International Entrepreneurship Research: What ...

Journal of International Entrepreneurship 1, 31±42, 2003 # 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.

International Entrepreneurship Research: What Scope for International Business Theories? STEPHEN YOUNG University of Strathclyde, Strathclyde International Business Unit, Stenhouse Building, 173 Cathedral Street, Glasgow G4 0RQ, U.K. PAVLOS DIMITRATOS* University of Strathclyde, Strathclyde International Business Unit, Stenhouse Building, 173 Cathedral Street, Glasgow G4 0RQ, U.K. LEÂO-PAUL DANA University of Canterbury, Department of Management, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand Abstract. International entrepreneurship (IE) research has commonly neglected significant perspectives applied by international business scholars. Explanations for the emergence and growth of international entrepreneurial firms largely focus on the resource-based view and the network perspective. While these approaches are useful, we suggest that IE would benefit significantly from a greater emphasis on its ìnternational nature'. Therefore, theories of international business should be employed in conjunction with other approaches in order to appropriately emphasize the ìnternational character', holistically study the IE notion, and considerably broaden the scope of IE examination. Suggestions for relevant research directions are discussed. Keywords:

International entrepreneurship, international business, research directions

International entrepreneurship (IE) is typically considered one of the key areas for future research in international business, entrepreneurship, and strategic management studies (see Wright and Ricks, 1994; Zahra et al., 1999; Hitt and Ireland, 2000, respectively). Research in IE has grown dramatically in the past and current decades, yet it is distinguished by a multiplicity of approaches. Still in its infancy, this area seeks for delineation of its boundaries and demarcation of its key theoretical aspects. A major issue is that the IE field is lacking in solid theoretical frameworks, which is a deficiency that should be closely monitored since it may cause fragmentation in this area (McDougall and Oviatt, 2000). It may also lead to narrow and excessively descriptive studies lacking theoretical support. The present article seeks to contribute to the debate concerning the features and boundaries of IE research. IE appears to be largely influenced by the resource-based view and the network perspective. In the IE research, the former seeks to identify the key factors likely to be conducive to superior performance of entrepreneurial firms, while the latter stresses the vital role

*Corresponding author

32

YOUNG ET AL.

of cooperative activities in their international activities. Nevertheless, key theories and notions of international business appear to be employed to a minimal extent in IE research. Although this consideration seems to be an oxymoron, IE is lacking notions from international business theories that would significantly highlight its unique ìnternational nature'. In order for IE to be truly international it should stress its international business aspects also. If it fails to do so, it may end up being another branch of strategic management or entrepreneurship, notwithstanding their importance to the study of the field. This article is organized as follows. In the next section, the two aforementioned theoretical perspectives, namely the resource-based and network views that are prevalent in IE study are explored. Another emerging research stream in IE research is also discussed. This stream is likely to bring future IE research closer to that of strategic management but also broaden the scope of IE research. After that, the potential influence of international business research on present IE studies is analyzed by examining four different themes from international business theory that can provide insightful directions. In the concluding section, some suggestions for IE research originating from the discussion of this article are explored. Streams in international entrepreneurship research For many researchers, IE deals with the study of ìnternational new ventures', `born globals', or `global start-ups'. In the first influential study in this area, McDougall (1989) suggests that IE is the development of new ventures that from inception go abroad. Therefore, the initial (and ongoing in many studies) emphasis of IE research has been on young and unavoidably small firms that initiate and manage effectively internationalization ventures in their early life stages. Indeed a substantial share of studies in the past decade dealt with the international activities of young small firms, especially in knowledge-intensive sectors (e.g. Jolly et al., 1992). Two themes seem to distinguish relevant research examinations of international new ventures: the resource-based view and the network perspective. The resource-based view in international entrepreneurship research The first theme that distinguishes IE research is linked to the emphasis given to the unique and idiosyncratic assets and capabilities of international new ventures. The possession and nurturing of their assets and capabilities may be able to explain the successful growth of these firms abroad. Hence, in order to identify how international new ventures can achieve and maintain a competitive advantage likely to generate economic rents, IE research in this examination has incorporated the resource-based view in its rationale. In one of the most significant IE writings, McDougall et al. (1994) argue that the resource-based view is a valid framework that can be used to illuminate the international activities of international new ventures. In related studies, Autio et al.

INTERNATIONAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP RESEARCH

33

(1997) and Bloodgood et al. (1996) explicitly employ the resource-based view. Also, other researchers find that firm-specific resources, such as global vision and foreign work experience of the management team are likely to render competitive advantage in the international marketplace (Oviatt and McDougall, 1995; McDougall and Oviatt, 1996). IE may not have fully utilized the value that the resource-based view can provide, a fact possibly linked to the weaknesses of this approach (see Priem and Butler, 2001). Nevertheless, no one can dispute its key importance and widespread use in the IE study so far. The network perspective in international entrepreneurship research The second theme that appears to characterize IE research is associated with the role of networks in the development of international new ventures. Personal connections and interorganizational arrangements may considerably assist the growth of these ventures. The extensive application of the network perspective is warranted since formal or informal networks may be mechanisms employed by international new ventures to overcome resource constraints that they encounter. The network theory has repeatedly been proven to be useful in understanding the expansion and success of international entrepreneurial firms (Jolly et al., 1992; Oviatt and McDougall, 1995). Towards an enlargement of the international entrepreneurship scope During the last decade there have been pleas for an extension of the IE field to cover other international enterprise activities also (e.g. Wright and Ricks, 1994). To a large extent these stemmed from the view in the (mainstream) entrepreneurship literature that entrepreneurial behaviour may concern all firms irrespective of age, size, or sector (e.g. Stevenson and Jarillo, 1990). As a result of this debate, recently McDougall and Oviatt (2000: 903) argued that ÌE is a combination of innovative, proactive, and risk-seeking behavior that crosses national borders and is intended to create value in organizations'. In essence, this definition implicitly recognizes that the emphasis put on the study of international new ventures has been rather one-sided and unrepresentative of other IE activities. This definition is likely to signify the emergence of an emerging stream in IE research, in which empirical studies of firms of varying ages, sizes, and sectors start taking place. A characteristic of these studies (e.g. Zahra and Garvis, 2000) is that they explicitly adopt the construct of innovation, proactiveness, and risk-taking behaviour in international enterprise activities to measure IE. The emergence of this research stream is anticipated to bring IE research closer to the underlying theme of strategic management studies, that is, organizational value creation. Viewed in this light, IE can be identified with the raison d' être of strategic management, which regards the pursuit and exploitation of competitive advantage as being central to the scope of the firm (cf. Hitt and Ireland, 2000).

34

YOUNG ET AL.

We approve the broadening of scope of IE research that the emergence of this research stream may signify. In the remaining of this article, we suggest that a greater involvement of international business theories in IE would similarly work towards the same direction: by embracing more international business theories, IE examination can potentially cover international activities of organizations regardless of age, size, (private/public) sector, or foreign market servicing mode. International business and international entrepreneurship research The current debate within the emerging IE field on subject boundaries is not unique, since the wider international business area has also endured regular soul-searching. Thus, significant discussion took place during the last decade regarding the boundaries of international business, with definitions ranging from `transactions that cross-national boundaries' (Rugman and Hodgetts, 1995: 4) to à multi-level economic exchange process' (Toyne, 1997: 37). According to Young (1997: 231), international business inquiry should seek èxplanations for the management of and the societal dimensions of international business at multiple levels'. A difficulty in international business has been that its different and often diverging research fields have developed independently and have never really been reconciled, as they start from different premises (e.g. rational versus behavioural assumptions in the transaction-cost versus stages theories, respectively) and deal with different questions (Andersson, 2000). Moreover, the international business area may be losing its distinctiveness: the higher the proportion of business that becomes international, the less international business can lay unique claim to the field. Despite the soul-searching in international business, there are many insights that can be drawn and research themes identified by evaluating its existing and new literature. Such an approach may in turn throw up opportunities for IE. These four aspects related to international business literature and study are given below. 1. The critique of international business theories. It is perhaps surprising but one of the basic premises of and justifications for IE research lies in criticisms of traditional international business models and concepts. Particular criticism was directed at the incrementalist proposition of the stages theory, namely the notion that resource commitments of the firm abroad are made in small steps as experiential knowledge is acquired (Bilkey and Tesar, 1977; Johanson and Vahlne, 1977). There have been many cases of international new ventures examining knowledge-intensive sectors attesting to the opposite (McDougall et al., 1994; Oviatt and McDougall, 1994; Bloodgood et al., 1996). Often in these studies, the firm from its inception appears to disregard its domestic market in favour of the international marketplace. While it is true that the international growth of international new ventures may not be sufficiently explained by the stages theory, IE in these writings appeared as if it was a totally segregated body of knowledge for which traditional international business theories could offer no useful insights whatsoever. Widening the critique,


