Jordanian companies start small .. Why don’t they grow?
It is easy to celebrate the launch of a new company, the opening of a small business, or a new entrepreneurship programme. But the more important question comes later: what happens to these companies after five or ten years? How many expand production and hire more people, and how many remain the same size or leave the market? This issue receives too little attention in Jordan’s economic debate. The challenge is not only to encourage people to start businesses, but also to create conditions in which successful businesses can grow. With the continuing need for more jobs, and unemployment among Jordanians reaching 21% in the second quarter of 2026, the growth of existing companies matters to both the economy and people’s lives.
Micro, small and medium-sized enterprises account for more than 99% of businesses in Jordan and provide around 60% of formal employment, yet contribute less than 30% of gross domestic product, according to estimates cited by the International Fund for Agricultural Development in a report issued in 2025. These shares are not expected to be equal: differences in company size and business activity are natural. But the figures show the breadth of the economic base on which Jordan can build, and raise a crucial question: why do more promising firms not move into higher levels of production and employment?
The 2024–2025 national entrepreneurship report adds another dimension. It recorded a 34% rise in early-stage entrepreneurial activity, while the share of established business owners fell from 7% to 5%. This does not mean that the same new businesses failed: the indicators describe different groups. But they show why economic policy needs to pay more attention to what happens after a company is established. Encouraging more people to enter the market is not enough unless businesses also have a better chance to survive and expand. We need to know what happens after support ends, not simply how many beneficiaries were announced.
This is where the responsibility of economic policy becomes clearer. Jordan has introduced initiatives and reforms to improve the business environment, and these efforts matter. But announcements alone cannot establish their impact. The government report issued on 10 November 2026 on implementation of the Economic Modernisation Vision tracks 395 projects, 34 of them completed by the end of the third quarter. Monitoring delivery is necessary, but it does not, by itself, tell us enough about economic results. The challenge is not merely to move a project from “in progress” to “completed”, but to establish whether it helped firms increase output and employment. Without published indicators connecting support to company growth, it is difficult to know which policies work and which need adjustment.
A company’s needs change as it matures. What helps a business get started may not be enough to double its output years later. In financing, for example, micro, small and medium-sized enterprises received around 10.9% of bank credit facilities extended to the private sector in the first quarter of 2026, compared with 11.1% a year earlier. That share does not, on its own, prove a financing shortage, but it invites closer examination of whether funding meets the needs of companies capable of expanding. Growth also requires stronger management, specialised skills, wider markets, and procedures that do not make each additional step more complex and costly.
The consequences extend beyond business owners. A growing company can, when market conditions allow, buy more from local suppliers, train its workforce, invest in technology, and create more productive jobs. When many businesses remain small, opportunities to raise productivity and wages are constrained. This matters particularly in the governorates, where expanding an existing competitive firm may deliver results sooner than waiting for a new project to start from scratch. The point is not to favour older companies over new ones, but to give growth after establishment the attention it deserves.
Company growth should no longer be a secondary consideration in economic policy. The government could publish an annual indicator showing how many businesses moved from small to medium-sized, and from medium-sized to large, while tracking recipients of support over three to five years. The measure should follow sales, productivity and employment, and identify obstacles that held other firms back. Those findings could then guide changes to licensing, market access and financing arrangements. That would allow programmes to be judged by what changed for companies and their employees, not merely by the number of initiatives launched.
Economic policy cannot be judged solely by the number of businesses entering the market or the number of government projects reported as completed. It must also be judged by whether firms have the conditions they need to grow. This does not make government responsible for every success or failure; management, competition and market conditions also matter. It does, however, make government accountable for the results of its policies and for obstacles within its power to address. If the private sector is expected to drive output and jobs, we need to know how many firms have moved into a larger category and how many jobs they added. The question is no longer only how many companies we helped to start, but how many our policies helped to grow.
It is easy to celebrate the launch of a new company, the opening of a small business, or a new entrepreneurship programme. But the more important question comes later: what happens to these companies after five or ten years? How many expand production and hire more people, and how many remain the same size or leave the market? This issue receives too little attention in Jordan’s economic debate. The challenge is not only to encourage people to start businesses, but also to create conditions in which successful businesses can grow. With the continuing need for more jobs, and unemployment among Jordanians reaching 21% in the second quarter of 2026, the growth of existing companies matters to both the economy and people’s lives.
Micro, small and medium-sized enterprises account for more than 99% of businesses in Jordan and provide around 60% of formal employment, yet contribute less than 30% of gross domestic product, according to estimates cited by the International Fund for Agricultural Development in a report issued in 2025. These shares are not expected to be equal: differences in company size and business activity are natural. But the figures show the breadth of the economic base on which Jordan can build, and raise a crucial question: why do more promising firms not move into higher levels of production and employment?
The 2024–2025 national entrepreneurship report adds another dimension. It recorded a 34% rise in early-stage entrepreneurial activity, while the share of established business owners fell from 7% to 5%. This does not mean that the same new businesses failed: the indicators describe different groups. But they show why economic policy needs to pay more attention to what happens after a company is established. Encouraging more people to enter the market is not enough unless businesses also have a better chance to survive and expand. We need to know what happens after support ends, not simply how many beneficiaries were announced.
This is where the responsibility of economic policy becomes clearer. Jordan has introduced initiatives and reforms to improve the business environment, and these efforts matter. But announcements alone cannot establish their impact. The government report issued on 10 November 2026 on implementation of the Economic Modernisation Vision tracks 395 projects, 34 of them completed by the end of the third quarter. Monitoring delivery is necessary, but it does not, by itself, tell us enough about economic results. The challenge is not merely to move a project from “in progress” to “completed”, but to establish whether it helped firms increase output and employment. Without published indicators connecting support to company growth, it is difficult to know which policies work and which need adjustment.
