International Networking Typology, Strategies, and Paths of Family Firms

  • Tanja LeppäahoEmail author
  • Jaakko Metsola


Our empirical study indicates that FFs can be divided into two main categories in regard to international networking strategies and paths: narrow network maximisers (NNMs) and broad network enablers (BNEs). This typology is derived from the scale, scope, and strength of foreign network ties. NNMs focus their international networking either on psychically close or distant foreign markets, while BNEs operate globally. NNMs aim to maximise the benefits from a low number of strong relationships, while BNEs aim to enable their large portfolio of various network ties to induce international growth. This section discusses the idiosyncrasies of NNMs and BNEs with plenty of interview quotes. Despite differences, there are common FF-specific success factors that we outline in the end of the chapter: utilising global niche/high-quality product strategy, minimising bifurcation bias, selecting suitable network ties, and embracing FF status and virtues in marketing and relationship building.


Narrow network maximiser Broad network enabler International networking strategy International networking path Network tie 


  1. Alessandri, T. M., Cerrato, D., & Eddleston, K. A. (2018). The mixed gamble of internationalization in family and nonFFs: The moderating role of organizational slack. Global Strategy Journal, 8(1), 46–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banalieva, E. R., & Eddleston, K. A. (2011). Home-region focus and performance of family firms: The role of family vs non-family leaders. Journal of International Business Studies, 42, 1060–1072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baronchelli, G., Bettinelli, C., Del Bosco, B., & Loane, S. (2016). The impact of family involvement on the investments of Italian small-medium enterprises in psychically distant countries. International Business Review, 25(4), 960–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bell, J., McNaughton, R., Young, S., & Crick, D. (2003). Towards an integrative model of small firm internationalisation. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1(4), 339–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gomez-Mejia, 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
  6. Bird, M., & Zellweger, T. (2018). Relational embeddedness and firm growth: Comparing spousal and sibling entrepreneurs. Organization Science, 29(2), 264–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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
  8. Calabrò, A., Campopiano, G., Basco, R., & Pukall, T. (2017). Governance structure and internationalization of family-controlled firms: The mediating role of international entrepreneurial orientation. European Management Journal, 35(2), 238–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. D’Angelo, A., Majocchi, A., & Buck, T. (2016). External managers, family ownership and the scope of SME internationalization. Journal of World Business, 51(4), 534–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. D’Angelo, A., Majocchi, A., Zucchella, A., & Buck, T. (2013). Geographical pathways for SME internationalization: Insights from an Italian sample. International Marketing Review, 30(2), 80–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gallo, M. A., & Pont, C. G. (1996). Important factors in family business internationalization. Family Business Review, 9(1), 45–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Makri, M., & Kintana, M. L. (2010). Diversification decisions in family-controlled firms. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 223–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Håkanson, L., & Kappen, P. (2017). The ‘casino model’ of internationalization: An alternative Uppsala paradigm. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(9), 1103–1113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hennart, J. F., Majocchi, A., & Forlani, E. (2019). The myth of the stay-at-home family firm: How family-managed SMEs can overcome their internationalization limitations. Journal of International Business Studies, 50(5), 758–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Johnson, M. D., & Selnes, F. (2004). Customer portfolio management: Toward a dynamic theory of exchange relationships. Journal of Marketing, 68(2), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kano, L., & Verbeke, A. (2018). FF internationalization: Heritage assets and the impact of bifurcation bias. Global Strategy Journal, 8(1), 158–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kao, M. S., Kuo, A., & Chang, Y. C. (2013). How family control influences FDI entry mode choice. Journal of Management and Organization, 19(4), 367–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 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
  21. Lester, R. H., & Cannella, A. A., Jr. (2006). Interorganizational familiness: How FFs use interlocking directorates to build community-level social capital. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(6), 755–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Majocchi, A., D’Angelo, A., Forlani, E., & Buck, T. (2018). Bifurcation bias and exporting: Can foreign work experience be an answer? Insight from European family SMEs. Journal of World Business, 53(2), 237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ray, S., Mondal, A., & Ramachandran, K. (2018). How does family involvement affect a firm’s internationalization? An investigation of Indian FFs. Global Strategy Journal, 8(1), 73–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Singh, R. P. (2000). Entrepreneurial opportunity recognition through social networks. New York: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
  27. Yang, X., Li, J., Stanley, L. J., Kellermanns, F. W., & Li, X. (2018). How family firm characteristics affect internationalization of Chinese family SMEs. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 1–32.
  28. Yeoh, P. L. (2004). International learning: Antecedents and performance implications among newly internationalizing companies in an exporting context. International Marketing Review, 21(4/5), 511–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LUT UniversityLappeenrantaFinland
  2. 2.LUT UniversityLappeenrantaFinland

Personalised recommendations