Entry Nodes in Foreign Market Entry and Post-Entry Operations of Family-Managed Firms



The twofold purpose of this study is to investigate the types of entry nodes that family-managed SMEs select to enter foreign markets and to identify whether family-managed SMEs change their entry nodes after the first entrance to existing foreign markets. In doing so, this study employs a qualitative case study design of eight family-managed SMEs operating in the Greek apiculture sector. The findings contribute to the literature of family firm (FF) internationalisation by bringing into light two socioemotional wealth (SEW) dimensions that affect entry node development. In particular, the findings illustrate that the investigated firms embarked on different entry nodes by building indirect relationships (triads or tetrads) to enter the international arena. This was mainly due to family owners’ identification with the business. The results indicate that post first entry into existing foreign markets, the investigated family-managed SMEs aimed at maintaining relationships with their entry nodes instead of searching to find new international partners. This was mainly due to an emotional attachment of the family owners with their entry nodes. Still, the investigated firms changed the type of the international business relationships with their entry nodes by engaging in higher committed relationships in existing and/or new foreign markets.


Family-managed SMEs Internationalisation SEW Entry nodes Post-entry 


  1. Alessandri, T. M., Cerrato, D., & Eddleston, K. A. (2018). The mixed gamble of internationalization in family and nonfamily firms: The moderating role of organizational slack. Global Strategy Journal, 8(1), 46–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arregle, J. L., Naldi, L., Nordqvist, M., & Hitt, M. A. (2012). Internationalization of family-controlled firms: A study of the effects of external involvement in governance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(6), 1115–1143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bee, C., & Neubaum, D. O. (2014). The role of cognitive appraisal and emotions of family members in the family business system. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5(3), 323–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gómez-Mejía, L. R. (2012). Socioemotional wealth in family firms theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Family Business Review, 25(3), 258–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boellis, A., Mariotti, S., Minichilli, A., & Piscitello, L. (2016). Family involvement and firms’ establishment mode choice in foreign markets. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(8), 929–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boers, B. (2016). Go East! How family businesses choose markets and entry modes when internationalising. International Journal of Globalisation and Small Business, 8(4), 333–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cavusgil, S. T. (1998). International partnering: A systematic framework for collaborating with foreign business partners. Journal of International Marketing, 6(1), 91–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cesinger, B., Hughes, M., Mensching, H., Bouncken, R., Fredrich, V., & Kraus, S. (2016). A socioemotional wealth perspective on how collaboration intensity, trust, and international market knowledge affect family firms’ multinationality. Journal of World Business, 51(4), 586–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chang, Y. C., Kao, M. S., & Kuo, A. (2014). The influences of governance quality on equity-based entry mode choice: The strengthening role of family control. International Business Review, 23(5), 1008–1020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen, T. J. (2003). Network resources for internationalization: The case of Taiwan's electronics firms. Journal of Management Studies, 40(5), 1107–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chidlow, A., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Welch, C. (2014). Translation in cross-language international business research: Beyond equivalence. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(5), 562–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., & Sharma, P. (1999). Defining the family business by behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(4), 19–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Craig-Lees, M. (2001). Sense making: Trojan horse? Pandora's box? Psychology & Marketing, 18(5), 513–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Farias, S. A., Nataraajan, R., & Kovacs, E. P. (2009). Global business partnering among family-owned enterprises. Journal of Business Research, 62(6), 667–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Massis, A., & Foss, N. J. (2018). Advancing family business research: The promise of microfoundations. Family Business Review, 31(4), 386–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. De Massis, A., Frattini, F., Majocchi, A., & Piscitello, L. (2018). Family firms in the global economy: Toward a deeper understanding of internationalization determinants, processes, and outcomes. Global Strategy Journal, 8(1), 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Debicki, B. J., Kellermanns, F. W., Chrisman, J. J., Pearson, A. W., & Spencer, B. A. (2016). Development of a socioemotional wealth importance (SEWi) scale for family firm research. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 7(1), 47–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dimitratos, P., Plakoyiannaki, E., Pitsoulaki, A., & Tüselmann, H. J. (2010). The global smaller firm in international entrepreneurship. International Business Review, 19(6), 589–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dubois, A., & Gadde, L. E. (2002). Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research. Journal of business research, 55(7), 553–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dubois, A., & Gadde, L. E. (2014). “Systematic combining”—A decade later. Journal of Business Research, 67(6), 1277–1284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Eberhard, M., & Craig, J. (2013). The evolving role of organisational and personal networks in international market venturing. Journal of World Business, 48(3), 385–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Elango, B., & Pattnaik, C. (2007). Building capabilities for international operations through networks: A study of Indian firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 541–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. European Commission. (2003). Retrieved December 2017, from
  26. Evert, R. E., Sears, J. B., Martin, J. A., & Payne, G. T. (2017). Family ownership and family involvement as antecedents of strategic action: A longitudinal study of initial international entry. Journal of Business Research, 84, 301–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fernandez Moya, M. (2010). A family-owned publishing multinational: The Salvat company (1869–1988). Business History, 52(3), 453–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fernández, Z., & Nieto, M. J. (2006). Impact of ownership on the international involvement of SMEs. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(3), 340–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fletcher, M., & Plakoyiannaki, E. (2011). Case selection in international business: Key issues and common misconceptions. In R. Piekkari & C. Welch (Eds.), Rethinking the case study in international business and management research (pp. 171–192). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  30. Fletcher, M., Zhao, Y., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Buck, T. (2018). Three pathways to case selection in international business: A twenty–year review, analysis and synthesis. International Business Review, 27(4), 755–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Campbell, J. T., Martin, G., Hoskisson, R. E., Makri, M., & Sirmon, D. G. (2014). Socioemotional wealth as a mixed gamble: Revisiting family firm R&D investments with the behavioral agency model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(6), 1351–1374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Cruz, C., Berrone, P., & De Castro, J. (2011). The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 653–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J., & Moyano- Fuentes, J. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 106–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 76(6), 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Graves, C., & Thomas, I. (2006). Internationalization of Australian family businesses: A managerial capabilities perspective. Family Business Review, 19(3), 207–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Graves, C., & Thomas, J. (2008). Determinants of the internationalization pathways of family firms: An examination of family influence. Family Business Review, 21(2), 151–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hennart, J. F., Majocchi, A., & Forlani, E. (2017). The myth of the stay-at-home family firm: How family-managed SMEs can overcome their internationalization limitations. Journal of International Business Studies, 1, 1–25.Google Scholar
  38. Hilmersson, M., & Jansson, H. (2012). Reducing uncertainty in the emerging market entry process: On the relationship among international experiential knowledge, institutional distance, and uncertainty. Journal of International Marketing, 20(4), 96–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Holmen, E., & Pedersen, A. C. (2000). Avoiding triadic reductionism: Serial tetrads–a useful concept for studying connected relationships?. In Interaction, Relationships and Networks, Proceedings from the 16th IMP Conference, Bath. Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University.Google Scholar
  40. International Trade Map. (2017). Data derived from. Retrieved December 2017, from
  41. Jack, S. L. (2010). Approaches to studying networks: Implications and outcomes. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(1), 120–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Järvensivu, T., & Törnroos, J. Å. (2010). Case study research with moderate constructionism: Conceptualization and practical illustration. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(1), 100–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Johanson, J., & Mattsson, L.-G. (1988). Internationalization in industrial systems – a network approach. In N. Hood & J.-E. Vahlne (Eds.), Strategies in global competition (pp. 303–321). New York: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
  44. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (2006). Commitment and opportunity development in the internationalization process: A note on the Uppsala internationalization process model. Management International Review, 46(2), 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (2009). The Uppsala internationalization process model revisited: From liability of foreignness to liability of outsidership. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(9), 1411–1431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kampouri, K., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Leppäaho, T. (2017). Family business internationalisation and networks: Emerging pathways. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 32(3), 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kao, M. S., & Kuo, A. (2017). The effect of uncertainty on FDI entry mode decisions: The influence of family ownership and involvement in the board of directors. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 8(4), 224–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kao, M. S., Kuo, A., & Chang, Y. C. (2013). How family control influences FDI entry mode choice. Journal of Management & Organization, 19(4), 367–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kauser, S., & Shaw, V. (2004). The influence of behavioural and organizational characteristics on the success of international strategic alliances. International Marketing Review, 21(1), 17–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kellermanns, F. W., Dibrell, C., & Cruz, C. (2014). The role and impact of emotions in family business strategy: New approaches and paradigms. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5(3), 277–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kontinen, T., & Ojala, A. (2011a). Network ties in the international opportunity recognition of family SMEs. International Business Review, 20(4), 440–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kontinen, T., & Ojala, A. (2011b). Social capital in relation to the foreign market entry and post-entry operations of family SMEs. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 9(2), 133–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kontinen, T., & Ojala, A. (2012). Social capital in the international operations of family SMEs. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 19(1), 39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Kraus, S., Mensching, H., Calabrò, A., Cheng, C. F., & Filser, M. (2016). Family firm internationalization: A configurational approach. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 5473–5478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Leppäaho, T., & Metsola, J. (2020a). International networking typology, strategies, and paths of family firms. In Family firm internationalisation (pp. 73–120). Cham: Palgrave Pivot.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Leppäaho, T., & Metsola, J. (2020b). Conclusions: Implications of family firm internationalisation from a network perspective. In Family firm internationalisation (pp. 121–135). Cham: Palgrave Pivot.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Leppäaho, T., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Dimitratos, P. (2016). The case study in family business: An analysis of current research practices and recommendations. Family Business Review, 29(2), 159–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Martin, G. P., Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Wiseman, R. M. (2013). Executive stock options as mixed gambles: Revisiting the behavioral agency model. Academy of Management Journal, 56(2), 451–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  60. Mohr, J., & Spekman, R. (1994). Characteristics of partnership success: Partnership attributes, communication behavior, and conflict resolution techniques. Strategic Management Journal, 15(2), 135–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Neubaum, D. O. (2018). Family business research: Roads travelled and the search for unworn paths. Family Business Review, 31(3), 259–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  63. Pisano, V. (2018). The international entry mode of family-owned enterprises: A socioemotional wealth perspective. International Journal of Comparative Management, 1(1), 45–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Polkinghorne, D. E. (2005). Language and meaning: Data collection in qualitative research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Pongelli, C., Caroli, M. G., & Cucculelli, M. (2016). Family business going abroad: The effect of family ownership on foreign market entry mode decisions. Small Business Economics, 47(3), 787–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Poulis, K., Poulis, E., & Plakoyiannaki, E. (2013). The role of context in case study selection: An international business perspective. International Business Review, 22(1), 304–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pukall, T. J., & Calabrò, A. (2014). The internationalization of family firms: A critical review and integrative model. Family Business Review, 27(2), 103–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Reay, T. (2014). Publishing qualitative research. Family Business Review, 27, 95–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Saldaña, J. (2013). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks,Google Scholar
  70. Sandberg, S. (2013). Emerging market entry node pattern and experiential knowledge of small and medium-sized enterprises. International Marketing Review, 30(2), 106–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sandberg, S. (2014). Experiential knowledge antecedents of the SME network node configuration in emerging market business networks. International Business Review, 23(1), 20–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Scholes, L., Mustafa, M., & Chen, S. (2016). Internationalization of small family firms: The influence of family from a socioemotional wealth perspective. Thunderbird International Business Review, 58(2), 131–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Sestu, M. C., Majocchi, A., & D’Angelo, A. (2018). Entry mode strategies: Are SMEs any different? In N. Dominguez, & U. Mayrhofer, (Eds.) Key Success Factors of SME Internationalisation: A Cross-Country Perspective (chapter 4, 63-68).Google Scholar
  74. Sharma, V. M., & Erramilli, M. K. (2004). Resource-based explanation of entry mode choice. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 12(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sinkovics, R. R., & Ghauri, P. N. (2008). Enhancing the trustworthiness of qualitative research in international business. Management International Review, 48(6), 689–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Spiggle, S. (1994). Analysis and interpretation of qualitative data in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(3), 491–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Stieg, P., Cesinger, B., Apfelthaler, G., Kraus, S., & Cheng, C. F. (2018). Antecedents of successful internationalization in family and non-family firms: How knowledge resources and collaboration intensity shape international performance. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 28(1), 14–27.Google Scholar
  78. Swinth, R. L., & Vinton, K. L. (1993). Do family-owned businesses have a strategic advantage in international joint ventures? Family Business Review, 6(1), 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Thrasyvoulou, A., & Manikis, J. (1995). Some physicochemical and microscopic characteristics of Greek unifloral honeys. Apidologie, 26, 441–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Welch, C., Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Paavilainen-Mäntymäki, E. (2011). Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 42(5), 740–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wiseman, R. M., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (1998). A behavioral agency model of managerial risk taking. Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 133–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  83. Zellweger, T. M., & Astrachan, J. H. (2008). On the emotional value of owning a firm. Family Business Review, 21(4), 347–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Business AdministrationUniversity of MacedoniaThessalonikiGreece
  2. 2.Faculty of Business, Economics and StatisticsUniversity of ViennaViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations