,7

3,5

2,5

2,4

2,9

28

NMS12

5890

57,6

3,2

3,2

3,2

4,1

3,7

3,7

4,9

16,4

NMS10

4525

58.5

3.5

3.4

3.2

4

3.5

3.5

4.6

15.8

Belgium

446

28,6

5

2,7

3,4

5,3

1,6

5,7

3,8

44

Czech Rep.

480

64,2

5,3

3,3

2,5

1,9

3,1

2,8

2,4

14,4

Denmark

472

46,7

6

3,2

2,6

4,5

3,5

4,6

9,2

19,7

Germany

901

54,2

3,7

3,2

3

2,7

2,4

2

1,6

27

Estonia

290

39,5

4,9

5,2

6,5

3,4

5,3

6,7

16,9

11,7

Greece

460

39

7,8

4,2

6,3

8,4

3,7

6,6

7,9

16

Spain

921

49,5

5,3

3,6

4

2,7

2,6

2,4

2

28

France

885

54,7

7

3,2

2

2,4

1,4

1,2

0,8

27,3

Ireland

553

16,4

7,2

8,7

5,2

9,4

5

9,6

10,3

28,3

Italy

875

59,3

6,7

2,7

2

3,8

1,8

1,2

2,8

19,6

Cyprus

296

32,5

1,3

1,5

2,3

1

4,4

3,5

9,2

44,3

Latvia

298

48,5

1,8

0,3

0,7

0,6

2,7

5,7

4,7

35

Lithuania

296

45,5

3,2

2,4

3,6

6,5

7,5

7,2

6,8

17,3

Luxembourg

313

16,4

7,8

1

3,8

4,8

4,3

9,6

11,5

40,9

Hungary

481

56

3,2

4,5

3,7

5,2

2,2

3,5

3,1

18,7

Malta

302

25,4

2,6

1,9

3,2

6,5

8,5

7,8

23,5

20,6

Netherlands

549

49

2,4

2,1

2,6

3,4

4,9

2,7

2,6

30,1

Austria

568

43,1

10,1

5,7

4,8

4,6

4,2

5,9

4,1

17,4

Poland

866

59,9

2,3

3,3

3,4

4,7

3,6

3

5,6

14,2

Portugal

484

45,4

6,1

6,1

1,3

8,1

4

5,2

6,5

17,2

Slovenia

299

46,1

3,7

3,8

4,2

7,1

8,6

6,6

8,2

11,6

Slovakia

471

57,5

7

2,1

3,4

3,4

5,3

6,3

2,3

12,7

Finland

469

51,6

10

4,7

4,3

4,9

3,8

1,9

5,2

13,6

Sweden

478

61,9

8,1

2,3

1,7

1,7

3,8

3,2

6,5

10,9

United Kingdom

865

34,3

5,3

4,2

2,3

3,6

3,2

2,4

3,5

41,3

Bulgaria

478

59,9

1,3

0,4

0,8

3,9

2,3

2,8

5,5

23,1

Romania

887

46,8

1,2

3,4

4,5

5

6,8

6,5

8

17,8

Iceland

288

39,8

4,3

7,2

5,3

11,8

4

6,3

13,3

8

Norway

454

68,4

5

3,4

4,1

2,1

2,9

2,8

3,4

7,9

Turkey

914

44,3

2,1

2,3

4

5,7

5,6

6,4

9,9

19,7

Total N

0%

EU27

14683

EU25

13318

EU15

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

page 202


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 41b. Inputs purchased abroad Question q36.What percentage of your inputs, - including capital, energy and raw materials, but NOT including labour - is purchased abroad Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise Total N

0%

% 15

% 610

% 1120

14683

50,4

5,3

3,4

2,8

% 2140 3,6

1-9

13121

52,2

5,2

3,5

2,7

10-49

1225

46,6

7

3,9

50-249

201

37,7

8,3

5,5

250+

47

31,2

7,1

1857

43

F. Construction

1577

G. Wholesale and retail H. Hotels and restaurants

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% DK/NA

2,8

2,6

3,2

26

3,5

2,8

2,6

3,2

24,1

3,4

5,3

2,5

2,9

3,6

24,7

5,7

5,6

3,7

4,3

2,9

26,2

4

6,4

10

6,5

2,7

1,9

30,2

7,9

5,9

4,4

5,2

4,6

3,7

3,1

22,1

55,2

5,4

2,8

3,2

3,4

2,8

1,2

1,7

24,3

3967

41

6,4

3,8

3

5,8

4,8

5,4

7,2

22,6

1092

55,7

4,2

2,7

3,9

2,8

0,5

0,5

0,2

29,4

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

49,8

1,9

3,2

2

2,8

4

1,9

2,5

32

J. Financial intermediation

693

61,7

2,2

1

0,4

0,9

1,6

1,4

1,2

29,6

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

56,7

5,3

2,7

1,9

1,8

0,7

1,1

1,5

28,3

N. Health and social work

696

51,7

3,2

2,9

1,5

2,3

0,5

1,4

1,7

34,6

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

61,3

2,8

3,8

2,4

2,1

1,3

0,3

1,9

24,1

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

Annex, page 203


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 42a. Turnover created in foreign subsidiaries Question q37a . How much of your total turnover, that is your annual sales in percentages is created in foreign subsidiaries, joint ventures abroad?-foreign subsidiaries Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) Total N

% 15

% 610

% 1120

% 2140

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% No subsidiary

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

0.4

1

0.8

0.5

0.4

0.2

0.5

93.1

3.1

EU25

13318

0.4

1

0.8

0.5

0.4

0.2

0.5

93.1

3.1

EU15

9239

0.4

1.2

0.9

0.5

0.4

0.2

0.6

92.3

3.4

NMS12

5890

0.2

0.2

0.3

0.3

0.1

0.3

0.3

96.9

1.5

NMS10

4525

0.2

0.2

0.3

0.3

0.1

0.2

0.3

97.1

1.4

Belgium

446

0

7

2.3

0.4

0

0.4

1.2

78.5

10.2

Czech Rep.

480

0

0.1

0

0

0.1

0

0

99

0.8

Denmark

472

0.9

0.6

1

1.3

1.6

0.5

0.9

92.5

0.9

Germany

901

0.4

0.1

0.3

0.1

0.3

0.2

0

97.6

0.9

Estonia

290

0.1

0.3

0.1

0

2.4

0

0

96.7

0.4

Greece

460

0

2

0

1.7

1.2

0

0

92.6

2.4

Spain

921

0.3

0.5

0.3

0.1

0.3

0.5

0

94.2

3.8

France

885

0

3.6

3.6

0

1.1

0

0.8

85.7

5.1

Ireland

553

0.9

0.1

0.9

3.2

1.9

0.7

1.3

82.9

8.1

Italy

875

0.4

0.5

0.2

0

0.2

0

0.5

97.4

0.7

Cyprus

296

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

90.3

9.6

Latvia

298

0.2

0

0.7

0

0

0

0.1

96.4

2.6

Lithuania

296

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.5

1.1

0

0.8

93.7

3.4

Luxembourg

313

0.7

1.4

0.6

0.1

1.1

3.7

0.1

85.4

6.9

Hungary

481

0

0.1

0

0

0

0

0

98.7

1.2

Malta

302

0.2

0

0.4

0.2

0.2

0

0.9

95.2

2.8

Netherlands

549

0.9

0.4

0.1

0.4

0.7

0.1

0.7

92.1

4.6

Austria

568

0

0.4

0.2

0.9

0.2

0

0.5

94.6

3.2

Poland

866

0.4

0.2

0.4

0.5

0

0.5

0.6

96

1.3

Portugal

484

0.8

1.1

0.7

1

2.1

1.3

1.8

85.6

5.6

Slovenia

299

0.2

0.2

1.4

0.2

0

0

0

96.2

1.8

Slovakia

471

0.5

1.2

1.3

0.4

0.1

0.2

0.3

94.3

1.7

Finland

469

0.1

0.8

0.3

0.6

0.8

0

0

96.2

1.1

Sweden

478

0.2

0.1

0.4

0.8

0.4

0.4

0.1

94.9

2.7

United Kingdom

865

1

0.8

0.8

1.6

0

0.2

1

89.3

5.4

Bulgaria

478

0.1

0

0

0

0

0

0

99.8

0.1

Romania

887

0.3

0.1

0.4

0.9

0.4

0.5

0.4

92.7

4.3

Iceland

288

0.2

0.9

0

0

0.8

0

0.5

94.1

3.5

Norway

454

0

0.5

0.2

1.7

0

0.4

0

94.8

2.4

COUNTRY

page 204


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

914

1.8

The Gallup Organization

0.9

2

3

2.8

1.5

1.4

82.7

3.9

Annex, page 205


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 42b. Turnover created in foreign subsidiaries Question q37a . How much of your total turnover, that is your annual sales in percentages is created in foreign subsidiaries, joint ventures abroad?-foreign subsidiaries Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise Total N

% 15

% 610

% 1120

% 2140

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% No subsidiary

% DK/NA

14683

0.4

1

0.8

0.5

0.4

0.2

0.5

93.1

3.1

1-9

13121

0.3

0.5

0.4

0.5

0.3

0.2

0.5

94.5

2.8

10-49

1225

0.9

1.2

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.5

91.1

4.2

50-249

201

0.7

1.5

1.4

1.3

0.6

0.3

0.4

88.1

5.7

250+

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

47

3.7

2.6

3.1

5.3

2

0.9

1.2

74.9

6.4

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

1857

0.2

1.1

1.3

0.3

0.1

0.3

0.7

91.7

4.4

F. Construction

1577

0.1

1.1

0.6

0.5

0.5

0.1

0.2

94.4

2.5

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

0.6

1.2

0.7

0.6

0.6

0.3

0.9

91.8

3.3

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

0.2

1.4

1.8

0.6

0.9

0

0

91.8

3.3

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

0.2

1

0.7

0.7

0.1

0.3

0.7

93.9

2.5

J. Financial intermediation

693

0.9

0.7

1

0.3

0.3

0.8

1

93.2

1.9

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

0.5

0.9

0.5

0.5

0.2

0.2

0.3

93.9

3

N. Health and social work

696

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0

0

0

96.4

3

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

0.1

0.7

1.1

0

0.1

0

0.1

95.8

2.1

page 206


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 43a. Turnover created in joint ventures abroad Question Q37_B. How much of your total turnover, that is your annual sales in percentages is created in foreign subsidiaries, joint ventures abroad? - joint ventures abroad Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) Total N

% 1-5

% 610

% 1120

% 2140

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% No joint venture

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

0.4

1

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.1

0.2

92.4

4.4

EU25

13318

0.4

1

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.1

0.2

92.4

4.4

EU15

9239

0.5

1.1

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.1

0.1

92.2

4.4

NMS12

5890

0.1

0.1

0.5

0.2

0.3

0.2

0.6

93.1

4.9

NMS10

4525

0.1

0.1

0.6

0.3

0.3

0.2

0.7

93.2

4.7

Belgium

446

0

6

3.5

0

0.1

0

0

80.2

10.1

Czech Rep.

480

0

0.1

0.5

0

0

0

0

98.4

0.9

Denmark

472

0.8

1.2

0

1.2

1.6

0

0

94.6

0.5

Germany

901

0

0

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0

98.5

1

Estonia

290

2.1

0

0

0

0

0

0.7

96.9

0.3

Greece

460

0

0

0

0

0

1.2

0.8

92.7

5.2

Spain

921

0.4

0.1

0.3

0.2

0.3

0

0

94.9

3.8

France

885

0

3

2.4

0.4

1.5

0

0

87.5

5.2

Ireland

553

0.5

0.3

0.9

1.8

0.7

0

0

88.9

6.8

Italy

875

0.3

0.7

0

0

0

0

0

93.6

5.4

Cyprus

296

0

0

0.6

0.6

0

0

0

89.8

8.9

Latvia

298

0.2

1

0

0

0

0

0

96.2

2.6

Lithuania

296

1.1

0

0

0.1

1.4

1

0

92

4.5

Luxembourg

313

0.1

0.6

1.9

1.4

0

0.1

0

91.3

4.5

Hungary

481

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

97

3

Malta

302

0.9

0

0.5

0.6

0.2

0.1

0.2

94.5

3

Netherlands

549

0.5

1

0.1

1.4

0.5

0

0.2

90.4

6

Austria

568

0.1

0.1

0.4

0.5

0.3

0.1

0.2

94

4.4

Poland

866

0

0

0.9

0.5

0.5

0.4

1.6

87.9

8.1

Portugal

484

1.4

0.7

0

1

1.2

0.8

0.4

80

14.6

Slovenia

299

0.2

0.1

0

0.1

0

0

0

94.9

4.7

Slovakia

471

0.5

0.3

0.8

0

0.3

0

0.1

96.5

1.6

Finland

469

1.4

0.5

0.9

1.4

0.9

0.6

1.1

91.9

1.4

Sweden

478

0.9

0.9

0.5

0.9

0.9

0.4

1.3

88.3

6

United Kingdom

865

1.4

1.4

0.1

1.8

0.2

0.1

0.1

91.5

3.3

Bulgaria

478

0.1

0

0

0

0

0

0

91.4

8.5

Romania

887

0

0.2

0.5

0.3

0.3

0.2

0.1

94

4.4

Iceland

288

0

0.1

0.2

0

0.1

0.7

2

93.3

3.6

Norway

454

0

0.4

0.1

0.8

0

0.1

0

96.1

2.4

COUNTRY

Annex, page 207


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 208

914

1.6

0

1.6

0.6

2.9

0.5

0.2

88.6

3.9


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 43b. Turnover created in joint ventures abroad Question Q37_B. How much of your total turnover, that is your annual sales in percentages is created in foreign subsidiaries, joint ventures abroad? - joint ventures abroad Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise Total N

% 15

% 610

% 1120

% 2140

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% No joint venture

% DK/NA

14683

0.4

1

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.1

0.2

92.4

4.4

1-9

13121

0.4

0.5

0.3

0.5

0.2

0.1

0.2

93.4

4.3

10-49

1225

0.9

0.7

0.5

0.6

0.3

0.1

0.1

91.5

5.3

50-249

201

1.2

1

0.8

0.4

0.4

0.1

0.1

89

7

250+

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

47

4

1.2

1

1.9

0.7

0.2

0.6

83.4

7

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

1857

0.4

1.9

0.5

0.3

0.1

0.1

0

90.6

6.1

F. Construction

1577

0.1

1.1

0.3

0.2

0.4

0

0.3

92.9

4.6

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

0.7

1

0.4

0.8

0.6

0.2

0.2

92

4.1

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

1

1

1.2

0.8

0.5

0

0.2

90.5

4.9

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

0.4

0.1

0.3

0.8

0.7

0.3

0.6

93.3

3.7

J. Financial intermediation

693

0.3

1.5

0.8

1

0.4

0

0.3

92.8

2.9

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

0.3

0.7

0.8

0.4

0.2

0

0.1

92.4

5

N. Health and social work

696

0

0

0.2

0.1

0

0

0.1

96.4

3

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

0.3

0.7

0.4

0.6

0.2

0.5

0

95.2

2.2

Annex, page 209


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 44a. Reason for having foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures Question Q39. What is the main reason why you have foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures abroad?

4,7

11,6

3,8 12,3

11,2 16,9

17.8

13.1

16.2

% DK/NA

17,3 17,2 18,5

% Lower taxes,

11,8

% Lower total labour costs,

138

4,7

% Less administrative and regulatory burdens,

481 170

17,4

% Export regulations,

650

EU15

% Proximity as a supplier to one or several global large-scaled enterprise

705

EU25

% Access to finance,

EU27

% Proximity to final customers

Total N

Basis: ask if enterprise has foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures

5,3

8,3

11,2

9,2

32,2

5,3

8,3

11,3

9,2

32,2

5,6 2,4

8,8 3,6

11 13

10,1 1,6

32,2 31,6

2.7

3.7

13.5

1.1

31.9

COUNTRY

NMS12 NMS10 Belgium

page 210

57

17,1

16,4

10,9

7

13,5

10,9

13,9

10,3

Czech Rep.

