Abstract
According to the GEM (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor) classification, there are only necessity and opportunity entrepreneurship. When linked to public policies, public intervention creates crowding-in effects to compensate for, and even to overcome, the crowding-out effects produced. The generation of crowding-in effects is notably intense in the EU when governments apply EU Structural and Investment Funds. In this case, federal intervention causes benefits to the private sector, and startups can transform into SMEs. The final goal of SMEs is to give a legacy to society as a way to return to society what the company has received from it (social mortgage). In this process, both the proprietor-manager dilemma and the succession process are a problem, mainly in family SMEs, which determine the future of the company.
Do not pretend that things change if you always do the same. (Albert Einstein)
TopNecessity Vs. Opportunity Entrepreneurship
Mainly in developing countries, the greater the poverty, the more necessity entrepreneurship there is, thus resulting in high rates of entrepreneurial activity (Reynolds et al., 2001; Rosa, Kodithuwakku, & Balunywa, 2006). However, this venture is not of quality nor does it allow the company to grow, so it will always be a survival enterprise. This problem reversed with the internalization by the entrepreneur of a specialized education and focused on improving his business to achieve sustainable growth over time. In this case, the State does not generate economic and social wealth, although it participates in a majority way in the economy, nor dominates as a single customer to the supply if it follows a monopsony model. The creation of wealth is given by the synergies created by individual entrepreneurship, which, when promoted both by public administrations and private initiative, allows achieving levels of excellence in the medium term with the creation of stable and quality employment.