Table I.- Principal values of the sample. Employment and age of firms in 1990.
Employment Age
|
All firms |
Survived |
Disappeared |
All firms |
Survived |
Disappeared | |
|
Mean |
265.7 |
331.9 |
111.26 |
21.67 |
22.72 |
19.23 |
|
Median |
36.0 |
48.0 |
26.0 |
15.0 |
17.0 |
11.0 |
|
Mode |
12.0 |
13.0 |
12.0 |
4.0 |
4.0 |
5.0 |
|
Percentile 25 |
18.0 |
20.0 |
16.0 |
6.0 |
7.0 |
5.0 |
|
Percentile 50 |
36.0 |
48.0 |
26.0 |
15.0 |
17.0 |
11.0 |
|
Percentile 75 |
249.5 |
284.0 |
104.25 |
28.0 |
30.0 |
25.25 |
|
Skewness |
13.9 |
11.8 |
3.4 |
2.0 |
1.8 |
2.4 |
|
N° observations |
1073 |
751 |
322 |
1073 |
751 |
322 |
Source: Drawn up by author.
Table II.- Distribution of the total sample6.
|
All firms N° % |
Survived |
Disappeared | |||||
|
N° ,∙ |
/о |
N° |
% | ||||
|
Liability |
Limited |
809 |
75.4 |
579 |
77.1 |
230 |
71.4 |
|
Not limited |
264 |
24.6 |
172 |
22.9 |
92 |
28.6 | |
|
Sector’s Technical |
High |
234 |
21.8 |
177 |
23.5 |
57 |
17.7 |
|
Development |
Medium |
347 |
32.3 |
258 |
34.5 |
89 |
27.6 |
|
Low |
492 |
45.9 |
316 |
42.1 |
176 |
54.7 | |
|
Innovation of |
Innovative |
631 |
58.8 |
524 |
69.8 |
107 |
33.2 |
|
Product |
Non Innovative |
442 |
41.2 |
227 |
30.2 |
215 |
66.8 |
|
Innovation of |
Innovative |
767 |
71.5 |
643 |
85.6 |
124 |
38.5 |
|
Process |
Non innovative |
306 |
28.5 |
108 |
14.4 |
198 |
61.5 |
Source: Drawn up by author.
6 The definition of variables is included in the Appendix.