4

74,7

1,1

8,4

0

0,6

5,3

0

9,8

Denmark

33

21,3

0,9

17,2

0,3

10,5

0,7

8,3

40,8

Germany

10,7

1,1

6,5

11,6

7,6

7

21,5

16

33,9

Estonia

11

93,8

0

3,1

0

0

0

2

1,1

Greece

27

13,1

0

22,2

21,5

8,7

0,5

12,9

21

Spain

21

16,1

5

7,6

0

12,8

14,4

0

44,2

France

88

6,3

3

5,5

12,2

7,7

11,6

17,2

36,6

Ireland

56

12,6

4,2

12,3

8,3

13,6

14,3

3,9

30,9

Italy

17

11,1

0

18,7

0

9,6

11

7,5

42,1

Cyprus

4

50,1

0

1,2

2,4

0

0

0

46,2

Latvia

6

0

0

0

0

0

10

41

49

Lithuania

14

69,7

0

21,5

0

0

0

3,7

5,1

Luxembourg

30

40,6

0,9

0

0

7,2

7,2

0

44,2

Hungary

1

23,1

0

28,8

0

0

0

0

48,1

Malta

11

68,2

2,2

6,6

2,2

13,4

3,2

2,2

2,2

Netherlands

25

12,8

18

2,2

2,6

4

8,8

4,2

47,3

Austria

16

50,6

0

25,2

0

2,5

4,2

0

17,5

Poland

48

7,3

15,9

17,3

3

3,3

16,4

0,4

36,3

Portugal

50

19,1

3,3

24,3

9,6

10

1,7

19,9

12,1

Slovenia

6

87,4

0

4,6

1,3

1,3

2,7

0

2,7

Slovakia

22

20,4

10,2

18,7

4,5

16,5

1,5

3,8

24,4

Finland

37

28,1

3,9

5,6

0

26,9

3,7

7,5

24,3

Sweden

32

28,4

0

18,8

8,7

1,5

11,5

8,8

22,1

United Kingdom

65

22,9

0,7

13,1

0

7,2

14,4

5

36,7

Bulgaria

0

0

84,5

0

0

0

0

0

15,5

Romania

29

25,4

4,2

22,9

0,5

3,1

8,2

6,7

29,1

Iceland

16

12,7

38,8

12,4

0

0,9

1,1

9,1

25

Norway

15

8,9

0

29,7

0

12,2

0,9

0

48,2

Turkey

131

8,8

12,9

11,5

9,8

4,2

14,3

9,7

28,7


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 44b. Reason for having foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures Question Q39. What is the main reason why you have foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures abroad?

% Proximity to final customers

% Access to finance,

% Proximity as a supplier to one or several global large-scaled enterprise

% Export regulations,

% Less administrative and regulatory burdens,

% Lower total labour costs,

% Lower taxes,

% DK/NA

EU27

Total N

Basis: ask if enterprise has foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures

705

17,4

4,7

11,8

5,3

8,3

11,2

9,2

32,2

475

19,5

2,6

14,3

4,1

7,4

10,8

9,5

31,7

PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9 10-49

71

22,5

9,4

14,3

1,6

9,6

7,4

4,1

31,3

50-249

16

44,5

2,4

8,9

1

7,9

14,1

4,9

16,3

250+

9

43,3

0,9

14,2

4,7

1,6

5,2

4,3

26

D. Manufacturing

95

9,8

1,9

7,2

14,5

18,1

12,6

0,6

35,4

F. Construction

59

20,6

8

7,2

0

4,6

16,8

7,3

35,5

G. Wholesale and retail

236

16,7

4,9

16,2

2,3

5

16

11,5

27,3

H. Hotels and restaurants

59

9,8

7,5

14

21,7

18,5

0,2

8,8

19,5

I. Transport, storage and communication

45

21

9

8,8

7,3

5,3

13

4,2

31,5

J. Financial intermediation

45

13,2

5,4

16,9

0,1

4,8

7,6

8,8

43,2

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

136

22,4

1,5

8,3

1,2

7,4

6,7

13,2

39,3

N. Health and social work

5

6,9

0

27,7

5,9

11,2

11,3

18,7

18,2

O. Other community, social and personal service

27

35,7

9

4,2

0

2,8

2,8

11,6

33,9

NACE SECTOR

Annex, page 211


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 45a. Foreign subsidiaries or joint ventures affecting the home country employment Question Q40. Did your foreign subsidiaries or joint ventures affect the employment of your enterprise in [COUNTRY]? Basis: ask if enterprise has foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures Total N

% They increased it

% They did not affect it

% They decreased it

% DK/NA

EU27

705

17,5

48,5

3,1

31

EU25

650

17,5

48,5

3,1

30,9

EU15

481

17,3

47,3

3,3

32,2

NMS12

170

19

58,7

1,2

21,1

NMS10

138

19.6

60.5

1.3

18.6

Belgium

57

15,8

25,1

6,1

53,1

Czech Rep.

4

5,2

91,1

0

3,7

Denmark

33

26,7

36,6

1,4

35,3

Germany

16

30,8

61,1

8,1

0

Estonia

11

1,6

97,6

0,8

0

Greece

27

65,4

34

0,4

0,3

Spain

21

13,4

48,4

0

38,2

France

88

5,3

14,8

1,4

78,5

Ireland

56

10,4

79,8

5,4

4,4

Italy

17

11,1

69,4

0

19,5

Cyprus

4

94,4

5,6

0

0

Latvia

6

56,6

43,4

0

0

Lithuania

14

70,5

17,9

7,7

3,9

Luxembourg

30

16,5

39,5

6,4

37,6

Hungary

1

0

71,2

28,8

0

Malta

11

28,7

71,3

0

0

Netherlands

25

52,6

25,2

7,8

14,4

Austria

16

49,1

40,9

3,8

6,2

Poland

48

18,7

58,2

0,4

22,7

Portugal

50

15,3

75,5

4,8

4,4

Slovenia

6

10,5

85,5

4

0

Slovakia

22

19,9

62,4

8,3

9,4

Finland

37

29,2

60,4

5,5

4,9

Sweden

32

46,7

53,3

0

0

United Kingdom

65

17,5

69,4

4,5

8,5

Bulgaria

0

100

0

0

0

Romania

29

12,7

43,8

0

43,6

Iceland

16

53,1

36,7

1,1

9,1

Norway

15

20,8

43,3

0

35,9

Turkey

131

23,2

46,9

14,3

15,6

COUNTRY

page 212


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 45b. Foreign subsidiaries or joint ventures affecting the home country employment Question Q40. Did your foreign subsidiaries or joint ventures affect the employment of your enterprise in [COUNTRY]? Basis: ask if enterprise has foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures

705

% They increased it 17,5

% They did not affect it 48,5

% They decreased it 3,1

475

19,5

59,8

2,8

17,9

10-49

71

26,3

58,2

2,5

13

50-249

16

23,2

57,2

12,2

7,4

250+

9

34,1

54,5

5,9

5,5

D. Manufacturing

95

12,1

49,7

4,2

34

F. Construction

59

18,5

41,1

4,9

35,5

G. Wholesale and retail

236

17,2

59,1

2,4

21,4

H. Hotels and restaurants

59

22,3

25,1

2,6

50

I. Transport, storage and communication

45

39,9

46,2

1,1

12,8

J. Financial intermediation

45

20,8

50,2

3,6

25,4

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

136

11,3

44,7

0,5

43,5

N. Health and social work

5

25,7

33,6

11,2

29,5

O. Other community, social and personal service

27

13,2

41

15,9

29,9

Total N EU27

% DK/NA 31

PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

NACE SECTOR

Annex, page 213


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 46a. Intensity of competition Question Q41. Has competition within the markets of your enterprise altogether decreased or increased during the last two years? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% Increased

% Remained about the same

% Decreased

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

59,5

30,6

5,4

4,5

EU25

13318

59,1

30,8

5,5

4,6

EU15

9239

57,8

31,9

5,2

5,1

NMS12

5890

67,4

23,9

6,5

2,1

NMS10

4525

66.6

24.7

6.9

1.7

Belgium

446

53,1

27,7

3,8

15,4

Czech Rep.

480

66,4

25,9

6

1,7

Denmark

472

50,7

36,4

7,4

5,5

Germany

901

63,5

26,6

7,9

2

Estonia

290

62,5

18,6

13,5

5,4

Greece

460

81,1

10,9

5,6

2,4

Spain

921

62

33,8

1,9

2,2

France

885

43,9

37,7

4,6

13,9

Ireland

553

65

25,1

7,3

2,6

Italy

875

65,2

29,6

2,7

2,5

Cyprus

296

66,7

22,2

6,8

4,4

Latvia

298

58,6

32,8

5

3,6

Lithuania

296

66,2

25,9

6,7

1,1

Luxembourg

313

60,3

28,5

5,5

5,7

Hungary

481

63

22,6

10,4

4

Malta

302

85,1

9,2

1,4

4,3

Netherlands

549

57,9

26,8

7,4

7,9

Austria

568

66,6

22,6

6

4,8

Poland

866

67,6

25,4

6,5

0,6

Portugal

484

64,8

25,6

4,6

5

Slovenia

299

69,4

22,7

5,8

2,1

Slovakia

471

73,2

23,1

2,5

1,2

Finland

469

68,8

24,6

5,2

1,4

Sweden

478

53,5

34,9

7,1

4,5

United Kingdom

865

49,7

38,4

7,5

4,3

Bulgaria

478

71,9

23,4

3

1,6

Romania

887

72,3

17

4,9

5,8

Iceland

288

56,5

34,3

6,3

2,8

Norway

454

57,8

25,6

10,7

5,8

COUNTRY

page 214


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

914

The Gallup Organization

75,3

13,2

11,3

0,3

Annex, page 215


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 46b. Intensity of competition Question Q41. Has competition within the markets of your enterprise altogether decreased or increased during the last two years? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise Total N

% Increased

14683

59,5

% Remained about the same 30,6

1-9

13121

60,2

10-49

1225

50-249 250+

% Decreased

% DK/NA

5,4

4,5

31

5,6

3,1

60,3

31,7

4,8

3,1

201

64,8

27,5

4,6

3,1

47

72,8

18,2

2,9

6,1

D. Manufacturing

1857

55,3

33,9

7,1

3,7

F. Construction

1577

52,5

37,3

6,1

4,2

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

65,2

25,7

5,4

3,7

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

54,7

30,4

7,9

6,9

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

65,3

26

5,2

3,5

J. Financial intermediation

693

64,1

26,9

4,1

4,8

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

57,2

33,7

4,2

4,9

N. Health and social work

696

56,3

35

4

4,7

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

63,2

24,5

4,7

7,6

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 216


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 47a. Strategies in increased competition and shrinking margins Question Q42_A-E. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

reduce costs

forming strategic partnerships

reduce prices

increase quality

increase product differentiation/ look for market niches

EU27

14683

52,8

37,9

36

64,3

61,6

EU25

13318

52,8

37,6

35,6

63,9

61,4

EU15

9239

52,2

37,2

33,7

62,8

61,3

NMS12

5890

55,6

41,1

46,5

71

62,9

NMS10 Belgium

4525

56.3

39.4

45.7

69.7

62.3

446

49,3

36,9

34,2

63,4

46,4

Czech Rep.

480

49,8

33,6

42,4

69,7

50,5

Denmark

472

56,8

40

34,7

52,9

42

Germany

901

66,8

43,5

27,4

64,7

68,3

Estonia

290

64,4

58,2

30,7

85,8

72,7

Greece

460

65,8

61,1

54,1

83,2

60,8

Spain

921

44,8

35,1

35,2

48,3

45,1

France

885

45,4

33,4

32,8

58

53

Ireland

553

69

35

54

74,6

81,3

Italy

875

44,7

35,5

30,1

70,8

61,9

Cyprus

296

71,6

49,5

39,3

68,1

41,8

Latvia

298

29,4

40,6

24,3

63,1

58,4

Lithuania

296

46,1

66,4

36,8

72,9

79,4

Luxembourg

313

48,2

38,8

35,2

56,6

34,2

Hungary

481

62,4

45,2

29,8

62

61,3

Malta

302

70,4

29,4

40

68

70

Netherlands

549

40,9

38,3

26,3

65,4

50,8

Austria

568

61,3

38,5

20,7

68,7

69,5

Poland

866

58

38,9

57,1

71,8

68,9

Portugal

484

51,9

40,8

45,4

59

63,2

Slovenia

299

61,7

47,7

40,3

72,9

69,3

Slovakia

471

51,3

31,9

44,5

81,2

65,8

Finland

469

64,8

69,6

23,9

75,9

76,8

Sweden

478

62,3

36,7

27,7

56,6

63,1

United Kingdom

865

54,4

33,2

41

64,1

73

Bulgaria

478

51,7

46,3

54,2

77,7

64,7

Romania

887

52

53,6

48,8

79,1

67,6

Iceland

288

69,1

51,4

34

75

58,7

Norway

454

60,2

63,9

22,1

60,1

67,6

Turkey

914

66,2

59,5

58,3

79,7

79,3

COUNTRY

Annex, page 217


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 47b. Strategies in increased competition and shrinking margins Question Q42_A-E. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

reduce costs

forming strategic partnerships

14683

52,8

37,9

36

64,3

increase product differentiation/ look for market niches 61,6

1-9

13121

51,5

36,4

35,1

63,5

60,9

10-49

1225

61,1

44

37,2

68,5

67,3

50-249

201

68,8

49,4

41

69

68,7

250+

47

68,2

52,2

39,3

70,5

70,3

1857

54,5

34,2

40,2

64,2

64,8

F. Construction

1577

51,1

31,5

38

61,8

55,8

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

56

37,9

44,9

62,8

65,8

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

60,3

27,9

34,3

72,1

60

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

52,1

38,7

29,7

62

51,5

J. Financial intermediation

693

48,9

44,8

23,9

62

59,6

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

50,1

42,8

32

65

62,7

N. Health and social work

696

44,9

38,5

21

65,2

55,2

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

48

46,1

25,3

66,4

58,8

EU27

reduce prices

increase quality

PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

page 218


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 48a. Strategies in increased competition and shrinking margins Question Q42_F-I. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

look for (other) foreign markets

increase working hours

reduce production

increase marketing activity

EU27

14683

25,7

28,4

11,3

61,4

EU25

13318

25,2

28,2

11,4

61,1

EU15

9239

25,3

28,8

12,1

60,7

NMS12

5890

27,4

26,1

7,5

65

NMS10

4525

24.7

24.7

7.7

63.8

Belgium

446

44,1

26

21,8

59,8

Czech Rep.

480

16,5

25,1

7,6

48,2

Denmark

472

27,4

26

15,3

51

Germany

901

18

36,9

6,4

65,3

Estonia

290

48,7

18

8,4

71,8

Greece

460

48,5

44,8

14,1

82,2

Spain

921

28

22,2

12,6

61,8

France

885

26,8

28,7

17,9

39,2

Ireland

553

40,3

35,5

17,5

76,7

Italy

875

22,3

22,5

8,1

57,3

Cyprus

296

32

29,5

18,1

54,7

Latvia

298

24,5

12,1

7

64,3

Lithuania

296

56,5

23,2

15

78,7

Luxembourg

313

37,3

25,5

16,9

41,5

Hungary

481

21,4

18,4

9,6

59,9

Malta

302

48,9

33,4

11,9

73,6

Netherlands

549

22,4

17,5

5,9

63,7

Austria

568

24,6

20,3

10,4

67,3

Poland

866

27,6

26,1

6,2

73

Portugal

484

30,5

28,5

21,1

55,4

Slovenia

299

37,2

41,5

10,7

81,9

Slovakia

471

27,4

30,4

6,5

66,3

Finland

469

28,3

28,1

9,5

74,9

Sweden

478

17,4

34,3

15,5

60,7

United Kingdom

865

26,4

33,1

13,4

71,5

Bulgaria

478

34,4

40,4

5,5

57,5

Romania

887

49,4

30

6,8

81,5

Iceland

288

31,3

26,8

24,8

80,1

Norway

454

23,7

25,3

14,1

71,2

COUNTRY

Annex, page 219


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 220

914

66,7

47

21,6

83,2


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 48b. Strategies in increased competition and shrinking margins Question Q42_F-I. If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise increase working hours

reduce production

28,4

11,3

increase marketing activity 61,4

14683

look for (other) foreign markets 25,7

1-9

13121

24

27,8

10,2

60,2

10-49

1225

31,7

25,8

10,7

68,8

50-249

201

38,4

27,4

11,7

74,6

250+

47

43,1

20,3

12,6

68

D. Manufacturing

1857

34,4

28,6

19,5

57,6

F. Construction

1577

17

27,8

13

53,8

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

30,7

25,4

10

68

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

22,6

30,3

16

61,6

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

30,9

29,2

9,5

54,2

J. Financial intermediation

693

17,1

32

7,6

59,5

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

25,7

31,7

8,9

62,7

N. Health and social work

696

11,1

28

3,1

58,5

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

16,4

23,3

10,6

58,6

Total N EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

Annex, page 221


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 49a. Annual marketing budget Question q43.Could you please indicate your approximate annual amount of marketing costs Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% No marketing cost

% less than 10.000 EUR

% 10.000 to 25.000 EUR

% 25.000 to 50.000 EUR

% 50.000 to 100.000 EUR

% 100.000 to 150K EUR

% 150K to 500K EUR

% more than 500K EUR

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

11,8

22,5

7,5

3,1

2,1

1

1,1

0,5

50,3

EU25

13318

11,7

22,5

7,6

3,1

2,2

1

1,2

0,5

50,1

EU15

9239

12,6

20,1

8,1

3,3

2,4

1,1

1,3

0,6

50,4

NMS12

5890

8,2

33,6

4,7

2

0,9

0,4

0,4

0

49,7

NMS10 Belgium

4525

6.6

35.8

5

2

0.8

0.4

0.4

0

48.8

446

5,3

8,5

3,1

0,2

0,2

0,1

0,2

0,5

81,8

Czech Rep.

