Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The emerging new architecture in international entrepreneurship: Dynamic impacts of business models transformation favoring accelerated internationalization of smaller enterprises

  • Published:
Journal of International Entrepreneurship Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article explores the evolving impact of the behavioral, competitive, institutional, and technological forces and factors that have already influenced, and continue to influence, the architectural nature, speed and extent, and functional operations of international entrepreneurship. These evolutionary institutional and technological changes are intensifying competition, and accelerating the transformation of business models and their corresponding international operations, which are in turn stimulating the global consumers’ evolutionary behavioral change in favor of higher services and consumer-centered values (CCVs). It will be also exploring the ongoing evolutionary offline, and mainly online, developments that have already had and continue to impact internationalizing smaller enterprises (iSMEs). These developments have transformed the iSMEs’ international operations in favor of more service-oriented logic, adding value, offering higher services, speed, and extending their international reach substantially. As a result, iSMEs have been reaching much larger number of international customers and international markets at much faster than their slower predecessors (e.g., the born globals, the international new ventures, and the rapidly internationalizing enterprises) with lesser efforts and lower risks than ever before, mainly through collaborative arrangements with much larger institutions, such as the multi-sided online platforms (simply, Platforms). Consequently, iSMEs that are willing to collaborate with platforms need to evaluate the strategic cost/benefits of their transformation for reaching ever larger number of international markets through platforms to have larger and more satisfied international customers at highly accelerated internationalization through online platforms. The comparative, empirical, and theoretical analysis of this article contribute to advancing iSMEs’ accelerated internationalization benefiting from larger number of consumers and markets at lower risks, costs, and efforts through dominant platforms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Ironically, the interprovincial barriers in Canada and interstate restrictions in the USA and Mexico are still more strict than those across national country borders.

  2. Currently, the European Union is an economic and political union of 27 countries. It operates as a single internal market, which allows for free movement of goods, capital, services, people, and enterprises amongst its member states. Entrepreneurs are nearly free to set-up shop at the preferred location(s) of their choice.

  3. In 2005, Thomas Friedman, the author of World is Flat (2005), noticed that several services had shifted mainly because of the ability of the global Internet network and the decreasing barriers to movement of resources, which he called it as “the playing field is being leveled.” The book highlighted 10 influential “flatteners” (The fall of barriers -- e.g., the fall of Berlin Wall), Netscape, work-flow, outsourcing, offshoring, open-sourcing, insourcing, supply-chaining, in-forming and collaborations for faster learning), which would contribute to the further flattening of the global economies. He also outlined three shifts in level of globalization through the concept of “triple convergences” (i.e., the convergences of (i) workforces, (ii) business models, and (iii) corporate leadership) of other factors that would increase the impact of the 10 flatteners.

  4. The concept of “algorithmic” process, discussed in a later section, is a manifestation of progressive transformations in favor of lower costs and higher efficiencies for faster operation to result in higher delivered values.

  5. Interestingly, the introduction of fax machines, offering a more advanced technology at the time (and nearly obsolete and mostly discarded now), began to change our collective perception of timely value of information through communication, which would have previously taken days, if not weeks, to send or receive the same information from one part of the world to the other. Ironically, our expected typical timeliness has further shrunk substantially to momentarily, especially for receiving information.

  6. Allen (1990) suggests that information is a highly valuable commodity, but it is time-sensitive as its value declines rapidly over time.

  7. Prior to eBay, small “classified” advertisings were the means for possible P2P transaction, which involved the buyer(s) and seller(s) to meet, negotiate, and finalize their transaction.

  8. “A chaebol would consist of multiple diversified affiliates, controlled by a person or group.” Chaebols also refers to several dozen large South Korean family-controlled corporate groups. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaebol

  9. Zaibatsus were pre-Second World War Japanese large conglomerates, such as Mitsui, Mitsubishi, amongst many others, which were disbanded in the aftermath of the Second World War.

  10. Figure 1 is a modified schematic from Etemad 2023a, b.

  11. Such flows of information back and forth are shown in Fig. 4, in a later section, below.

  12. It is noteworthy that collaborative arrangements may transform into unexpected competitive and co-opetitve situations (see Kock et al. 2010) possibly harming previous collaborators.

  13. The earlier infra-structural arrangements for nearly free movement of good, service, information and funds facilitated the platforms’ international operations. They, however, had to systematize the necessary logistics for the transfer of supplies from their supply chain enterprises to their ultimate buyers through their online and physical operations. At times, however, international supplies were stored in their various warehouses for better controls and saving delivery times.