A company’s needs change as it matures. What helps a business get started may not be enough to double its output years later. In financing, for example, micro, small and medium-sized enterprises received around 10.9% of bank credit facilities extended to the private sector in the first quarter of 2026, compared with 11.1% a year earlier. That share does not, on its own, prove a financing shortage, but it invites closer examination of whether funding meets the needs of companies capable of expanding. Growth also requires stronger management, specialised skills, wider markets, and procedures that do not make each additional step more complex and costly.
The consequences extend beyond business owners. A growing company can, when market conditions allow, buy more from local suppliers, train its workforce, invest in technology, and create more productive jobs. When many businesses remain small, opportunities to raise productivity and wages are constrained. This matters particularly in the governorates, where expanding an existing competitive firm may deliver results sooner than waiting for a new project to start from scratch. The point is not to favour older companies over new ones, but to give growth after establishment the attention it deserves.
Company growth should no longer be a secondary consideration in economic policy. The government could publish an annual indicator showing how many businesses moved from small to medium-sized, and from medium-sized to large, while tracking recipients of support over three to five years. The measure should follow sales, productivity and employment, and identify obstacles that held other firms back. Those findings could then guide changes to licensing, market access and financing arrangements. That would allow programmes to be judged by what changed for companies and their employees, not merely by the number of initiatives launched.
Economic policy cannot be judged solely by the number of businesses entering the market or the number of government projects reported as completed. It must also be judged by whether firms have the conditions they need to grow. This does not make government responsible for every success or failure; management, competition and market conditions also matter. It does, however, make government accountable for the results of its policies and for obstacles within its power to address. If the private sector is expected to drive output and jobs, we need to know how many firms have moved into a larger category and how many jobs they added. The question is no longer only how many companies we helped to start, but how many our policies helped to grow.
It is easy to celebrate the launch of a new company, the opening of a small business, or a new entrepreneurship programme. But the more important question comes later: what happens to these companies after five or ten years? How many expand production and hire more people, and how many remain the same size or leave the market? This issue receives too little attention in Jordan’s economic debate. The challenge is not only to encourage people to start businesses, but also to create conditions in which successful businesses can grow. With the continuing need for more jobs, and unemployment among Jordanians reaching 21% in the second quarter of 2026, the growth of existing companies matters to both the economy and people’s lives.
Micro, small and medium-sized enterprises account for more than 99% of businesses in Jordan and provide around 60% of formal employment, yet contribute less than 30% of gross domestic product, according to estimates cited by the International Fund for Agricultural Development in a report issued in 2025. These shares are not expected to be equal: differences in company size and business activity are natural. But the figures show the breadth of the economic base on which Jordan can build, and raise a crucial question: why do more promising firms not move into higher levels of production and employment?
The 2024–2025 national entrepreneurship report adds another dimension. It recorded a 34% rise in early-stage entrepreneurial activity, while the share of established business owners fell from 7% to 5%. This does not mean that the same new businesses failed: the indicators describe different groups. But they show why economic policy needs to pay more attention to what happens after a company is established. Encouraging more people to enter the market is not enough unless businesses also have a better chance to survive and expand. We need to know what happens after support ends, not simply how many beneficiaries were announced.
This is where the responsibility of economic policy becomes clearer. Jordan has introduced initiatives and reforms to improve the business environment, and these efforts matter. But announcements alone cannot establish their impact. The government report issued on 10 November 2026 on implementation of the Economic Modernisation Vision tracks 395 projects, 34 of them completed by the end of the third quarter. Monitoring delivery is necessary, but it does not, by itself, tell us enough about economic results. The challenge is not merely to move a project from “in progress” to “completed”, but to establish whether it helped firms increase output and employment. Without published indicators connecting support to company growth, it is difficult to know which policies work and which need adjustment.
A company’s needs change as it matures. What helps a business get started may not be enough to double its output years later. In financing, for example, micro, small and medium-sized enterprises received around 10.9% of bank credit facilities extended to the private sector in the first quarter of 2026, compared with 11.1% a year earlier. That share does not, on its own, prove a financing shortage, but it invites closer examination of whether funding meets the needs of companies capable of expanding. Growth also requires stronger management, specialised skills, wider markets, and procedures that do not make each additional step more complex and costly.
The consequences extend beyond business owners. A growing company can, when market conditions allow, buy more from local suppliers, train its workforce, invest in technology, and create more productive jobs. When many businesses remain small, opportunities to raise productivity and wages are constrained. This matters particularly in the governorates, where expanding an existing competitive firm may deliver results sooner than waiting for a new project to start from scratch. The point is not to favour older companies over new ones, but to give growth after establishment the attention it deserves.
Company growth should no longer be a secondary consideration in economic policy. The government could publish an annual indicator showing how many businesses moved from small to medium-sized, and from medium-sized to large, while tracking recipients of support over three to five years. The measure should follow sales, productivity and employment, and identify obstacles that held other firms back. Those findings could then guide changes to licensing, market access and financing arrangements. That would allow programmes to be judged by what changed for companies and their employees, not merely by the number of initiatives launched.
Economic policy cannot be judged solely by the number of businesses entering the market or the number of government projects reported as completed. It must also be judged by whether firms have the conditions they need to grow. This does not make government responsible for every success or failure; management, competition and market conditions also matter. It does, however, make government accountable for the results of its policies and for obstacles within its power to address. If the private sector is expected to drive output and jobs, we need to know how many firms have moved into a larger category and how many jobs they added. The question is no longer only how many companies we helped to start, but how many our policies helped to grow.
comments
Jordanian companies start small .. Why don’t they grow?
comments