480

9,6

40,1

4,1

0,9

0,1

0,4

0,1

0

44,6

Denmark

472

8,6

37,7

11

5,6

3,6

3,4

2,5

0,7

26,9

Germany

901

5,5

41,2

10,3

3,5

1,4

0,9

1

0,2

35,8

Estonia

290

8

28,1

4

4,9

1,3

0,1

3

0,1

50,5

Greece

460

13,3

18,7

17,8

4,1

6,4

0,3

1,9

0,1

37,5

Spain

921

2,7

6,7

2,8

1,9

0,9

0,7

0,4

0,9

83

France

885

18,9

5,7

3,9

1

1,1

1

0,7

0,2

67,6

Ireland

553

12,6

23,2

13,6

3,2

4,5

2,4

3,3

1

36,1

Italy

875

16

11,2

8,2

2,9

3,6

0,6

1,7

0,8

55

Cyprus

296

16

18,6

3,7

3,1

1,5

0

1,5

0

55,7

Latvia

298

8,4

17,9

3,7

2,6

1,2

0,1

0,1

0,3

65,7

Lithuania

296

3,9

32,3

5,7

6,2

0,9

0,3

0

0

50,7

Luxembourg

313

4,7

8,9

4,9

0,4

1,3

1

0,2

0,6

78

Hungary

481

11,8

39,1

5,7

1,3

0,8

0,1

0,1

0

41,1

Malta

302

4,7

23

10,7

4

2,5

0,5

1,4

0,7

52,6

Netherlands

549

9,1

23,4

11,7

4,3

3

1,7

1,4

1,1

44,3

Austria

568

3,4

25,5

14,3

6,7

2,5

1,8

1,5

1,1

43,2

Poland

866

2,4

33

5,1

2,4

1

0,6

0,7

0

54,8

Portugal

484

21,4

21,6

6,2

1,9

0,4

0,6

0,7

1,3

45,9

Slovenia

299

2,7

43,8

6,9

7,5

3,8

0,2

0,6

0,3

34,2

Slovakia

471

9,2

35,7

4,8

2,3

1,1

0,6

0,8

0,4

45,2

Finland

469

2,8

28,8

26,1

9,1

6,7

3,1

4,3

1,4

17,8

Sweden United Kingdom

478

12,7

40,4

16,2

4,7

2

2,4

1,6

1

19

865

18,5

27,1

9,5

5,8

3,7

2

2

0,7

30,7

Bulgaria

478

37,8

12

1,3

0,4

0,5

0,1

0,1

0

47,9

Romania

887

4,5

26,7

3,4

2,8

2

0,1

0

0

60,5

Iceland

288

12

23,3

11,2

5,5

7,6

1,5

5,4

0,9

32,7

Norway

454

8,4

43,7

15,4

8,2

1,9

2

1,7

0,5

18,2

Turkey

914

5,8

15,8

6,8

2,1

2,2

1

0,3

0

65,9

COUNTRY

page 222


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 49b. Annual marketing budget Question q43.Could you please indicate your approximate annual amount of marketing costs Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

EU27

Total N

% No marketing cost

% less than 10.000 EUR

% 10.000 to 25.000 EUR

% 25.000 to 50.000 EUR

% 50.000 to 100.000 EUR

% 100.000 to 150K EUR

% 150K to 500K EUR

% more than 500K EUR

% DK/NA

14683

11,8

22,5

7,5

3,1

2,1

1

1,1

0,5

50,3

PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

13121

12,8

23,7

7,5

3

2

0,7

0,9

0,4

48,9

10-49

1225

7,9

18,5

11,1

5,1

5

2,9

3

1,2

45,3

50-249

201

5

7,1

9,5

6,4

5,2

5,2

10,8

5,5

45,2

250+

47

4,4

3,5

1,6

2,9

6

6,3

4,5

19,8

50,9

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

1857

13,3

21,1

6,3

2,8

1,5

1,2

1,4

0,5

51,9

F. Construction

1577

15,4

25,7

7,9

2,1

1,3

0,7

1,2

0,4

45,3

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

8,8

20,9

7,9

4

3,6

1,3

1,8

0,7

51

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

9,6

29,7

6,2

1,7

1,8

1,1

1,1

0,3

48,4

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

14,9

20,9

6,9

1,9

2

0,4

0,4

0,1

52,4

J. Financial intermediation

693

14,2

28,2

5,6

3,9

1

0,5

1,1

0,6

44,9

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

11,8

19,4

8,5

4

2,3

1,3

0,9

0,6

51,1

N. Health and social work

696

16,8

27,2

4,8

1,7

0,1

0,2

0

0

49,3

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

9,7

22,3

9,7

1,2

0,6

0,3

0,2

0,3

55,6

Annex, page 223


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 50a. Turnover from innovation Question q51a. Could you please estimate the percent of turnover (annual sales) coming from new or significantly improved products or services in the last two years Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% 15

% 610

% 1120

% 2140

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% No new or improved products

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

3,8

6,3

8

6,2

2,5

1

1,6

36,6

34

EU25

13318

3,8

6,3

8

6,1

2,5

1

1,6

36,6

34,2

EU15

9239

4

6,2

8,1

5,6

2,4

0,8

1,6

37,1

34,2

NMS12

5890

2,4

6,7

7,7

9,1

3,2

1,8

1,7

34,4

33

NMS10

4525

2.6

6.8

7.4

8.9

3.1

1.9

1.7

33.7

33.8

Belgium

446

1,7

3,4

1,8

2,7

0

0,4

1

33,8

55,1

Czech Rep.

480

2,3

7,8

7,6

6,6

2,2

1

1

29,1

42,5

Denmark

472

3,6

5,1

5,5

5,1

0,8

0,5

0,3

46,2

32,9

Germany

901

4,9

7,8

9,9

6,4

2,7

0,8

1

33,5

32,9

Estonia

290

8,3

8,8

9,1

6,1

5,4

4,2

4,6

32,3

21,2

Greece

460

3,3

8,6

10,7

9

3,7

0,5

3

31,3

29,8

Spain

921

2,7

5

7

3,2

2,9

1,1

2,1

46,2

29,9

France

885

5

3,7

2,4

1,3

2,3

0,3

1

40,4

43,7

Ireland

553

6,2

7,9

8,6

5,9

5,7

2,4

1,6

27,7

34

Italy

875

4,1

5,9

8,2

6,1

1,9

1

3

45,6

24,4

Cyprus

296

1,9

2,5

2,7

2,9

1,4

0,7

1,7

43,9

42,2

Latvia

298

1,5

4,2

3,9

4,9

2

1,2

0,9

63,7

17,8

Lithuania

296

7,8

5,2

14,6

6,8

3,5

2,2

1,5

23

35,4

Luxembourg

313

0,9

0,2

5,1

2,7

1,2

2,4

0,7

37

49,8

Hungary

481

2,2

7,3

5,7

7,9

4,4

2,2

2,8

55,9

11,6

Malta

302

1,7

5,4

6,7

7,1

0,6

0,2

0,3

33,3

44,7

Netherlands

549

3

2,9

3

3,1

2,2

0,7

1,2

34,3

49,6

Austria

568

5,8

8,9

8,3

5,6

1,7

1,3

0,6

22,2

45,6

Poland

866

2,6

6,1

7,8

11,3

3,1

2,2

1,5

26,2

39,1

Portugal

484

2

4,7

4,9

9

3,6

1,1

1,9

39,9

32,9

Slovenia

299

4

6,3

11,3

8,6

3,8

6

3,9

22,3

33,9

Slovakia

471

3,2

8,1

8,6

8,9

4,3

1

0,9

35

29,9

Finland

469

10,1

12,4

10,8

5,2

2,1

1,1

1,6

28,9

27,8

Sweden

478

5,3

6,6

9,4

6,8

1,8

1,4

0,8

34,4

33,6

United Kingdom

865

3,8

7,9

12,6

8,8

2,6

0,9

1

26,6

35,9

Bulgaria

478

0,8

3,2

9,4

5,1

0,8

0,3

0,4

63

17

Romania

887

1,4

8

9,4

13

5,4

2

2,7

22,5

35,7

Iceland

288

7

7,2

15,5

6,5

1,1

1,8

1,9

37,2

21,8

Norway

454

4,9

5,3

6,6

6,7

1,6

2,2

4,7

42

26

COUNTRY

page 224


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

914

2,4

The Gallup Organization

6,9

9,4

13,2

5,1

1,6

1,8

29,1

30,4

Annex, page 225


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 50b. Turnover from innovation Question q51a. Could you please estimate the percent of turnover (annual sales) coming from new or significantly improved products or services in the last two years Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% 1-5

% 610

% 1120

% 2140

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% No new or improved products

% DK/NA

14683

3,8

6,3

8

6,2

2,5

1

1,6

36,6

34

1-9

13121

3,8

6,2

8,3

6,5

2,6

1

1,7

38

32

10-49

1225

5,4

9,6

8,5

6,8

2,7

0,9

1,4

29,9

34,8

50-249

201

8,6

10,6

10,8

5,9

2,2

1

1

26,6

33,2

250+

47

11,3

8,5

6,9

7

3,4

0,6

0,3

24,2

37,8

D. Manufacturing

1857

4,2

7,1

8,8

6,7

2,3

1,4

1,4

31,3

36,6

F. Construction

1577

2,9

5,3

6,4

5,9

3,2

1

0,9

42,2

32,2

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

3,8

6,9

9,9

7,1

2,4

1,2

1,7

31

36,1

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

5,1

6,6

5

2,4

0,9

0,5

0,4

40,3

38,8

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

3

4,3

6,3

5,3

3,6

0,3

2,1

45,6

29,5

J. Financial intermediation

693

3,6

6,3

6,8

8,5

2,5

0,8

0,5

38,8

32,1

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

3

6,7

7,5

6,5

3,3

1,1

2,2

39,1

30,6

N. Health and social work

696

1,6

3,5

11,1

2

1,2

0,4

0,6

41,2

38,2

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

8,5

4,8

6

8,1

1,2

0,8

4,3

35,7

30,6

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

page 226


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 51a. Main constraint for innovation activities Question Q52. What was the main constraint for your innovation activities in the last two years? Please consider constraints of innovation regarding products and services as well as production technology.

Total N

% Lack of ability to use new technologies,

% Too expensive human resources,

% Lack of skilled human resources,

% High interest rates

% Problems with access to finance, other than interest rates

% Hard to protect intellectual property

% Lack of market demand for innovation

% Did not plan to innovate

% DK/NA

Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

EU27

14683

3

8,5

8,4

6,3

9,9

2,8

8,4

37,5

15,2

EU25

13318

3

8,6

8,3

6,2

9,9

2,8

8,5

37,3

15,3

EU15

9239

2,9

8,9

8

6,5

9,3

3

8,8

37,2

15,5

NMS12

5890

3,3

6,6

10,5

5,6

13

1,9

6,6

38,9

13,7

NMS10 Belgium

4525

3.5

7

10.2

5.1

13.3

1.9

6.6

38.1

14.3

446

2

5

11,5

10,5

5,5

3,5

4,9

42,4

14,7

Czech Rep.

480

3,7

9,5

9

3,6

7,8

1

7,3

34,1

24

Denmark

472

1,8

4,2

8,8

2,1

2,2

1,4

6,8

52,6

20,2

Germany

901

2,3

12,5

7,5

4,3

10,1

4,2

11,4

37,2

10,5

Estonia

290

3,7

8,1

36,9

2,7

10,6

0,3

6,5

10,6

20,6

Greece

460

5,4

12,4

11,2

5,8

10,7

2,6

15,3

22,6

14,2

Spain

921

3,2

7,7

5,6

5,5

7

1,1

6,4

51,7

11,8

France

885

2,4

2,1

3

3,9

7,5

2,8

7,1

50,2

20,9

Ireland

553

6,1

15

13,1

13,2

12,1

2,2

11,2

11,2

15,9

COUNTRY

Italy

875

1,4

10,4

7,7

5,6

8,3

3,2

9,4

43,1

11

Cyprus

296

3,6

7,9

6,6

8

4,6

2,8

5,6

46,4

14,4

Latvia

298

3,7

7,3

21,3

6,7

4,4

1,4

4,4

44,7

6

Lithuania

296

3,6

9,8

38,3

2,4

9,8

3,6

5

13

14,4

Luxembourg

313

3,3

5,2

5,4

1,3

8,3

1,8

8,3

47,7

18,8

Hungary

481

4,9

6,9

1,8

6,4

16,2

2,8

5,2

51,8

4,1

Malta

302

2,1

9,2

5,2

4,8

10,6

2,1

11,4

25,3

29,4

Netherlands

549

4,6

2,6

6,2

3,1

7,4

2,9

5,5

38,7

29,1

Austria

568

2,2

16,4

9,7

3,7

8,8

3,6

6,6

34,7

14,2

Poland

866

2,9

5,6

12,6

5,4

16,4

2

7

36,1

12,2

Portugal

484

4

8,5

5,9

9,9

12,9

2,5

8,8

32

15,5

Slovenia

299

3,7

7,3

14,6

5,2

11

3,6

6,1

30,2

18,4

Slovakia

471

1,5

4,7

10,8

6,2

11,5

2

4,3

39

20

Finland

469

0,5

17,6

21,6

0,8

9,4

4,8

11

16,9

17,4

Sweden

478

1,8

10,7

8,6

1,3

7,8

2,9

7,5

33,2

26,2

UK

865

4,8

10

12,4

12

12,9

3

9,5

15,9

19,6

Bulgaria

478

0,5

1,2

6,8

4,5

9,3

0,8

6,9

63,6

6,5

Romania

887

2,8

6,1

16,1

11,4

12,7

2,3

6,2

30,4

12,1

Iceland

288

1,5

2,3

7,7

6,8

11,7

2

9

37,2

21,7

Norway

454

1,6

4,8

16,7

1

10,9

2

6,1

41,9

15

Turkey

914

9,7

5,9

14

20

11,4

1,6

9,3

21,4

6,5

Annex, page 227


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 51b. Main constraint for innovation activities Question Q52. What was the main constraint for your innovation activities in the last two years? Please consider constraints of innovation regarding products and services as well as production technology.

Total N

% Lack of ability to use new technologies,

% Too expensive human resources,

% Lack of skilled human resources,

% High interest rates

% Problems with access to finance, other than interest rates

% Hard to protect intellectual property

% Lack of market demand for innovation

% Did not plan to innovate

% DK/NA

Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

14683

3

8,5

8,4

6,3

9,9

2,8

8,4

37,5

15,2

1-9

13121

2,8

8,5

7,9

6

10,1

2,6

8,5

38,8

14,6

10-49

1225

3,4

10,1

13,9

6,6

10,9

2,8

8,6

28,3

15,6

50-249

201

5,1

9,5

16

2,6

8,9

3,3

10,9

27,1

16,6

250+

47

3,1

10,9

13,6

2,2

7,5

2,6

11,6

22,9

25,7

1857

3,7

8,6

8,9

5,3

12,4

4

8,8

32,9

15,3

F. Construction

1577

2,1

7,4

13,1

5,8

8,7

1

9,3

38,8

13,7

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

2,7

9,1

7,5

7

9,9

2,2

8,7

36,6

16,3

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

3,6

9,6

9

9,5

11

1,5

5,9

34,3

15,6

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

2,1

5,4

9

9

12,3

1,8

5,5

41,8

13

J. Financial intermediation

693

4,7

5,6

8,6

3,6

7

1,2

9,1

42,7

17,5

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

2,8

7,5

7,5

5,2

8,3

4,5

9,3

38,8

16,1

N. Health and social work

696

4

11,6

6,1

5,4

9,9

5,5

8,3

35,7

13,5

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

2,4

13

7,2

6,4

12,5

1,3

6,9

41

9,3

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

page 228


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 52a. Measures to save energy and resources Question Q54. Does the enterprise use an environmental management system or any other measures to save energy and resources? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% Yes, simple rules or devices to save energy

% Yes, complex energy saving systems

% No

% DK/NA

EU27

14683

29,4

4

63,2

3,4

EU25

13318

29,6

4

63

3,4

EU15

9239

30,2

4,3

61,9

3,6

NMS12

5890

25,7

2,8

69,1

2,4

NMS10

4525

26.2

2.7

68.8

2.3

Belgium

446

39,1

5,9

44,6

10,4

Czech Rep.

