Advertisement

Journal of International Entrepreneurship

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 28–48 | Cite as

Dynamic capabilities and performance in foreign markets: Developments within international new ventures

  • Tobias Pehrsson
  • Navid Ghannad
  • Anders PehrssonEmail author
  • Tobias Abt
  • Siyuan Chen
  • Fabian Erath
  • Tobias Hammarstig
Article

Abstract

Studies on the relationship between level of internationalization and performance of new ventures show conflicting results indicating a need for more in-depth understanding of the mechanisms underlying the relationship. This study draws on dynamic capability theory and extends the understanding of the issue. The study contributes to international entrepreneurship literature by developing a proposed model built on analyses of event histories of US operations of three Swedish international new ventures. The events take place during more than 20 years. It is proposed that the number of organizationally stable periods of the foreign unit strengthens the positive relationship between product/market knowledge transferred to the unit and its dynamic capabilities, and knowledge acquired locally by the unit and its dynamic capabilities. Also, it is proposed that dynamic capabilities aligned with the transferred and local knowledge are associated with high financial performance. Contributions to literature on international entrepreneurship are discussed.

Keywords

International new venture Dynamic capabilities Performance Knowledge transfer Knowledge acquisition Event histories 

Abstrakt

Studien über den Zusammenhang zwischen dem Niveau der Internationalisierung und der Leistung der neuen Unternehmen zeigen widersprüchliche Ergebnisse, die einen Bedarf an mehr in ein tiefes Verständnis der Mechanismen, die Beziehung zugrunde liegt. Diese Studie stützt sich auf dynamische Fähigkeit Theorie und erweitert das Verständnis des Problems. Die Studie trägt dazu bei, International Entrepreneurship-Literatur durch die Entwicklung einer vorgeschlagenen Modell auf der Analyse von Ereignisentwicklungen der US-Operationen von drei schwedischen International neue Unternehmen gebaut. Die Ereignisse während mehr als zwanzig Jahren statt. Es wird vorgeschlagen, dass die Zahl der organisatorisch stabiles Perioden der ausländischen Einheit stärkt die positive Beziehung zwischen Produkt / Marktkenntnisse, um die Einheit und ihre dynamischen Fähigkeiten übertragen, und das Wissen vor Ort von dem Gerät und seinen dynamischen Fähigkeiten erworben. Es wird auch vorgeschlagen, dass dynamische Fähigkeiten mit der übertragenen und lokales Wissen ausgerichtet sind mit hohen finanziellen Leistungsfähigkeit verbunden. Beiträge zur Literatur über internationale Unternehmertum werden diskutiert.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for constructive comments received from the Editor of Journal of International Entrepreneurship and two anonymous reviewers.

