Measuring the Performance of Born-global Firms throughout their Development Process:
The Roles of Initial Market Selection and Internationalisation Speed
Ryan Trudgen
Monash University
Department of Management, Faculty of Business and Economics
Caulfield Campus, 21 Sir John Monash Drive, Caulfield East, 3145, Victoria, Australia
Tel: +61 3 9903 2807 and Fax: +61 3 9903 2718
e-mail: ryan.trudgen@gmail.com
Associate Professor Susan Freeman, PhD
The University of Adelaide
Adelaide Business School, International Business Discipline
Nexus 10, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia, 5005, Australia
Tel: +61 8 8303 3255 and Fax: +61 8 8303 4368
e-mail: susan.freeman@adelaide.edu.au
Abstract:
Purpose: Recent efforts have been made to operationalise the performance of born-global (BG) firms in ways
that acknowledge their unique characteristics and strategies. This paper explores the BG development process
and assesses the relevance of various types of performance measures. Two questions are addressed: First, which
types of performance measures are most relevant to BGs in the various phases of their development? Second,
how do initial market selection and internationalisation speed influence BG development, and therefore the
relevance of performance measures?
Method: Drawing on international entrepreneurship theory, this study undertook a progressive focussing, theory
development/refinement (abduction) approach. Utilising a multiple case study design, data were collected
primarily through in-depth, face-to-face interviews with senior managers from Australian BGs and with industry
experts and analysed using open, axial and selective coding. Data were collected from BGs across each of the
three phases of BG development: pre-start-up/venture creation; early international entry/development; and
international growth/consolidation.
Results: Building on recent conceptualisations of the BG development process, we found that the relevance of
performance measures is dependent, in part, on the BG’s phase of development. Further, the rapidity of
internationalisation and the psychic distance of initial markets influence the duration of each phase.
Conclusion: The unique characteristics and strategies of BGs should be reflected in the measures used to
evaluate their performance in each of the three phases. This study represents the first empirical examination into
the measurement of BG performance across the phases of development, providing a foundation for future scale
development.
Keywords: Born-global, Performance measurement, Pre-founding, Initial internationalisation, Maturity,
International entrepreneurship.
1
1
Introduction
Changes in the global business environment have substantially reduced barriers to international trade, making
global markets accessible to even the youngest and smallest of firms (Efrat and Shoham 2012). This has created
conditions conducive to the emergence and proliferation of born-globals (BGs) (Knight and Cavusgil 2005;
Freeman and Cavusgil 2007). Frequently defined as firms that enter multiple foreign markets at, or soon after,
inception (Knight and Cavusgil 1996), BGs have become increasingly important to both emerging and
developed economies (Almor 2013; Varma 2011). However, many variables are used to distinguish venture
types with key variants defined by differences in innovation and technology, operational and competitive
strategies, international entrepreneurial orientation, finance and performance (Knight and Cavusgil 2005;
Gabrielsson et al. 2008; Kuivalainen et al. 2012). Consequently, greater understanding of BGs, and the factors
that facilitate their success within the global market place, is required (Griffith et al. 2008).
Recent and extensive reviews reveal substantial theoretical and empirical gaps in our understanding of venture
types, such as the BG, despite their prevalence in the international entrepreneurship (IE) literature since the
1980s (Jones et al. 2011). Considerable effort has been devoted to differentiating BGs from the broader
categorisation of international new ventures (INVs) (Madsen 2013), and also traditional (gradual)
internationalizers (Johanson and Vahlne 1977) in terms of their entrepreneurial mindset and risk tolerant
behaviour,
international
experience,
networks
and
international
entrepreneurial
capability.
Recent
conceptualisations reveal that BG strategic behaviour and performance objectives are influenced, at least in part,
by the phase of development in which they find themselves (Efrat and Shoham, 2012; Rialp-Criado et al. 2010;
Gabrielsson et al. 2008; Sleuwaegen and Onkelinxn 2013). While the performance outcomes of BG strategies
have emerged as a prominent topic of interest (Efrat and Shoham 2012; Zhang et al. 2013), progress in this area
has been slowed by the myriad of approaches undertaken to select measures of BG performance. With BG
performance defined ‘as the extent to which financial and other goals are achieved as a function of business
strategies’ (Knight and Cavusgil 2004, p. 129), the selection of performance measures should take into account
not only the unique characteristics of BGs, but also their level of development (Gabrielsson et al. 2008). To our
knowledge, this approach has not yet been systematically addressed. Responding to a lack of empirical evidence
in this area, the first research question of this study is: Which types of performance measures are most relevant
to BGs in the various phases of their development?
To address this first research question, this study explored not only the relevance of specific performance
measures during the BG’s early international entry/development phase, but also the often neglected Pre-startup/new venture creation and international growth/consolidation phases of BG development (Rialp-Criado et al.
2010). However, these phases are not easily operationalised (Gabrielsson et al. 2008). Identifying a point of
incorporation can be problematic, with BG inception recently conceptualised as a process, rather than a single
event (Hewerdine and Welch 2013). Similar challenges arise in identifying the point at which a BG has
progressed from early international entry/development, to international growth and consolidation. The pace of
progression through these phases is likely to be unique to each individual BG, and to be dependent on the
strategic decisions made by entrepreneurial management (Gabrielsson et al. 2008). Consequently, this study
2
explored the influence that BG strategies have on the pace of BG development. The second research question of
this study is: How do initial market selection and internationalisation speed influence BG development, and
therefore the relevance of performance measures?
Responding to recent calls for performance to be assessed through ‘theoretically stronger discipline-specific
measures’ (Richard et al. 2009, p. 744), we adopt international entrepreneurship (IE) as our primary theoretical
lens. There are other perspectives in international business (IB) research, namely the economic (e.g eclectic
paradigm) (Dunning and Lundan 2008) and the process view (e.g. Uppsala internationalisation process (IP)
model, (Johanson and Vahlne 1977), which provide valuable knowledge on the behaviour of internationalising
firms, and we realise that these should not be ignored. As internationalisation is a complex process, many
different perspectives need to be understood, especially if we accept that entrepreneurs are individuals and that
research suggests ‘these individuals influence…firms’ international processes in various ways’ (Andersson
2000, p. 64). Given this ‘reality’, the purpose of our study is to provide a perspective that acknowledges
entrepreneurs and ‘the importance of individuals’ actions’ (p. 66) in our analysis, to enhance our understanding
of the complex phenomenon of firms’ international performance throughout their various development phases
(pre-start-up, initial internationalisation and maturity). Operating at the owner/manager level of analysis, the
development of IE literature has followed the emergence and continued growth of BGs in the global
marketplace (Andersson and Florén 2011). Originally defined as ‘a combination of innovative, proactive and
risk-seeking behaviour that crosses national borders and is intended to create value in organisations’
(McDougall and Oviatt 2000, p.903), IE theory continues to develop and is commonly adopted to explain the
internationalisation and performance of BGs (Peiris et al. 2012). This perspective is valuable as it provides
insights into both the unique strategies pursued by BGs, and the heterogeneity of firms that fall under the BG
label.
The BG literature has recently progressed from qualitative explorations of BG internationalisation strategies
(Knight and Cavusgil 1996), to quantitative tests of their performance outcomes (Efrat and Shoham 2012;
Zhang et al. 2013). However, this emerging stream of research has been comprised largely of BG performance
studies that ‘have ignored BGs’ unique characteristics’ (Efrat and Shoham 2012, p. 676) and ‘the context of BGs
varies greatly’ (Gabrielsson et al. 2008, p. 400). This current study is unique and makes valuable contributions
to this emerging field of literature; specifically, by applying an IE lens, this study will provide insights into how
researchers can identify performance measures that reflect more accurately the changing goals and objectives of
BGs at various phases of their development process. Furthermore, this study will highlight how the strategic
internationalisation decisions made by BG mangers affect their BG’s progression through the three phases of
their development process and, therefore, the relevance of performance measures.
This study begins with a review of extant literature on defining BGs, their development phases, and the
measures typically selected to measure their performance. We then outline the methodology and analysis
utilised to address the first and second research questions stated above. The paper concludes with a discussion of
the findings, development of propositions and conceptual framework and implications for future research.
2
Theoretical perspectives on BGs
3
BGs are a distinct subset of INVs, which are characterised by early, rapid, and extensive involvement in
multiple geographically dispersed foreign markets (Madsen 2013). The emergence of BGs has been driven by
factors at the environmental, industry, and managerial levels. At the environmental level, substantial advances in
communication, transportation, and information technology, combined with the removal of many tariff and nontariff barriers to international trade (Efrat and Shoham 2012; Varma 2011) have made it faster, easier, and more
affordable for resource deficient firms to compete on an international scale. At the industry level, operating in
global industrial sectors and frequently with little or no domestic market, BGs are often forced to
internationalise in order to generate sufficient demand for their offerings (Freeman et al. 2010). Finally, at the
managerial level, the ability of international entrepreneurial owner/managers to maintain personal networks,
identify foreign opportunities, and acquire resources plays a critical role in the early and rapid
internationalisation of BGs (Andersson and Florén 2011; Freeman et al. 2012; Gabrielsson et al. 2008; Hashai
and Almor 2004).