480

42,9

3,8

49,2

4,1

Denmark

472

22,8

5,2

69

2,9

Germany

901

24,4

4,1

70,5

1

Estonia

290

16,3

5

73

5,8

Greece

460

21,6

4,2

72,9

1,3

Spain

921

26,3

4,9

67,1

1,6

France

885

33

4,7

50,8

11,4

Ireland

553

40,5

2,5

55,9

1,2

Italy

875

20,6

4

73,8

1,6

Cyprus

296

16,4

4,5

68,8

10,3

Latvia

298

15,1

5,5

78,8

0,6

Lithuania

296

25,7

5,2

66,9

2,2

Luxembourg

313

39,4

9,7

45,9

5

Hungary

481

25,2

1,8

70,5

2,5

Malta

302

30

3,1

66

0,9

Netherlands

549

20,6

3,6

68,7

7,1

Austria

568

22,8

5,6

69

2,7

Poland

866

17,5

2,1

79,3

1,1

Portugal

484

34

4,8

55,8

5,4

Slovenia

299

40,3

2,8

56,8

0,1

Slovakia

471

14,6

3

80,9

1,6

Finland

469

36,9

1,5

52,2

9,3

Sweden

478

50,2

7,3

40,7

1,8

United Kingdom

865

42,7

3,2

52

2,1

Bulgaria

478

28,6

3

66,7

1,7

Romania

887

19

3,9

73,2

3,9

Iceland

288

17,9

1

78,8

2,3

Norway

454

33,8

4,8

59,1

2,3

COUNTRY

Annex, page 229


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 230

914

14,8

1,3

81,3

2,5


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 52b. Measures to save energy and resources Question Q54. Does the enterprise use an environmental management system or any other measures to save energy and resources? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Yes, simple rules or devices to save energy

% Yes, complex energy saving systems

% No

% DK/NA

14683

29,4

4

63,2

3,4

1-9

13121

29,2

3,7

65,2

1,9

10-49

1225

35

6,1

56,8

2,2

50-249

201

40

12,6

44,2

3,3

250+

47

45,9

18,9

29,8

5,5

D. Manufacturing

1857

31,7

5,7

58,9

3,8

F. Construction

1577

27,3

4,7

64,8

3,2

G. Wholesale and retail

3967

27,8

3,6

65,1

3,5

H. Hotels and restaurants

1092

39,3

2,9

52,8

5

I. Transport, storage and communication

817

34,2

5,6

56,6

3,6

J. Financial intermediation

693

24,9

1,8

69,5

3,8

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

3239

25,8

3,7

68

2,5

N. Health and social work

696

35,3

4,9

56,9

2,8

O. Other community, social and personal service

744

31,7

3,3

61,6

3,4

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR

Annex, page 231


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 53a. Geographic origin of labour force - own region Question q61a. What is the geographic origin of existing labour force at your firm/location?-your region Basis: those who are not self-employed Total N

0%

% 1-5

% 610

% 1120

% 2140

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% DK/NA

EU27

11784

3,3

0,2

0,5

2,5

2

4,8

5,3

80,4

1

EU25

10650

3,4

0,2

0,5

2,5

2

4,9

5,4

80,2

0,9

EU15

7277

3,4

0,2

0,6

3

2,2

5,2

5,9

78,5

1

NMS12

5143

2,9

0,2

0,2

0,3

1,1

3,1

2,9

88,6

0,8

NMS10

3919

2.9

0.2

0.1

0.3

1.2

3.1

2.9

88.8

0.5

Belgium

379

11,1

0

3,1

13,5

4,9

1,6

1,8

61,5

2,5

Czech Rep.

385

6,4

0

0

0,6

1,2

1,8

1,9

88,2

0

Denmark

412

1,6

0,2

0,3

0

2

4,1

4,2

85,3

2,1

Germany

662

2,6

0

0,7

1,3

1,4

4,4

6,1

82,6

0,9

Estonia

262

0,1

0

2,3

3,4

0,8

5

1,8

86,6

0

Greece

429

3,3

0,1

0

2,2

4,4

7

4,7

76,8

1,4

Spain

856

8

0,3

0,9

0,5

3

7

5,4

74,3

0,5

France

775

1,8

0

0

11,5

1,4

2,7

2,9

78,8

0,8

Ireland

187

3,6

0,4

0,6

2,8

3,9

7,3

5,9

74,2

1,4

Italy

816

1

0,2

0,5

0,7

2

6,5

9,8

78,8

0,5

Cyprus

239

7,7

1,1

0,7

0,8

2,7

3,4

6,4

74

3,1

Latvia

272

3,8

0

0,2

1

0,3

4,8

6,1

82,9

1,1

Lithuania

246

3,5

0

0,2

1,4

2

5

4,4

81,2

2,4

Luxembourg

273

41,3

1,9

3,1

3,9

3,6

17,5

3,3

21,4

4,2

Hungary

423

1,3

0

0

0

0,1

0,9

2,7

94,5

0,6

Malta

299

29,6

0,9

0,7

0,4

1,8

2,9

4,9

58,1

0,5

Netherlands

398

6

0

0,8

1,1

1,6

6,6

5,5

75,7

2,6

Austria

528

2,2

0,1

0,5

1,5

3,1

6,3

8,3

76,4

1,5

Poland

778

1,1

0,4

0

0

1,8

4,1

3,1

88,9

0,6

Portugal

418

12,5

0,1

2,1

0,2

0,9

2,8

3,9

74,1

3,5

Slovenia

261

3

0

0,7

2

0,1

6,4

4,4

83,3

0

Slovakia

397

0,6

0

0,7

1,3

0,5

5,9

4,3

86,3

0,4

Finland

421

2,7

0,3

0,6

2,7

1,2

6,5

8,5

76,9

0,5

Sweden

406

1,4

0,4

0

0,1

1,6

5,6

4

86,6

0,3

United Kingdom

430

1,2

0,2

0,3

1

2,5

5,6

4,4

83

1,6

Bulgaria

414

0

0

0,5

0,1

0,5

2,4

3,3

93,1

0

Romania

839

4,1

0

0,5

0,4

0,9

3,9

2,3

83,9

4,1

Iceland

262

1,8

0

0,6

0,7

4,2

5,3

13,1

73,6

0,8

Norway

378

1,4

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,9

6,4

9,2

81,5

0

Turkey

793

7,4

0,5

0,4

1,8

6

6,9

2,4

73,7

0,9

COUNTRY

page 232


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 53b. Geographic origin of labour force - own region Question q61a. What is the geographic origin of existing labour force at your firm/location?-your region Basis: those who are not self-employed Total N

0%

% 15

% 610

% 1120

11784

3,3

0,2

0,5

2,5

% 2140 2

10277

3,3

0,1

0,5

0,8

10-49

1137

3,3

0,4

1,3

50-249

194

2,5

1,2

250+

47

5,1

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

1553

F. Construction G. Wholesale and retail

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% DK/NA

4,8

5,3

80,4

1

1,7

4,5

4,9

83,7

0,4

0,9

2,5

7,8

9,3

73,4

1

1

1,9

2,7

8

11

68,9

2,7

0,2

0,5

4

4,6

10,4

13,9

56,7

4,6

3,2

0,1

0,5

1,9

1,9

3,6

4,8

83,4

0,7

1318

2,1

0,2

0,5

2,5

2,7

6,1

6,3

79

0,6

3350

2,7

0

0,3

2

1,2

3,6

5,3

84,1

0,8

H. Hotels and restaurants

891

3,4

0,9

1,7

6,8

3,7

6,2

6,5

69,6

1,1

I. Transport, storage and communication

711

2,6

0

1,1

1,6

1,5

4,7

5,2

81,8

1,5

J. Financial intermediation

527

3,5

0

0

1,2

0,4

4,9

5

84,7

0,3

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

2362

5,6

0,1

0,6

2,6

1,9

4,9

3,7

79

1,6

N. Health and social work

502

1,7

0

0

0,5

3,5

9,4

6,2

77,8

0,9

O. Other community, social and personal service

570

3,3

0,5

0

3,7

2,6

6

8,7

74,1

1,1

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

Annex, page 233


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 54a. Geographic origin of labour force - own country, other region Question q61b. What is the geographic origin of existing labour force at your firm/location?-[COUNTRY], but not from your region Basis: those who are not self-employed % 610

% 1120

% 6180

% 81100

% DK/NA

1,3

2,9

4,6

3,4

1,3

2,9

4,7

3,4

2,7

0,8

3

1,2

2,7

0,8

3

1,2

1,3

3,1

5,3

3,7

2,6

0,8

3,1

1,3

85,9

1,2

2

1,5

2,1

2,8

0,6

3

0,9

3919

86.2

1.4

1.8

1.4

2.1

3

0.6

3

0.6

Belgium

379

61

0,7

0,4

12,9

7,6

1,6

0,2

13,2

2,4

Czech Rep.

385

84

2,8

2,2

0,7

1

2,6

0,3

6,4

0

Denmark

412

85,1

1,1

1,6

2,7

3,1

2,4

0,3

1,8

2,1

Germany

662

83,6

1,1

2,3

2,5

3,7

2,4

0,8

2,6

0,9

Estonia

262

78,6

5,2

1,1

2,7

3,5

2,9

3,7

2,5

0

Greece

429

85,3

0,2

1,8

2,9

0,2

1

4,7

2,5

1,4

Spain

856

76,6

1,4

3,4

2,8

4,6

2,9

1,2

6,6

0,5

France

775

77,4

1

1,1

13,9

1,6

2,2

0,8

1,2

0,8

Ireland

187

75,2

3,8

5,1

4,4

4,9

3,3

0,7

0,4

2,2

Italy

816

78,8

1,4

5,4

4,9

4,6

3,4

0,2

1,1

0,3

Cyprus

239

81,7

0,1

2,5

1,8

2,9

1,4

0

6,6

3,1

Latvia

272

66

3,7

7

2

5,9

2,6

0,4

3

9,4

Lithuania

246

74

2,6

0,8

4,8

2,7

4,3

0,7

4,9

5,1

Luxembourg

273

55

3,2

5

5,8

8

9,5

2,2

10,6

0,8

Hungary

423

94,1

0,9

0,1

1,6

1,2

0,8

0

1,3

0

Malta

299

61,8

0,2

1,3

0,4

3

2,8

2,7

27,4

0,4

Netherlands

398

75,6

1,3

2

3,7

3,6

5,2

0,7

5,3

2,7

Austria

528

73,3

1,6

2,9

4,2

2,3

2,2

0,4

1,2

11,9

Poland

778

86,8

0,6

1,8

1,4

2,5

4,2

0,7

1,3

0,8

Portugal

418

74

0,9

3,8

2,5

1,6

1,3

0,6

11,8

3,5

Slovenia

261

78,2

1,7

5,1

2,5

7

1,8

1,9

1,6

0,1

Slovakia

397

83

1,9

3,5

3,1

2,9

3

0,8

1,3

0,4

Finland

421

69,7

3,1

3,3

5,3

3,8

4,6

2,7

4,8

2,9

Sweden

406

85,2

1,6

2,8

2,1

3,6

3,5

0,1

0,8

0,4

United Kingdom

430

82,5

2

3,1

2,3

4

2

1,3

0,7

2,2

Bulgaria

414

87,9

0,1

5,1

2,4

2,3

1,5

0,1

0,6

0

Romania

839

81,9

0,3

2,2

1,2

2,4

2,6

0,8

4,5

4,1

Iceland

262

92,2

1,2

0,8

1,4

1,9

0,8

0,8

0,1

0,8

Norway

378

78,5

1,8

5,4

5,9

4,1

3

0,6

0,8

0

Turkey

793

74,1

0,5

2,3

3

5,1

5

1,6

6,8

1,6

Total N

0%

EU27

11784

80,1

EU25

10650

80

EU15

7277

78,8

NMS12

5143

NMS10

% 1-5

% 2140

% 4160

COUNTRY

page 234


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 54b. Geographic origin of labour force - own country, other region Question q61b. What is the geographic origin of existing labour force at your firm/location?-[COUNTRY], but not from your region Basis: those who are not self-employed

EU27

Total N

0%

% 15

% 610

% 1120

11784

80,1

1,3

2,9

4,6

% 2140 3,4

10277

83,9

0,8

2,5

2,6

3,1

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% DK/NA

2,7

0,8

3

1,2

2,5

0,8

2,9

0,8

PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9 10-49

1137

71,2

4,1

5,1

5,6

5,2

3,7

0,7

3,2

1,1

50-249

194

54,7

11

9,4

7,4

5,5

4,8

1

2,3

3,9

250+

47

41,9

10,8

9,7

11,9

7

5,4

3

6,2

4,1

1553

82,2

1,4

3

3,9

2,5

1,8

1

3

1

F. Construction

1318

80,7

1

3,2

5

4,4

2

0,7

2

0,9

G. Wholesale and retail

3350

83,4

1,6

2,5

4,2

2,2

2,1

0,6

2,6

0,8

H. Hotels and restaurants

891

72,4

1,5

3,2

7,3

6,4

2,5

1,4

3,3

1,8

I. Transport, storage and communication

711

82,2

1,4

1,7

3,4

3,2

2,9

0,2

2,4

2,5

J. Financial intermediation

527

80,5

0,2

3,3

6,4

3,9

1,7

0,3

3,4

0,4

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

2362

77,6

1

2,6

4,3

3,7

3,5

0,7

5

1,6

N. Health and social work

502

76,1

1,8

3,4

3,4

4,3

6,5

2,3

1,2

1

O. Other community, social and personal service

570

76,8

1,3

5,6

4,7

3,9

4,2

0,5

1,9

1

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

Annex, page 235


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 55a. Geographic origin of labour force - other EU countries Question q61c.What is the geographic origin of existing labour force at your firm/location?-other EU countries Basis: those who are not self-employed Total N

0%

% 1-5

% 610

% 1120

% 2140

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% DK/NA

EU27

11784

91,4

1,1

1,2

1,2

2,8

0,7

0,2

0,2

1,2

EU25

10650

91,2

1,1

1,2

1,2

2,9

0,7

0,2

0,2

1,2

EU15

7277

89,9

1,3

1,4

1,4

3,4

0,9

0,3

0,3

1,2

NMS12

5143

97,9

0,3

0,2

0,2

0,2

0,1

0

0,1

1,1

NMS10

3919

98.1

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0

0.1

0.8

Belgium

379

74,2

1

0,7

7

10,9

0,2

0,9

0,8

4,2

Czech Rep.