  14. Repeated purchasing visits to platforms have resulted in platforms’ rapid international growth in the past two decade. For example, more than 45% of Amazon’s Prime customers return frequently to Amazon platform for buying more.

  15. Figures 2 and 3 are modified schematics from Etemad 2023a, b.

  16. Consequently, most platforms have abandoned the development of their own brands similar to those of the major traditional retailers (e.g., see different suppliers’ brand names on the product category pages of, for example, Amazon.com, Zolando.com, Wayfair.com, amongst many others).

  17. Returned products can be only sold as “open box” or used products at lower prices if they can be sold at all.

  18. Such consumer feedbacks can serve as ideas for improvements in the suppliers’ offerings as well.

  19. An independent survey by Feedvisor found that of all consumers who belong to Amazon Prime, nearly half (48%) buy products online once a week or more frequently, and nearly three-quarters (74%) shop online at least every few weeks. It also found that more than two-thirds (67%) of consumers cited Prime eligibility as an important factor influencing their purchase decisions for the majority of situations. More importantly, when they were in need of purchasing a product, the majority of consumers favored buying it from Amazon rather than other platforms. Sources: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kirimasters/2019/03/20/study-89-of-consumers-are-more-likely-to-buy-products-from-amazon-than-other-e-commerce-sites/?sh=284442744af1).

  20. Despite the above descriptions, some Amazon suppliers have voiced their dissatisfaction about Amazon’s demands for better products at lower costs.

  21. In less than three decades, Amazon sales in the USA reached 11% of all US e-commerce transactions in 2022, and forecasted to exceed 14% in 2024. Furthermore, it nearly matched the total US sales of the largest global retailer, the Walmart, in 2022. (Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kirimasters/2019/03/20/study-89-of-consumers-are-more-likely-to-buy-products-from-amazon-than-other-e-commerce-sites/?sh=284442744af1).

  22. Three examples are commonly known: (i) General Motors and Toyota Motors’s collaboration in building the “New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc. (NUMMI) in Fremont, California, for manufacturing, assembling and selling of similar cars. Toyota’s version was branded as Toyota Matrix, and the GM’s version was sold as Vibe by GM’s Pontiac Division, both of which were assembled side-by-side and their combined scale economies offered competitive advantages to both collaborators against other car companies; (ii) the US Ford and Japanese Mazda Motor companies initially collaborated and became partners later, and (iii) the US Chrysler and the German Daimler Benz Companies collaboration offered advantage to each partner difficult to attain by each firm alone. Such collaborations have not been limited to auto industry alone.

  23. Figure 4 is a modified schematic of Etemad 2023a, b.

  24. This is the strategy that well-established firms such as Walmart adopted to slow down loosing market share to Amazon. A competitor of Walmart, the Target, used to be a localized and mainly offline retailer when it started. Although they are not the only examples, they are included in the Table 1’s comparative analysis.

  25. The influential long list may include the enterprise’s age, size, resources, and strengths, as well as the presence and the extent of experiential knowledge of the firm in different international markets at the time. Similarly, information on time and timing preferences of the top management team, the complementary nature of their offerings, capabilities and resources, potential liabilities and weaknesses, perception of risk-bearing capacity, expectations of returns, and growth rates in the short to medium terms could amongst factors influence enterprises’ strategic path forward.

  26. Source of phone statistics: https://www.bankmycell.com/blog/how-many-phones-are-in-the-world (Accessed on Sept 10th, 2023).

  27. In accelerated internationalizations, where smaller supplier(s) need to depend on the larger multi-sided platform, the likelihood of “opportunistic behavior” be of concern to smaller suppliers.