35

McDougall et al. (1994) and Oviatt and McDougall (1994) argued that international new venture behaviour was not in accord with other international business models, including monopolistic advantage, product life cycle, oligopolistic reaction, and internalization theories. If this is the case, then no theory of international business can provide useful insights into IE. More recently, IE scholars (McDougall and Oviatt, 2000; Zahra and George, 2002) have called for an integration of approaches and the use of a holistic view. Additionally, coming from an international business standpoint, authors such as Birkinshaw (2001) have also demonstrated the usefulness of a comprehensive approach involving transaction-cost as well as resource-based and network perspectives. Such integrative studies would provide interesting insights on the investigation of the mode of market servicing and the internationalization of valueadded activities in the IE research. 2. The role of environment for international entrepreneurial firms. Reflecting on the nature of international business research, Young (2001) has argued for a stronger focus upon the environment in which internationalized firms operate. This dilemma focuses upon a key question for IE research, namely what is different in the environment of international entrepreneurial activities of firms? There are distinct strategic and managerial challenges as entrepreneurial firms cross international borders. The characteristics of and developments in the international economic, legal/institutional, and political/social environment are of major significance. They may provide the distinctive host country challenges and opportunities that can be exploited by international entrepreneurs. As Casson (1996) suggests, the role of the entrepreneur is to monitor a volatile environment for transitory and persistent shocks. At the same time, from a home nation perspective, the external environment contains the business systems, market-hierarchy relations, and cultural practices within which IE activities are born and generated. Nevertheless, the theme of discovery and exploitation of environmental opportunities abroad is under-explored in the IE area. Only a few studies in IE (Zahra et al., 1997; Zahra and Garvis, 2000) have been identified to examine explicitly the role of the international and domestic environment for entrepreneurial ventures abroad. Thus, more work on this area that is relevant to the activities of any international entrepreneurial firm should be undertaken. 3. The importance of an institutional approach. Recently increasing interest has been given to institutional economics, with themes of emphasis including institutions as sources of growth; microanalytical perspectives on trust, distrust, and corruption; modes of organization; enforcement issues (MeÂnard, 2000); and network-based strategies (Peng and Heath, 1996). In an international business context, the importance of the institutional framework is confirmed in the work of Brunetti et al. (1997), who find that security of property rights, reliability of the judiciary, extent of corruption, and political stability are positive determinants of the level of foreign direct investment inflows in

36

YOUNG ET AL.