385

99

0,3

0,1

0,1

0,5

0

0

0

0

Denmark

412

93,3

0,8

0,8

0,9

1,3

0,3

0

0,4

2,1

Germany

662

92

1,3

1,7

1

2

0,9

0

0,3

0,9

Estonia

262

99,5

0,4

0

0

0,1

0

0

0

0

Greece

429

97

0,3

0,6

0,1

1,4

0

0,5

0

0,1

Spain

856

90,7

1,4

1,9

1,1

2,7

0,9

0

0,6

0,5

France

775

85,7

0,5

0,2

0,7

11,5

0

0,6

0

0,8

Ireland

187

72,1

2,8

7,6

3,9

5,9

2,7

3,4

0,3

1,3

Italy

816

93,5

1,2

1,8

1,7

0,6

0,8

0,2

0

0,3

Cyprus

239

87,5

0,1

1,7

1,2

2,9

1,7

0,7

1,1

3,1

Latvia

272

85,5

0,1

1,2

0

0

0

0

0

13,2

Lithuania

246

93,5

0,2

0,1

0

0

1,2

0

0

5

Luxembourg

273

33,5

2,6

6,1

3,7

5,5

19,4

6,8

20,8

1,5

Hungary

423

99,9

0,1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Malta

299

88,6

5,6

1,3

1

1,2

1,8

0,5

0

0

Netherlands

398

93,2

0,7

1

0,4

1,4

0,6

0

0

2,7

Austria

528

72,4

2,8

3

3,6

2,7

1,8

0,9

0,5

12,2

Poland

778

98,4

0,4

0

0,2

0

0

0

0

1

Portugal

418

90,6

1,6

1,5

0,2

1,4

0

1,2

0

3,5

Slovenia

261

95,9

0,3

1,8

0,1

0

0

0

1,9

0,1

Slovakia

397

95

0,8

1,1

0,6

0,3

1,7

0

0

0,4

Finland

421

92,2

0,6

1,6

1,3

1

0

0

0

3,1

Sweden

406

94,8

1,1

0,7

0,3

1

1,4

0

0,4

0,3

United Kingdom

430

88,6

2,4

1,3

1,8

1,5

2,1

0,2

0,5

1,6

Bulgaria

414

99,9

0

0,1

0

0

0

0

0

0

Romania

839

94,9

0

0,6

0,2

0

0,2

0

0

4,1

Iceland

262

72,4

5,2

4,6

7,4

5,3

2,6

1,3

0,7

0,7

Norway

378

90,9

0,8

3

0,3

2,4

1,4

0

0,7

0,5

Turkey

793

90,2

0,2

1,9

3

1,1

1,3

0

0,8

1,6

COUNTRY

page 236


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 55b. Geographic origin of labour force - other EU countries Question q61c.What is the geographic origin of existing labour force at your firm/location?-other EU countries Basis: those who are not self-employed Total N

0%

% 15

% 610

% 1120

11784

91,4

1,1

1,2

1,2

% 2140 2,8

10277

94,7

0,6

0,9

0,7

10-49

1137

85,9

4,2

3,3

50-249

194

74,7

9,5

250+

47

67,7

1553

F. Construction

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% DK/NA

0,7

0,2

0,2

1,2

1,2

0,8

0,2

0,2

0,7

2,2

1,9

0,6

0,3

0,4

1,2

4,3

3,2

2,5

1,6

0,8

0,3

3,1

11,7

7,9

3,5

3,7

0,2

1,2

0,4

3,7

92,4

2

0,8

1

2

0,3

0,2

0,2

1,2

1318

89,5

0,8

1,9

2,3

3,7

0,8

0,2

0,1

0,7

G. Wholesale and retail

3350

93,1

0,7

1,1

1

2,1

0,8

0,2

0,2

0,8

H. Hotels and restaurants

891

82,5

1,4

3

2,5

6,3

1,3

0,3

0,7

2

I. Transport, storage and communication

711

90,3

0,8

1,2

1,5

1,7

1,6

0

0,2

2,6

J. Financial intermediation

527

97

0,5

0,5

0,1

1,3

0,1

0

0

0,4

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

2362

91,2

1,3

0,5

0,9

3,2

0,5

0,4

0,3

1,6

N. Health and social work

502

93,9

1,5

1

0,6

1,7

0,1

0

0,2

0,9

O. Other community, social and personal service

570

91,6

0,8

1

0,6

3,5

1

0,1

0,3

1,1

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

Annex, page 237


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 56a. Geographic origin of labour force - non-EU countries Question q61d.What is the geographic origin of existing labour force at your firm/location?-non-EU countries Basis: those who are not self-employed Total N

0%

% 1-5

% 610

% 1120

% 1121

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% DK/NA

EU27

11784

90,9

1

1,5

1

3,2

0,7

0,2

0,2

1,2

EU25

10650

90,7

1

1,6

1

3,3

0,7

0,2

0,2

1,2

EU15

7277

89,3

1,2

1,9

1,2

3,9

0,9

0,2

0,2

1,3

NMS12

5143

97,7

0,2

0,1

0,3

0,4

0

0,1

0

1

NMS10

3919

97.9

0.2

0.1

0.3

0.4

0.1

0.1

0

0.8

Belgium

379

77,1

0,5

0,1

4,5

13,2

0

0

0,5

4

Czech Rep.

385

98,1

0,1

0,1

0,9

0,8

0

0

0

0

Denmark

412

93,8

1

0,7

0,5

1,3

0,4

0,3

0

2,1

Germany

662

95

0,7

1,1

0,7

0,8

0,7

0,2

0

0,9

Estonia

262

100

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Greece

429

85,2

3

1,7

0,7

3,3

3,9

2,1

0

0,1

Spain

856

86,3

1,6

3,5

1,8

3,8

1,9

0,4

0,2

0,5

France

775

86,4

0,2

0,1

0,2

12,2

0,1

0

0

0,8

Ireland

187

87,9

3,2

0,4

1,7

3,3

1,2

0,2

0,8

1,3

Italy

816

89

2,2

3,4

1,9

2,1

0,9

0

0,3

0,3

Cyprus

239

89

0,2

0,2

3,6

1,1

1,3

1,5

0

3,1

Latvia

272

84,6

0,1

1,8

0

0

0

0

1,1

12,5

Lithuania

246

94,1

0

0,8

0,1

0

0

0,1

0

5

Luxembourg

273

87,6

0,4

4,8

0

2,9

0,7

0,8

0,6

2,2

Hungary

423

99,7

0,1

0

0

0,1

0,1

0

0

0

Malta

299

90,3

2,3

2

1,3

2,1

1,8

0

0,1

0

Netherlands

398

93,4

0,1

0,4

0,8

0,8

0,5

0,2

1,4

2,4

Austria

528

77

1

1,9

0,7

2,5

2,4

0,6

0,2

13,6

Poland

778

98,2

0,3

0

0

0,4

0

0,2

0

1

Portugal

418

92,3

0,3

2

0,1

0,5

0

0,1

1,2

3,5

Slovenia

261

96,1

1,8

0,5

0,8

0,3

0,2

0,1

0,2

0,1

Slovakia

397

97,4

0

0,7

1,2

0,3

0

0

0

0,4

Finland

421

92,5

1,1

1,2

0,5

0,6

0,3

0,3

0

3,6

Sweden

406

96,1

0,9

0,2

0,5

1

0,3

0

0,7

0,4

United Kingdom

430

92,5

1

1,4

0,9

1,4

0,8

0,1

0,2

1,7

Bulgaria

414

100

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Romania

839

94,8

0,3

0,1

0,2

0,5

0

0

0

4,1

Iceland

262

88

2,4

2,1

2,8

0,5

2

0,3

1,2

0,8

Norway

378

95,4

2,1

0,9

0,8

0,3

0

0

0

0,5

Turkey

793

91,4

0,2

2

1,5

2

0,9

0

0,4

1,6

COUNTRY

page 238


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 56b. Geographic origin of labour force - non-EU countries Question q61d.What is the geographic origin of existing labour force at your firm/location?-non-EU countries Basis: those who are not self-employed Total N 11784

90,9

% 15 1

% 610 1,5

% 1120 1

% 1121 3,2

% 4160 0,7

% 81100 0,2

% DK/NA 1,2

10277

93,8

10-49

1137

86,5

0,7

1,4

3

3,7

0,9

1,6

0,7

1,4

1,9

1,6

0,1

0,1

0,7

0,2

0,5

1,1

50-249

194

81,4

6,6

3

2,5

1,7

0,3

0,5

0

3,9

250+

47

75,7

10,2

4,6

2,2

2,3

1,1

0

0,1

3,7

1553

90,4

2

1,1

1,4

3,2

0,7

0,1

0

1,2

F. Construction G. Wholesale and retail

1318

89,2

1,2

2,1

1,5

3,7

1

0,4

0,1

0,7

3350

93,6

0,6

1,3

0,4

2,8

0,3

0,1

0,1

0,8

H. Hotels and restaurants

891

80

2,2

2,7

3,3

7,1

1,4

0,6

0,5

2,2

I. Transport, storage and communication

711

92,6

0,8

0,5

0,4

1,8

0,4

0,1

0,8

2,6

J. Financial intermediation

527

96,6

0,4

0,5

0

2

0,2

0

0,1

0,3

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

2362

92,8

0,3

0,7

0,9

2,7

0,8

0,2

0,1

1,6

N. Health and social work

502

92,4

1,4

1,1

1

2

0,8

0

0,2

1

O. Other community, social and personal service

570

81,5

1,2

6,7

0,9

5,1

2,4

0,1

0,9

1,1

EU27

0%

% 6180 0,2

PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

Annex, page 239


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 57a. Recruitment strategies Question Q62. Thinking of the employees who are difficult to recruit for your company, what is your main approach to find them? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% through public labour market institutions,

% through private labour market institutions,

% through newspaper,

% through private contacts,

% through spontaneous applications

% no problem with recruiting

% DK/NA

EU27

13409

11

6,5

12,7

33,2

8,8

24,1

3,8

EU25

12132

11,1

6,5

12,5

33

8,8

24,2

3,8

EU15

8268

11

7,1

12,8

32,2

9,8

23,3

3,9

NMS12

5890

11

3,9

12,3

37,1

4,6

27,7

3,3

NMS10

4525

11.8

3.8

11.2

37

4.2

28.6

3.5

Belgium

446

13,3

5,3

11,3

11,7

16,4

31

11,1

Czech Rep.

480

13,6

4,7

7,5

33,4

4,3

28,6

7,9

Denmark

472

7,7

6,9

16,1

27,8

7,8

27,4

6,4

Germany

901

9,8

6,2

13,1

37,6

6,7

24,6

2

Estonia

290

3,5

6

17

53,9

2

10,8

6,7

Greece

460

6,9

10,1

17,1

52,3

4,2

6,2

3,2

Spain

921

16,9

9

10,7

23,5

7,7

30,7

1,6

France

885

19,2

6,5

10,1

18,8

12

25,4

8,1

Ireland

187

10,2

8,8

35,6

27,8

11,4

3,5

2,7

Italy

875

4,5

6,6

7,5

45,5

11,7

23,1

1,1

Cyprus

296

9,8

6,7

12,9

22,9

1

39,7

6,9

Latvia

298

6,5

3,7

13,5

50,6

2,8

21,8

1,1

Lithuania

296

14,4

13,2

16,2

40,1

1,6

10,9

3,6

Luxembourg

313

16,3

6,6

15,9

20

17,7

19,5

3,9

Hungary

481

8,9

3,4

9,1

36,6

2,3

38,9

0,8

Malta

302

21,1

3,3

27,4

28,1

6,3

7,6

6,3

Netherlands

549

6,7

10,1

9,9

26

6,9

27

13,4

Austria

568

19

5,1

19,4

32,4

4,8

15,7

3,6

Poland

866

11,6

2,7

13,4

37,9

5,2

27,2

2,2

Portugal

484

12,6

1,5

14,6

16,3

16,3

31,7

6,9

Slovenia

299

22,6

4,6

9,7

41,6

4,4

14,4

2,6

Slovakia

471

10,8

5,4

15,1

45,9

3,9

17,3

1,6

Finland

469

19,6

6,2

13,4

39,9

5,7

12,4

2,8

Sweden

478

8,7

4

6,1

50,5

6,4

20,8

3,4

United Kingdom

430

6,2

9,9

28,7

31,1

10,4

9,6

4,2

Bulgaria

478

5,3

1,6

8

51,9

4,1

28,5

0,6

Romania

887

7,4

6,4

25,6

29,2

9

19,3

3,1

Iceland

288

7,7

7,1

14

44,4

3

15,5

8,3

Norway

378

12,9

4,5

18,1

38,4

3,6

20,3

2,2

COUNTRY

page 240


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Turkey

914

2,9

The Gallup Organization

6,3

23,9

41

8,2

15,5

Annex, page 241

2,3


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 57b. Recruitment strategies Question Q62. Thinking of the employees who are difficult to recruit for your company, what is your main approach to find them? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

13409

% through public labour market institutions, 11

% through private labour market institutions, 6,5

11954

10,7

10-49

1137

50-249 250+

% through newspaper,

% through private contacts,

% through spontaneous applications

% no problem with recruiting

% DK/NA

12,7

33,2

8,8

24,1

3,8

5,9

11,9

34,9

8,4

25,7

2,5

13,1

11,9

20,2

29,1

12,1

11,8

1,7

194

15,3

18,2

22

17,5

11,5

11,1

4,5

47

16,9

15,5

30,8

11,7

8,2

12,9

4

1715

14,3

8

11,9

29,5

9,3

22,5

4,4

F. Construction

1482

10,5

6,1

11,5

38,4

10,8

19,9

2,7

G. Wholesale and retail

3717

10,1

6,3

11,8

35,8

7,9

24,3

3,8

H. Hotels and restaurants

961

14,5

4,8

12,5

30,4

11,5

21,8

4,4

I. Transport, storage and communication

767

12,8

4,7

12

34,8

10,7

23,1

1,9

J. Financial intermediation

658

9,2

8,5

16,3

31

4,9

26,3

3,8

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

2804

9,8

8

13

30,2

8,5

26,1

4,3

N. Health and social work

608

11,6

5

12,2

35

6

27,8

2,4

O. Other community, social and personal service

695

7,6

1,5

19,1

30,8

9,5

27,5

4

Total N EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

page 242


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 58a. Main recruiting problem Question Q63. What is your main recruiting problem? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs)

Total N

% Scarcity of skilled labour force,

% Scarcity of nonskilled labour force,

% Low image of profession/ sector/ type of enterprise,

% Wage levels too expensive

% Unpleasant work or working conditions

% No problem with recruiting

% DK/NA

EU27

13409

27,3

5

2,9

10,8

2,3

46,5

5,3

EU25

12132

27,1

5

2,9

10,9

2,3

46,5

5,3

EU15

8268

26,7

5

3,1

10,8

2,4

46,6

5,4

NMS12

5890

30,1

4,8

1,8

11

1,9

45,8

4,6

COUNTRY

NMS10

4525

29.2

4.9

1.8

11.6

1.9

45.7

4.9

Belgium

446

15,9

6

4

9,5

5,3

45,8

13,5

Czech Rep.

480

26

4

3

11,5

2,1

44,1

9,2

Denmark

472

21,1

7,8

1,8

6,2

1,4

55,8

5,9

Germany

901

28,2

1,2

4,3

15,7

3,9

42,7

4

Estonia

290

50,8

2,5

2,2

10,8

5,2

22,1

6,4

Greece

460

33,2

9,9

1,5

6,4

2,2

38,5

8,2

Spain

921

28,9

6

2,9

7,4

2,4

50,7

1,6

France

885

31,7

2,2

1,7

6,4

1,6

47,2

9,2

Ireland

187

38,1

6,6

9,5

12,7

1,1

30,1

1,9

Italy

875

21,6

7,7

2,2

13,8

1,4

50,4

2,9

Cyprus

296

19,2

6,4

5

4,8

2,4

51,1

11,3

Latvia

298

40,7

5,1

0,5

5,2

0,6

45,9

2

Lithuania

296

50,5

5,6

0

14,7

4,4

17,9

6,9

Luxembourg

313

25,4

6

1,5

7,9

4,6

51,2

3,5

Hungary

481

13,2

1,8

0,3

21,8

2

60

1

Malta

302

35,6

10,8

6

7,4

3,3

27,3

9,6

Netherlands

549

17,8

4,4

3,7

8,8

1,4

48,2

15,7

Austria

568

37,3

2,4

4,9

9,2

4,4

38,1

3,8

Poland

866

35,5

6,7

1,5

8,3

1,3

42,9

3,8

Portugal

484

22,5

10,5

0,9

4,5

3,6

51,2

6,8

Slovenia

299

35,9

5,5

2

8,1

5

38,6

4,8

Slovakia

471

38,4

3,4

1,9

5,4

2,9

43,1

5

Finland

469

44,8

4,2

5

13,2

2,1

27,9

2,9

Sweden

478

26,1

3,4

7,1

9,5

0,4

46,4

7,1

United Kingdom

430

27,1

6,3

4,4

11,6

2,2

42,3

6,1

Bulgaria

478

25,9

3,1

1,3

3,1

2,2

63,1

1,2

Romania

887

42,4

5,3

2,3

10,1

1,2

34,9

3,9

Iceland

288

29,5

6,3

0,5

7,2

1,6

38,2

16,6

Norway

378

45

1,3

4,8

6

2,4

37,5

3

Annex, page 243


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Turkey

page 244

914

31,8

13,7

8,4

12

8,3

23,1

2,6


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 58b. Main recruiting problem Question Q63. What is your main recruiting problem? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

Total N

% Scarcity of skilled labour force,

% Scarcity of nonskilled labour force,

13409

27,3

5

% Low image of profession / sector/ type of enterprise, 2,9

1-9

11954

26,6

4,7

10-49

1137

39,6

50-249

194

250+

47

1715

F. Construction

% Wage levels too expensive

% Unpleasan t work or working conditions

% No problem with recruiting

% DK/ NA

10,8

2,3

46,5

5,3

2,7

11,1

2,2

48,7

4

5,8

4,9

9,8

3,2

34,5

2,2

43,4

4,8

4,3

9,7

4,6

30,4

2,8

39,4

6,7

4,7

7,2

5,5

31,8

4,7

35,2

5

2,5

10

1,8

41,5

4

1482

39,2

6,7

2

7,5

2,4

38,2

4

G. Wholesale and retail

3717

26,1

5,1

2,8

11,3

2

46,7

6,1

H. Hotels and restaurants

961

23,1

8,3

5,5

7,8

6,7

42,4

6,2

I. Transport, storage and communication

767

27,8

5

3,1

11,9

2,1

46,8

3,3

J. Financial intermediation

658

19,3

4,4

5,5

11,6

2,1

52

5,1

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

2804

24,3

3,9

1,2

12

1,8

51,2

5,6

N. Health and social work

608

20,1

3,1

6,8

9,7

1,7

55,1

3,6

O. Other community, social and personal service

695

20,8

2,2

2,7

15,9

1,8

49

7,6

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

Annex, page 245


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 59a. Unfilled job vacancies in 2006 Question q65. How many job vacancies did you have in your enterprise on average in 2006 that you could not fill in? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) Total N

%0

%1

%2

% 3-5

% 6-10

% 1120

% 21+

% DK/NA

EU27

13409

74,3

8,7

5,5

3,4

0,6

0,2

0,1

7,1

EU25

12132

74,8

8,8

5,3

3,2

0,5

0,2

0,1

7

EU15

8268

76,5

8,7

4,5

2,8

0,4

0,2

0,1

6,9

NMS12

5890

65,1

8,7

9,9

6,1

1,4

0,3

0,3

8,4

NMS10

4525

66.4

9

9.5

5.4

1.4

0.2

0.3

7.8

Belgium

446

64,1

5,2

3,9

0,6

0,1

1,9

0

24,1

Czech Rep.

