سرمایه گذاری های جدید بین المللی و شبکه های اجتماعی: منفعت یا تعهد؟

This research seeks to expand our knowledge of the role of networks, particularly social networks, in the rapid internationalisation process. To deepen our understanding of this process, we review the network approach on internationalisation in light of the social network perspective and recently published empirical findings on the internationalisation of International New Ventures (INVs). We also analyse the internationalisation process of ten Information and Communication Technology (ICT) case companies from Finland. The findings in this study reveal, in line with the network theory of internationalisation that the case firms gained access to and mobilised resources through established long-term relationships [Johanson, J. and Mattsson, L. G. (1987) Interorganizational relations in industrial systems: A network approach compared with the transaction-cost approach. International Studies of Management & Organization, 17(1), 34–48, Johanson, J. and Mattsson, L. G. (1988) Internationalization in industrial systems – A network approach. In Strategies in global competition, (eds) N. Hood, and J. E. Vahlne, Croom Helm, London], but the relationships were those of the founders, not those of the firms. The relationships are characterised by a high level of trust and commitment, and particularly in the early phases of internationalisation, the INVs focus on exploiting the existing ties instead of adding new ties, a path dependent process. We find that it is useful to divide the internationalisation process into two phases: early internationalisation, which is aimed at gaining access to global business; and subsequent international/global growth. The empirical evidence shows that those firms who rely on dyadic relationships are able to complete the first phase successfully. The dyadic relationships, however, become a limitation during the phase of international growth. Only those firms that manage to complete the transition from dyadic relationships to multilateral network relationships achieve significant international growth.

Networks and collaborative relationships (Thorelli, 1986) are without argument important facilitators of the international activities of small and medium-sized firms (SMEs) (cf. Johanson and Mattsson, 1988, Oviatt and McDougall, 1995, Coviello and Munro, 1995, Hadley and Wilson, 2003, Nummela, 2004, Oviatt and McDougall, 2005, Coviello, 2006, Coviello and Cox, 2006, Chetty and Agnda, 2007, Zhou et al., 2007, Chetty and Agnda, 2008 and Stam and Elfring, 2008). To date, the SME internationalisation research has been dominated by models advocating an incremental, step-by-step internationalisation pattern (Johanson and Vahlne, 1977 and Luostarinen, 1979), in terms of both cross-border operation modes and network relationships. According to the network theory of internationalisation (Johanson and Mattsson, 1988 and Johanson and Mattsson, 1992) firms invest in strengthening and monitoring their positions in international networks. However, there is usually a time lag before investments in these formal business relationships develop into the necessary international business capabilities, and this time-consuming process can slow the pace of internationalisation pace of International New Ventures (INVs), instead of being a driving force. Several researchers have argued that the network theory of internationalisation cannot fully explain the phenomena of Born Globals or INVs (cf. Bell, 1995 and Chetty and Blankenburg Holm, 2000). Rapidly internationalising and globalising firms have increasingly drawn attention (Luostarinen and Gabrielsson, 2004 and Knight and Cavusgil, 2005) since the early work of McDougall et al. (e.g., McDougall, 1989 and Oviatt and McDougall, 1994). INVs enter international markets shortly after inception and experience high international growth, despite being constrained by resource scarcity and by liabilities of newness and foreignness. Oviatt and McDougall (1994) suggest that these entrepreneurial firms typically use”alternative governance structures”, such as franchising, licensing, or even a network structure to access vital resources without entering into the slow process of gaining ownership control over them. Through the use of networks INVs can decrease the slowing effect of resource scarcity, liability of newness and foreignness on rapid globalisation. Research on networks and internationalisation has been dominated by the network theory of internationalisation. The network theory of internationalisation (Johanson and Mattsson, 1988 and Johanson and Mattsson, 1992) focuses on non-hierarchical systems, where firms invest in strengthening and monitoring their positions in international formal business networks. Chetty and Blankenburg Holm (2000) point out that the Johanson and Mattsson’s (1988) model has several shortcomings, among others, because it fails to address the importance of the decision-maker. In other words, the network theory of internationalisation needs to be re-examined, because it neglects the entrepreneur and his/her social networks. Therefore, in this paper we focus on social network relationships (cf. Ellis, 2000, Arenius, 2002 and Zhou et al., 2007) and their impact on the internationalisation patterns of INVs. Our purpose is to advance our understanding of social networks in this context, thus extending previous research on international networks. In the paper, we combine current research on social networks and social capital in the international context with the network theory of internationalisation. Through this combination we aim to explain how personal relationships are transformed into exchange relationships, and how this transformation contributes to the early and rapid internationalisation of INVs. Our paper is structured as follows: We will first review the network theory of internationalisation, and combine it with the social capital theory from the point of view of INVs. In the subsequent section we will explain our research methodology and our explorative research approach. The methodology used in the empirical part of the paper is qualitative. We will analyse 10 International New Venture case firms from the global Information and Communications Technology Industry and examine their rapid internationalisation to find evidence on the role of networks in internationalisation. In the conclusion we draw together the theoretical and the empirical work and present implications for theory and practice.