While environmental (Efrat and Shoham 2012; Varma 2011) and industry level (Freeman et al. 2010) factors
provide insights into why BGs choose to internationalise rapidly soon after inception and how they are able to
do so, it is the entrepreneurial owner/manager level of analysis that is commonly adopted when examining BG
behaviour (Andersson 2011; Andersson and Floren 2011). This is because BGs are often founded by
entrepreneurs (Knight and Cavusgil 2004) who drive the firms’ internationalisation through the identification
and pursuit of opportunities in foreign markets (Loane and Bell 2006). While the IP (Johanson and Vahlne
1977) and other stage models (Bilkey and Tesar 1977) provide an organisational level perspective, the models
do not position individuals as making individual choices and emphasise standard patterns of behaviour, which
are less helpful for understanding strategic change, where managers play a fundamental role (Andersson 2000).
For these reasons, IE theory is consistently used as a lens for discussing the behaviour and performance
objectives of BGs (Peiris et al. 2012).
Firm performance has emerged as a central issue within the IE field (Keupp and Gassman 2009).
Comprehensive reviews of IE literature reveal the extensive application of this theory in examinations of both
the antecedents and outcomes of firm performance (see Jones et al. 2011). However, IE theory has yet to be
extended to the selection of performance measures for BGs in the early phases of development compared to
their more mature counterparts. This study seeks to address this gap.
2.1
Extant Measures of BG Performance
Operationalising firm performance within an IB context is a challenging and uncompleted task. Focussing on
export performance, Shoham (1998) provided a detailed discussion of the complexities of measuring the
performance of international firms. Hult et al. (2008) offered a categorisation of the plethora of performance
measures into three distinct categories: financial performance, operational performance, and overall
effectiveness. It is this classification that is adopted for this current study. Financial performance refers to
achievement of economic goals, which can be either accounting-based or market-based. Operational
performance refers to achievement of operational objectives, including product-market outcomes and internal
4
process outcomes, which may facilitate future financial performance. Finally, overall effectiveness ‘reflects a
wider conceptualization of performance’ which captures those measures that are neither financial nor
operational (Hult et al. 2008, p. 1066).
Further complexity is added to the task of selecting performance measures when an international business is also
a new venture (McDougall and Oviatt 1996). Thus it can be seen that selecting appropriate measures to evaluate
BG performance is an especially challenging task, and one that requires the unique characteristics of BGs to be
taken into account. However, this is rare within existing BG literature (Efrat and Shoham, 2012; Gabrielsson et
al. 2008). Despite some studies in which the authors attempt to adapt their performance measures to suit BGs
(Crick 2009; Mort and Weerawardena 2006; Mort et al. 2012), empirical examination into the appropriateness
of specific measures remains rare (Crick 2009).
Recent efforts to capture BG performance have involved the application of a plethora of inconsistent measures,
including survival, global market share, improvements in strategic position and global competitiveness, sales
growth, export growth, and profitability (Efrat and Shoham 2012; Zhang et al. 2013; Zhou et al. 2007) (see
Table 1 below). Extant studies have not achieved an understanding of how to define and operationalise BG
performance. In this sense, the BG literature is reflective of the broader management/strategy literature which
also lacks methodological consistency in the ways that performance is measured (Richard et al. 2009). It can be
argued that the BG literature has applied an arbitrary mix of financial performance, operational performance,
and overall effectiveness measures as performance measures (Hult et al. 2008). This haphazard approach to
performance measurement makes ‘effective positive scientific comparisons between these papers difficult and
normative recommendations hard to justify as having any degree of prescriptive validity’ (Richard et al. 2009,
p.720). If the BG performance field is to progress, this issue needs to be resolved.
(Please insert Table 1 here)
2.2
Measuring BGs’ Performance throughout their Development Processes
The issue of BG age is well acknowledged within the literature, yet it is treated at only a general level. Although
liabilities of newness do influence BG strategy and performance (Sleuwaegen and Onkelinxn 2013), assigning
them the generic label of young firms does not truly reflect the heterogeneity in the age of BGs. Rather, BG
firms advance through numerous phases of development from initial idea generation through to growth and
consolidation (Rialp-Criado et al. 2010). Other studies provide a similar categorisation: introductory, growth
and resource accumulation and break out, when the BG evolves into a ‘normal’ MNE (Gabrielsson et al. 2008).
More recently, Gabrielsson and Gabrielsson (2013) introduced an empirically derived model of the phases of
INV development: INV creation, commercialization and foreign entries, rapid growth and foreign expansion,
and rationalisation and foreign maturity. Each of these models outlines a process by which the firm moves from
initial idea generation and creation, through to maturity. That being said, BGs may also undertake non-linear
internationalisation and move back and forth between stages as they de- and re-internationalise in order to adapt
their strategies to changes in the firm and in the external environment (Freeman et al. 2013; Vissak and
Francioni 2013; Welch and Welch 2009).
5
While recent BG literature has explored the implications of the various phases of the BG development process
with respect to strategy formation and the decision making-logic adopted by managers (Gabrielsson and
Gabrielsson 2013; Pettersen and Tobiassen 2012; Rialp-Criado et al. 2010), examination into the selection of
performance measures appropriate to these phases is lagging behind. For instance, Crick (2009) provided a rare
empirical examination of the performance measures valued and utilised by BG managers. The study, however,
did not take the phase of development of each individual BG into account. Given that the challenges faced,
strategy formation process undertaken, and decision making logic applied by BGs is unique to their phase of
development (Rialp-Criado et al. 2010; Gabrielsson and Gabrielsson 2013; Pettersen and Tobiassen 2012), it
makes sense that the performance goals and objectives of BG managers would also be dependent on the firm’s
phase of development. Performance is best measured as the extent to which a firm meets its desired outcomes
(Shoham 1998) and the relevance of performance measures to BGs is expected to be determined, at least in part,
by their phase of development. This study primarily adopts the phases of development outlined by Rialp-Criado
et al. (2010) because they were developed specifically for BGs, rather than NVs (Kazanjian 1988) or INVs
(Gabrielsson and Gabrielsson 2013).
First, the pre-start-up and new venture creation phase can be quiet extensive (Hewerdine and Welch 2013) and
have considerable implications for the BGs post-founding strategy and behaviour (Pettersen and Tobiassen
2012). In this phase, BGs benefit from proactive entrepreneurs who are internationally experienced and possess
valuable interpersonal relationships (Rialp-Criado et al. 2010). Critical steps and incidents denote each phase
(Gabrielsson et al. 2008). The focus of the entrepreneurial manager in this phase is likely to be on developing
resources, networks, and interest in the product (Pettersen and Tobiassen 2012). To align performance measures
with these objectives, the use of overall effectiveness outcomes would seem appropriate. This is because a
highly entrepreneurial approach to strategy formation is likely to be taken in this phase (Rialp-Criado et al.
2010). Thus, measures that take into account the ambitions of the entrepreneurs are required. Given that the firm
is neither producing nor selling at this point, financial and operational measures are not likely to be relevant.
Second, immediately after founding, BGs enter their early international entry/development phase. It is on this
phase that the preponderance of BG literature has been focussed (Melén and Nordman 2009), with these studies
tending to rely ‘primarily on measures developed for the international operations of [gradual globalisers]’ (Efrat
and Shoham 2012, p. 676). This phase is characterised by rapid expansion into geographically dispersed markets
(Almor 2013; Hashai and Almor 2004; Madsen 2013), which results in BGs being faced simultaneously with
liabilities of newness, foreignness, and outsidership (Johanson and Vahlne 2009; Mudambi and Zahra 2007).
Due to these considerable pressures, BGs are likely to prioritise establishing themselves as a legitimate
competitor within their new markets, focusing on growth and resource accumulation (Gabrielsson et al. 2008)
rather than on short-term financial outcomes (Mudambi and Zahra 2007). Consequently, longer-term strategic
outcomes would take precedence in this phase (Efrat and Shoham 2012). This would promote the adoption of
operational performance and overall effectiveness measures; rather than financial measures.
Third, once the criteria for being considered a BG have been met (i.e. the firm has rapidly internationalised to
geographically dispersed markets, within 3 years of inception), it has been suggested that this legacy of early
and rapid expansion remains with the firm for 20 years (Knight et al. 2004), suggesting that some BGs move
into a phase of international growth and consolidation (Rialp-Criado et al. 2010).
6
The so-called ‘break out’ phase, where the BG evolves into a ‘normal’ MNE (Gabrielsson et al. 2008), is
challenged by other studies. Not all BGs achieve this. Rather, the liabilities of newness, foreignness, and
outsidership overwhelm many BGs, resulting in a relatively high failure rate (Mudambi and Zahra 2007;
Sleuwaegen and Onkelinxn 2013). Furthermore, even when a BG has reached the breakout phase, it may deand re-internationalise and return to the early international entry/development phase (Freeman et al. 2013;
Vissak and Francioni 2013; Welch and Welch 2009). However, the liabilities of foreignness and newness are
temporary in their nature. They are likely to have subsided by the time BGs achieve growth and consolidation. It
is also in this phase that BGs are able to begin leveraging ‘on the resource accumulation and organisational
learning effort previously deployed’ (Rialp-Criado et al. 2010, p. 118). In some ways, the evolution of BGs may
result in their strategy and performance goals converging with traditional internationalising firms. If this is true,
then tradition financial measures of performance will be appropriate for BGs who have reached international
growth and consolidation. From these arguments, a theoretical model (matrix) has been derived (see Table 2
below).