References

  • Adejare BO, Udofia EE, Olaore GO (2023) Strategy integration, sustainable drivers of firm internationalization performance—moderated by environmental uncertainty and firm capabilities. J Int Entrep 21:3 (in Press)

  • Adomako S, Frimpong K, Amankwah-Amoah J, Donbesuur F, Opoku RA (2021) Strategic decision speed and international performance: the roles of competitive intensity, resource fexibility, and structural organicity. Manag Int Rev 61(1):27–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agustí M, Kuivalainen O, Ramos-Hidalgo E, Acedo FJ (2023) Maturing international new ventures: short- and medium-term Insights. J Int Entrep 21:3 (in Press)

  • Allen B (1990) Information as an economic commodity. Am Econ Rev 80(2):268–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Amezcua AS, Grimes MG, Bradley SW, Wiklund J (2013) Organizational sponsorship and founding environments: a contingency view on the survival of business-incubated firms, 1994–2007. Acad Manag J 56(6):1628–1654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anwar ST (2023) The sharing economy and collaborative consumption: strategic issues and global entrepreneurial opportunities. J Int Entrep 21:60–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-022-00323-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney J (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manag 17(1):99–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Blesa-Pérez A, Ripollés-Meliá M, Rialp-Criado A, Rialp-Criado J (2023) Introduction to the special issue: digitalisation and servitisation in international entrepreneurship. J Int Entrep 21(2):150–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boudreaux CJ, Nikolaev BN, Klein P (2019) Socio-cognitive traits and entrepreneurship: the moderating role of economic institutions. J Bus Ventur 34(1):178–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouthers KD (2002) Institutional, cultural and transaction cost infuences on entry mode choice and performance. J Int Bus Stud 33(2):203–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruneel J, Ratinho T, Clarysse B, Groen A (2012) The evolution of business incubators: comparing demand and supply of business incubation services across different incubator generations. Technovation 32(2):110–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruton GD, Ahlstrom D, Li HL (2010) Institutional theory and entrepreneurship: where are we now and where do we need to move in the future? Entrep Theory Pract 34(3):421–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler JE, Doktor R, Lins FA (2010) Linking international entrepreneurship to uncertainty, opportunity discovery, and cognition. J Int Entrep 8(2):121–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-010-0054-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cannone G, Pisoni A, Onetti A (2014) Born global companies founded by young entrepreneurs. A multiple case study. Int J Entrep Innov Manag 18:210–232

    Google Scholar 

  • Casillas JC, Acedo FJ (2013) Speed in the internationalization process of the firm. Int J Manag Rev 15:15–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2012.00331.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavusgil ST, Knight G (2015) The born global firm: an entrepreneurial and capabilities perspective on early and rapid internationalization. J Int Bus Stud 46:3–16. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2014.62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandra Y (2017) A time-based process model of international entrepreneurial opportunity evaluation. J Int Bus Stud 48(4):423–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandra Y, Styles C, Wilkinson I (2009) The recognition of first time international entrepreneurial opportunities: evidence from firms in knowledge-based industries. Int Mark Rev 26(1):30–61. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651330910933195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coeurderoy R, Murray G (2014) Regulatory environments and the location decision: evidence from the early foreign market entries of new-technology-based firms. In: Location of International Business Activities. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp 226–260

  • Crick D, Crick J (2014) The internationalization strategies of rapidly internationalizing high-tech UK SMEs: planned and unplanned activities. Eur Bus Rev 26(5):421–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crick JM, Crick D, Chaudhry S (2020) Entrepreneurial marketing decision-making in rapidly internationalising and de-internationalising start-up firms. J Bus Res 113:158–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dana LP, Etemad H, Wright R (2000) The global reach of symbiotic networks. In: Marketing G (ed) Leo Paul Dana LP. Cooperation and Networks. Haworth Press, New York, pp 1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Dana LP, Etemad H, Wright R (2001) Symbiotic interdependence. In: Welsh D, Alon I (eds) International Franchising in Emerging Markets, Chapter 5. Illinois CCH Publishing, Riverwoods, pp 119–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Dana LP, Etemad H, Wright R (2008) Towards a paradigm of symbiotic entrepreneurship. Int J Entrep Small Bus V5(2):109–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Das A (2023) Developing dynamic digital capabilities in micro-multinationals through platform ecosystems: assessing the role of trust in algorithmic smart contracts. J Int Entrep 21(2):157–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Clercq D, Zhou L (2014) Entrepreneurial strategic posture and performance in foreign markets: the critical role of international learning effort. J Int Mark 22(2):47–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellwood P, Grimshaw P, Pandza K (2017) Accelerating the innovation process: a systematic review and realist synthesis of the research literature. Int J Manag Rev 19:510–530. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etemad H (2011) Rapidly-growing firms and their main characteristics: a longitudinal study from United States. Int J Entrep Ventur 3(4):344–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etemad H (2017) The emergence of online global marketplace and the multilayered view of international entrepreneurship. J Int Entrep 15(4):353–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etemad H (2019) The competitive context of strategic orientation and strategy formulation in entrepreneurial and strategic internationalization: multiple-player and multiple-period games. J Int Entrep 17(3):279–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etemad H (2022a) The emergence of international small digital ventures (ISDVs): reaching beyond born globals and INVs. J Int Entrep 20(1):1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etemad H (2022b) The evolving international entrepreneurship orientations and international entrepreneurship capital in the rapidly changing and digitizing international environments. J Int Entrep 20(3):345–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-022-00322-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etemad H (2023a) The increasing prevalence of multi-sided online platforms and their influence on international entrepreneurship: the rapid transformation of entrepreneurial digital ecosystems. J Int Entrep 21(1):1–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etemad H (2023b) Digitization and servitization in international entrepreneurship. J Int Entrep 21(2):143–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-023-00339-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etemad H, Wu P-C (2013) Revisiting aspects of born globals: young Canadian SMEs growing rapidly and becoming born globals. In: Etemad H (ed) Current issues in international entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd., Northampton, Mass. and Cheltenham, UK, pp 13–37

