Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine what makes some firms, but not others, see a crisis as an opportunity to become entrepreneurial. Specifically, it examines how two key capabilities for durability—(unabsorbed) slack resources and external market networks—influence small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)’ “opportunity confidence”, a term recently coined to denote the subjective assessment of the extent to which a crisis is a good (bad) basis for entrepreneurial activities, such as the introduction of new products/services and new market entry. Methodology Analysis of hand-collected survey data from 138 SMEs in Greece — a country hit hard by the 2008 economic crisis. Findings The findings reveal that an SME's number of network contacts has a positive effect on opportunity confidence, whereas firm slack resources lack a direct effect. It is, in fact, at low levels of firm slack resources that network returns are higher, especially for older firms. An extension to the main analysis also shows that opportunity confidence is linked to firm sales growth. Practical implications Understanding what makes some firms, but not others, see a crisis as an opportunity will help build an extensive and solid knowledge base and get ready for the next big (or small) crisis, which is inevitable to occur. Besides the grants and subsidies that policymakers often provide to SMEs in times of crisis, they may also need to consider organizing actions that support the extraversion and networking of SMEs—that can be done in a variety of ways due to the rise of teleworking and online collaboration platforms since the onset of the recent COVID-19 pandemic. Originality/value This paper draws linkages between the “external enabler perspective” and the burgeoning resilience literature and illustrates empirically what makes some SMEs, but not others, view an economic crisis as a good basis for entrepreneurial activities—that is a manifestation of early-stage entrepreneurial behavior and a necessary condition before taking entrepreneurial action in times of crisis. By so doing, this study extends research on resilience that has explained the role of “capabilities for durability” as a means of surviving through a crisis by revealing that these capabilities do not necessarily translate into capabilities for renewal that will help firms to bounce forward in response to the crisis. It also points to the “dark side” of capabilities for durability and, by implication, of resilience.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 27 citations exist upstream.