480

75,4

7,3

6,2

2,8

1,6

0

0

6,6

Denmark

472

72,9

9,7

6,8

3,8

0,4

0,3

0

6,1

Germany

901

75,3

12,5

5,3

2,2

0,5

0,1

0

4

Estonia

290

53,6

9,3

18,2

11

3,9

0,6

0,1

3,3

Greece

460

62,8

11,9

8,4

13,8

0,1

0

0

2,9

Spain

921

74,8

8,8

5,5

2,9

0,3

0,1

0

7,5

France

885

73,4

8,1

4,4

1

0,4

0,3

0

12,4

Ireland

187

66,6

8,5

11,1

2,5

1,7

0,2

0,2

9,3

Italy

875

84,9

6,4

2,1

2,5

0,3

0

0

3,7

Cyprus

296

67,2

10,5

5,2

2,6

1

0

0

13,4

Latvia

298

56,1

7,2

10,3

12,2

2,7

0,5

0,2

10,8

Lithuania

296

45,4

8,2

14,2

11,1

5,1

2,6

0,5

12,9

Luxembourg

313

72,1

6

5,3

1,2

0,9

0,1

0

14,3

Hungary

481

72

4,3

5,3

1,5

0,9

0

0,4

15,6

Malta

302

54,2

12,8

11

4,5

0,9

1,1

0

15,5

Netherlands

549

64,9

6,3

4

3,2

0,1

0,9

1,2

19,5

Austria

568

71,9

11,5

7,5

4,2

0,8

0,1

0,2

3,8

Poland

866

60,8

11,5

13,1

7,9

1,1

0,1

0,4

5

Portugal

484

80,3

6

4,8

3,1

0,2

0,1

0

5,4

Slovenia

299

64,8

17,4

10

2,3

1,4

0,2

0,1

3,8

Slovakia

471

60,9

9,2

8,9

10,6

2,4

2

0,6

5,5

Finland

469

65,8

15,9

9,3

5,1

0,3

0,1

0

3,6

Sweden

478

80,5

8,7

5,5

3,2

0

0

0

2,1

United Kingdom

430

77,9

8,8

4,5

4

0,5

0,2

0,4

3,7

Bulgaria

478

74,3

4,7

4,2

3

0,7

0,1

0,1

12,9

Romania

887

45,6

8,6

16,9

14,8

2,1

1,1

0,4

10,5

Iceland

288

68,3

11,8

8,5

5,6

1,5

0,8

0

3,6

Norway

378

71

17,8

6,4

3,5

0,4

0,2

0

0,6

Turkey

914

51,1

7,6

13

7,9

1

0,9

2,1

16,5

COUNTRY

page 246


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 59b. Unfilled job vacancies in 2006 Question q65. How many job vacancies did you have in your enterprise on average in 2006 that you could not fill in? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise Total N

%0

%1

%2

% 3-5

% 6-10

% 11-20

% 21+

% DK/NA

13409

74,3

8,7

5,5

3,4

0,6

0,2

0,1

7,1

11954

77,8

8,8

5,1

2,8

0,3

0,1

0,1

4,8

10-49

1137

63,4

9,3

10,5

8,7

2,1

0,6

0,2

5,3

50-249

194

56,6

4,6

8,5

13,7

4,8

2,4

1,2

8,2

250+

47

46,1

1,8

5

6,8

10

6,6

7,2

16,4

1715

71,7

7,9

6,7

3,8

0,8

0,5

0,1

8,4

F. Construction

1482

67,2

10,5

8,5

5,6

0,9

0,2

0,2

6,9

G. Wholesale and retail

3717

76,6

8,8

4,5

3

0,4

0,1

0,1

6,6

H. Hotels and restaurants

961

71,8

6,9

7,2

4,1

0,3

0,1

0

9,6

I. Transport, storage and communication

767

71,5

10,7

7,8

3,2

0,6

0,1

0

6,1

J. Financial intermediation

658

75,2

9,8

4,5

1,4

1,8

0,1

0,3

7

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

2804

76,3

8,6

4,7

2,1

0,5

0,5

0,2

7,2

N. Health and social work

608

84,1

5,9

3,3

2,9

0

0

0

3,7

O. Other community, social and personal service

695

72,3

9,5

3,2

6,2

0,1

0

0,3

8,3

EU27 PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

Annex, page 247


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 60a. Educational attainment of employees - postgraduate degree Question q64a. What is the educational attainment level of your employees? What percentage of your staff does have any of the following as their highest level of education -a postgraduate exam such as a doctorate? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) Total N

%0

% 1-5

% 610

% 1120

% 2140

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% DK/NA

COUNTRY

page 248

EU27

13409

86,1

2,3

1,6

2,2

1,7

1,7

0,3

2

2

EU25

12132

86,1

2,3

1,6

2,2

1,7

1,7

0,3

2

2,1

EU15

8268

85,9

2,4

1,7

2,2

1,6

1,6

0,4

2

2,3

NMS12

5890

87

2,1

1,4

2,2

2,3

2,1

0,3

1,9

0,9

NMS10

4525

87.1

2.1

1.1

2.1

2.4

2.2

0.2

1.9

0.9

Belgium

446

87,1

2,2

2,4

2,3

0

0

0

0,1

5,8

Czech Rep.

480

90,4

1,6

0,1

0,9

2,3

1,2

0

3,4

0,1

Denmark

472

93,4

1,6

0,6

0,6

1,4

0,8

0

0,8

0,8

Germany

901

90,2

1,4

1

0,9

0,5

1,7

0

3

1,4

Estonia

290

94,7

0,6

1

0,8

1,1

0,1

0

1,4

0,3

Greece

460

81,3

2,7

1,7

5,2

2,3

0,5

0

2

4,3

Spain

921

87,3

2,4

2,3

1,5

1,9

1,7

0,6

1,9

0,5

France

885

82,9

1,8

3,5

4,5

1,7

1,9

0,9

2,3

0,5

Ireland

187

62,3

8,7

2,8

1,1

10,1

4,1

4,4

5,1

1,5

Italy

875

90,7

2,5

0,8

1,5

1,1

0,4

0

1

2,1

Cyprus

296

82,2

5,4

1,9

0,8

5,9

0,7

0,6

0,7

1,9

Latvia

298

77,9

2,9

2,8

1

2

3

0,2

0

10,3

Lithuania

296

55,6

11,1

5,5

7,2

5

3,7

0,9

5,7

5,4

Luxembourg

313

78,9

3

3,5

2,6

1,5

1

1,3

1,2

7,1

Hungary

481

88,4

2,7

0,5

1,9

1,2

2,5

0,1

2,3

0,4

Malta

302

83,8

5,2

2,4

1,6

3,7

1,5

0,1

0,3

1,5

Netherlands

549

82

2,4

1,4

1,4

0,9

2,6

0,5

5,7

3

Austria

568

73,5

2,6

1,7

2,9

2,2

2

0

1,3

13,8

Poland

866

85,2

1,5

1,7

3,1

3

2,9

0,3

1,1

1,2

Portugal

484

84,8

5

1,1

0,2

0,2

2

0,3

1,4

5

Slovenia

299

93,5

2,8

1,1

0,6

1,7

0

0

0

0,2

Slovakia

471

92,6

3,3

0,6

0,8

1,1

0,5

0,4

0,2

0,4

Finland

469

85,4

1,1

2

2,4

1,7

2,3

0,2

2,1

2,8

Sweden

478

93,8

0,3

0,8

0,7

1,3

0,8

0,3

1,6

0,3

United Kingdom

430

73,7

4,3

1,8

3,8

4,4

3,7

0,9

2,2

5,2

Bulgaria

478

97,3

0,4

0,8

0,7

0

0,6

0

0,2

0

Romania

887

79,1

3

4,6

3,9

2,8

2,1

1

2,4

1,2

Iceland

288

65,3

3,5

6,2

5,2

4,6

6,5

0,7

5,9

2,2

Norway

378

92,5

1,2

0,2

1,3

1,4

0,7

0,5

1,6

0,7

Turkey

914

90,4

3,1

1,9

0,6

0,9

0,7

0,4

0,6

1,4


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 60b. Educational attainment of employees - postgraduate degree Question q64a. What is the educational attainment level of your employees? What percentage of your staff does have any of the following as their highest level of education -a postgraduate exam such as a doctorate? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

86,1

% 15 2,3

% 610 1,6

% 1120 2,2

% 2140 1,7

% 4160 1,7

% 6180 0,3

% 81100 2

% DK/NA 2

11954

88,1

1,9

1

1,8

1,7

1,7

0,4

2

1,5

10-49

1137

78,3

5,8

4,7

2,6

2,1

1,7

0,1

1

3,8

50-249

194

65,7

16,5

4,5

2

2,4

1,6

0,6

0,4

6,3

250+

47

46,2

25,6

7,7

2,2

3,5

3,1

0,3

0,2

11,1

1715

87,1

4,3

2,7

1,3

1,3

1,3

0

0,2

1,9

F. Construction

1482

91

0,5

1,9

1,6

1,2

1

0,2

0,6

2,1

G. Wholesale and retail

3717

88,3

1,9

1,6

1,6

1,2

1,3

0,2

1,5

2,3

H. Hotels and restaurants

961

88,8

1,1

2,5

2,8

0,7

0,7

0

1,1

2,2

I. Transport, storage and communication

767

91

1,4

1,6

1,3

1,4

0,4

0,1

0,6

2,3

J. Financial intermediation

658

84,6

2,6

0,8

2,8

1

2,9

0,8

3

1,5

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

2804

81,6

2,6

1,2

2,8

2,7

2,6

0,9

3,8

1,8

N. Health and social work

608

73,1

5,2

0,9

2,4

4,8

4,4

0,5

7,7

1,1

O. Other community, social and personal service

695

83,9

1,8

1

5,6

1,7

1,7

0,1

1,5

2,6

Total N 13409

1-9

EU27

0%

PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

Annex, page 249


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 61a. Educational attainment of employees - university degree Question q64b.What is the educational attainment level of your employees? What percentage of your staff does have any of the following as their highest level of education -a diploma from a university or another higher education institution? Basis All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) % 1-5

% 610

% 1120

% 2140

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% DK/NA

53,6

5,3

54,3

5,2

4,2

5,3

4,2

5,2

7,3

7,5

3,4

11,4

2

7,1

7,4

3,3

11,2

2

8268

56,3

5,6

4,3

4,7

6,7

6,5

3

10,7

2,3

NMS12

5890

42,3

3,9

4,1

7,6

9,6

11,9

5,1

14,7

0,7

NMS10

4525

44.6

3.5

3.9

7.4

9.2

11.9

4.7

14

0.7

Belgium

446

49,1

5,3

3,2

6,6

4,2

3,3

1,9

22,4

3,9

Czech Rep.

480

73,1

1,6

2,9

4,9

3,9

9,2

1,2

3,1

0,1

Denmark

472

63,7

5,4

2,8

4,5

6,2

7,6

1,4

7,4

1

Germany

901

68,7

4,9

1,8

2,7

4,6

3,3

2,1

10,7

1,4

Estonia

290

27,1

8,2

7,2

12,7

11,8

6,7

9,1

16,9

0,3

Greece

460

47,5

6,9

9,1

2,6

11,5

6

5,2

6,9

4,3

Spain

921

51,9

4,1

6,8

3,1

6,3

9,5

2,6

15,3

0,4

France

885

43,8

2,9

7,8

9,7

7,9

9,1

5,1

13,1

0,5

Ireland

187

26,3

11,3

9,1

8,8

11,8

7,3

7

16,8

1,5

Italy

875

67,2

7,2

2,8

2,9

6,9

5

1,7

4,2

2,2

Cyprus

296

55

6,9

3,3

3,5

12,9

6,4

1,8

8,3

1,9

Latvia

298

13

7,4

6,5

9,8

11,8

9,9

7,9

30,4

3,2

Lithuania

296

14,4

11,9

7,8

8,1

8,9

14,2

9,6

20

5,1

Luxembourg

313

38,3

4,9

6,6

5,6

6,4

8,5

4,2

20,2

5,3

Hungary

481

31

7,9

5,2

9,7

13

11,9

5,1

16,3

0

Malta

302

54,5

7,8

4,7

5,9

6,8

7,7

3,9

7,4

1,5

Netherlands

549

52,7

4

1,7

2,2

4,5

4,6

3,1

23,9

3,3

Austria

568

59,7

5

5,5

3,5

4,5

5,8

2,2

2,8

11

Poland

866

36,2

1,6

3,3

7,8

9,9

14,2

6,6

19,2

1,2

Portugal

484

58,1

9,2

4,7

2,8

5,1

3,6

1,7

9,7

5

Slovenia

299

25,7

2,6

3,9

11

22,2

13,8

2

18,6

0,2

Slovakia

471

50,6

8

7

6,1

7,7

8,1

2,8

9,2

0,5

Finland

469

56,9

4,9

2,6

7,3

11,2

6

4,2

4,2

2,7

Sweden

478

53,5

3,1

4

6,8

8

8,8

4

11,1

0,6

United Kingdom

430

41,5

9

3,2

7,3

9,3

9,1

5

9,8

5,6

Bulgaria

478

41,7

7,4

4,2

5,4

5,1

10,7

6,6

18,9

0

Romania

887

20,9

5,6

5,8

11

16,1

12,9

8,2

18,5

1,1

Iceland

288

47

4,7

7,6

9

10

5,7

3,9

9,3

2,8

Norway

378

38,7

3,5

3,4

7,1

11,9

12,1

7,5

14,8

1,1

Turkey

914

47,5

9,7

5,9

5

7,6

10,5

2,6

10,4

0,9

Total N

0%

EU27

13409

EU25

12132

EU15

COUNTRY

page 250


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 61b. Educational attainment of employees - university degree Question q64b.What is the educational attainment level of your employees? What percentage of your staff does have any of the following as their highest level of education -a diploma from a university or another higher education institution? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

53,6

% 15 5,3

% 610 4,2

% 1120 5,3

% 2140 7,3

% 4160 7,5

% 6180 3,4

% 81100 11,4

% DK/NA 2

11954

55,9

4,3

3,2

4,6

7,1

7,4

3,5

12,5

1,4

10-49

1137

39,2

13

10,5

8,4

9,6

7

4

4,2

4,2

50-249

194

20

25,4

14,6

11

10,5

6,6

2,5

2,9

6,4

250+

47

8,8

20,9

13,4

16,9

15,7

8,8

4,1

1,7

9,6

1715

58,7

5,9

6,5

8,4

5,3

6,1

1,8

5,4

1,8

F. Construction

1482

61,1

5,2

5,5

5,3

7,6

5,1

2,5

5,9

1,8

G. Wholesale and retail

3717

55,9

4,4

3,6

5,9

8,2

8

2,7

9

2,2

H. Hotels and restaurants

961

65,2

4,8

7,2

4,5

5,1

4,7

0,9

5,5

2,1

I. Transport, storage and communication

767

60,4

6,6

6,4

2,9

6,4

4,9

2,2

7,1

3,1

J. Financial intermediation

658

41,7

4,4

1,7

4,3

8,3

10

3,8

24,5

1,4

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

2804

38,8

5,9

3,1

4,5

8,8

9,1

7,1

20,8

1,8

N. Health and social work

608

48,8

9,7

2

2,8

4,9

11,8

3,1

16

0,8

O. Other community, social and personal service

695

63,8

1,8

1,8

4,3

5

8,1

3,4

9,6

2,1

Total N 13409

1-9

EU27

0%

PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

Annex, page 251


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 62a. Educational attainment of employees - secondary school Question q64c.What is the educational attainment level of your employees? What percentage of your staff does have any of the following as their highest level of education -a final secondary school exam? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs) Total N

0%

% 1-5

% 610

% 1120

% 2140

% 4160

% 6180

% 81100

% DK/NA

EU27

13409

22,1

4,2

2,9

4,1

6,6

11,1

8,3

38,3

2,3

EU25

12132

22,1

4,2

2,9

4,1

6,5

11

8,2

38,5

2,3

EU15

8268

21,6

4,3

2,8

4,1

5,6

10,2

8

40,8

2,6

NMS12

5890

23,9

3,7

3,7

4,4

10,7

15,1

9,8

27,9

0,8

NMS10

4525

24.7

3.8

3.7

4.4

10.9

15.2

9.4

27

0.8

Belgium

446

40,3

1,2

3,6

2

4,4

6,2

3,4

35,6

3,2

Czech Rep.

