The Internationalization of New Russian Ventures: The Institutional Frontier

  • Igor Laine
  • Olli Kuivalainen
Chapter
First Online:
Part of the The Academy of International Business book series (AIB)

Abstract

Based on the view that re-engineering and upgrading the institutional environment in previous command economies offer an important new frontier for boosting new venture creation and entrepreneurial internationalization, Laine and Kuivalainen examine and address institutional constraints to the internationalization of new ventures in Russia. It draws on 213 interviews with entrepreneurs and government officials, specifically regarding their perceptions and experiences of the impact of Russian institutional environment on entrepreneurial growth and internationalization. The study illuminates and discusses critical impediments to the growth and internationalization of new Russian ventures, providing practice-based insights on how the internationalization of entrepreneurial ventures might be facilitated through improvements in the institutional environment.

Keywords

Institutional Environment Entrepreneurial Intention Informal Institution Nascent Entrepreneur Entrepreneurial Internationalization 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Aidis, R., Estrin, S., & Mickiewicz, T. (2008). Institutions and entrepreneurship development in Russia: A comparative perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(6), 656–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alon, I., & Rottig, D. (2013). Entrepreneurship in emerging markets: New insights and directions for future research. Thunderbird International Business Review, 55(5), 487–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atkins, R. (2012). Judging economic performance in the G20. Financial Times. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/6af76b28-3320-11e2-aa83-00144feabdc0
  4. Barber, L., Buckley, N., & Belton, C. (2008). Laying down the law: Medvedev vows war on Russia’s ‘legal nihilism’. Financial Times. Retrieved from www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/4b93ecde-f9c3-11dc-9b7c-000077b07658.html#axzz3zKjGoOAcGoogle Scholar
  5. Berglund, H. (2007). Researching entrepreneurship as lived experience. In H. Neergaard & J. P. Ulhoi (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods in entrepreneurship (pp. 75–94). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  6. Bell, J. (1997). A comparative study of the export problems of small computer software exporters in Finland, Ireland and Norway. International Business Review, 6(6), 585–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berglund, H. (2015). Between cognition and discourse: Phenomenology and the study of entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 21(3), 472–488.Google Scholar
  8. Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Li, H. L. (2010). Institutional theory and entrepreneurship: Where are we now and where do we need to move in the future? Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 34(3), 421–440.Google Scholar
  9. Bullough, A., Renko, M., & Myatt, T. (2014). Danger zone entrepreneurs: The importance of resilience and self-efficacy for entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(3), 473–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Busenitz, L. W., Gómez, C., & Spencer, J. W. (2000). Country institutional profiles: Unlocking entrepreneurial phenomena. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 994–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cope, J. (2005). Researching entrepreneurship through phenomenological inquiry: Philosophical and methodological issues. International Small Business Journal, 23(2), 163–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cope, J. (2011). Entrepreneurial learning from failure: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(6), 604–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davidsson, P., & Gordon, S. R. (2016). Much ado about nothing? The surprising persistence of nascent entrepreneurs through macroeconomic crisis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 40(4), 915–941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dyer, W. G., & Wilkins, A. L. (1991). Better stories, not better constructs, to generate better theory: A rejoinder to Eisenhardt. Academy of Management Review, 16(3), 613–619.Google Scholar
  16. Giorgi, A. (1985). Phenomenology and psychological research. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  18. Hendley, K. (2012). Who are the legal nihilists in Russia? Post-Soviet Affairs, 28(2), 149–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jackson, G., & Deeg, R. (2008). Comparing capitalisms: Understanding institutional diversity and its implications for international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(4), 540–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kafle, N. P. (2011). Hermeneutic phenomenological research method simplified. Bodhi: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 5(1), 181–200.Google Scholar