a study of 20 transition economies in the 1990s (see also Peng and Heath, 1996; Habib and Zurawicki, 2001). Additionally, employing an institutional perspective in an international business area, Yeung (2002) investigates the entrepreneurial activities across borders in his study of city-states of Hong Kong and Singapore. The constituents of the institutional approach in his research refer to the pre-existing configuration of institutional structures, which consists of: ownership patterns; patterns of business formation and coordination; intra-firm management and/or entrepreneurial processes; and, work and employment relations. These institutional structures provide entrepreneurial endowments and resources, namely information asymmetry, business risks and opportunities, finance and capital, experience in business and management, and relationships with customers and suppliers. The entrepreneurial endowments and resources enable the entrepreneur to act differently in the international marketplace. Success in international business is dependent upon the embeddedness of these transnational entrepreneurs into cross-border institutional structures, comprising global, international, and national networks. Following a similar line of thinking, Busenitz et al. (2000) introduce a country institutional profile for entrepreneurship comprising regulatory, cognitive, and normative dimensions. Based on their empirical cross-cultural research, these authors suggest that country-level institutional dissimilarities can contribute differently to levels and types of entrepreneurship across nations. Such a study can provide useful insights on how government regulations as well as public perceptions towards entrepreneurs and their societal contributions may facilitate the development of international entrepreneurial activities. 4. Multinationals and the role of subsidiaries. The study of multinational activity has been the dominant area of research in the international business field. Long standing themes in the literature on multinationals include parent±subsidiary relations, autonomy and centralization, and roles of multinational subsidiaries. The latter research goes back to studies by predominantly Canadian scholars in the 1980s (e.g. Poynter and Rugman, 1982). Subsequently, largely building on the literature on hierarchies, heterarchies, and the multinational as an inter-organizational network (Bartlett and Ghoshal, 1989; Hedlund, 1994), researchers have explored a number of dimensions of subsidiary roles and strategies that have implications for entrepreneurship research. However, it is only in the very recent past that the work of Birkinshaw (1997, 2000) has provided a direct association between multinationals and corporate entrepreneurship. Specifically, his work discusses the notion of dispersed corporate entrepreneurship, with subsidiary initiative as the manifestation of this activity. He finds that subsidiaries have the potential to enhance local responsiveness, global integration, and worldwide learning. In other words, they may undertake truly entrepreneurial functions that would work to the benefit of the entire organizational system of the multinational (Birkinshaw, 1997). The key contribution implied in this work on multinationals is that IE research can also be transferred into the


37

international activities of larger firms, as proposed by Zahra and George (2002), hence shifting the current emphasis from younger and smaller firms. Future research directions In this article, we have undertaken a critical stance towards IE research. We have noted that the resource-based view and the network approach have attracted a substantial degree of attention in IE studies. We have also suggested that another research stream emerges and brings IE research closer to that of strategic management, but also broadens the scope of IE research. We applaud this enlargement of the scope of IE examination and claim that theories traditionally encountered in international business studies would additionally facilitate such an enlargement. Moreover, examinations embracing international business concepts are likely to generate more comprehensive studies in the IE field and stress the ìnternational character' of this notion. In particular, IE research can benefit from study in the following six aspects that are associated with international business theories (Table 1): 1. Market servicing mode and internationalization of value-added activities. In the IE field, insufficient emphasis has been given to entry and subsequent market servicing modes used by international entrepreneurial firms. Especially internalization theories and the linked transaction-cost frameworks may provide useful insights on when and why the entrepreneurial firm chooses different collaborative modes. These theories have also a contribution to make to the examination of other modes employed by international entrepreneurial firms, such as exporting or subsidiary formation. Also, coming from an international business standpoint, Rugman and Verbeke (2001) have suggested a greater emphasis on specific cross-border value creating activities. This point has also been picked up by Zahra and George (2002) in their review of IE research stressing the deficiency of past studies in ignoring the internationalization of the firm's value chain (e.g. R&D and cross-border innovation). Two issues that arise for IE research include: Which aspects of production, marketing, R&D, sales are kept at home and which become international, and why? And, which countries are likely to host these aspects of international enterprise activities, and why? These are important themes from the international business literature that apply to all international entrepreneurial firms irrespective of their age or size. 2. Conceptualization and measurement of international environment. The role of international environmental threats and opportunities is key in the identification and pursuit of international entrepreneurial activities. Studies in management have used both subjective and perceptive measures to measure environment, with the two environmental dimensions of munificence and uncertainty being regularly employed. Questions associated with IE study are: Are these variables and existing scales sufficient in capturing the environment related to IE activities? Or do we have to

38

YOUNG ET AL.

Table 1. Future research directions for international entrepreneurship study associated with international business theories Area

Directions

Market servicing mode and internationalization of value-added activities

When and why does the entrepreneurial firm choose different collaborative modes, exporting forms, and subsidiaries? Which aspects of value-added activities become international, in which countries, and why?

Conceptualization and measurement of international environment

How should the international and domestic environment of the entrepreneurial firm be measured? What types of environmental conditions are conducive to international entrepreneurial activities?

Use of institutional approach

How can the institutional context involving national (host and home), regional, and multilateral institutions affect activities of the entrepreneurial firm? What is the role of government-linked companies as political international entrepreneurial organizations?