This research investigates a rather new trend in rapidly internationalising and globalising firms and looks at the formal and informal networks of the founders and the firms, and the role of the networks in the international new venture’s internationalisation process. To deepen our understanding of this process, we review the network theory of internationalisation in light of the social network perspective and recently published empirical findings on the internationalisation of INVs. We also analyse the internationalisation process of 10 ICT case companies from Finland. The theoretical contribution of this study can be summed up as follows. Firstly, in line with the network theory of internationalisation, the firms gained access to and mobilised resources through established long-term relationships (Johanson and Mattsson, 1987 and Johanson and Mattsson, 1988), but the relationships were those of the founders, not those of the firms. A majority of the firms studied were founded by an entrepreneurial team. The founders had entrepreneurial traits mentioned in the literature, i.e., they were able to identify industry shifts and act on emerging opportunities. In most cases, the founders had a diverse background contributing to a high level of social capital. At founding, the INVs derived benefits from the individual-level social capital possessed by the founders. The founders are the source of social capital for the new venture and they bring in the initial social capital endowments. It is their external relationships that provide access to resources and resource providers, such as customers, suppliers, key employees and advisors. Our analysis of the theories led us to propose that a social network approach is applicable to study the INVs. Based on our case evidence, we argue that the INVs rely heavily on the idiosyncratic and personal relationships of their founders. It would seem that a high level of trust and commitment characterise the relationships of the INV. Furthermore, our evidence suggest that particularly in the early phases of internationalisation, the INVs focus on exploiting the existing ties instead of adding new ties. When they move on to building new ties, they exploit their existing ties to find new partners and take advantage of existing international network relationships to increase their attractiveness. We found this process of finding new network partners to be path-dependent, since very few of the studied firms studied were able to internationalise or even globalise their network during their internationalisation process, and subsequently most firms relied very much on a domestic resource-base, in terms of funding and management. Secondly, according to our case evidence, we find that it is useful to divide the internationalisation process into two phases: early internationalisation, which is aimed at gaining access to global business; and subsequent international growth. All our case firms have begun internationalisation/global and are operating on multiple markets using multiple operation modes. At the same time, however, only two of them have been able to continue operating on multiple continents and only one has been able to grow globally (see Figure 1). The Finnish firms are likely to have access to resources to support early internationalisation, but apparently the resource base is not sufficient to support international growth. The firms, which are able to create an international resource base, are more likely to grow than firms relying on domestic resources.Thirdly, our results support the criticism of Chetty and Blankenburg Holm (2000). Chetty and Blankenburg Holm (2000) found in their study on the internationalisation of small and medium-sized manufacturing companies that the firms were using a wider network of relationships than the production net advocated by Johanson and Mattsson (1988). Similarly, in our study, the networks of INVs were broader than proposed by the network theory of internationalisation. However, we did find some differences between the firms in terms of the level of internationalisation of the network. We find that consulting firms typically have a narrow and domestic network. In similar fashion, B2B firms are likely to have a narrow, but a more technology focused network. B2C firms, on the contrary, already show diverse networks at founding. However, because of the nature of our study, we are not able to assess the causality between network diversity and firm type. Fourthly, the empirical evidence shows that firms relying on the dyadic relationships emphasised by the network theory of internationalisation (Johanson and Mattsson, 1987 and Johanson and Mattsson, 1988) are able to complete the first phase of internationalisation successfully. The dyadic relationships, however, become a limitation during the phase of international growth. Only those firms that manage to complete the transition from dyadic relationships to multilateral network relationships achieve significant international growth. The transition warrants an ability to develop both markets and products beyond exclusive exchange relationships.