COVID-19 adversities: setting an agenda for research on SME resilience

Abstract

Purpose This study presents a systematic literature review (SLR) of research on small to medium enterprises (SME) resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic, synthesizing entrepreneurial responses through the lens of ambidexterity, crisis adaptation and relational support. Design/methodology/approach Unlike narrative literature reviews, which are considered less comprehensive, an SLR was deemed appropriate for this study. Its methodological rigour enabled a systematic search of several bibliographic databases, resulting in an initial sample of 2,616. Rigorous and structured qualification criteria were applied to ensure that suitable articles were selected for analysis, resulting in 175 articles. Findings This study revealed that, due to the pandemic's significant impact on small businesses, their owners had to be ambidextrous in pivoting between exploration and exploitation. This included leveraging their capabilities while adventurously applying technology and innovation, and being flexible, agile and able to tolerate ambiguity. This involved entrepreneurially identifying previously unexploited opportunities, viewing “dire circumstances” as opportunities and continuing business in the face of mounting COVID-19 adversities. Research limitations/implications This study has both academic and practical implications, as well as social and policy implications. Its perspectives encourage additional research and policy initiatives to mitigate the impacts of a crisis on SMEs. SME owners acquire knowledge in dealing with adversities and learn how to promote a resilient workforce during a pandemic. Originality/value This paper is unique in that it integrates exploration, bricolage and ambidexterity within the context of SME resilience, developing a model of SME resilience that incorporates entrepreneurial adaptability and relational networks.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 5 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.