480

23,5

3

1,2

3,3

9,5

13,2

5,7

40,5

0,1

Denmark

472

40,8

6,9

2,5

3,4

7,6

12,3

3,2

21

2,4

Germany

901

23,8

3,2

1,4

2,3

3,3

5,7

5,6

53,3

1,4

Estonia

290

21,7

2,1

0,5

3,6

5,7

13

17,7

35,4

0,3

Greece

460

18,8

1,3

3

2

5,9

11,2

11,2

43,6

3

Spain

921

17,4

1,1

1,8

1,6

3

11,9

7,3

55,5

0,4

France

885

32,1

1,1

3,4

9,9

4,6

12,5

8,3

27,4

0,8

Ireland

187

10,5

5,3

3,3

1,5

12,8

13,3

9,2

43,5

0,6

Italy

875

12

9,1

3,8

4,8

9,6

12,2

9

37,2

2,3

Cyprus

296

18,3

9,7

3

3

2,7

11,1

12,1

38,3

1,9

Latvia

298

25,7

1,3

2,9

3,7

12

8,9

17,1

24,4

3,9

Lithuania

296

31,3

2,9

4,9

2,1

6

12,2

11,9

22,8

5,9

Luxembourg

313

24,3

2,2

4,9

4,6

3,7

9,2

6,8

39,2

5,1

Hungary

481

21,9

8,1

6,4

4,1

14,1

18,1

9,7

17,5

0

Malta

302

13,2

1,6

3,3

4,9

8,3

11,1

9,9

45,5

2,3

Netherlands

549

40,6

0,8

0,7

1

3

3,5

5,3

41,9

3,3

Austria

568

35,6

5,5

2,5

5,5

9,2

8,5

5,5

20,6

6,9

Poland

866

28,3

2,5

4,2

5,9

11,4

15,7

9,9

20,9

1,2

Portugal

484

25,7

11,5

5,2

2

4,9

7,8

7,3

30,7

4,8

Slovenia

299

16,8

0,2

2,8

0,3

8,2

15,2

21,7

34,5

0,2

Slovakia

471

12,8

5,2

3,5

2,6

7,1

16,4

11,9

40,1

0,5

Finland

469

20,3

3,8

3,8

10,7

13,6

13,5

8,1

25,2

1,1

Sweden

478

16,6

1,4

1,6

1

7,9

13,1

12,1

45,1

1,2

United Kingdom

430

13,9

5,9

3

2,9

5,6

10,8

11,9

36,5

9,5

Bulgaria

478

21,4

4,2

1,8

2,6

7,1

10,8

9,9

42,2

0

Romania

887

17,7

2,5

5,4

5,3

10,5

16,4

13,7

27,5

1,1

Iceland

288

16,3

3,3

7

7,9

14,5

17,9

7,8

22,3

3

Norway

378

19,9

1,2

1

4,4

9,9

16,8

15,4

30,5

0,9

Turkey

914

23,6

8,1

4,3

2,2

6

15,1

8,7

31,4

0,6

COUNTRY

page 252


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Table 62b. Educational attainment of employees - secondary school Question q64c.What is the educational attainment level of your employees? What percentage of your staff does have any of the following as their highest level of education -a final secondary school exam? Basis: All enterprises interviewed which have less than 250 persons employed (SMEs), unless indicated otherwise

22,1

% 15 4,2

% 610 2,9

% 1120 4,1

% 2140 6,6

% 4160 11,1

% 6180 8,3

% 81100 38,3

% DK/NA 2,3

11954

22,5

4,4

2,5

3,6

6,5

11

8,1

39,5

1,8

10-49

1137

9,5

3,3

5,1

6,7

9

11,4

12,3

37,5

5,1

50-249

194

4,8

3

5,5

7

11,1

16,6

11,5

33,3

7

250+

47

3,2

3,8

1,4

7,5

17,8

15,8

15,7

24

10,9

1715

18,7

3,8

4,6

7,6

6,4

11,4

9,2

36,2

2,1

F. Construction

1482

18,7

6,7

2

3,4

8,4

10,8

7,4

40,4

2,3

G. Wholesale and retail

3717

15,9

3,5

3

4,1

6,9

11,8

9,6

43

2,3

H. Hotels and restaurants

961

17,8

3,8

2,6

4,5

8,1

12,3

5,6

41,9

3,3

I. Transport, storage and communication

767

20,6

5,5

1,9

2,6

6,1

8,3

7,6

43,5

4,1

J. Financial intermediation

658

32,5

4,1

1

2,7

5,7

10,4

7,6

34,5

1,6

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

2804

33,4

3,7

2,5

3,9

5,7

11,3

7,9

29,8

1,8

N. Health and social work

608

24,7

7,9

3,5

2,2

6

13,5

5,6

35,1

1,4

O. Other community, social and personal service

695

20,1

1,7

5,4

2,7

4,9

7,4

11,1

44,1

2,7

Total N 13409

1-9

EU27

0%

PERSONS EMPLOYED

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

Annex, page 253


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Technical note This Flash Eurobarometer 196: “Observatory of European small and medium sized enterprises” telephone survey was conducted on behalf of the DG Enterprise and Industry , Directorate BIndustrial policy and economic reforms, Unit B.2 “Competitiveness and economic reforms. The objective of the Observatory survey is to increase and disseminate information about the characteristics and specificities of SMEs across Europe. The survey constitutes a source of information for the design of horizontal policies in the European Commission in areas such as the Lisbon strategy, better regulation and entrepreneurship. The 2006 survey contributed to this objective by collecting information about enterprises, broken down by size class, on the following topics: general information about the status and performance of the enterprise, constraints on business performance, globalisation, competition, innovation and labour market. The current special target group Flash Eurobarometer survey was organised and managed by the Eurobarometer Team of the European Commission (Directorate-General Communication, Unit A-4). The interviews were conducted between the 17th of November 2006 and the 3rd of January 2007 by partner institutes of The Gallup Organization Hungary: Belgium Czech Republic Denmark Germany Estonia Greece Spain France Ireland Italy Cyprus Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Hungary Malta Netherlands Austria Poland Portugal Slovenia Slovakia Finland Sweden United Kingdom Bulgaria Romania Turkey Norway Iceland

page 254

BE CZ DK DE EE EL ES FR IE IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT SI SK FI SE UK BG RO TR NO IS

Gallup Europe Focus Agency Hermelin IFAK Saar Poll Metron Analysis Gallup Spain Efficience3 Gallup UK Demoskopea CYMAR Latvian Facts Baltic Survey Gallup Europe Gallup Hungary MISCO Telder Spectra Gallup Poland Consulmark Cati d.o.o. Focus Agency Hermelin Hermelin Gallup UK Vitosha Gallup Romania Konsensus Fieldwork Scandinavia IGM

(Interviews : 11/24/2006 – 12/13/2006) (Interviews : 11/22/2006 – 12/13/2006) (Interviews : 11/21/2006 – 12/04/2006) (Interviews : 11/22/2006 – 01/02/2007) (Interviews : 11/28/2006 – 12/08/2006) (Interviews : 11/22/2006 – 12/20/2006) (Interviews : 11/23/2006 – 12/21/2006) (Interviews : 11/28/2006 – 12/12/2006) (Interviews : 11/22/2006 – 12/07/2006) (Interviews : 11/21/2006 – 12/07/2006) (Interviews : 11/21/2006 – 11/30/2006) (Interviews : 11/21/2006 – 12/05/2006) (Interviews : 11/22/2006 – 12/12/2006) (Interviews : 11/27/2006 – 01/03/2007) (Interviews : 11/21/2006 – 12/11/2006) (Interviews : 11/22/2006 – 12/04/2006) (Interviews : 11/29/2006 – 12/27/2006) (Interviews : 11/21/2006 – 12/04/2006) (Interviews : 11/22/2006 – 12/07/2006) (Interviews : 11/22/2006 – 12/11/2006) (Interviews : 11/21/2006 – 12/12/2006) (Interviews : 11/21/2006 – 12/14/2006) (Interviews : 11/21/2006 – 12/13/2006) (Interviews : 11/21/2006 – 12/04/2006) (Interviews : 11/22/2006 – 12/08/2006) (Interviews : 11/22/2006 – 12/08/2006) (Interviews : 11/21/2006 – 12/12/2006) (Interviews : 11/24/2006 – 12/08/2006) (Interviews : 11/17/2006 – 11/30/2006) (Interviews : 11/29/2006 – 12/15/2006)


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Representativeness of the results The geographical coverage of the survey is as follows: Member States of the EU-25, Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey, Norway and Iceland – in the countries participating in the Multiannual Programme for Enterprise & Entrepreneurship (MAP)28. The sample used for the survey is – after proper weighting – representative of the population of enterprises in each of the above mentioned countries and for the following size-classes: micro firms (1-9 persons employed), small firms (10-49 persons employed), medium-sized firms (50-249 persons employed) and large-scale firms (250 and more persons employed). The sampling criteria: SME sector in most Member States A. In each country/size class combination: at least 100 observations. B. In each industry/size class combination: at least 100 observations. C. In each country/industry combination: at least 35 observations. D. In each individual industry/size class/country combination: at least 2 observations. E. In each individual industry/size class/country combination: an upper limit of 10 % of the stock of enterprises. Regarding the SME sector in Cyprus, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Malta, Luxembourg, Slovenia and Iceland: A. In each country/size class combination: at least 20 observations. B. In each industry/size class combination: at least 20 observations. D. In each individual industry/size class/country combination: at least 2 observations. E. In each individual industry/size class/country combination: an upper limit of 10 % of the stock of enterprises. Large enterprises (250+employees), in “regular”Member States A. In each country: at least 30 observations. B. In each industry: at least 30 observations. C. In each country/industry combination: at least 2 observations. E. In each individual industry/size class/country combination: an upper limit of 10 % of the stock of enterprises. Large enterprises (250+employees) in Cyprus, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Malta, Luxembourg, Slovenia and Iceland A. In each country: at least 10 observations. B. In each industry: at least 10 observations. C. In each country/industry combination: at least 1 observations. E. In each individual industry/size class/country combination: an upper limit of 10 % of the stock of enterprises. D. Manufacturing F. Construction G. Wholesale and retail H. Hotels and restaurants I. Transport, storage and communication J. Financial intermediation K. Real estate, renting and business activities N. Health and social work

28

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/enterprise_policy/mult_entr_programme/programme_2001_2005.htm Annex, page 255


The Gallup Organization

Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The statistical stratification took into account O. Other community, social and personal service economic activities at the 0-digit level of the European NACE-Nomenclature v1.1. The interviews were made in D, F, G, H, I, J, K, N and O sectors. A few countries could not achieve the defined target sample sizes in each cell of the sampling matrix: Cyprus (5), Malta (1), Slovenia (6) could not reach 10 companies among the largest (250+ employees) companies, and Cyprus made 16 interviews among the medium-sized firms instead of 20 interviews. Luxembourg (14) and Iceland (15) could not interview the defined 20 companies in the Health and social work sector.

Margins of error Maximum margin of error, at 95% confidence level

COUNTRY EU27 EU25 EU15 NMS12 E30 Belgium Czech Rep. Denmark Germany Estonia Greece Spain France Ireland Italy Cyprus Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Hungary Malta Netherlands Austria Poland Portugal Slovenia Slovakia Finland Sweden United Kingdom

page 256

Sample size (unweighted)

Margin of error (Âą)

15533 14099 9839 5694 17283 516 510 501 935 302 523 954 911 600 909 300 308 305 327 517 307 604 611 905 529 306 500 505 507 907

0,8 0,8 1,0 1,3 0,7 4,3 4,3 4,4 3,2 5,6 4,3 3,2 3,2 4,0 3,3 5,7 5,6 5,6 5,4 4,3 5,6 4,0 4,0 3,3 4,3 5,6 4,4 4,4 4,4 3,3


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Bulgaria Romania

Sample size (unweighted) 514 920

Margin of error (Âą) 4,3 3,2

Iceland Norway Turkey

302 501 947

5,6 4,4 3,2

PERSONS EMPLOYED 1-9

7550

1,13

10-49

3908

1,57

50-249

2461

1,97

250+

815

3,43

NACE SECTOR D. Manufacturing

2813

1,85

F. Construction

1864

2,27

G. Wholesale and retail

3380

1,69

H. Hotels and restaurants

1239

2,78

I. Transport, storage and communication

1025

3,06

J. Financial intermediation

943

3,19

K. Real estate, renting and business activities

2391

2,0

N. Health and social work

946

3,19

O. Other community, social and personal service

932

3,21

Exchange rates In several questions in the survey we asked amoung figures (e.g. turnover, exports, marketing budget). The amount figures were collected in national currency, and where it was different, the amounts were re-calculated to euro. The exchange rates are provided below: Exchange rates used for calculating the euro figures in q6, q7, q31, q32, and q4329 euro / 1 unit of euro / 1 unit of national currency national currency rate, as of rate, as of 2006.12.17 2006.12.17 Czech Rep. 0,0361263000 Slovenia 0,0041731700 Denmark

0,1339690000

Slovakia

0,0286693000

Estonia

0,0639115000

Sweden

0,1105450000

Cyprus

1,7310600000

UK

1,4917000000

Latvia

1,4228700000

Bulgaria

0,5111560000

Lithuania

0,2896200000

Romania

0,0000293262

Hungary

0,0039493400

Turkey

0,5355720000

Malta

2,3278000000

Norway

0,1224070000

29

In Romania and Turkey the amounts were given in old and new currency (in both countries there was a recent redenomination of the currency), and cases were assessed one-by-one to determine the currency they used in giving the response to these questions Annex, page 257


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Poland

page 258

0,2638530000

Iceland

0,0110678000


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Sizes of the samples The targeted number of main interviews varied somewhat by the size of the country. In the largest EU countries (Germany, Spain, France, Italy, Poland, Romania and UK) the target sample size was 900. In Estonia, Luxembourg, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia and Malta, the target number of the main interviews was 300; in other countries it was 500. The below table shows the achieved sample size by country. The detailed weighting targets per size class and industry categories in each country (as well as the unweighted distributions) are presented in a separate technical and evaluation report. Post-stratification weights were used to restore the artificially distorted proportions according to company size and industry sector. When we are discussing EU-wide or other supra-national summary estimations, results are weighted to correct for the disproportional selection of countries, and the various segments within the countries. The weighting was based on the number of enterprises. Total Interviews

Total BE CZ DK DE EE EL ES FR IE IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT SI SK FI SE UK BG RO TR NO IS

Conducted

% of Total

17283 516 510 501 935 302 523 954 911 600 909 300 308 305 327 517 307 604 611 905 529 306 500 505 507 907 514 920 947 501 302

100 3.0 3.0 2.9 5.4 1.7 3.0 5.5 5.3 3.5 5.3 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.9 3.0 1.8 3.5 3.5 5.2 3.1 1.8 2.9 2.9 2.9 5.2 3.0 5.3 5.5 2.9 1.7

EU27 Weighted 15533 372 138 78 1937 20 232 1939 1634 20 2515 27 58 22 15 192 2 676 185 1811 182 18 77 138 161 2721 143 219

EU27 % on Total ( weighted) 100 2,4 0,9 0,5 12,5 0,1 1,5 12,5 10,5 0,1 16,2 0,2 0,4 0,1 0,1 1,2 0,0 4,4 1,2 11,7 1,2 0,1 0,5 0,9 1,0 17,5 0,9 1,4

Annex, page 259


The Gallup Organization

Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

Questionnaires The institutes listed above translated the questionnaire to their respective national language(s) using a centralized process of back-translation procedure, involving two initial local translations, independent back-translation and central verification of the localised questionnaires. The survey questionnaire in English is attached to this report. Further details For further details you may contact Gallup or The European Commission. The relevant contacts are: European Commission: B-1049 Brussels - BELGIUM relevant e-mails: entr-horizontal-aspect-sme-poicy@ec.europa.eu entr-compet-economic-reforms@ec.europa.eu Mr. Jost ANGERER (DG ENTR) Tel.: +32-2-29.55.956 Mrs. Maria-Pia Vigliarolo-Del Colombo (DG ENTR) Tel.: +32-2-29.96.528 Mr. Karlheinz REIF (DG COMM) Tel: +32-2-29.99.441

GALLUP: Mr. Gergely HIDEG, research director Tel:+36-30-9709595, gergely_hideg@gallup-europe.be,

page 260


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Survey questionnaire Section 1: General Characteristics Q1.