Entrepreneurial roles of subsidiaries

What are the characteristics and functions of entrepreneurial subsidiaries? What is the role of the parent firm in entrepreneurial activities of subsidiaries?

Refinement of the resource-based view How can the resource-based view better explain in international entrepreneurship international entrepreneurial activities? What are the constituents and dynamics of the ìnternational entrepreneurship process'? Application of emerging ìnnovation' theories in international business

What are the sources and forms of innovation for international entrepreneurial activities? What is the role of the multinational as an agent of innovation? What is the role of governments and research institutions internationally and domestically in the `socialization of innovation'?

resort to other studies and variables of international business, such as those described by Porter (1990) in his `national diamond' approach? Also, are the environmental conditions that are supportive of (domestic) entrepreneurship activities supportive of IE activities as well? Research on these issues is necessary in order to provide an understanding of the environmental context that can be conducive to superior performance of IE activities of any organization. 3. Use of institutional approach. Different regulatory, cognitive, and normative contextual dimensions, such as those described by Busenitz et al. (2000) can stimulate dissimilar entrepreneurial behaviour across countries. This examination may take place in both the host and the home economies involving national, regional, and multilateral institutions (cf. Brewer and Young, 2000). Additionally, Yeung (2002) embracing an institutional perspective, extends the notion of intrapreneurs to government-linked companies operating abroad, thus


39

opening up an agenda that focuses on the role of the state as a political international entrepreneurial organization. Viewed in this light, IE research can encompass crossnational activities of public as well as private sector organizations, thus benefiting from the broadening of its scope. 4. Entrepreneurial roles of subsidiaries. There have been numerous studies on the roles and scopes of subsidiaries as part of the differentiated corporate network of multinationals (e.g. Bartlett and Ghoshal, 1989). The recent extension of this into the area of subsidiary entrepreneurship, principally by Birkinshaw (1997, 2000), opens up interesting avenues for IE research. This examination would be designed to provide answers to questions, such as: What is the full range of different entrepreneurship functions that subsidiaries may undertake? What are the characteristics of truly entrepreneurial subsidiaries? How do parent±subsidiary interactions play out in IE? What is the role of subsidiary autonomy in entrepreneurship? 5. Refinement of the resource-based view in international entrepreneurship. Few would disagree with the fact that the resource-based view has been very influential in so many international business studies recently. Peng (2001: 821) in a critical evaluation of the interface of the two areas notes that future international business examination `needs to pay more attention to process- and implementation-related issues'. Similarly, further IE research can explore such themes in longitudinal and indepth case studies. In accord with this suggestion, recently researchers have argued that IE may better be conceptualized as a processual phenomenon unfolding over time (Zahra and George, 2002). Through this processual viewpoint, IE study can potentially benefit from the emerging dynamic-capability perspective (Teece et al., 1997), which is closely related to the resource-based view. In essence, the entrepreneurial behaviour of the internationalized firm can be approached as an organizational dynamic capability that may render the firm a competitive advantage. By employing such a multidisciplinary approach the IE notion can be significantly enriched and acquire greater theoretical coherence. 6. Application of emerging ìnnovation' theories in international business. There are promising theoretical insights on IE coming from authors working at the interface of international business and economics (e.g. Cantwell, 2002; Pitelis, 2002). These scholars are investigating unexplored avenues with regard to innovation mainly in the writings of Penrose (1959) and Schumpeter (1934). The four ideas that could be valuable to IE study largely stem from Cantwell (2002) and include the following. First, the nature of innovation as a more active problem-solving process than that derived simply from path-dependent expansion, as proposed by Penrose (1959). International entrepreneurial firms need to understand and explore a range of sources of innovation in a continuous search for technological advantage rather than solely relying on past accumulated technological know-how. Second, forms of innovation, which in a modern environment extend beyond Schumpeter's `new combinations', to include the ability to blend together and incorporate technological

40

YOUNG ET AL.

developments from in-house and external (domestic and international) networking activities. Third, the role of the multinational as an active agent of innovation and technological change. Associated with this consideration is the involvement of multinational subsidiary networks in facilitating complementary paths of innovation through integration of technologies (Cantwell and Piscitello, 2000). Fourth, the role of governments and research institutions in knowledge development and transfer, as part of, what Cantwell (2002: 241) describes as, the `socialization of innovation'. This last consideration again stresses the importance of institutions and institutional networks in the IE process. In short, in this article we have argued in favour of application of more international business theories and notions in the IE study. By discussing how six research directions related to international business theories can be of relevance to IE, we aim at a clearer ìnternational nature' of IE in future examinations. By paying more attention to international business, IE study would cover international activities of young and old, small and large, and private and public sector organizations, which employ any market servicing mode abroad.

