【正文】 Argenti 1976), and large overcapacity (Ooghe and De Prijcker 2020。 Sharma and Mahajan 1980), decline in market share (Crutzen and Van Caillie 2020。 Weitzel and Jonsson 1989), let alone agreement between disciplines. Several terms have been used in the literatures: anization mortality, exit or death (Swaminathan 1996), anizational collapse (Argenti 1976), bankruptcy (Laitinen 1991), and decline (Chowdhury and Lang 1993). In the literature, we can find the extreme definitions of failure: the discontinuance of a business for any reason and formal bankruptcy proceedings (Watson 2020). Between these two extremes, there have been proposed further definitions, for example, termination to prevent further losses (Ulmer and Nielsen 1947), and failure to make a go of it (Cochran 1981). It should be noted that the definition of failure used by researchers generally has depended on the nature of the data available. To better understand the origins of failure and for future prevention, it is important to understand why and how firms fail, as business failure is not a sudden event, but a dynamic process. Failure as a Process The study of the process failures is important for two reasons (Crutzen and Van Caillie 2020): (1) to try to understand and reach the origins of failure, because only the corrective actions that address the fundamental and true causes of the crisis could lead to regeneration and prevent collapse of the pany, and (2) the failure of a process shows how important factors (causes, consequences, symptoms) are bined in time. The oldest and most wellknown failure processes were developed by Argenti (1976). He describes the relation between nonfinancial causes of bankruptcy and their financial effects within three different failure trajectories. In each of the trajectories, there are different sequences of events, each described by different binations of causes and symptoms characteristic of a given trajectory. Subsequent investigators have proposed their classification, similar to the Argenties trajectories by adding their own types, or expanding existing classifications for more detailed descriptions of the causes and symptoms (Ooghe and De Prijcker 2020, Richardson et al. 1994). Based on the analysis of authors presented above, we can distinguish five general types of trajectories of failures relating to small and mediumsized enterprises: An Unsuccessful Startup: A typical failure process of startups in which panies have no chance of survival due to management errors mitted in the establishment of the business. Inappropriate management leads to insufficient control mechanisms and operational ineffic iencies. Errors in the pany’s policy are the visible result of errors made by management. Within a short period, the pany has major problems surviving, and the fall of the pany most likely appears shortly after its foundation. – A Dazzled Growth Company: The initial shorting of the leaders of this pany is their reaction to the first successes of the pany. Management bees dazzled and dangerously overoptimistic. Capital expenditures increase together with financial leverage. Issues and pitfalls that could take the pany down are ignored and management and anizational structure remains almost unchanged. This leads to loss of control and an unawareness of possible problems that may affect the effectiveness of business. In the longer term, this situation leads to the loss of good financial health and negative signals are ignored and interpreted as the effect of the external factors. – An Apathetic Established Company: A pany existing more or less successfully for several years. Lack of motivation and mitment of the pany’s leaders is typical of these panies. Entrepreneurs keep promoting strategies that were successful in the past. Due to apathy, they are not aware of gradual changes in the environment and the losses of its strategic advantage. This continues until a serious disturbance in the capital structure of the pany happens. Attempts to restructure do not bring improvement due to the rigidity and lack of mitment of managers. – An Ambitious Growth Company: The management or the entrepreneur leading an ambitious growth pany has the objective of making their anization an important pany in the industry. These panies have a high propensity for risk and some of them are also overly optimistic. They do not attach importance to longterm plans. Their initial shorting is the large overestimation of the demand for the pany’s products despite the inexperience and capabilities of management. This overestimation can be the consequence of overoptimism or misinformation about the market size or about the speed by which possible clients switch over from petitors. As a result of this situation, there are not enough sales to cover expenses and there is large overcapacity, which means the loss of liquidity and solv