IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Paying fees for government business advice: an assessment of Business Link experience

  • Paul Robson
  • Robert Bennett
Registered author(s):

    Business Link (BL) in Britain provides a unique opportunity to examine a government policy support to small firms which has targeted fee income as a major part of its management objectives in order to increase the 'sense of value' of the services offered. This article examines the influence of fees on client impact and satisfaction. It finds that fees have no significant relationship with client satisfaction or impact. Government targets and manager/advisor policies have, therefore, been wrong to pursue an explicit fee-based targeting strategy. Instead, satisfaction and impact are most significantly influenced by the character of the BL provider, being significantly higher for franchises managed by chambers of commerce and other agents, and being poorer for independent stand-alone providers. Service type has a significant influence on the propensity to charge a fee and on service impact. Small- and medium-sized enterprises characteristics have little influence on client evaluations. The policy implication is that advisors should focus on what they do best and can quality assure; in other cases, they should use referral to other professional advisors. The scope to raise fees from government advice services is, therefore, opportunistic and limited, and should not be incentivized.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Applied Economics.

    Volume (Year): 42 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 1 ()
    Pages: 37-48

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:42:y:2010:i:1:p:37-48
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:42:y:2010:i:1:p:37-48. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.