References Andersson, S., ``The Internationalization of the Firm from an Entrepreneurial Perspective'', International Studies of Management and Organization 30(1), 63±92, (2000). Autio, E., H. Yli-Renko, and A. Salonen, `Ìnternational Growth of Young Technology-Based Firms: A Resource-Based Network Model'', Journal of Enterprising Culture 5(1), 57±73, (1997). Bartlett, C. A. and S. Ghoshal, Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1989. Bilkey, W. J. and G. Tesar, ``The Export Behavior of Smaller-Sized Wisconsin Manufacturing Firms'', Journal of International Business Studies 8(1), 93±98, (1977). Birkinshaw, J., `Èntrepreneurship in Multinational Corporations: The Characteristics of Subsidiary Initiatives'', Strategic Management Journal 18, 207±229, (1997). Birkinshaw, J., Entrepreneurship in the Global Firm. London: Sage, 2000. Birkinshaw, J., ``Strategy and Management in MNE Subsidiaries''. In A. M. Rugman and T. L. Brewer (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Business, pp. 380±401. London: Oxford University Press, 2001. Bloodgood, J. M., H. J. Sapienza, and J. G. Almeida, ``The Internationalization of New High-Potential U.S. Ventures: Antecedents and Outcomes'', Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 20(4), 61±76, (1996). Brewer, T. L. and S. Young, The Multilateral Investment System and Multinational Enterprises. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. Brunetti, A., G. Kisunko, and B. Weber, `Ìnstitutions in Transition: Reliability of Rules and Economic Performance in Former Socialist Countries'', World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, No. 1809, Washington, DC: The World Bank, 1997. Busenitz, L. W., C. Gomez, and J. W. Spencer, ``Country Institutional Profiles: Unlocking Entrepreneurial Phenomena'', Academy of Management Journal 43, 994±1003, (2000). Cantwell, J., `Ìnnovation, Profits and Growth: Penrose and Schumpeter''. In C. Pitelis (ed.), The Growth of the Firm, pp. 215±248. London: Oxford University Press, 2002. Cantwell, J. A. and L. Piscitello, `Àccumulating Technological CompetenceÐIts Changing Impact on Corporate Diversification and Internationalisation'', Industrial and Corporate Change 9, 21±51, (2000).