  21. Kim, J. Y., & Miner, A. S. (2007). Vicarious learning from the failures and near-failures of others: Evidence from the U.S. commercial banking industry. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 687–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  24. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  25. Miller, T., Holmes, K. R., & Feulner, E. J. (2013). Index of economic freedom. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation and Dow Jones & Company. Retrieved from http://www.heritage.org/index/pdf/2013/book/index_2013.pdf
  26. Miller, T., & Kim, A. B. (2015). Index of economic freedom: Promoting economic opportunity and prosperity. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation and Dow Jones & Company. Retrieved from http://www.heritage.org/index/pdf/2015/book/index_2015.pdf
  27. OECD. (2005). OECD SME and entrepreneurship outlook 2005. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/industry-and-services/oecd-sme-and-entrepreneurship-outlook-2005-edition_9789264009257-en
  28. OECD. (2015). SMEs and entrepreneurship in the Russian federation. In Russian federation: Key issues and policies (pp. 47–64). Paris, France: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/industry-and-services/russian-federation-key-issues-and-policies/smes-and-entrepreneurship-in-the-russian-federation_9789264232907-6-en
  29. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Puffer, S. M., McCarthy, D. J., & Boisot, M. (2010). Entrepreneurship in Russia and China: The impact of formal institutional voids. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(3), 441–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Safonov, S. (2014). Small and medium entrepreneurship in Russia. Luxembourg. Retrieved from http://www.eib.org/attachments/efs/econ_study_small_and_medium_entrepreneurship_in_russia_en.pdf
  32. Seringhaus, R. (1987). The role of information assistance in small firms’ export involvement. International Small Business Journal, 5(2), 26–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Seymour, R. G. (2007). Hermeneutic phenomenology and international entrepreneurship research. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 4(4), 137–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Singer, S., Amorós, J. E., & Moska, D. (2015). Global entrepreneurship monitor. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor–2014 Global Report. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/docs/download/3616
  35. Smith, J. A., Jarman, M., & Osborn, M. (1999). Doing interpretative phenomenological analysis. In D. M. Murray & K. Chamberlain (Eds.), Qualitative health psychology: Theories and methods (pp. 218–240). Thousands Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.Google Scholar
  36. Szyliowicz, D., & Galvin, T. (2010). Applying broader strokes: Extending institutional perspectives and agendas for international entrepreneurship research. International Business Review, 19(4), 317–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Verkhovskaia, O., & Dorokhina, M. (2014). Global entrepreneurship monitor: Russia 2013 (in Russian). St.Petersburg, Russia: Graduate School of Management. Retrieved from http://www.gemconsortium.org/report/49153
  39. Volchek, D., Jantunen, A., & Saarenketo, S. (2013). The institutional environment for international entrepreneurship in Russia: Reflections on growth decisions and performance in SMEs. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 11(4), 320–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Webb, J. W., Laszlo, T., Duane Ireland, R., & Sirmon, D. G. (2009). You say illegal, I say legitimate: Entrepreneurship in the informal economy. Academy of Management Review, 34(3), 492–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Witt, M. A., & Lewin, A. Y. (2007). Outward foreign direct investment as escape response to home country institutional constraints. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 579–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. World Bank. (2012). Enterprise surveys: Russian Federation country profile. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.enterprisesurveys.org/~/media/GIAWB/EnterpriseSurveys/Documents/Profiles/English/Russia-2012.pdf
  43. World Bank. (2016). Doing business 2016: Measuring regulatory quality and efficiency. Economic Profile 2016. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Retrieved from http://www.doingbusiness.org/~/media/GIAWB/Doing Business/Documents/Annual-Reports/English/DB16-Full-Report.pdf
  44. Yamakawa, Y., Peng, M. W., & Deeds, D. L. (2008). What drives new ventures to internationalize from emerging to developed economies? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Igor Laine
    • 1
  • Olli Kuivalainen
    • 1
  1. 1.LUT School of Business and ManagementLappeenranta University of TechnologyLappeenrantaFinland

Personalised recommendations