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Etemad H, Wright RW, Dana LP (2001) Symbiotic business networks: collaboration between small and large firm. Thunderbird Int Bus Rev 43(4):481–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman TL (2005) The world is flat: the brief history of the first century. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York, pp 2–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagen B, Zucchella A (2014) Born global or born to run? The long-term growth of born global firms. Manag Int Rev 54:497–525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-014-0214-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannibal M, Evers N, Servais P (2016) Opportunity recognition and international new venture creation in university spin-ofs—cases from Denmark and Ireland. J Int Entrep 14(3):345–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-016-0181-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johanson J, Vahlne J-E (1977) The internationalization process of the firm—a model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Int Bus 8:23–32. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315199689-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johanson J, Vahlne JE (2006) Commitment and opportunity development in the internationalization process: a note on the Uppsala internationalization process model. Manag Int Rev 46(2):165–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-006-0043-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johanson J, Vahlne J-EJE (2009) The Uppsala internationalization process model revisited: from liability of foreignness to liability of outsidership. J Int Bus Stud 40:1411–1431. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keen C, Etemad H (2012) Rapid growth and rapid internationalization: the case of smaller enterprises from Canada. Manag Decis 50(4):569–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kock S, Nisuls J, Söderqvist A (2010) Co-opetition: a source of international opportunities in Finnish SMEs. Compet Rev 20(2):111–125. https://doi.org/10.1108/10595421011029839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin GT, Dess GG (1996) Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Acad Manag Rev 21(1):135–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin GT, Dess GG (2001) Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: the moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. J Bus Ventur 16(5):429–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madsen TK, Servais P (1997) The internationalization of born globals: an evolutionary process? Int Bus Rev 6:561–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-5931(97)00032-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDougall PP, Oviatt BM (1996) New venture internationalization, strategic change, and performance: a follow-up study. J Bus Ventur 11(1):23–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDougall P, Oviatt B (2000) International entrepreneurship: the intersection of two research paths. Acad Manag J 43(5):902–906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meschi P-X, Ricard A, Tapia Moore E (2017) Fast and furious or slow and cautious? The joint impact of age at internationalization, speed, and risk diversity on the survival of exporting firms. J Int Manag 23:279–291

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller D (1987) The genesis of configuration. Acad Manag Rev 12(4):686–701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller D (2011) Miller (1983) revisited: a reflection on EO research and some suggestions for the future. Entre Theory Pract 35:873–894

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitze T, Kreutzer F (2023) Relocation, innovation, and the difference that firm size makes: insights for global sourcing strategies of SMEs. J Int Entrep 21(2):157–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Mort GS, Weerawardena J (2006) Networking capability and international entrepreneurship: how networks function in Australian born global frms. Int Mark Rev 23(5):549–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musteen M, Francis J, Datta DK (2010) The influence of international networks on internationalization speed and performance: a study of Czech SMEs. J World Bus 45:197–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2009.12.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nambisan S, Zahra SA, Luo Y (2019) Global platforms and ecosystems: implications for international business theories. J Int Bus Stud 50:1464–1486. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-019-00262-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikolaeva R, Bicho M (2011) The role of institutional and reputational factors in the voluntary adoption of corporate social responsibility reporting standards. J Acad Market Sci 39:136–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I, Takeuchi H, Umemoto K (2014) A theory of organizational knowledge creation. Int J Technol Manag 11(7–8)(Published Online: August 4, 833–845. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.1996.025472

  • Nonaka I, Takeuchi H (1996) The knowledge-creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press, pp 12–25

    Google Scholar 

  • North DC (1991) Institutions. J Econ Perspect 5:97–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrino J, McNaughton R (2015) The co-evolution of learning and internationalization strategy in international new ventures. Manag Int Rev 55:457–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter ME (1979) How competitive forces shape strategy. Harv Bus Rev 57:137–145. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513559810244356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rachinger M, Rauter R, Müller C, Vorraber W, Schirgi E (2019) Digitalization and its infuence on business model innovation. J Manuf Technol Manag 30(8):1143–1160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reddy SK, Reinartz W (2017) Digital transformation and value creation: sea change ahead. Mark Intell Rev 9(1):10–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Rennie MW (1993) Born global. McKinsey Q 45–52

  • Romanello R, Chiarvesio M (2017) Turning point: when born globals enter post-entry stage. J Int Entrep 15:177–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-016-0192-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romanello R, Chiarvesio M (2019) Early internationalizing frms: 2004–2018. J Int Entrep 17:172–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schu M, Morschett D, Swoboda B (2016) Internationalization speed of online retailers: a resource-based perspective on the infuence factors. Manag Int Rev 56:733–757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schüler D (2023) Institutional change and entrepreneurship as occupational choice—the case of South Korea. J Int Entrep 21:3 (in Press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma DDD, Blomstermo A (2003) The internationalization process of born globals: a network view. Int Bus Rev 12:739–753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2003.05.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stenholm P, Acs ZJ, Wuebker R (2013) Exploring country-level institutional arrangements on the rate and type of entrepreneurial activity. J Bus Ventur 28(1):176–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stigler GJ (1961) The economics of information. J Polit Econ 69(3):213–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sturgeon TJ, Kawakami M (2011) Global value chains in the electronics industry: characteristics, crisis, and upgrading opportunities for frms from developing countries. Int J Technol Learn Innov Dev 4(1–3):120–147. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTLID.2011.041902

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan DM, Marvel MR (2011) Knowledge acquisition, network reliance, and early-stage technology venture outcomes. J Manage Stud 48:1169–1193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan DM, Mort G, Weerawardena J (2006) Networking capability and international entrepreneurship: how networks function in Australian born global frms. Int Mark Rev 23(5):549–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sussan F, Acs ZJ (2017) The digital entrepreneurial ecosystem. Small Bus Econ 49:55–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9867-5. Accessed in July 2023

  • Teece DJ (2007) Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strateg Manag J 28(13):1319–1350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece DJ (2010) Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planing 43:172–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece DJ (2018) Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Plan 51(1):40–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen AMY (1997) Dynamic and strategic management. Strateg Manag J 18:509–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urban B, Willard C (2017) The antecedents of opportunity recognition in internationalized firms: an empirical study in South Africa. Int J Entrep Innov 18(3):175–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/1465750317713931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandermerwe S, Rada J (1988) Servitization of business: adding value by adding service. Eur Manag J 6(4):315–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasilchenko E, Morrish S (2011) The role of entrepreneurial networks in the exploration and exploitation of internationalization opportunities by information and communication technology fims. J Int Mark 19(4):88–105. https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.10.0134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb J, Ireland R, Hitt MA, Kistruck GM et al (2011) Where is the opportunity without the customer? An integration of marketing activities, the entrepreneurship process, and institutional theory. J Acad Mark Sci 39(4):537–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weerawardena J, Mort GS, Liesch PW, Knight G (2007) Conceptualizing Accelerated Internationalization in the Born Global Firm: A Dynamic Capabilities Perspective. J World Bus 42:294–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund J, Shepherd D (2003) Knowledge-based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and medium-sized businesses. Strategic Manage J 24:1307–1314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willamson (1975) Markets and hierarchies: analysis and antitrust implications. The Free Press, New York, pp 98–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Willamson OL (1985) The economic institutions of capitalism. The Free Press, New York, pp 11–35

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. McGill University, Montreal, Canada

    Hamid Etemad

Authors
  1. Hamid Etemad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hamid Etemad.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Etemad, H. The emerging new architecture in international entrepreneurship: Dynamic impacts of business models transformation favoring accelerated internationalization of smaller enterprises. J Int Entrep 21, 271–300 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-023-00341-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-023-00341-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation