The Uppsala Internationalization Process Model Revisited: From Liability of Foreignness to Liability of Outsidership
21 May 2009-Journal of International Business Studies (Palgrave Macmillan UK)-Vol. 40, Iss: 9, pp 1411-1431
TL;DR: The Uppsala internationalization process model was revisited in the light of changes in business practices and theoretical advances that have been made since 1977 as mentioned in this paper, and the change mechanisms in the revised model are essentially the same as those in the original version, although they add trust-building and knowledge creation, the latter to recognize the fact that new knowledge is developed in relationships.
Abstract: The Uppsala internationalization process model is revisited in the light of changes in business practices and theoretical advances that have been made since 1977. Now the business environment is viewed as a web of relationships, a network, rather than as a neoclassical market with many independent suppliers and customers. Outsidership, in relation to the relevant network, more than psychic distance, is the root of uncertainty. The change mechanisms in the revised model are essentially the same as those in the original version, although we add trust-building and knowledge creation, the latter to recognize the fact that new knowledge is developed in relationships.
Citations
More filters
1,011 citations
TL;DR: The 2010 Journal of International Business Studies (JIBS) special issue on Culture in International Business Research as discussed by the authors is a collection of 10 articles on culture and IB, all of which were submitted to the editorial team led by JIBS Editorin-Chief Lorraine Eden.
Abstract: Journal of International Business Studies (2010) 41, 1259–1274. doi:10.1057/jibs.2010.41 OVERVIEW OF 41.8: HOFSTEDE AND GLOBE IN CROSS-CULTURAL RESEARCH While Hofstede’s work was not the first systematic study on crossnational cultures, his seminal book, Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values (1980), succeeded in putting cross-cultural analysis at the forefront of international business (IB) research. In a later paper, he boldly asserted that the “business of international business is culture” (1994: 1). Despite the criticisms that have been voiced against his work (see McSweeney, 2002; Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002), Hofstede’s influence on the fields of IB and management is undeniable: according to Harzing’s “Publish or Perish” citation index, as of June 2010 there were over 54,000 citations to his work. This is a remarkable record that attests to, first, the growing popularity of cross-cultural research in light of continued internationalization of the world economy, and second, Hofstede’s personal impact on scholarly research. This JIBS issue brings together 10 articles on culture and IB, all of which were submitted to the editorial team led by JIBS Editorin-Chief Lorraine Eden. While the articles were independently submitted through the regular double-blind reviewing process, the decision to join them in one collection creates, in effect, a Special Issue on “Culture in International Business Research”, which the JIBS editors hope will be widely read and cited by IB scholars. In general terms, the papers in this collection fall into one of two categories: (1) articles and commentaries about conceptual and methodological issues associated with Hofstede’s oeuvre vs the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) project’s cultural dimensions, and (2) articles and perspectives that use culture and/or cultural dimensions, as well as the operational measurement thereof, to explain differences in behavior and practices across countries. The common feature of all these scholarly pieces is that they challenge particular assumptions often made too easily in conventional cross-cultural research. The first paper in this collection is a perspective written by Franke and Richey that cautions against “questionable generalizations from small numbers of countries in international business research”. Using statistical analysis to support their assertion, Franke and Richey argue that in order to draw “credible” generalizations in IB, a minimum of 7–10 countries must be used. This is an important message: researchers should never formulate strong conclusions about the impact of cultural dimensions on Journal of International Business Studies (2010) 41, 1259–1274 & 2010 Academy of International Business All rights reserved 0047-2506
554 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors review the literature on the exporting challenges and problems of small and medium scale enterprises in this era of globalization and identify gaps in the literature and provide directions for future research, which serve as a basis to understand the research gaps, opportunities, and undertake new research projects based on the propositions and the future research agenda outlined.
471 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigate the rapid internationalization of many multinationals from emerging economies through acquisition in advanced economies, and they conceptualize these acquisitions as an act and form of entrepreneurship, aimed to overcome the "liability of emergingness" incurred by these firms and to serve as a mechanism for competitive catch-up through opportunity seeking and capability transformation.
Abstract: We investigate the rapid internationalization of many multinationals from emerging economies through acquisition in advanced economies. We conceptualize these acquisitions as an act and form of entrepreneurship, aimed to overcome the ‘liability of emergingness’ incurred by these firms and to serve as a mechanism for competitive catch-up through opportunity seeking and capability transformation. Our explanation emphasizes unique asymmetries (and not necessarily advantages) of emerging multinationals due to their historical and institutional differences with advanced economy multinationals, as well as a search for advantage creation when firms possess mainly ordinary resources. The argument shifts the central focus from advantage to asymmetries as the starting point for internationalization.
451 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigate the rapid internationalization of many multinationals from emerging economies through acquisition in advanced economies, and they conceptualize these acquisitions as an act and form of entrepreneurship, aimed to overcome the "liability of emergingness" incurred by these firms and to serve as a mechanism for competitive catch-up through opportunity seeking and capability transformation.
Abstract: We investigate the rapid internationalization of many multinationals from emerging economies through acquisition in advanced economies. We conceptualize these acquisitions as an act and form of entrepreneurship, aimed to overcome the ‘liability of emergingness’ incurred by these firms and to serve as a mechanism for competitive catch-up through opportunity seeking and capability transformation. Our explanation emphasizes (1) the unique asymmetries (and not necessarily advantages) distinguishing emerging multinationals from advanced economy multinationals due to their historical and institutional differences, as well as (2) a search for advantage creation when firms possess mainly ordinary resources. The argument shifts the central focus from advantage to asymmetries as the starting point for internationalization and, additionally, highlights the role of learning agility rather than ability as a potential ‘asset of emergingness.’
439 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that the ability of a firm to recognize the value of new, external information, assimilate it, and apply it to commercial ends is critical to its innovative capabilities.
Abstract: In this paper, we argue that the ability of a firm to recognize the value of new, external information, assimilate it, and apply it to commercial ends is critical to its innovative capabilities. We label this capability a firm's absorptive capacity and suggest that it is largely a function of the firm's level of prior related knowledge. The discussion focuses first on the cognitive basis for an individual's absorptive capacity including, in particular, prior related knowledge and diversity of background. We then characterize the factors that influence absorptive capacity at the organizational level, how an organization's absorptive capacity differs from that of its individual members, and the role of diversity of expertise within an organization. We argue that the development of absorptive capacity, and, in turn, innovative performance are history- or path-dependent and argue how lack of investment in an area of expertise early on may foreclose the future development of a technical capability in that area. We formulate a model of firm investment in research and development (R&D), in which R&D contributes to a firm's absorptive capacity, and test predictions relating a firm's investment in R&D to the knowledge underlying technical change within an industry. Discussion focuses on the implications of absorptive capacity for the analysis of other related innovative activities, including basic research, the adoption and diffusion of innovations, and decisions to participate in cooperative R&D ventures. **
31,623 citations
"The Uppsala Internationalization Pr..." refers background in this paper
...developed by Cohen and Levinthal (1990) is a third example....
[...]
...The concept of absorptive capacity developed by Cohen and Levinthal (1990) is a third example....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the extent to which economic action is embedded in structures of social relations, in modern industrial society, is examined, and it is argued that reformist economists who attempt to bring social structure back in do so in the "oversocialized" way criticized by Dennis Wrong.
Abstract: How behavior and institutions are affected by social relations is one of the classic questions of social theory. This paper concerns the extent to which economic action is embedded in structures of social relations, in modern industrial society. Although the usual neoclasical accounts provide an "undersocialized" or atomized-actor explanation of such action, reformist economists who attempt to bring social structure back in do so in the "oversocialized" way criticized by Dennis Wrong. Under-and oversocialized accounts are paradoxically similar in their neglect of ongoing structures of social relations, and a sophisticated account of economic action must consider its embeddedness in such structures. The argument in illustrated by a critique of Oliver Williamson's "markets and hierarchies" research program.
25,601 citations
"The Uppsala Internationalization Pr..." refers background in this paper
...Building on the work of Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998), Granovetter (1985, 1992), Madhok (1995) and others, we conclude that trust is an important ingredient for successful learning and the development of new knowledge....
[...]
...Two firms that are parties to a relationship are tied to each other to some extent: they share in their mutual future development, and may exercise some degree of power over one another (Granovetter, 1985)....
[...]
...Two reviews of our original model have been written that discuss its concepts of knowledge and learning (Forsgren, 2002; Petersen, Pedersen, & Sharma, 2003)....
[...]