(Please insert Table 2 here)
2.3
The influence of BGs’ international strategies on their development process
Arguably, the development process, described in Table 2 may be applicable to any form of new venture. The
rate at which a BG is able to progress through the phases of its development process is likely to be unique to
each firm and dependent on a range of factors. For instance, in the case of INVs, Gabrielsson and Gabrielsson
(2013) proposed that advancement through growth phases is positively related to: knowledge of opportunities,
the existence of resources, existence of dynamic networking capabilities, and an entrepreneurial orientation. The
internationalisation processes of BGs can also be expected to influence the pace at which BGs progress through
the various phases of their development. The current study focuses on BG rapid internationalisation and the
selection of multiple geographically dispersed markets as these differentiate BGs from other forms of domestic
new ventures and INVs (Madsen 2013).
2.3.1
BG Rapid Internationalisation
A key objective of many BGs is to establish, very quickly, a foothold in multiple foreign markets (Mort et al.
2012). In recent times, ‘theoretical development in the performance implications of rapid internationalization
has become a central topic of debate’ (Zhou et al. 2007, p. 673). However, it has been argued that ‘there have
been too few studies on rapid-growth firms as a distinct category to provide a basis for a theory refinement and
testing approach’ (Fischer and Reuber 2003, p. 348). The concept of internationalisation speed remains an
important avenue for research (Prashantham and Young 2011). For the current study, we apply Prashantham and
Young’s (2011) concept of country scope speed (i.e., rate of increase in the number of countries entered) when
discussing rapid internationalisation.
7
BGs typically enter foreign markets soon or immediately after their founding and must therefore endure
liabilities of foreignness (Zaheer and Mosakowski 1997). It is this early entry into foreign markets that can
extend the early international entry/development phase of the BG’s development. Additional transaction costs
arise from the company’s unfamiliarity with the foreign market conditions, which necessitates rapid
organisational learning, and the adaption of products and processes to align with foreign business practices
(Salomon and Wu 2012). Entering numerous markets, and having repeatedly to overcome liabilities of
foreignness can potentially destabilise BGs and place substantial strain on their configuration, finances,
resources and capabilities (Chetty and Campbell-Hunt 2003). The speed of BG internationalisation means that
these costs are faced repeatedly within a short time-frame.
With speed of entry identified as ‘the essential performance criterion for successful born globals’ (Mort et al.
2012, p. 550), there is a prolonged period in which financial measures of performance are rendered less relevant
as firms invest in establishing a foothold in their target markets (Mort and Weerawardena 2006). Indeed, this
may further extend the early international entry/development period in which it is unrealistic to expect financial
returns, and can delay international growth/development. Therefore, while domestic new ventures often
experience an initial period of establishment where financial returns are unlikely to be achieved, the phase is
likely to be more extended for BGs progressing through rapid internationalisation.
2.3.2
BG Initial Market Selection
The role played by psychic distance in the initial market selection of BGs remains unclear. Some argue that
psychic distance is of little concern to the entrepreneurial owner/managers of BGs, who are primarily network
driven and focussed on opportunity recognition and exploitation behaviour, leading to psychically distant
markets often being selected early in their foray (Freeman et al. 2006; Freeman and Cavusgil 2007). Others have
suggested that many BGs could more accurately be labelled born-regionals as they tend to limit their
international expansion to a single geographic region (Lopez et al. 2008). More recent studies (Freeman et al.
2012) propose that some BGs initially select psychically proximate markets for the purpose of risk reduction,
but are then able to utilize technical expertise, networks and entrepreneurial skill to move very quickly to
psychically distant markets with more opportunities.
In either case, ‘the choice of the first target market can have a crucial impact on their strategic performance’
(Efrat and Shoham 2012, p.677). Traditional views of internationalisation suggest that firms should be able to
maximise their profit if they follow a path of gradually increasing psychic distance, as this reduces uncertainty
and risk (Johanson and Vahlne 1977). Such an incremental strategy is assumed to be beneficial because firms
are able to adjust by only a certain amount per unit of time, before performance outcomes are adversely affected
(Hutzschenreuter and Voll 2008). Expanding into markets with similar cultures and business practices enables
firms to ‘leverage their home country competencies in these locations more easily, translating to superior
profitability’ (Gomes and Ramaswamy 1999, p. 179). However, for BGs that originate from small, saturated
domestic markets and in industries that operate globally with industrial relevance elsewhere, the domestic
market may hold little relevance (Chetty and Campbell-Hunt 2003). This suggests that BGs may be driven out
8
of their domestic markets in search of sufficient demand for their products (Freeman et al. 2010). Nonetheless,
while some studies suggest, that BGs may seek out culturally proximate markets, initially, (Chetty and
Campbell-Hunt 2003; Freeman et al. 2006), others demonstrate that if the returns in the initial culturally
proximate market are not realised quickly, they will move to other, culturally distant markets, where greater
opportunities for growth are likely (Freeman et al. 2012). Expansion into culturally and psychically similar
markets will allow BGs to achieve international growth and consolidation more quickly, only if the potential
that the market offers is realised.
Entering psychically distant markets in the early international entry/development phase of their development
requires BGs to undertake a process of learning and adaptation that may inhibit immediate financial returns
(Barkema and Drogendijk 2007). However, because ‘psychic distance is comprised of a combination of
differences and uncertainty’ (Freeman et al. 2012, p. 352), this effect is temporary. While the differences
between nations may endure, the entrepreneur’s uncertainty will subside as they gain familiarity with the new
environment. BGs can then reap the benefits of their initial foray into these markets, as it ‘serves to create the
knowledge base and accumulation of experience which helps in enhancing performance in sequential markets’
(Efrat and Shoham 2012, pp. 676-677). In this sense, an initial foray into psychically distant markets may reflect
a longer-term orientation, in which BGs spend many years in the early international entry/development phase of
their development.
From this discussion, we conclude that the level of BG development may affect the relevance of BG
performance measures, while the speed of internationalisation and initial market selection may influence the
duration of the phases of BG development.
3
Methodology
To maximise the value of the insights achieved through qualitative research, a progressive focussing approach
was utilised. This entailed ‘a systematic narrowing and refinement of the research focus during fieldwork in
order to accommodate highly unique and specific issues (emic) of socio-cultural behaviour’ (Sinkovics and
Alfoldi 2012, p.818). Emic approaches investigate how those existing in a culture think, while etic approaches
deal in generalisations about behaviour considered universally true (Kottak 2006). This involved a non-linear
research approach in which each phase of the research design was continually revisited as the project evolved.
While this study initially sought to identify appropriate measures of BG performance, the iterative and cyclical
approach of research design and analysis revealed the interaction between the BG development process and the
measurement of their performance. Accordingly, the research focus of the study was narrowed and shifted in
this direction. This focussing approach was then reflected across all components of the research design and
analysis. We selected a case study design due to the exploratory, contemporary, and complex (Yin 2011) nature
of the research questions. With the ability to generate ‘extremely rich, detailed, and in-depth’ information (Berg
1998, p. 212), case studies are particularly appropriate for ‘acquiring intimate knowledge of a small business in
its natural context’ (Romano 1989, p. 41). This is especially true given the complexity of the IB context
(Piekkari et al. 2009).
9
3.1
Context
Australia was selected as the country context of this study. While some BGs have originated from larger
countries, they more frequently emerge from small, open, and advanced economies (Almor 2013; Chetty and
Campbell-Hunt 2003; Freeman et al. 2012; Mort et al. 2012). With a relatively small domestic market,
Australian firms commonly seek growth through internationalisation. Over 40 per cent of Australian exporting
firms are small or medium sized businesses, and this percentage continues to grow (DIISC 2011). As Australia
increasingly becomes a knowledge-based economy (DFAT 2009) and with government bodies such as Austrade
set up to facilitate growth in exports and international trade (Australian Trade Commission 2011), the BG
phenomenon is expected to become increasingly prevalent and economically important within the Australian
economy.
3.2
Sampling
To be classified BG in this study, firms needed have internationalised within 3 years of inception and derived at
least 25% of total sales from foreign markets (Knight and Cavusgil 2004). Borrowing from Eisenhardt (1989,
p.537), a theoretical sampling approach was undertaken, in which cases are ‘chosen to fill theoretical categories
and provide examples of polar types’. This form of sampling was considered ideal for the progressive focussing
approach undertaken by this study as it allowed the selection of additional cases to be driven by the findings
derived from the previous cases (Sinkovics and Alfoldi 2012). Because this study adopted IE theory as its
theoretical lens, initial sampling was focussed on Australian BGs that met the abovementioned criteria. To
ensure that polar examples of BGs were represented, the cases were selected so that they ranged with respect to
their age, size, type of offering (manufacturing vs service), and initial market selection (psychically close vs
distant) (see Table 3 below). As a result of our progressive focussing approach (Sinkovics and Alfoldi 2012), the
sampling criteria evolved throughout the fieldwork and, due to the initial findings, the phases of BG
development emerged as more central to the study. As a result, the phases of BG development outlined by
Rialp-Criado et al. (2010) became important in our final sampling criteria. This allowed for a spectrum of
entrepreneurial decision-making logics (Gabrielsson and Gabrielsson 2013), and strategy formation processes
(Rialp-Criado et al. 2010) to be captured. The cases were similar and comparable in that they were Australian
based BGs seeking to establish a global presence. However, we sought variety across the cases with respect to
their position in the BG development process, which emerged as the primary theoretical categories of interest. In
sum, we selected seven cases (firms) that captured the pre-start-up/venture creation (TravelWear), early
international entry/development (WebSource and GlobalHome), and international growth/consolidation
(DeviceDesign, InDesign, SysTrain, and GamePlay) phases of BG development. The need to access a sufficient
range of data sources and analyse each case in sufficient depth dictated the number of cases included in this
study (Piekkari et al. 2009). We opted for a multiple case study design so that each case could be used to
corroborate the data gathered from the others, while also providing insights into ‘complementary aspects of the
phenomenon under investigation’ (Eisenhardt 1991, p.621).
