Abstract
This article proposes the use of the theory of granularity as an overall theme for this issue, in order to relate various issues discussed by the articles, and also to bridge across differences within and across articles in this issue.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Two aspects of transformation for shifting the perspective in the Granularity Theory are briefly and simply highlighted. Simply stated, transitive (see definition below) properties of relations are used, in part or in whole, to simplify the extent of complexity in the theory. While preserving their underlying relations, the nontransitive relations were re-characterized (or re-formulated) in terms of tractable local axioms and local partial theories, in order to make the shift in analytical perspective possible allowing for more tangible (simpler alternative but true) understanding of the concepts involved. Logically, axiomatic relations of all local theories had to remain compliant (preserved) after the shift in perspective.
The average cost of the discovery and regulatory approval of a new drug in the USA is about $500 Million and takes about 10 years; which leaves a short span of time to recover costs before the drug is replaced by a more advanced or effective one.
The above two articles share other common features, including the complexity of functional fragmentation, information asymmetry, hard markets boundaries, and diverse regulatory and institutional requirements, among others, some of which are already discussed.
References
Baghai M, Smit S and SP Viguerie (2007) The granularity of growth: a fine-grained approach to growth is essential for making the right choices about where to compete. The McKinsey Quarterly, May 2007 visited at http://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/employment-and-growth/the-granularity-of-growth Nov 2016)
Bittner T and Smith B (2001) A unified theory of granularity, vagueness and approximation. Proceedings of COSIT Workshop on Spatial Vagueness, Uncertainty, and Granularity. Vol. 102.2001. Visited at https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?biw=1366&bih=634&dpr=1&bav=on.2,or.&um=1&ie=UTF-8&lr&q=related:_VHqEuCOC_L9PM:scholar.google.com/ (Nov 2016)
Blankenburg Holm D, Eriksson K, Johanson J (1999) Creating value through mutual commitment to business network relationships. Strateg Manag J 20(5):467–486
Bower JL and Christensen CM (1995) Disruptive technologies: catching the wave. Harvard Business Review Jan Feb 1995 43–53
Brandenburger AM, Stuart H (1996) Value-based business strategy. J Econ Manag Strateg 5:5–25
Christensen CM, Bower JL (1996) Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms. Strateg Manag J 17:197–218
Dana L, Etemad H, Wright R (2000) The global reach of symbiotic networks. In: Dana LP (ed) Global marketing cooperation and networks. Haworth Press, New York, pp. 1–16
Dana L, Etemad H, Wright R (2001) Symbiotic interdependence. In: Welsh D, Alon I (eds) International franchising in emerging markets, chapter 5. CCH Publishing, Riverwoods, pp. 119–129
Etemad, H (2003) Managing relations: the essence of international entrepreneurship. In Etemad H, Wright RW (eds) Globalization and entrepreneurship: policy and strategy perspectives (2003). Elgar Publishing, Northampton, MA, pp. 223–243
Etemad H (2015a) Entrepreneurial orientation-performance relationship in the international context. J Int Entrep 13(1):1–6
Etemad H (2015b) The promise of a potential theoretical framework in international entrepreneurship: an entrepreneurial orientation-performance relation in internationalized context. J Int Entrep 13(2):89–95
Etemad H, Wright R, Dana LP (2001) Symbiotic business networks: collaboration between small and large firm. Thunderbird International Business Review 43(4):481–500
Jiang YP, Fan ZP, Jian M (2008) A method for group decision making with multi-granularity linguistic assessment information. Inf Sci 178.4(2008):1098–1109 Down loaded from https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=Multi-granularity&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5 (Nov 2016)
Lapierre J (2000) Customer perceived value in industrial contexts. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing 15(2–3):122–140
Lepak DP, Smith KG, Taylor MS (2007) Value creation and value capture: a multilevel perspective. Acad Manag Rev 32:180–194
Liesch P, Welch LS, Buckley PJ (2011) Risk and uncertainty in internationalization and international entrepreneurship studies. Manag Int Rev 51(6):851–873
Lumpkin G, Dess G (1996) Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Acad Manag Rev 21(1):135–172
Mach MA, Owec ML (2014) Knowledge granularity and representation of knowledge: towards knowledge grid., HAL Open Access (Hall-Id: hal-0155071), downloaded from: https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01055071/document through ttps://www.google.ca/?gws_rd=ssl#q=knowledge+granularity-Inria
Miller D (1983) The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Manag Sci 29(7):770–791
Prahalad CK (2004) The co-creation of value—invited commentary. J Mark 68(1):23
Prahalad CK, Ramaswamy V (2000) Co-opting customer competence. Harv Bus Rev 78(1):79–87
Prahalad CK, Ramaswamy V (2004) The future of competition: creating unique value with customers. Harvard Business School Press, Boston
Rutu M-M, JR Hobbs and Hovy EH (2011) Applications and discovery of granularity structures in natural language discourse. In: AAAI Spring Symposium: logical formalizations of commonsense reasoning. 2011. Visited at https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?biw=1366&bih=634&dpr=1&bav=on.2,or.&um=1&ie=UTF-8&lr&q=related:DYOJmYsrpqOokM:scholar.google.com/ (Nov 2016)
Sacks E (1985) Qualitative mathematical reasoning in the proceeding of the 9th international joint conference on artificial intelligence, vol 1. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, pp. 137–139 (Los Angeles, August 18 - 23, ISBN:0-934613-02-8
Smit S, Thompson CM, SP Viguerie (2005) The do-or-die struggle for growth. The McKinsey Quarterly (3): 34–45
Woodruff R (1997) Customer value: the next source for competitive advantage. J Acad Mark Sci 25(2):139–153
Zeithaml V (1988) Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means–end model and synthesis of evidence. J Mark 52:2–22
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Etemad, H. The promise of granularity theory in simplifying challenges of entrepreneurial internationalization. J Int Entrep 14, 473–482 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-016-0198-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-016-0198-4