The Internationalisation of Ventures: The Roles of a Nation’s Institutions and the Venture’s Value Orientation

Part of the The Academy of International Business book series (AIB)


This chapter examines how national-level, firm-level and individual-level predictors influence a venture’s likelihood of internationalisation based on a data set adapted from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) data set in 2009, covering 10,920 individual ventures in 54 countries. We found that socially oriented (or early-stage) ventures are more likely to be international than profit-oriented (and thus, more established) ventures are. Also, ventures from countries with better-developed formal institutions, higher power distance and higher individualistic and feminine cultures tend to also become international. Findings further indicate that opportunity-driven entrepreneurs are more likely to establish international ventures than necessity-driven entrepreneurs. This study deepens our understanding of a venture’s internationalisation and provides a general guideline that may be used to predict the likelihood of internationalisation for socially oriented ventures.


  1. Aidis, R., Estrin, S., & Mickiewicz, T. M. (2012). Size matters: Entrepreneurial entry and government. Small Business Economics, 39(1), 119–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arend, R. J. (2013). A heart-mind-opportunity nexus: Distinguishing social entrepreneurship for entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Review, 38(2), 313–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aspelund, A., & Moen, Ø. (2005). Small international firms: Typology, performance and implications. Management International Review, 45(3), 37–57.Google Scholar
  4. Aulakh, P. S., & Kotabe, M. (2008). Institutional changes and organisational transformation in developing economies. Journal of International Management, 14(3), 209–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: Same, different, or both? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Autio, E., & Acs, Z. (2010). Intellectual property protection and the formation of entrepreneurial growth aspirations. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 4(3), 234–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baker, T., Gedajlovic, E., & Lubatkin, M. (2005). A framework for comparing entrepreneurship processes across nations. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(5), 492–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bosma, N. S., & Levie, J. (2010). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2009 Executive Report. London: Global Entrepreneurship Research Association.Google Scholar
  9. Boter, H., & Holmquist, C. (1996). Industry characteristics and internationalisation processes in small firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 11(6), 471–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Busenitz, L. W., Gomez, C., & Spencer, J. W. (2000). Country institutional profiles: Unlocking entrepreneurial phenomena. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 994–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Casson, M. (1982). The entrepreneur: An economic theory. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  12. Coviello, N., & Munro, H. (1997). Network relationships and the internationalisation process of small software firms. International Business Review, 6(4), 361–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coviello, N. E., & Munro, H. J. (1995). Growing the entrepreneurial firm: Networking for international market development. European Journal of Marketing, 29(7), 49–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Del Junco, J. G., & Brás-dos-Santos, J. M. (2009). How different are the entrepreneurs in the European Union internal market?—An exploratory cross-cultural analysis of German, Italian and Spanish entrepreneurs. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 7(2), 135–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Emerson, J. (2003). The blended value proposition: Integrating social and financial returns. California Management Review, 45(4), 35–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Estrin, S., Mickiewicz, T., & Stephan, U. (2013). Entrepreneurship, social capital, and institutions: Social and commercial entrepreneurship across nations. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(3), 479–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gupta, V., & Fernandez, C. (2009). Cross-cultural similarities and differences in characteristics attributed to entrepreneurs: A three-nation study. Journal of Leadership and Organisational Studies, 15(3), 304–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hansen, J. D., Deitz, G. D., Tokman, M., Marino, L. D., & Weaver, K. M. (2011). Cross-national invariance of the entrepreneurial orientation scale. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(1), 61–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
  20. Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organisation: Software of mind. London: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  21. Kirca, A. H., Hult, G. T. M., Roth, K., Cavusgil, S. T., Perryy, M. Z., Akdeniz, M. B., et al. (2011). Firm-specific assets, multinationality, and financial performance: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Academy of Management Journal, 54(1), 47–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kiss, A. N., Danis, W. M., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2012). International entrepreneurship research in emerging economies: A critical review and research agenda. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2), 266–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Knight, G. (1997). Emerging paradigm for international marketing: The born global firm. Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.Google Scholar