10
(Please place Table 3 here)
We utilised personal contacts within the Australian Exporters Club to locate firms fitting our criteria of 'BG' that
were willing to be interviewed and provide appropriate documentation to assist with our study. We limited our
sample to respondents within Victoria, one of the two largest states in Australia. Recent statistics show that
approximately 40% of Australian new ventures cease to operate within four years of their inception (DIISRTE,
2012). Early and rapid internationalisation places additional pressures on BGs, further heightening the risk of
failure (Mudambi and Zahra 2007). This makes survival a fundamental desire of BGs (Efrat and Shoham 2012).
In a sense, the BGs sampled in this current study could be considered exceptional as they have all survived.
Arguably, then, these exceptional BGs provide insights into the most appropriate performance measures, as they
have resulted in BG success/survival. To gain further insights, the cases were supplemented by in-depth
interviews with 5 industry informants, with selection based on their knowledge of, and involvement with,
Australian BGs. These informants were sourced from the Australian Exporters Club, academia, MNEs, and both
state and federal level government departments. This provided a holistic and comprehensive understanding of
the phenomenon from both within and outside the cases for triangulation purposes (Yin 2011).
3.3
Data Collection
In order to maximise the benefits of a case study design, we utilised multiple data collection techniques. Our
primary method of data collection was semi-structure in-depth interviews (Kumar 2005) and, for every
interview, we used the same protocol, which included a list of open-ended questions. This ensured that general
information relating to the research area was addressed while also allowing us to pursue any topics that emerged
during the interview. Interviewees were asked about the BG’s current performance objectives, as well as those
that were pursued in early phases of the firm’s development, and those that were anticipated to gain prominence
as the BG developed further. Within each case, senior managers were selected for face-to-face interviews based
on their direct knowledge of their firm’s international activities and performance objectives and measures (e.g.
owners, marketing directors, CEOs and senior managers). Interviews lasted 1-2 hours, providing in-depth
understanding of the challenges faced by BGs, and how these influenced the measurement of performance. The
data collected from interviews was supplemented by secondary data gathered through publicly available
documentation, to build multiple individual case databases (Yin 2011). Interviews using the same semistructured approach were conducted with all industry informants.
3.4
Data Analysis
An iterative and cyclical approach to data collection and analysis was undertaken. Consistent with the
progressive focussing approach, insights gained from the initial data were used to inform subsequent case
selection and refine the conceptual foundations of the study (Sinkovics and Alfoldi 2012). As a result, the
research questions guided the interview process. Research themes where continually refined in the analysis, in a
manner that evolved constantly throughout the process of data analysis. A number of techniques (Yin 2011)
11
were used in the analysis of data, consistent with other cases studies on BGs (Freeman et al. 2012), including the
use of open, axial and selective coding to extract key themes and give meaning to the data. Open coding refers
to ‘the analytical process through which the components are identified and their properties and dimensions
discovered in the data’ (Strauss and Corbin 1998, p. 101). Axial coding entailed ‘relating categories to their
subcategories’ and selective coding involved the integration and refinement of theory (p.123). After data was
coded, similarities and differences between cases were analysed (pattern matching) with the findings
subsequently discussed in relation to relevant theories (explanation building) (Yin 2011).
During the analysis of the data we drew upon Eisenhardt and Graebner (2007) for insights and Miles and
Huberman (1984) for methods to analyse qualitative data. The transcripts and case study databases were then
analysed in detail to identify themes and to construct descriptive codes. The researchers worked independently
to construct themes, then compared them and adjusted discrepancies. Peer debriefing was used, with regular
meetings with the researchers who discussed the method, analysis of data and interpretation of findings. This
ensured that the data collection and analysis were accurate and effective. This detailed approach allowed us to
look for patterns by looking across the rows of transcripts and databases for cross case analysis and within the
rows for within case analysis. We regularly moved backwards and forwards between the theme summaries, case
study databases and transcripts to confirm conclusions and interpretations for triangulation. This abductive
process (Dubois and Gadde 2002) of moving between the theme summaries, case study databases and
transcripts enabled us to deepen our understanding of the causal links and the complex interplay of a variety of
factors as well as to ascertain why certain events took place. During the analysis we moved back and forth
constantly between the data and theory to refine and extend theory.
Because we sought insights regarding the past, present, and anticipated future performance objectives of each
firm, it was necessary to corroborate the findings obtained from each individual case. While measures of
performance may be more accurately obtained within close temporal proximity to the event of interest (Richard
et al. 2009), the emergent themes were found to be consistent across the cases in this study. This replication
suggests that the findings derived from this retrospective method were not unduly influenced by respondent
memory bias. Finally, we triangulated the data gathered from semi-structured interviews with managers and
industry experts and the documentation, enhancing the validity of the research results.
4
Findings
Analysis revealed not only that different performance measures are relevant within each of the phases of BG
development, but also that the unique internationalisation strategies (early and rapid) pursued by BGs influence
the duration of each phase. The speed of internationalisation and psychic distance of initial markets were also
explored in the analysis for each firm.
4.1
BG Firm Development and the Selection of Performance Measures
12
Our findings reinforce prior criticism of BG literature which focussed almost exclusively on the initial
internationalisation of BGs, to the exclusion of other phases of their development (Melén and Nordman 2009).
The youngest BG in this study was established less than a year prior to data collection, while the oldest was 17
years old. It was found that the relevance of BG performance objectives was strongly influenced by the BGs
phase of development.
We have predominantly built upon Rialp-Criado et al.’s (2010) conceptualisation of the BG development
process by exploring its implications for the measurement of BG performance. BGs in the pre-start-up/venture
creation phase of development (TravelWear), were found to face challenges notably different (Gabrielsson et al.
2008) from those in both the early international entry-development (WebSource, GlobalHome) and
international growth/consolidation (DeviceDesign, GamePlay, SysTrain, InDesign) phases, resulting in the
pursuit of different performance outcomes. Refining Hult et al.'s (2008) call for performance constructs to
include a combination of financial measure of performance, operational measures of performance and overall
effectiveness measures, we reveal that in the context of BGs, the relevance of each of these categories varies
substantially depending upon the firm’s phase of development.
Hewerdine and Welch (2013) emphasised that INVs often have a lengthy gestation period before their official
date of incorporation. Pettersen and Tobiassen (2012) noted the importance of this phase of entrepreneurial idea
generation, opportunity assessment, and resource seeking. Our findings extend this and reveal that BGs take
advantage of this pre-start-up phase to varying degrees, by exploring ideas, assessing opportunities and locating
resources, and that this has important implications for their post-founding performance objectives. For example,
the entrepreneurs responsible for the creation of DeviceDesign had previously worked at a leading global
software company. Following the initial idea generation, the entrepreneurs identified a company developing a
similar concept and sought funding to purchase the pre-existing company. Having undertaken this process, the
BG was able to utilise a pre-existing foundation at the time of inception. This allowed for the relatively quick
realisation of profits. Similarly, although TravelWear was yet to begin production, the entrepreneurs had
invested considerable resources into concept testing and product design. Crowd sourced funding was obtained
via the ‘Kickstarter’ website, meaning the future BG had been able to obtain finances and pre-orders for the
product. The entrepreneurs anticipated that these efforts would translate into faster realisation of profits once
their operations had commenced. By contrast, the pre-founding phase was not used to generate resources in the
case of GlobalHome. Consequently, at the point of foundation, GlobalHome was faced with severe financial and
human resource deficiencies which slowed the achievement of financial returns. Measures of overall
effectiveness are useful and relevant during all there phases of BG development. Particularly useful measures
within this category include perceived overall performance and the achievement of goals. Because these
measures are fully subjective, they are highly flexible and able to account for the varied aspirations of the BGs
(Richard et al. 2009). In the pre-start-up/venture creation phase, operational and financial measures of
performance are irrelevant, because the BG has yet to commence operations or trading.
The early international entry-development phase, was suggested to last for between 2 years (Industry Informant
1) and 5 years (Industry Informant 3) following a BG’s inception. In our analysis, it should be noted that these
timelines were not regarded as a literal representation. Rather, they were interpreted as a reflection of the
duration of this phase for each BG. The findings of the study reveal that BGs progress through this phase at
13
different speeds depending, in part, on the strategic decisions made by their owner/managers (discussed in depth
below). BG age may, therefore, not be a reliable indicator of their phase of development. Rialp-Criado et al.
(2010) suggested that BGs undertake different strategy formation processes depending on their phase of
development. Similarly, Gabrielsson and Gabrielsson (2013) found that decision making logic of INVs evolved
from effectuation logic (i.e. it centres on the entrepreneurs’ aspiration and their ability to remain flexible in their
search for opportunities and in creating value) in the early phases of development, towards a causation type of
logic (i.e. goal-driven and deliberately pursuing opportunities) as they reached more advanced phases. Adding to
this, the findings of the current study reveal that BGs pursue different performance objectives during the various
phases of their development. Integrating the findings of these three studies will provide better criteria for
ascertaining which phase of development BGs are in, so that they can adapt their measures accordingly.
Measures of overall effectiveness are relevant in the early international entry-development phase, as BGs invest
heavily in new processes, employees, products and markets. The primary objective for BGs in this phase is to
establish themselves within the marketplace. For instance, the entrepreneur from TravelWear was expecting to
enter the global market in coming months, and highlighted that product quality, service quality, distribution,
customer satisfaction, and reputation would initially take precedence over financial outcomes. Similarly, while
yet to achieve financial returns, GlobalHome, an accommodation agent for international students, invested in
numerous events and activities to enhance their reputation within the international student community. The
owner of WebSource also highlighted the importance of overall effectiveness measures when assessing the
performance of a BG in the initial phase of their development: ‘Reputation, survival, perceived overall
performance, achievement of goals and perceived overall [performance] relative to competitors; All good ones’
(WebSource, Owner). The relevance of financial measures is low in this phase as BGs are focussed primarily on
establishing their operations and reaching new markets (Industry informants 1 and 4). Instead, the operational
measures and overall effectiveness which gave an indication of likely future financial performance were found
to take precedence during early international entry/development. Specifically, in this phase, operational
performance measures such as product quality, service quality (InDesign and SysTrain), efficiency, and
customer satisfaction (TravelWear) should be adopted in conjunction with overall effectiveness measures of
brand awareness (TravelWear) and reputation (GlobalHome).
In their international growth/consolidation phase, we observed BGs seek to recoup their investment through
sustained financial success. Just as the BG strategy formation processes begin to converge with those of gradual
globalising firms (Rialp-Criado et al. 2010), so too do their performance measures. During this period,
traditional financial measures of performance gain prevalence: ‘Well I guess there’s typical sort of accounting
measures where you’re looking at your profit and loss on a regular basis just to see how you’re tracking’
(InDesign, Owner). Our findings suggest that during the international growth/consolidation phase, BG
performance objectives align more closely to the profit-maximising goals of traditional MNEs (Dunning and
Lundan 2008; Gabrielsson et al. 2008). For instance, in the case of SysTrain, ROI is their central objective:
‘Definitely ROI, everything that we do, whether it is a marketing event, investment in a course, venues we use,
everything is based on ROI’ (SysTrain, Marketing Director). GamePlay, also relied on financial performance
measures that were reflective of those utilised by larger, established multinationals: ‘I would say that we
probably account for our performance in a similar way as larger companies’ (GamePlay, Senior Manager). That
14
being said, in this phase, operational performance and overall effectiveness maintain their importance, as the
firms remain conscious of their longer-term survival (DeviceDesign, CEO). Efrat and Shoham (2012) criticised
measurement of BG performance using measures that were developed for gradual globalising firms. Our
findings refine this by revealing that these measures are appropriate for BGs that ‘break out’ of the early
international entry-development phase (Gabrielsson et al. 2008) and operating in the international
growth/consolidation phase. Specifically, profitability (InDesign, GamePlay), and ROI (SysTrain) were
suggested to be of increased relevance in this final phase of BG development.
4.2
Rapid Internationalisation Slows BG Progression Through The Early International Entry-Development
Phase
Noting the importance of internationalisation speed to performance, survival and continued growth,
Prashantham and Young (2011) conceptualised a learning-based model to explain the differential
internationalisation speeds amongst INVs. Building on this, the current study examined the role of
internationalisation speed in determining the rate at which BGs are able to progress through the phases of their
development. The initial period where financial outcomes are unlikely to be achieved also exists for domestic
new ventures, labelled the 'conception and development' phase by Kazanjian (1988). For some BGs, however,
this phase was extensive and made increasingly critical due to their strategies of early and rapid
internationalisation into a large number of foreign markets (DeviceDesign). This can be particularly challenging
for BGs introducing unique and highly innovative products to the market (WebSource). Compared to those BGs
who restrict their initial expansion to a narrow range of foreign markets (SysTrain, GamePlay, GlobalHome),
BGs who enter a large number of markets can experience greater financial strain as the challenges of building
reputation and establishing market position are repeated for each new market (DeviceDesign, WebSource). This
was reiterated by Industry Informant 3 below:
‘Once they get to be stronger, their revenue is higher, their profit margin is higher, and then multiple
overseas markets becomes a strength because that buffers against any particular downturn. But when
they have just started… then they are probably draining cash at a very fast pace’ (Industry Informant 3).
Furthermore, BGs often operate in niche (specialised) markets, and in highly technical industries, where they
introduce unique and innovative products. As a result, financial returns to BGs can be further delayed as they
need to invest time and resources into educating the market about the value of their products. In the case of
WebSource, constant product innovations led to a situation in which they were 'ahead' of their customers. This
meant that the launching of products was delayed until customers were able to comprehend the value of the
offering. This is further highlighted in the case of DeviceDesign. When they initially launched their computer
peripheral device, there was no pre-existing market and the potential customers were neither knowledgeable nor
able to recognise the value exchange, and thus not ready to adopt the product. The consequence for BGs with
such unique and innovative products is the extension of the period in which it is naive to expect financial results,
as time is required to explain, and create a demand for, the product in the marketplace.
‘With our product, our product is very unique and it was the first of its kind. So it requires more of an
explanation and it's harder to sell upfront because of the nature of the product’ (DeviceDesign, CEO).
15
‘We have created things that we haven’t given to our clients yet because they are still trying to come to
terms with implementing step one. If we give them step 5 they’re just going to cave in and go back to
what they were doing before!’ (WebSource, Owner).
While our findings support extant literature, which suggests that there is a limit to how rapidly firms can move
across cultures before organisational and financial outcomes are compromised (Chetty and Campbell-Hunt
2003), we show for the first time what are the consequences, which is illustrated by DeviceDesign. As suggested
by Mort et al. (2012), this BG was initially focussed primarily on rapid expansion into multiple markets. As a
result, the set-up costs associated with entry into each market overlapped and delayed the financial returns. This
was a cost that management willingly accepted. This is highlighted below:
‘We went for getting the product worldwide very, very quickly, very slim margins, volume and when
entering a new product into the marketplace, you probably have to look or anticipate for some losses at
the outset... Then get to break even and then after that be profitable. So if you’re looking for profitability
right from the outset, you’re probably going to be disappointed’ (DeviceDesign, CEO).
Thus through the early international entry-development phase, BGs endure the considerable strains of
rapidly entering multiple foreign markets, and the need to repeatedly educate potential customers about the
product.
4.3
High Psychic Distance of Initial Markets Slows BG Progression Through Early International
Entry/Development
This study provides insights into conflicting perspectives on the influence that psychic distance has on BG
initial market selection. While some BGs were found to internationalise into culturally similar markets to ease
challenges associated with differing languages and business systems (TravelWear, WebSource, SysTrain, and
GamePlay), others followed their networks into markets with unfamiliar business cultures (DeviceDesign,
GlobalHome, and InDesign). The findings also reveal that BGs are aware of, but not daunted by, the challenges
of psychic distance. Entering psychically distant markets was found to reflect a longer-term perspective, which
prolonged the amount of time BGs spent in the early international entry/development phase.
As prescribed by the IP model (Johanson and Vahlne 1977), the challenges associated with difference and
uncertainty do, in some cases, encourage BGs to expand initially into psychically close markets. For instance, as
a systems engineering training firm, SysTrain relied heavily on effective communication with customers when
providing its services. Consequently, cultural and language differences formed substantial deterrents for
SysTrain, and were a central consideration for the initial market selection process. By comparison, the initial
international markets of other BGs were found to be psychically distant. DeviceDesign was indifferent to the
pressures of psychic distance, and was committed to following the distribution channels of their key business
partner.
‘It grew very, very quickly due to the logistics of our partner that once you get it into their system, it's
like a distributor. Basically where they are, they tried to get it into different channels and you're there’
(DeviceDesign, CEO).
16
Similarly, GlobalHome expanded initially into China, and this market selection was the result of pre-existing
personal networks and the size of the Chinese market. China remains the largest single nation contributor to the
international student population in Australia (ABS 2011). Our findings also reveal an additional strategy
whereby the BG (InDesign) would initially enter simultaneously a combination of psychically distant and
psychically close markets in order to balance short- and long- term objectives.
We confirm that initial selection of psychically distant markets indicates a long-term perspective, whereby BGs
pursue the operational performance and overall effectiveness outcomes that will eventually result in financial
performance. The Marketing Director of SysTrain revealed that their entry into psychically close markets was
motivated by the desire to experience quick financial returns. While there were opportunities for the BG to enter
psychically distant markets, this approach was not taken due to the delay it would cause on financial returns.
‘It can be poor performance in the market, initially short-term but in terms of like, long term, it takes a
long time to get within a culture of another country as well as getting that same reputation we have in the
western countries. I guess our biggest barrier is language’ (SysTrain, Marketing Director).
The Owner of InDesign provided additional insights into varying motives that underpin BG initial market
selection. By simultaneously entering a combination of psychically close and psychically distance markets, the
BG sought to balance short- and long- term objectives. Entrance into psychically distant South East Asian
markets such as China was driven by longer-term prospects including access to valuable resources and a large
customer base. By contrast, entry into psychically close markets was motivated by the opportunity to achieve
more immediate financial outcomes.
‘The markets where we do quite well is very simple. Obviously, it’s Canada, US, South Africa, Ireland,
England and the only other place which is quite interesting is Holland. ….. English is obviously of a
high standard but also culturally, there’s quite a lot of similarities with perhaps even Australians and
Dutch people. So basically at the early stages, we started in Melbourne but as soon as we started, we
were travelling to Asia and identifying where there were growth markets at that time from a customer
point of view but also from a resource point of view’ (InDesign, Owner).
Our findings show that the motivations underlying BG initial market selection vary. Entering psychically close
markets can lead to quicker financial returns because of greater business familiarity and less need for adaptation.
This hastens BG progression towards international growth/consolidation. By comparison, when BGs are
attracted initially into psychically distant markets by their networks and opportunity identification, they tend to
spend a longer period of time in their early international entry-development phase.
In summary, we derive a conceptual model (Figure 1) with supporting propositions and make two significant
contributions to the BG and IE literature. First, our data confirm that BGs in different phases of development
prioritise different performance objectives. Interestingly, the majority of BG and IE literature has focussed on
the initial internationalisation phase of BG development (Nordman and Melen 2008), relying heavily on
financial measures to evaluate their performance (Li et al. 2012). However, our findings suggest that in this
early international entry/development phase, it is overall effectiveness and operational performance measures
that are most relevant. It is in the international growth/consolidation phase that financial performance measures
are most appropriate. Second, our findings reveal that the extent to which BGs internationalise rapidly and do
not follow patterns of gradually increasing psychic distance influences the duration of the early international
entry/development phase, and delays the achievement of financial outcomes.
17
(Please insert Figure 1 here)
Finally, we use the above analysis of the findings to suggest the following propositions to compare and contrast
early international entry/development phase of BGs that initially enter psychically distant markets with those
that initially enter psychically close markets.
Proposition 1: Financial measures of performance are not appropriate in the early phases (pre-startup/venture creation and early international entry/development) of BG development, but will become
increasingly valid as the firm matures (international growth and consolidation).
Proposition 2: Rapid internationalisation of BGs slows their progression through the early
international entry-development phase as they repeatedly invest time and finances to establish their
position within each new market.
Proposition 3: Due to the learning and adaptation processes necessitated by increased psychic
distance, BGs that initially enter psychically distant markets are slower to progress through their early
international entry/development phase than those BGs that initially enter psychically close markets.
5
Conclusion and Discussion
Researchers have called for empirical examination of ‘[w]hat makes young, entrepreneurial start-ups successful
in IB?’ (Griffith et al. 2008, p. 1227). This study has drawn upon IE to contribute to this goal by providing
theoretical and empirical insights into what constitutes 'success' for BGs. We have built on recent efforts to
operationalise BG performance in a way that acknowledges their unique characteristics and strategies (Efrat and
Shoham 2012; Mort et al. 2012). To our knowledge, this paper represents the first empirical exploration into the
suitability of specific measures for evaluating the performance of BGs across the various phases of
development. Furthermore, the unique internationalisation strategies of BGs (early and rapid) were also taken
into consideration so as to more accurately identify relevant performance measures (Efrat and Shoham 2012)
through the varying phases of BG development.
As with domestic firms (Kazanjian 1988), the relevance of BG performance measures is dependent on which
phase of development they are in. That being said, the fundamental differences between BGs and domestic new
ventures are also reflected in the process. In the pre-start-up / venture creation phase, overall effectiveness
measures took precedence. As the firm is not producing or selling at this point, operational and financial
measures were found to be irrelevant. In the period immediately following their founding (early international
entry / development), operational measures we found to be become important as the firm seeks to establish itself
and develops its operations. However, the strains of customer education and early and rapid internationalisation
delay the realisation of financial outcomes. It is not until the BG has reached international growth /
consolidation that financial measures can be considered a suitable gauge of their performance. In this phase,
overall effectiveness and operational performance retain their importance as the mature BG continues to pursue
longer-term success (see Figure 1).
This study commenced with the objective of identifying performance measures that are appropriate for BG
research. It was not until data collection and analysis had been initiated that the focus of this study was refined
18
and directed towards the interaction between BG phase of development and the appropriate measurement of
their performance. This cyclical approach proved invaluable when responding to the true complexity of BG
performance measurement. Rather than suggest that a linear research design was undertaken, we acknowledge
the use of a non-linear progressive focussing approach, advocated by Sinkovics and Alfoldi (2012). This
represents a step towards greater research transparency, which they suggest has been lacking in the IB literature.
Future research would be encouraged to extend this effort further by taking advantage of recent developments to
further increase the transparency of their research, addressed especially well in Sinkovics and Alfoldi (2012).
We invite future research to build upon this study. For instance, within each phase BGs were found to pursue
similar performance objectives and these were distinct from those pursued by BGs in other phases of their
development. This was interpreted as preliminary evidence of a process through which the appropriateness of
specific BG performance measures evolves over time. Supporting Welch and Paavilainen-Mantymaki’s (2013)
call for more IB process theorising to be accompanied by process data, we would encourage future research to
explore our propositions further through the use of longitudinal research designs. Identifying entrepreneurs at
the point of idea generation and following the evolution of their performance objectives through their
development process will provide better understanding of the critical time dimension of BG development
(Welch and Paavilainen-Mantymaki 2013).
Greater understanding could also be obtained by delving further into the impact of market selection and
internationalisation speed on BG progression through their phases of development. For instance, it would be
interesting to build on the findings of this study by exploring the role of different forms of internationalisation
speed (country scope speed versus international commitment speed) (Prashantham and Young 2011). Rapidly
increasing commitment to only a small number of foreign markets could be expected to have a considerably
different influence on the rate at which BGs progress through the early international entry / development phase,
from rapidly entering a large number of markets. In addition, the current study treated initial market selection
and internationalisation speed as two separate factors influencing BG progression through their development
process. In reality, however, it is likely that these factors interact with one another. Investigations into this
interaction would be valuable. For instance, research is encouraged to explore whether the role of rapidly
entering a large number markets is reduced, or reversed, when the markets entered are culturally similar to that
of the home country. We argue that this also depends on the nature of their products/businesses. Such an
internationalisation path could then be compared to those BGs who enter only a small number of psychically
distant markets. The extent to which these two internationalisation decisions may align with or compensate for
each other provides an interesting avenue for future research.
Despite the theoretical and practical importance of the respective phases of BG development, establishing a
precise operationalisation is a complex task. Recent work by Hewerdine and Welch (2013) provides valuable
insights into this challenge. Indeed, a BG’s transition from one phase of their development to another may
represent a process rather than a single event (Hewerdine and Welch 2013). That being said, this study
represents an important step forward in this endeavour. By combining the findings of this current study with the
theoretical propositions presented by Rialp-Criado et al. (2010) and others (Gabrielsson et al. 2008), we can see
that at each phase of the BG development process, BGs undertake unique strategy formation processes in the
pursuit of evolving performance objectives. These characteristics can be adopted to help operationalise the
19
phases of BG development. For example, BGs applying an entrepreneurial/visionary approach to strategy
formation in the sole pursuit of overall effectiveness outcomes could be identified as being in their pre-startup/venture creation phase. At the other end of the spectrum, a BG that adopts a formalised planning-analytical
approach to strategy formation in the pursuit of financial outcomes would be located in the international
growth/consolidation phase. The precision of this operationalization could be enhanced further by empirical
examinations into the implications of the BG development process for BG structure. This would provide an
additional dimension on which BGs could be assessed to determine how far they have progressed through their
development process.
While we have detailed the triangulation approach used to minimise respondent memory bias in the
methodology section, we make additional suggestions. We recommend in future studies, including more than
one key-informant per firm would better assure reliable retrospective recall, especially for older firms.
Finally, this study has revealed that researchers should not attempt to apply a universal set of performance
measures to all BGs. Rather, for each phase of development, separate measures are required which recognise
that strategic choices made by individuals vary. As the BG field continues to move towards quantitative tests of
their performance outcomes (Efrat and Shoham 2012), we provide a foundation for future scale development. In
summary, BGs are a unique and diverse category of firms and, in order to properly evaluate their performance,
equally unique and diverse measures are required. By taking account of the BG’s level of development,
performance measures can be selected which more accurately reflect their goals and objectives.
20
References
Almor, T. (2013). Conceptualizing paths of growth for technology-based born-global firms originating in a
small-population advanced economy. International Studies of Management and Organization, 43(2), 56-78.
Andersson, S., & Florén, H. (2011). Differences in managerial behavior between small international and noninternational firms. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 9(3), 233-258.
Andersson, S. (2000). Internationalization of the firm from an entrepreneurial perspective. International Studies
of Management and Organization, 30(1), 63–92.
Andersson, S. (2011). International entrepreneurship, born globals and the theory of effectuation. Journal of
Small Business and Enterprise Development, 18(3), 627-643.
The Australian Trade Commission. (2011). Reform of the Australian trade commission: Maximising our value.
http://www.austrade.gov.au/annual_report_2010-11/index.html. Accessed 5 January 2013.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2011). Australian social trends. December 2011.
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features30Dec+2011. Accessed 20 August
2012.
Baum, M., Schwens, C., & Kabst, R. (2011). A typology of international new ventures: Empirical evidence from
high-technology industries. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(3), 305-330.
Barkema, H. G., & Drogendijk, R. (2007). Internationalising in small, incremental or larger steps? Journal of
International Business Studies, 38(7), 1132-1148.
Berg, B. (1998). Qualitative research methods for social sciences (3rd Edition). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Bilkey, W.J., & Tesar, G. (1977). The export behaviour of smaller-sized Wisconsin manufacturing firms.
Journal of International Business Studies, Spring/Summer, 8(1), 93-98.
Chetty, S., & Campbell-Hunt, C. (2003). Explosive international growth and problems of success amongst small
to medium-sized firms. International Small Business Journal, 21(1), 5-27.
Crick, D. (2009). The internationalisation of born global and international new venture SMEs. International
Marketing Review, 26(4/5), 453-476.
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT). (2009). A stable and competitive economy.
http://www.dfat.gov.au/aib/competitive_economy.html. Accessed 17 October 2009.
Department of Innovation Industry Science and Research (DIISC). (2011). Key Statistics: Australian Small
Business. http://www.innovation.gov.au/smallbusiness/keyfacts/Documents/SmallBusinessPublication.pdf.
Accessed 22 February 2012.
Dubois, A., & Gadde, L-E. (2002). Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research. Journal of
Business Research, 55(7), 553-560.
Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. (2008). Institutions and the OLI paradigm of the multinational enterprise. Asia
Pacific Journal of Management, 25(4), 573-593.
Efrat, K., & Shoham, A. (2012). Born global firms: The differences between their short- and long-term
performance drivers. Journal of World Business, 47(4), 675-685.
Eisenhardt, K., & Graebner, M.E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy
of Management Journal, 50(1), 25-32.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1991) Better stories and better constructs: The case for rigor and comparative logic. The
Academy of Management Review, 16(3), 620-627.
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4),
532-550.
21
Fischer, E., & Reuber, A. R. (2003). Support for rapid-growth firms: A comparison of the views of founders,
government policymakers, and private sector resource providers. Journal of Small Business Management, 41(4),
346-365.
Freeman, S., Deligonul, Z., & Cavusgil, T.S. (2013). Strategic re-structuring by born-globals using outward and
inward-oriented activity. International Marketing Review (Special Issue: SME Internationalization Patterns)
30(2), 156-182.
Freeman, S., Hutchings, K., & Chetty, S. (2012). Born-globals and culturally proximate markets. Management
International Review, 52(3), 425-460.
Freeman, S., Giroud, A., Kalfadellis, P., & Ghauri, P. (2012). Psychic distance and environment: Impact on
increased resource commitment. European Business Review, 24(4), 351-373.
Freeman, S., Hutchings, K., Lazaris, M., & Zyngier, S. (2010). A model of rapid knowledge development: The
smaller born-global firm. International Business Review, 19(1), 70-84.
Freeman, S., & Cavusgil, S.T. (2007). Entrepreneurial strategies for accelerated internationalization of smaller
born globals. Journal of International Marketing, 15(4), 1-40.
Freeman, S., Edwards, R., & Schroder, B. (2006). How smaller born-globals use networks and alliances to
overcome constraints to rapid internationalization. Journal of International Marketing, 14(3), 33-63.
Gabrielsson, P. & Gabrielsson, M. (2013). A dynamic model of growth phases and survival in international
business-to-business new ventures: The moderating effect of decision-making logic. Industrial Marketing
Management, 42(8), 1357-1373.
Gabrielsson, M., Kirpalani, M., Dimitratos, P., Solberg, C. & Zucchella, A. (2008). Born globals: Propositions
to help advance the theory. International Business Review, 17(4), 385-401.
Gomes, L., & Ramaswamy, K. (1999). An empirical examination of the form of the relationship between
multinationality and performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(1), 173-187.
Griffith, D., Cavusgil, T., & Xu, S. (2008). Emerging themes in international business research. Journal of
International Business Studies, 39(7), 1220-1235.
Hashai, N., & Almor, T. (2004). Gradually internationalizing 'born global' firms: An oxymoron? International
Business Review, 13(4), 465-483.
Hewerdine, L., & Welch, C. (2013). Are international new ventures really new? A process study of
organizational emergence and internationalization. Journal of World Business, 48(4), 466-477.
Holtbrügge, D., & Kreppel, H. (2012). Determinants of outward foreign direct investment from BRIC countries:
An explorative study. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 7(1), 4-30.
Hult, G. T. M., Ketchen Jr, D. J., Griffith, D. A., Chabowski, B. R., Hamman, M. K., & Dykes, B. J. (2008). An
assessment of the measurement of performance in international business research. Journal of International
Business Studies, 39(6), 1064-1080.
Hutzschenreuter, T., & Voll, J. C. (2008). Performance effects of "added cultural distance" in the path of
international expansion: The case of German multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business
Studies, 39(1), 53-70.
Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J.-E. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm-A model of knowledge
development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(1), 2534.
Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. (2009). The Uppsala internationalization process model revisited: From liability of
foreignness to liability of outsidership. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(9), 1411-1431.
Jones, M. V., Coviello, N., & Tang, K. T. (2011). International entrepreneurship research (1989-2009): A
domain ontology and thematic analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(6), 632-659.
22
Kazanjian, R. (1988). Relation of dominant problems to stages of growth in technology-based new ventures.
Academy of Management Journal, 31(2), 257-279.
Keupp, M. M., & Gassmann, O. (2009). The past and the future of international entrepreneurship: A review and
suggestions for developing the field. Journal of Management, 35(3), 600-633.
Kim, D., Basu, C., Naidu, G. M., & Cavusgil, E. (2011). The innovativeness of born-globals and customer
orientation: Learning from Indian born-globals. Journal of Business Research, 64(8), 879-886.
Knight, G., & Cavusgil, T. (1996). The born global firm: A challenge to traditional internationalization theory.
Advances in International Marketing, 8, 11-26.
Knight, G., & Cavusgil, T. (2004). Innovation, organizational capabilities, and the born-global firm. Journal of
International Business Studies, 35(2), 124-141.
Knight, G., & Cavusgil, T. (2005). A Taxonomy of born-globals. Management International Review, 45(3), 1535.
Knight, G., Madsen, T. K., & Servais, P. (2004). An inquiry into born-global firms in Europe and the USA.
International Marketing Review, 21(6), 645-665.
Kottak, C. (2006). Mirror for humanity. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Kuivalainen, O., Saarenketo, S., & Puumalainen, K. (2012). Start-up patterns of internationalization: A
framework and its application in the context of knowledge-intensive SMEs. European Management Journal,
30(4), 372-385.
Kumar, R. (2005). Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners (2nd Edition). London: SAGE
Publications.
Li, L., Qian, G., & Qian, Z. (2012). Early internationalization and performance of small high-tech "bornglobals". International Marketing Review, 29(5), 536-561.
Loane, S., & Bell, J. (2006). Rapid internationalisation among entrepreneurial firms in Australia, Canada,
Ireland and New Zealand. International Marketing Review, 23(5), 467-485.
Lopez, L. E., Kundu, S. K., & Ciravegna, L. (2008) Born global or born regional? Evidence from an exploratory
study in the Costa Rican software industry. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(7), 1228-1238.
Madsen, T. K. (2013). Early and rapidly internationalizing ventures: Similarities and differences between
classifications based on the original international new venture and born global literatures. Journal of
International Entrepreneurship, 11(1), 65-79.
McDougall, P. P., & Oviatt, B. M. (1996). New venture internationalization, strategic change, and performance:
A follow-up study. Journal of Business Venturing, 11(1), 23-40.
McDougall, P. P., & Oviatt, B. M. (2000). International entrepreneurship: The intersection of two research
paths. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 902-906.
McKinsey & Company (1993), Emerging exporters: Australia’s high value-added manufacturing exporters.
Melbourne: Australian Manufacturing Council.
Melén, S., & Nordman, E. R. (2009). The internationalisation modes of born globals: A longitudinal study.
European Management Journal, 27(4), 243-254.
Miller, A., Wilson, B., & Adams, M. (1988). Financial performance patterns of new corporate ventures: An
alternative to traditional measures. Journal of Business Venturing, 3(4), 287-299.
Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. (2nd edition). Sage Publications, California.
Mort, G. S., & Weerawardena, J. (2006). Networking capability and international entrepreneurship.
International Marketing Review, 23(5), 549-572.
23
Mort, G. S., Weerawardena, J., & Liesch, P. (2012). Advancing entrepreneurial marketing. European Journal of
Marketing, 46(3/4), 542-561.
Mudambi, R., & Zahra, S. A. (2007). The survival of international new ventures. Journal of International
Business Studies, 38(2), 333-352.
Nordman, E. R., & Melén, S. (2008). The impact of different kinds of knowledge for the internationalization
process of born globals in the biotech business. Journal of World Business, 43(2), 171-185.
Piekkari, R., Welch, C., & Paavilainen, E. (2009). The case study as disciplinary convention: Evidence from
international business journals. Organizational Research Methods, 12(3), 567-589.
Peiris, I. K., Akoorie, M. E., & Sinha, P. (2012). International entrepreneurship: A critical analysis of studies in
the past two decades and future directions for research. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 10(4), 279324.