41

Casson, M., ``The Nature of the Firm Reconsidered: Information Synthesis and Entrepreneurial Organisation'', Management International Review 36(1) (Special Issue), 55±94, (1996). Habib, M. and L. Zurawicki, ``Country-Level Investments and the Effect of CorruptionÐSome Empirical Evidence'', International Business Review 10, 687±700, (2001). Hedlund, G., `À Model of Knowledge Management and the N-Form Corporation'', Strategic Management Journal 15 (Special Issue), 73±90, (1994). Hitt, M. and R. D. Ireland, ``The Intersection of Entrepreneurship and Strategic Management Research''. In D. L. Sexton and H. LandstroÈm (eds), Handbook of Entrepreneurship, pp. 45±63. Oxford: Blackwell, 2000. Johanson, J. and J.-E. Vahlne, ``The Internationalization Process of the Firm: A Model of Knowledge Development and Increasing Foreign Market Commitments'', Journal of International Business Studies 8(1), 23±32, (1977). Jolly, V. K., M. Alahuhta, and J.-P. Jeannet, ``Challenging the Incumbents: How Technology Start-Ups Compete Globally'', Journal of Strategic Change 1, 71±82, (1992). McDougall, P. P., `Ìnternational Versus Domestic Entrepreneurship: New Venture Strategic Behavior and Industry Structure'', Journal of Business Venturing 4, 387±400, (1989). McDougall, P. P. and B. M. Oviatt, ``New Venture Internationalization, Strategic Change, and Performance: A Follow-Up Study'', Journal of Business Venturing 11, 23±40, (1996). McDougall, P. P. and B. M. Oviatt, `Ìnternational Entrepreneurship: The Intersection of Two Research Paths'', Academy of Management Journal 43, 902±908, (2000). McDougall, P. P., S. Shane, and B. M. Oviatt, `Èxplaining the Formation of International New Ventures: The Limits of Theories from International Business Research'', Journal of Business Venturing 9, 469±487, (1994). MeÂnard, C. (ed.), Institutions, Contracts and Organizations. Perspectives from New Institutional Economics. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar, 2000. Oviatt, B. M. and P. P. McDougall, ``Toward a Theory of International New Ventures'', Journal of International Business Studies 25, 45±64, (1994). Oviatt, B. M. and P. P. McDougall, ``Global Start-Ups: Entrepreneurs on a Worldwide Stage'', Academy of Management Executive 9(2), 30±43, (1995). Peng, M., ``The Resource-Based View and International Business'', Journal of Management 27, 803±829, (2001). Peng, M. W. and P. S. Heath, ``The Growth of the Firm in Planned Economies in Transition: Institutions, Organizations, and Strategic Choice'', Academy of Management Review 21, 492±528, (1996). Penrose, E., The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. London: Blackwell, 1959. Pitelis, C. (ed.), The Growth of the Firm. London: Oxford University Press, 2002. Porter, M. E., The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: The Free Press, 1990. Poynter, T. A. and A. R. Rugman, ``World Product Mandates: How Will Multinationals Respond?'' Business Quarterly 47(3), 54±61, (1982). Priem, R. L. and J. E. Butler, `Ìs the Resource-Based `View' a Useful Perspective for Strategic Management Research?'' Academy of Management Review 21, 22±40, (2001). Rugman, A. M. and R. M. Hodgetts, International BusinessÐA Strategic Management Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1995. Rugman, A. M. and A. Verbeke, ``Subsidiary-Specific Advantages in Multinational Firms'', Strategic Management Journal 22, 237±250, (2001). Schumpeter, J. A., The Theory of Economic Development (trans. R. Opie). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1934. Stevenson, H. H. and J. C. Jarillo, `À Paradigm of Entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial Management'', Strategic Management Journal 11, 17±27, (1990). Teece, D. J., G. Pisano, and A. Shuen, ``Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management'', Strategic Management Journal 18, 509±533, (1997). Toyne, B., ``The Conceptual Frontiers of International Business''. In I. Islam and W. Shepherd (eds), Current Issues in International Business, pp. 35±59. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar, 1997.

42

YOUNG ET AL.

Wright, R. W. and D. A. Ricks, ``Trends in International Business Research: Twenty-Five Years Later'', Journal of International Business Studies 25, 687±701, (1994). Yeung, H. W.-C., Entrepreneurship and the Internationalisation of Asian Firms: An Institutional Perspective. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar, 2002. Young, S., ``Current Issues in International Business: An Overview''. In I. Islam and W. Shepherd (eds), Current Issues in International Business, pp. 229±239. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar, 1997. Young, S., ``What Do Researchers Know About the Global Business Environment?'' International Marketing Review 18(2), 120±129, (2001). Zahra, S. A. and D. M. Garvis, `Ìnternational Corporate Entrepreneurship: The Moderating Effect of International Environmental Hostility'', Journal of Business Venturing 15, 469±492, (2000). Zahra, S. A. and G. George, `Ìnternational Entrepreneurship: The Current Status of the Field and Future Research Agenda''. In M. Hitt, D. Ireland, D. Sexton, and M. Camp (eds), Strategic Entrepreneurship: Creating an Integrated Mindset, pp. 255±288. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 2002. Zahra, S. A., D. F. Jennings, and D. F. Kuratko, ``The Antecedents and Consequences of Firm-Level Entrepreneurship: The State of the Field'', Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 24(2), 45±63, (1999). Zahra, S. A., D. O. Neubaum, and M. Huse, ``The Effect of the Environment on Export Performance Among Telecommunications New Ventures'', Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 22(1), 25±46, (1997).