Purpose This paper aims to investigate how entrepreneurial small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) develop resilience strategies when faced with crises by leveraging interactions within business networks. Using the Industrial Marketing and Purchasing (IMP) perspective, this study explores entrepreneurial SME responses to disruptive events moving towards resilience, robustness and antifragility. Design/methodology/approach The study adopts a qualitative, abductive approach using six illustrative case studies from diverse sectors across four countries. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews, direct observations, secondary sources and event-based narrative analysis. The study analyses resilience strategies across three interrelated levels, organisational, dyadic and network. Findings Entrepreneurial SMEs build resilience through six relationally embedded strategies across three levels: (1) Organisational strategies (Frame and Reclaim, Adapt and Advance) manage internal vulnerabilities through data-driven relationship management and business model innovation. (2) Dyadic strategies (Diversify and Thrive, Reconnect and Protect) stabilise relationships through portfolio diversification and emotional capital cultivation. (3) Network strategies (Bridge and Bond, Ally and Amplify) enable collective responses through cross-sector partnerships and institutional alliances. The study finds that the level at which a crisis originates does not determine the level at which firms develop their resilience responses. Practical implications The framework provides entrepreneurial SMEs with strategic options tailored to their network position, resource constraints and crisis type, demonstrating how firms can progress from basic recovery to antifragile growth. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study offers the first systematic, multi-level typology of resilience strategies in entrepreneurial SME networks, extending IMP theorising to capture how resilience strategies are co-constructed across organisational, dyadic and network levels.
McGrath et al. (Thu,) studied this question.