References

  1. Almodóvar P, Rugman AM (2014) The M curve and the performance of Spanish international new ventures. Br J Manag 25(1):6–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Augier M, Teece D (2007) Dynamic capabilities and multinational enterprise: Penrosean insights and omissions. Manag Int Rev 41:175–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Autio E, Sapienza HJ, Almeida JG (2000) Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity, and imitability on international growth. Acad Manag J 43:909–924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barney J (1997) Gaining and sustaining competitive advantages. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  5. Bartlett CA, Ghoshal S (1989) Managing across borders: the transnational solution. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  6. Baum M, Schwens C, Kabst R (2011) A typology of international new ventures: Empirical evidence from high-technology industries. J Small Bus Manag 49(3):305–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berg S (1988) Snowball sampling. In: Kotz S, Johnson N (eds) Encyclopaedia of statistical sciences. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  8. Bloodgood JM, Sapienza HJ, Almeida JG (1996) The internationalization of new high-potential U.S. ventures: Antecedents and outcomes. Enterp Theory Pract 20(4):61–76Google Scholar
  9. Coviello NE, Munro H (1997) Network relationships and the internationalisation process of small software firms. Int Bus Rev 6(4):361–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coviello NE, McDougall PP, Oviatt BM (2011) The emergence, advance and future of international entrepreneurship research—An introduction to the special forum. J Bus Ventur 26(6):625–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Creswell J (1994) Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  12. DeLuca LM, Atuahene-Gima K (2007) Market knowledge dimensions and cross-functional collaboration: Examining the different routes to product innovation performance. J Mark 71(1):95–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Døving E, Gooderham P (2008) Dynamic capabilities as antecedents of the scope of related diversification: The case of small firm accountancy practices. Strateg Manag J 29:841–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eisenhardt K (1989) Building theories from case study research. Acad Manag Rev 14(4):532–551Google Scholar
  15. Eisenhardt K, Graebner M (2007) Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Acad Manag J 50(1):25–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eisenhardt K, Martin J (2000) Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strateg Manag J 21(10/11):1105–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fang E, Zou S (2009) Antecedents and consequences of marketing dynamic capabilities in international joint ventures. J Int Bus Stud 40(5):742–761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fernhaber SA (2013) Untangling the relationship between new venture internationalization and performance. J Int Entrep 11:220–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Frasquet M, Dawson J, Molla A (2013) Post-entry internationalisation activity of retailers: An assessment of dynamic capabilities. Manag Decis 51(7):1510–1527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Galbraith JR (1973) Designing complex organizations. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  21. Ghannad N (2013) The role of the entrepreneur in the international new venture: opening the black box. Halmstad University Dissertations no. 3, Halmstad, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  22. Ghannad N, Ljungquist U (2012) Change of entrepreneurial agenda in a core competence context: Exploring the transformation from technology focus to market focus. Int J Enterp Ventur 4(2):148–167Google Scholar
  23. Grant R (1991) The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulations. Calif Manag Rev 33(3):114–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hansen M, Lövås B (2004) How do multinational companies leverage technological competencies? Moving from single to interdependent explanations. Strateg Manag J 25(8/9):801–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jones MV, Coviello N, Tang YK (2011) International entrepreneurship research (1989–2009): A domain ontology and thematic analysis. J Bus Ventur 26:632–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kale P, Singh H (2007) Building from capabilities through learning: The role of the alliance learning process in alliance capability and firm-level alliance success. Strateg Manag J 28(10):981–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Khavul S, Pérez-Nordtvedt L, Wood E (2010) Organizational entrainment and international new ventures from emerging markets. J Bus Ventur 25(1):104–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Knight GA, Cavusgil ST (1996) The born global firm: A challenge to traditional internationalization theory. Adv Int Mark 8:11–26Google Scholar
  29. Kogut B, Zander U (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organ Sci 3:383–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kotler P (2003) A framework for marketing management. Wiley, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  31. Kuuluvainen A (2012) How to concretize dynamic capabilities? Theory and examples. J Strateg Manag 5(4):381–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lee IH (2010) The M curve: The performance of born-regional firms from Korea. Multinatl Bus Rev 18:1–22Google Scholar
  33. Ljungquist U, Ghannad N (2014) Growth in international new ventures: facilitating and redundant components beyond start-up. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing (in press)Google Scholar
  34. Lu JW, Beamish PW (2001) The internationalization and performance of SMEs. Strateg Manag J 22(6/7):565–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ Sci 2:71–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Matsuno K, Mentzer J (2000) The effects of strategy type on the market orientation–performance relationship. J Mark 64:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nohria N, Ghoshal S (1997) The differentiated network: organizing multinational corporations for value creation. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  38. Nonaka I (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organ Sci 5(1):14–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Oviatt BM, McDougall P (1994) Toward a theory of international new ventures. J Int Bus Stud 25(1):45–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pehrsson A (2006) Business relatedness and performance: A study of managerial perceptions. Strateg Manag J 27(3):265–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pehrsson A (2010) Business-relatedness and strategy moderations: Impacts on foreign subsidiary performance. J Strateg Manag 3(4):110–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pehrsson A (2012) Competition barriers and strategy moderations: Impact on foreign subsidiary performance. Glob Strateg J 2(2):137–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pehrsson A, Pehrsson T (2014) Consistent resource base of a foreign subsidiary’s greenfield expansion: A conceptual framework and propositions. Eur Bus Rev 26(1):64–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Penrose E (1959) The theory of the growth of the firm. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  45. Pogrebnyakov N, Maitland CF (2011) Institutional distance and the internationalization process: The case of mobile operators. J Int Manag 17:68–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Potter J (1996) An analysis of thinking and research about qualitative methods. Erlbaum, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  47. Prange C, Verdier S (2011) Dynamic capabilities, internationalization processes and performance. J World Bus 46:126–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rouse M, Daellenbach U (1999) Rethinking research methods for the resource-based perspective: Isolating the sources of sustainable competitive advantage. Strateg Manag J 20(5):487–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rumelt R (1974) Strategy, structure, and economic performance. Harvard University Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  50. Sapienza HJ, Autio E, George G, Zahra SA (2006) A capabilities perspective on the effects of early internationalization on firm survival and growth. Acad Manag Rev 31(4):914–933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shepherd W (1979) The economics of industrial organization. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  52. Spreen M (1992) Rare populations, hidden populations and link-tracing designs: What and why? Bull Methodol Sociol 36(1):34–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tang J, Rowe G (2012) The liability of closeness: Business relatedness and foreign subsidiary performance. J World Bus 47:288–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tanriverdi H, Venkatraman N (2005) Knowledge relatedness and the performance of multibusiness firms. Strateg Manag J 26(2):97–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Teece D, Pisano G, Shuen A (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg Manag J 47:509–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wan W, Hoskisson R, Short J, Yiu D (2011) Resource-based theory and corporate diversification: Accomplishments and opportunities. J Manag 37(5):1335–1368Google Scholar
  57. Yin R (1994) Case study research, design and methods. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  58. Zaheer S (1995) Overcoming the liability of foreignness. Acad Manag J 38:341–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zahra SA, Sapienza HJ, Davidsson P (2006) Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: A review, model and research agenda. J Manag Stud 43(4):917–955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zhou KZ, Li CB (2012) How knowledge affects radical innovation: Knowledge base, market knowledge acquisition, and internal knowledge sharing. Strateg Manag J 33:1090–1102CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tobias Pehrsson
    • 1
  • Navid Ghannad
    • 1
  • Anders Pehrsson
    • 2
    Email author
  • Tobias Abt
    • 1
  • Siyuan Chen
    • 1
  • Fabian Erath
    • 1
  • Tobias Hammarstig
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Business and EngineeringHalmstad UniversityHalmstadSweden
  2. 2.School of Business and EconomicsLinnaeus UniversityVäxjöSweden

Personalised recommendations