Pettersen, I. B., & Tobiassen, A. E. (2012). Are born globals really born globals? The case of academic spin-offs
with long development periods. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 10(2), 117-141.
Prashantham, S. & Young, S. (2011). Post-entry speed of international new ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory
& Practice, 35(2), 275-292.
Rialp-Criado, A, Galvan-Sanchez, I., & Suarez-Ortega, S. M (2010) A configuration-holistic approach to bornglobal firms strategy formation process. European Management Journal, 28(2), 108– 123.
Richard, P. J., Devinney, T. M., Yip, G. S., & Johnson, G. (2009). Measuring organizational performance:
Towards methodological best practice. Journal of Management, 35(3), 718-804.
Romano, C. A. (1989). Research strategies for small business: A case study approach. International Small
Business Journal, 7(4), 35-43.
Ruigrok, W., & Wagner, H. (2003). Internationalization and performance: An organizational learning
perspective. Management International Review, 43(1), 63-83.
Salomon, R., & Wu. Z. (2012). Institutional distance and local isomorphism strategy. Journal of International
Business Studies, 43(4), 343-367.
Shoham, A. 1998. Export performance: A conceptualization and empirical assessment. Journal of International
Marketing, 6(3), 59–81.
Sinkovics, R. R. & Alfoldi, E. A. (2012) Progressive focusing and trustworthiness in qualitative research: The
enabling role of computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS). Management International
Review, 52(6), 817–845.
Sleuwaegen, L., & Onkelinx, J. (2013) International commitment, post-entry growth and survival of
international new ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.01.001
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory (2nd Edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Varma, S. (2011). Born global acquirers from Indian IT: An exploratory case study. International Journal of
Emerging Markets, 6(4), 351-368.
Vissak, T. & Francioni, B. (2013). Serial nonlinear internationalization in practice: A case study. International
Business Review, 22(6), 951-962.
Welch, C. & Paavilainen-Mäntymäki, E. (2013) Putting process (back) in: Research on the internationalization
process of the firm. International Journal of Management Reviews, doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12006
Welch, L. & Welch, C. (2009). Re-internationalisation: Exploration and conceptualisation. International
Business Review, 18(6), 567-577.
Yin, R., K. (2011). Applications of case study research (3rd Edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
24
Zhou, L., Wu, W.-P., & Luo, X. (2007). Internationalization and the performance of born-global SMEs: The
mediating role of social networks. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 673-690.
Zaheer, S., & Mosakowski, E. (1997). The dynamics of the liability of foreignness: A global study of survival in
financial services. Strategic Management Journal, 18(6), 439-463.
Zhang, M., Sarker, S., & Sarker, S. (2013) Drivers and export performance impacts of IT capability in ‘born‐
global’ firms: A cross‐national study. Information Systems Journal, 23(5), 419-443.
25
Table 1 Summary of BG performance measures utilised in the extant literature
Authors and Year
Nature of
Study
Context
Topic of interest
Performance Measures
Differences in short- and long-term
performance drivers
Short-term (global
competitiveness, strategic
position, global market share)
Long-term (survival)
Efrat and Shoham (2012)
Quant
Israel high-technology
industry
Li, Qian and Qian (2012)
Quant
US technology intensive
industries
Relationship between early internationalisation
and performance
Return on sales
Park and Rhee (2012)
Quant
South Korea early
internationalising SMES
Antecedents of knowledge competency and
performance
Share of sales from international
activities
Zhang and Tansuhaj (2007)
Qual
US early internationalising
SMES
Organizational culture, information technology
capability, and performance
International performance (not
specified)
Gleason, Madura and Wiggenhorn
(2006)
Quant
US early internationalising
SMES
Operating characteristics, risk,
and performance
Average holding period
abnormal returns, return on
equity, and growth in sales
Zhang, Sarker and Sarker (2013)
Quant
Chinese and US bornglobal firms
Drivers and export performance impacts of IT
capability
Financial performance
(profitability, sales volume,
rapid growth)
Strategic performance (global
competitiveness, strategic
position, global market share)
Zhou, Wu and Luo (2007)
Quant
China’s economically
developed Eastern
Province of Zhejiang
Internationalization and the performance of
born-global SMEs: The role of social networks
Export growth, profitability
growth, and total sales growth
26
Authors and Year
Nature of
Study
Context
Topic of interest
Performance Measures
Turkish BGs
The effects of entrepreneurial
marketing on performance
International performance (not
specified)
Liu and Fu (2011)
Conceptual
Review
n/a
Relationship between strategic orientation and
organizational
performance
Emphasises that BG
performance measures should
be adapted to the specific
context
Mort and Weeawarenda (1994)
Qual
Australian BGs
How networks function in Australian born
global firms
Entry into multiple markets and
rapid international market entry
Mort, Weerawardena and Liesch (2012)
Qual
Australian BGs
Entrepreneurial marketing strategies and
performance
Rapid international market entry
Organisational culture, business strategies, and
performance
Market share, sales growth, and
pre-tax profitability compared to
prior expectation. Product
success in export market, and
return on investment compared
to main competitor(s)
Customer focus, product quality, marketing
competence, product differentiation, and
international performance
Market share, sales growth, and
pre-tax profitability compared to
prior expectation. Product
success in export market, and
return on investment compared
to main competitor(s)
Kocak and Abimbola (2009)
Qual
Knight and Cavusgil (2004)
Knight, Madsen and Servais (2004)
Quant
Quant
US early internationalising
SMES
BGs from Denmark and
the US
27
Table 2 A matrix of the relevance of performance measures for BGs in the three phases of their development
Phase of Development
Performance
Measures
Pre-start-up /
venture creation
Early international entry/
development
International growth /
consolidation
(Preceding BG inception)
(Immediately following BG inception, where rapid
internationalisation is pursued)
(Following initially internationalisation, where the
BG becomes established)
High - Once BGs have established global presence
and achieved sustained growth, financial measures
gain prevalence
Financial
Low - The BG is yet to establish operations
and therefore unable to generate income.
Low - The development of BG operations, foreign
market entry, and the need to educate potential
customers delay the achievement of financial
outcomes. Early and rapid internationalisation of
BGs inhibits short-term financial performance
Operational
Low - The BG is yet to establish operations
rendering operational performance
inappropriate.
High - In order to secure longer-term financial
outcomes, firms focus on product quality and
innovation, employee retention, and efficiency
High - Due to their niche product strategies,
constant improvements in product, processes, and
market outcomes remain vital
Overall
Effectiveness
High – Entrepreneurial attention is
concentrated on idea generation, resource
acquisition, network development, and
obtaining finance.
High - Survival, development and maintenance of
reputation and achievement of BG goals provides
a foundation for future financial success.
High - Strong reputation, survival, and
performance relative to competition, remains vital
for the firm; regardless of whether their intention is
continued development or sale of the BG.
28
Table 3 Case and industry informant descriptions
Case /
Informant
Product/
Service/Department
Organisation
Interviewee
Case 1
TravelWear
Entrepreneur
Travel based clothing
product
Case 2
WebSource
Owner
Case 3
GlobalHome
Case 4
Firm Characteristics
Age
(years)
Phase of
development
2 entrepreneurs
-
Pre-start-up and new
venture creation
United States
Low
Web-based sourcing
applications
3 full-time staff
2
Early international
entry / development
United States,
United Kingdom
Low
Owner
Housing for international
students
1 full time staff, 2
assistants
<1
Early international
entry / development
Korea, China,
Hong Kong
High
DeviceDesign
CEO
Computer peripheral
devise
25 full time staff
6
International growth /
consolidation
Europe
Case 5
InDesign
Owner
Industrial and graphic
design
20 full-time staff
6
International growth /
consolidation
South-East Asia
High
Case 6
SysTrain
Marketing
Director
Systems engineering
training
5-10 full time staff
17
International growth /
consolidation
Western cultures
Low
Case 7
GamePlay
Senior
Manager
Video game design and
developer
90 full time staff
14
International growth /
consolidation
United States,
United Kingdom
Low
Industry
Informant 1
Industry
Informant 2
Austrade
(Federal)
Austrade
(Federal)
Senior
Advisor
Senior
Advisor
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Industry
Informant 3
State
Government
Director
Automotive and Advanced
Manufacturing
High-technology
Industries
Department of Innovation,
Industry and Regional
Development
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Industry
Informant 4
Australian
Exporters
Club
Knowledge Intensive
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Industry
Informant 5
Foreign MNE
Agribusiness
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Chair
Board
Member
Size
(Number of staff)
Internationalisation Pattern
Initial Market(s)
Psychic
distance
Medium
29
Figure 1 A framework of BG development
BG progression to international growth/consolidation can be slowed by:
- Rapid entry into multiple foreign markets;
- The need to educate potential customers; and
- Entry into psychically distant markets.
Process of BG
inception
Entrepreneurs conceive an idea, develop
a business model, obtain finances and
prepare to commence operations.
BG progression to international growth/consolidation can be hastened by:
- The extent to which the Pre-start-up/Venture creation phase is
used to obtain resources and attract potential customers.
The BG begins operations and seeks to
enter multiple foreign markets rapidly.
The BG becomes increasingly established
and begins to recoup initial investments.
Pre-start-up /
Venture creation
Early international entry /
development
International growth /
consolidation
(Any time preceding inception)
(Initial phase in which the BG invests heavily in
product development and market establishment)
(Any time after early internationalisation /
development)
30