  24. Lepoutre, J., Justo, R., Terjesen, S., & Bosma, N. (2013). Designing a global standardized methodology for measuring social entrepreneurship activity: The global entrepreneurship monitor social entrepreneurship study. Small Business Economics, 40(3), 693–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lopez, L. E., Kundu, S. K., & Ciravegna, L. (2009). Born global or born regional? Evidence from an exploratory study in the Costa Rican software industry. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(7), 1228–1238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Luo, Y., & Tung, R. L. (2007). International expansion of emerging market enterprises: A springboard perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 481–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lyon, F., & Sepulveda, L. (2009). Mapping social enterprises: Past approaches, challenges and future directions. Social Enterprise Journal, 5(1), 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marano, V., Arregle, J., Hitt, M. A., & Spadafora, E. (2016). Home country institutions and the internationalisation-performance relationship: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 42(5), 1075–1110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Munoz, J. M. (2010). International social entrepreneurship: Pathways to personal and corporate impact. New York: Business Expert Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Norman, W., & MacDonald, C. (2004). Getting to the bottom of “triple bottom line”. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(2), 243–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Patzelt, H., & Shepherd, D. A. (2011). Recognizing opportunities for sustainable development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(4), 631–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Peredo, A. M., & McLean, M. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: A critical review of the concept. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 56–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sapienza, H. J., Autio, E., George, G., & Zahra, S. A. (2006). A capabilities perspective on the effects of early internationalisation on firm survival and growth. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 914–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Scott, W. R. (1983). The organisation of societal sectors. In J. W. Meyer & W. R. Scott (Eds.), Organisational environments: Ritual and rationality (pp. 129–153). Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
  36. Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and Organisations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
  37. Scott, W. R. (2005). Institutional theory: Contributing to a theoretical research program. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt (Eds.), Great minds in management: The process of theory development (pp. 460–485). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.Google Scholar
  39. Slevin, D. P., & Terjesen, S. A. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation: Reviewing three papers and implications for further theoretical and methodological development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 973–987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stephan, U., Uhlaner, L. M., & Stride, C. (2015). Institutions and social entrepreneurship: The role of institutional voids, institutional support, and institutional configurations. Journal of International Business Studies, 46(3), 308–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stiglitz, J. E. (2000). Capital market liberalization, economic growth, and instability. World Development, 28(6), 1075–1086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stiglitz, J. E. (2004). Capital-market liberalization, globalization, and the IMF. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 20(1), 57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Stiglitz, J. E. (2010). Freefall: America free markets and the sinking of the world economy. New York, NY: W. W. Norton Company.Google Scholar
  44. Stray, S., Bridgewater, S., & Murray, G. (2001). The internationalisation process of small, technology-based firms: Market selection, mode choice and degree. Journal of Global Marketing, 15(1), 7–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sullivan, D. (1994). Measuring the degree of internationalisation of a firm. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(2), 325–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Teegen, H., Doh, J. P., & Vachani, S. (2004). The importance of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in global governance and value creation: An international business research agenda. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(6), 463–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Van Stel, A., Storey, D. J., & Thurik, A. R. (2007). The effect of business regulations on nascent and young business entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 28(2–3), 171–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wan, W. P., & Hoskisson, R. E. (2003). Home country environments, corporate diversification strategies, and firm performance. Academy of Management Journal, 46(1), 27–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zahra, S. A., Gedajlovic, E., Neubaum, D. O., & Shulman, J. M. (2009). A typology of social entrepreneurs: Motives, search processes and ethical challenges. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(5), 519–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zahra, S. A., Korri, J. S., & Yu, J. (2005). Cognition and international entrepreneurship: Implications for research on international opportunity recognition and exploitation. International Business Review, 14(2), 129–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zahra, S. A., Newey, L. R., & Li, Y. (2014). On the frontiers: The implications of social entrepreneurship for international entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(1), 137–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zahra, S. A., Rawhouser, H. N., Bhawe, N., Neubaum, D. O., & Hayton, J. C. (2008). Globalization of social entrepreneurship opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 2(2), 117–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Business and ManagementLappeenranta University of TechnologyLappeenrantaFinland

Personalised recommendations