How would you characterise your enterprise? Is it... ONE ANSWER ONLY - an independent enterprise ........................................................................................... 1 - a subsidiary of another enterprise................................................................................ 2 - a non profit enterprise: foundations, associations, semi-government ......................... 3 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

Q2.

Main activity of your enterprise CODE FROM DATABASE

Q3.

How many persons, including part time workers, were employed in your enterprise on average in 2005:: PART TIME WORKERS HAVE TO BE INCLUDED - RESPONDENT HAS TO BE INCLUDED WRITE IN number of people employed: (1-99998): ………………… - [DK/NA] ................................................................................................................99999

Q4.

How many persons, including part time workers, were employed in your enterprise on average in 2006: PART TIME WORKERS HAVE TO BE INCLUDED WRITE IN number of people employed:: ………………… - [DK/NA] ................................................................................................................99999

Q5.

What are your expectations regarding the number of employees in your enterprise in 2007? Will it increase, remain unchanged, or will decrease? - Will increase................................................................................................................. 3 - Will remain about the same ......................................................................................... 2 - Will decrease ...............................................................................................................1 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

Q7.

What was the turnover, that is the annual sales, of your enterprise in 2005? WRITE IN answer in [NATIONAL CURRENCY]:]: ……………………… - [DK/NA] ................................................................................................................99999 - billion .............................................................................................................................. - million ............................................................................................................................. - thousand ........................................................................................................................

Q6.

What is the expected turnover (annual sales) of your enterprise in 2006? WRITE IN answer in [NATIONAL CURRENCY]:]: ……………………… - [DK/NA] ................................................................................................................99999 - billion .............................................................................................................................. - million ............................................................................................................................. - thousand ........................................................................................................................

Q8.

What do you expect regarding the yearly turnover in 2007 compared to 2006? The turnover of your enterprise in 2007 will - Increase ...................................................................................................................... 1 - Remain about the same ............................................................................................... 2 - Decrease ...................................................................................................................... 3 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

Annex, page 261


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization Q10.

IN BE, DE, FR, IT, LU, AT, PL, SI ASK: Does your enterprise belong to the crafts sector? ELSEWHERE ASK Do you think that your enterprise belongs to the crafts sector of your country? READ OUT –- ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE

- Yes ............................................................................................................................... 1 - No ................................................................................................................................ 2 - [DK/NA] ....................................................................................................................... 9

Section 2: Constraints on business performance Q21.

Did your enterprise encounter any of these constraints or difficulties in the last two years? READ OUT - ONE ANSWER PER LINE - Yes ............................................................................................................................... 1 - No ................................................................................................................................ 2 - [No such constraint] ..................................................................................................... 3 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9 a) Limited access to finance ............................................................................................................... 1 b) Labour force too expensive ............................................................................................................ 1 c) Lack of skilled labour ...................................................................................................................... 1 d) Implementing new technology........................................................................................................ 1 e) Implementing new forms of organisation ....................................................................................... 1 f) Lack of quality management ........................................................................................................... 1 g) Problems with administrative regulations ....................................................................................... 1 h) Problems with infrastructure e.g. road, gas, electricity, communication, etc. ................................ 1 i) Problems with the purchasing power of customers ......................................................................... 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

AKS FOR ITEMS MENTIONED (CODE 1) IN Q21_A-I Q22.

How did these business constraints change during the last 2 years? Did business constraints increase, stay unchanged or decreased? - Increased ..................................................................................................................... 3 - Remained about the same ........................................................................................... 2 - Decreased .................................................................................................................... 1 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9 a) Limited access to finance ............................................................................................................... 1 b) Labour force too expensive ............................................................................................................ 1 c) Lack of skilled labour ...................................................................................................................... 1 d) Implementing new technology........................................................................................................ 1 e) Implementing new forms of organisation ....................................................................................... 1 f) Lack of quality management .......................................................................................................... 1 g) Problems with administrative regulations ....................................................................................... 1 h) Problems with infrastructure e.g. road, gas, electricity, communication, etc. ................................ 1 i) Problems with the purchasing power of customers ......................................................................... 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

IF ANSWER IS “1” IN Q22_G Q23. You have answered that the constraints due to regulations have decreased, please indicate what you consider to be the cause. Was it due to READ OUT –- ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE - Fewer regulatory obligations, or, .................................................................................. 1 - The regulations and their implementation by the government have been simplified or .................................................................................................................... 2 - Cheaper or easier communication through Information and Communication Technology (e-government) ........................................................................................... 3 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

page 262


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

Corporate responsibility Q24.

Governments impose various regulations for businesses in order to achieve some goals, Do you think that the regulations that apply to your company are appropriate to achieve their goals, for instance the protection of the environment or the financing of the provision of general public services? READ OUT –- ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE - Yes, .............................................................................................................................. 1 - No the regulations go clearly too far, ........................................................................... 2 - No the regulations go slightly too far,........................................................................... 3 - No the regulations could be more ambitious in order to achieve their goals. .............. 4 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

Q25.

How many working days, that is man days, have been spent this year in total in your enterprise with administrative tasks directly related to the compliance with information requirements contained in legislation, such as the time and effort in filling out forms? WRITE IN working days:: ……………… in terms of man days - [DK/NA] ....................................................................................................................999

Q26.

The following question is related to the possibilities that the internal market of the European Union offers. Please tell me how important each of the following possibilities is for your enterprise’s ability to do business in the European Union: READ OUT – ROTATE- ONE ANSWER PER LINE - very important ..............................................................................................................4 - rather important ............................................................................................................ 3 - rather not important...................................................................................................... 2 - not important at all .......................................................................................................1 - [does not do business elsewhere in the EU / not relevant] .......................................... 8 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9 A) No border controls any more? ................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 8 9 B) Same currency in most of the Member States? ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 8 9 C) Hire workers from other EU countries? ................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 8 9 D) Single Market legislation including harmonised technical standards? .................................. 1 2 3 4 8 9

Q27.

Nowadays, technical standards and certain regulations are often decided at the EU level to avoid trade barriers. Do you see any benefit for your enterprise that EU standards replace national regulations, or not? READ OUT – ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE - Yes ............................................................................................................................... 1 - not ................................................................................................................................ 2 - [It depends] .................................................................................................................. 3 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

Section 3: Globalisation Q31.

How much turnover was generated by exports in your enterprise in 2005? Answer in [NATIONAL CURRENCY]: ……………………… - [no exports in 2005] ..................................................................................................... 0 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9 - billion .............................................................................................................................. - million ............................................................................................................................. - thousand ........................................................................................................................

Annex, page 263


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization Q32.

How much is the expected turnover from exports in 2006? ALL EXPORT MATTERS, ALSO THAT WITHIN THE EU - ASK RESPONDENT TO ESTIMATE Answer in [NATIONAL CURRENCY]: : ……………………… - [no exports in 2006] ..................................................................................................... 0 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9 - billion .............................................................................................................................. - million ............................................................................................................................. - thousand ........................................................................................................................

Q33.

What is your expectation for 2007 regarding your enterprise’s turnover generated by exports? - Will increase................................................................................................................. 3 - Will remain about the same ......................................................................................... 2 - Will decrease ...............................................................................................................1 - [no exports are foreseen for 2007] ............................................................................... 0 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

ASK IF THE ANSWER IN Q33 “ 3””, OR “1”, Q33a. IF Q33 = 3: Could you, please estimate the expected increase of exports compared to 2006, in percent. IF Q33 = 1: Could you, please estimate the expected decrease of exports compared to 2006, in percent. WRITE IN %: : ………….. - [DK/NA] ....................................................................................................................999 ASK ONLY IF Q31 IS NOT “0” OR “9” Q34. What is the main country of destination for your exports? OPEN ENDED- RECORD ANSWER- ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE To select a country use the drop-down menu. If the country is not included in the list, you should enter it manually. Please make sure to type it in correctly. WRITE IN: ………………………….. - [DK/NA] ....................................................................................................................999

ASK ONLY IF Q31 IS NOT “0” OR “9” Q35. Looking at the last two years, what was the main constraint to exporting? Was it ... READ OUT – ROTATE- ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE - import tariffs/customs duties in the country of destination ......................................... 01 - lack of knowledge of foreign markets......................................................................... 02 - lack of management resources .................................................................................. 03 - language problems .................................................................................................... 04 - different regulations in other EU countries ................................................................. 05 - regulations in non-EU countries ................................................................................. 06 - lack of capital .............................................................................................................07 - no constraints at all .................................................................................................... 08 - enterprise’s product/service is not suited to export .................................................... 09 - [DK/NA] ...................................................................................................................... 99 Q36.

What percentage of your inputs, - including capital, energy and raw materials, but NOT including labour - is purchased abroad? WRITE IN %: ………………………….. - [DK/NA] ....................................................................................................................999

Q37.

How much of your total turnover, that is your annual sales in percentages is created in foreign subsidiaries, joint ventures abroad? IF THERE ARE NO SUBSIDIARIES OR JOINT VENTURES CODE 998 READ OUT – ONE ANSWER PER LINE a - foreign subsidiaries b - joint ventures abroad

................ % ................ %

- [no subsidiary / joint venture] ................................................................................... 998 - [DK/NA] ....................................................................................................................999 IF NO SUBSIDIARY OR JOINT VENTURE, SKIP TO Q41 ASK IF Q37a or Q37b IS NOT “0” OR “ 999” OR “998” Q38. In what countries do you have existing subsidiaries/joint ventures? page 264


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

OPEN ENDED- RECORD ANSWER- MAXIMUM THREE ANSWERS POSSIBLE To select a country use the drop-down menu. If the country is not included in the list, you should enter it manually. Please make sure to type it in correctly.

a) WRITE IN: ................................................................................................................... b) WRITE IN: ................................................................................................................... c) WRITE IN: ................................................................................................................... - [DK/NA] ....................................................................................................................999 ASK IF Q37a or Q37b IS NOT “0” OR “ 999” OR “998” Q39.

What is the main reason why you have foreign subsidiaries/joint ventures abroad? READ OUT – ROTATE- ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE - Proximity to final customers, ........................................................................................ 1 - Access to finance,, ...................................................................................................... 2 - Proximity as a supplier to one or several global large-scaled enterprise ..................... 3 - Export regulations,, ..................................................................................................... 4 - Less administrative and regulatory burdens,, ............................................................. 5 - Lower total labour costs,, ............................................................................................ 6 - Lower taxes,, ............................................................................................................... 7 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

ASK IF Q37a or Q37b IS NOT “0” OR “ 999” OR “998” Q40.

Did your foreign subsidiaries or joint ventures affect the employment of your enterprise in [COUNTRY]? READ OUT – ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE - They increased it.......................................................................................................... 3 - They did not affect it..................................................................................................... 2 - They decreased it ........................................................................................................ 1 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

Section 4: Questions on Competition Q41.

Has competition within the markets of your enterprise altogether decreased or increased during the last two years? READ OUT – ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE - Increased ..................................................................................................................... 3 - Remained about the same ........................................................................................... 2 - Decreased .................................................................................................................... 1 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

Q42.

If competition becomes tighter and profit margins decrease in your main market, how do you react, what actions do you take? READ OUT – ONE ANSWER PER LINE - Yes ............................................................................................................................... 1 - No ................................................................................................................................ 2 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9 a) reduce costs, .................................................................................................................................... 1 2 9 b) forming strategic partnerships, ......................................................................................................... 1 2 9 c) reduce prices, ................................................................................................................................... 1 2 9 d) increase quality, ............................................................................................................................... 1 2 9 e) increase product differentiation/ look for market niches, .................................................................. 1 2 9 f) look for (other) foreign markets, ........................................................................................................ 1 2 9 g) increase working hours, ................................................................................................................... 1 2 9 h) reduce production ............................................................................................................................ 1 2 9 i) increase marketing activity ................................................................................................................ 1 2 9

Q43.

Could you please indicate your approximate annual amount of marketing costs? WRITE IN answer in [NATIONAL CURRENCY]:………………

Annex, page 265


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs

The Gallup Organization

- [DK/NA] ..............................................................................................................999999 - billion .............................................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... - million ............................................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... - thousand ........................................................................................................................ .........................................................................................................................................

Section 5: Questions on Innovation Q51.

Could you please estimate the percent of turnover (annual sales) coming from new or significantly improved products or services in the last two years? WRITE IN %: ……… - [no new or improved products]................................................................................. 998 - [DK/NA] ....................................................................................................................999

Q52.

What was the main constraint for your innovation activities in the last two years? Please consider constraints of innovation regarding products and services as well as production technology. READ OUT – ROTATE- ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE - Lack of ability to use new technologies, ................................................................................................... 1 - Too expensive human resources, ............................................................................................................ 2 - Lack of skilled human resources, ............................................................................................................. 3 - High interest rates .................................................................................................................................... 4 - Problems with access to finance, other than interest rates ...................................................................... 5 - Hard to protect intellectual property ......................................................................................................... 6 - Lack of market demand for innovation ..................................................................................................... 7 - [Did not plan to innovate] ......................................................................................................................... 8 - [DK/NA] .................................................................................................................................................... 9

Q54.

Does the enterprise use an environmental management system or any other measures to save energy and resources? READ OUT –ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE - Yes, simple rules or devices to save energy................................................................ 1 - Yes, complex energy saving systems .......................................................................... 2 - No ................................................................................................................................ 3 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

Section 6: Questions on Labour Market IF SELF EMPLOYED (IF Q4=1), TERMINATE INTERVIEW Q61. What is the geographic origin of existing labour force at your firm/location? That is, what percentage of staff at your location comes from your region within [COUNTRY], from [COUNTRY] but not from your region, other EU countries, non-EU countries?

READ OUT – ONE ANSWER PER LINE - PERCENTAGES SHOULD ADD UP TO 100% a) your region b) [COUNTRY], but not from your region c) other EU countries d) non-EU countries

.................% .................% .................% .................%

- [DK/NA] ....................................................................................................................999

page 266


Flash EB No 196 – Observatory of European SMEs Q62.

The Gallup Organization

Thinking of the employees who are difficult to recruit for your company, what is your main approach to find them? READ OUT – ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE - through public labour market institutions,, ................................................................... 1 - through private labour market institutions,, .................................................................. 2 - through newspaper,, .................................................................................................... 3 - through private contacts,,............................................................................................. 4 - through spontaneous applications. .............................................................................. 5 - [no problem with recruiting] .......................................................................................... 8 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

Q63.

What is your main recruiting problem? READ OUT – ROTATE- ONE ANSWER POSSIBLE - Scarcity of skilled labour force,, ................................................................................... 1 - Scarcity of non-skilled labour force,, ............................................................................ 2 - Low image of profession/sector/type of enterprise,, .................................................... 3 - Wage levels too expensive .......................................................................................... 4 - Unpleasant work or working conditions. ...................................................................... 5 - [no problem with recruiting] .......................................................................................... 8 - [DK/NA] ........................................................................................................................ 9

Q65.

How many job vacancies did you have in your enterprise on average in 2006 that you could not fill in? WRITE IN number of vacancies: ……………… - [DK/NA] ....................................................................................................................999

Q64.

What is the educational attainment level of your employees? What percentage of your staff does have any of the following as their highest level of education?

a - a postgraduate exam such as a doctorate b - a diploma from a university or another higher education institution c - a final secondary school exam

.................% .................% .................%

- [DK/NA] ........................................................................................... 999

Annex, page 267

Observatory of European SMEs 2007_en  

Report: May 2007 This survey was requested by DG Enterprise and Industry and coordinated by the Eurobarometer Team of the European Commissio...