...A wealth of research, including Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998), Granovetter (1985), and Ring and van de Ven (1992), supports this point....
[...]
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors developed an evolutionary theory of the capabilities and behavior of business firms operating in a market environment, including both general discussion and the manipulation of specific simulation models consistent with that theory.
Abstract: This study develops an evolutionary theory of the capabilities and behavior of business firms operating in a market environment. It includes both general discussion and the manipulation of specific simulation models consistent with that theory. The analysis outlines the differences between an evolutionary theory of organizational and industrial change and a neoclassical microeconomic theory. The antecedents to the former are studies by economists like Schumpeter (1934) and Alchian (1950). It is contrasted with the orthodox theory in the following aspects: while the evolutionary theory views firms as motivated by profit, their actions are not assumed to be profit maximizing, as in orthodox theory; the evolutionary theory stresses the tendency of most profitable firms to drive other firms out of business, but, in contrast to orthodox theory, does not concentrate on the state of industry equilibrium; and evolutionary theory is related to behavioral theory: it views firms, at any given time, as having certain capabilities and decision rules, as well as engaging in various ‘search' operations, which determines their behavior; while orthodox theory views firm behavior as relying on the use of the usual calculus maximization techniques. The theory is then made operational by the use of simulation methods. These models use Markov processes and analyze selection equilibrium, responses to changing factor prices, economic growth with endogenous technical change, Schumpeterian competition, and Schumpeterian tradeoff between static Pareto-efficiency and innovation. The study's discussion of search behavior complicates the evolutionary theory. With search, the decision making process in a firm relies as much on past experience as on innovative alternatives to past behavior. This view combines Darwinian and Lamarkian views on evolution; firms are seen as both passive with regard to their environment, and actively seeking alternatives that affect their environment. The simulation techniques used to model Schumpeterian competition reveal that there are usually winners and losers in industries, and that the high productivity and profitability of winners confer advantages that make further success more likely, while decline breeds further decline. This process creates a tendency for concentration to develop even in an industry initially composed of many equal-sized firms. However, the experiments conducted reveal that the growth of concentration is not inevitable; for example, it tends to be smaller when firms focus their searches on imitating rather than innovating. At the same time, industries with rapid technological change tend to grow more concentrated than those with slower progress. The abstract model of Schumpeterian competition presented in the study also allows to see more clearly the public policy issues concerning the relationship between technical progress and market structure. The analysis addresses the pervasive question of whether industry concentration, with its associated monopoly profits and reduced social welfare, is a necessary cost if societies are to obtain the benefits of technological innovation. (AT)
22,566 citations
TL;DR: Relationship marketing, established, developing, and maintaining successful relational exchanges, constitutes a major shift in marketing theory and practice as mentioned in this paper, after conceptualizing relationship relationships as a set of relationships.
Abstract: Relationship marketing—establishing, developing, and maintaining successful relational exchanges—constitutes a major shift in marketing theory and practice. After conceptualizing relationship marke...
19,920 citations
"The Uppsala Internationalization Pr..." refers background in this paper
...Third, trust plays an important part in recent research on relationship development (Morgan & Hunt, 1994) and business networks (Johanson & Mattsson, 1987)....
[...]
...The result is the Journal of International Business Studies accumulation of knowledge and building of trust, and eventually greater commitment, as also demonstrated in channel and relationship marketing studies (Anderson & Weitz, 1992; Dwyer, Schurr, & Oh, 1987; Morgan & Hunt, 1994)....
[...]
...Morgan and Hunt (1994) provide definitions of trust....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors consider the relation between the exploration of new possibilities and the exploitation of old certainties in organizational learning and examine some complications in allocating resources between the two, particularly those introduced by the distribution of costs and benefits across time and space.
Abstract: This paper considers the relation between the exploration of new possibilities and the exploitation of old certainties in organizational learning. It examines some complications in allocating resources between the two, particularly those introduced by the distribution of costs and benefits across time and space, and the effects of ecological interaction. Two general situations involving the development and use of knowledge in organizations are modeled. The first is the case of mutual learning between members of an organization and an organizational code. The second is the case of learning and competitive advantage in competition for primacy. The paper develops an argument that adaptive processes, by refining exploitation more rapidly than exploration, are likely to become effective in the short run but self-destructive in the long run. The possibility that certain common organizational practices ameliorate that tendency is assessed.
16,377 citations