Networking and entrepreneurial orientation in internationalization of small-and medium sized enterprises: A two case study of Ostrobothnia company in Finland

The objective of this paper is to gain an increased understanding of how networking and entrepreneurial orientations facilitate internationalization of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This study is a qualitative research and the research is drawn upon findings of a sample of two SMEs located in Ostrobothnia, Finland. A qualitative data is gathered through personal interview with managers of the enterprises.  The study has shown importance of networking and entrepreneurial orientations for understanding internationalization pattern of small and medium size enterprises. My findings suggest that in order to be successful in international markets enterprises need to consider components of entrepreneurial orientations which are reflected by the two case enterprises in their internationalization. Furthermore, success of the enterprises depends largely on the ability of the companies to relate entrepreneurial orientation and networking in facilitating internationalization of the companies.

Introduction

Internationalization literature has traditionally emphasized the activities of large multinational enterprises and tends to rely on large enterprises as the traditional unit of analysis (Coviello and McAuley 1999). This reflects an inadequacy in the literature as SMEs differ from larger enterprises in terms of managerial characteristic, independence, operations and decision-making characteristics. Small enterprises are not smaller versions of larger enterprises but instead, they deal with unique size related issues and behave differently than larger enterprises (Shuman and Seeger 1986).

Studies in internationalization of SMEs by both practitioners and researchers has grown in its popularity but the number of empirical studies connecting networking and entrepreneurial orientation in internationalization is rather limited. (Hoang and Antoncic 2003). Using insights from research on entrepreneurship has been useful to consider enterprise’s entrepreneurial orientation in explaining the decision and moves of the enterprises make. McDougall and Oviatt (2000) have revisited view on international entrepreneurship and highlighted important qualities in entrepreneurship. These qualities include innovativeness, proactiveness and risk taking. Entrepreneurial orientation can be applied as a driver and an explanatory factor behind the internationalization process of enterprises. Entrepreneurial orientation consists of the processes, practices and decision making activities used by entrepreneurs that lead to the initiation of an entrepreneurial enterprise (Lumpkin and Dess 1996) and the role of lead entrepreneur is important to new start up enterprises (Covin and Slevin 1989; Lumpkin and Dess 1996; Kropp, Lindsay and Shoham 2008). The relationship between managerial characteristics and internationalization (Fletcher 2000; Knight 2000; Harveston, Osborne and Kedia 2002). They have suggested that the positive attitude of the manager is an important factor in distinguishing exporters from non-exporters. Moen and Servais (2002) have also found out that the role of managers is important in developing the international orientation of the employees. Asemokha, Musona, Torkkeli and Saarenketo (2019) have discussed that activities of enterprises in terms of business model innovation and entrepreneurial orientation are important aspects in internationalization of SMEs. They also have found out that business model innovation significantly mediates EO and international performance. Key activities defining entrepreneurial enterprises and actions are associated EO and firm performance.

By applying an entrepreneurial orientation construct to SMEs which are characterized by a low hierarchy could be useful even they may have different actors with different interests about how to develop their enterprise. Decision making power is generally in the hands of manager (Leonidou and Kalekha 1998) and entrepreneurial orientation as a driver behind the internationalization process of enterprises. Therefore, focus of this paper is on the role of entrepreneurs and managers as an influencing factor in internationalization. More specifically, this paper sheds some light on this topical issue by exploring how networking and entrepreneurial orientations of managers in internationalization of SMEs. This paper also contributes to the growing body of international entrepreneurship, networking and empirical research on internationalization of SMEs.

This paper is structured as follows: Firstly, based on concepts of the existing literatures in network theory, international business and entrepreneurship, a brief literature review on networking, entrepreneurial orientation and SME internationalization is presented. Secondly, an empirical study is conducted by using a sample of two SMEs in the region of Ostrobothnia, Finland. Finally, I conclude the paper by description of how my findings build upon the work of previous literature and identify directions for future studies.

1 Literature review

Networking and internationalization
Entry process in a foreign business network is a critical issue for every actor, regardless of the size of the enterprise, as a failure will result in a loss of money. When a focal actor penetrates a foreign business network the involved risk is even higher in far-away culturally different countries. In small and mid-sized enterprises, the internationalization process is often regarded as a stage model (e.g. Johanson and Vahlne 1977; 1990) in which commitments lead to deeper engagements, which in turn leads to more commitments. The original Uppsala model is based on assumption that managers act only once entrepreneurial opportunities have been identified and proven by entrepreneurs in domestic market. How managers search for, recognize and act upon opportunities that lead to internationalization is still an underdeveloped field in international business literature (see also Mathews and Zander 2007).

Mudalige, Noor and Marlin (2019) have discussed that when enterprises internationalize, they need to consider dynamic capability of the enterprises in terms of maintaining balance of both exploitation and exploration. Exploitation is closely to understanding of Uppsala model of gradual market development in internationalization. Exploration is closely link to proactiveness, innovativeness and risk-taking of international entrepreneurship model. A study by Coviello and Munro (1995) explains how selection of foreign market and entry are related from opportunities created through networking rather than decisions made by managers. The success of business depends on to a great extent on the caliber of managers. Managers manage an organization and they provide direction to manage the organization which consists of broad areas of planning, organizing, leading and controlling. As cited by Sanyal and Guvenli (2004) managers must have ability or competences to control the organization’s environment and resources, organizing and coordinating, handling information, providing growth and development, motivating employees and handling conflicts and strategic problem solving. Managers are required to take decisions. Decision making is the essence of manager’s task and is synonymous with managing (Katz 1974; Pavett and Lau 1983).

Chetty and Blankenburg-Holm (2000) state, especially the managers in small and medium-sized enterprises play an important role in identifying the stimuli for the enterprise to internationalize. Furthermore, managers need to be aware of the importance of issues such as their own attitudes, motivations, timing, coherence, managed growth, business networks and learning in the internationalization of the enterprise (Chetty and Campbell-Hunt 2003). Davidsson and Wiklund (2009) have written an article about Scott A. Shane as the winner of the global Award for entrepreneurship research. In the article they discussed and analyzed the most important contributions of Shane’s work to the field of entrepreneurship. In Shane’s studies he has dealt with several publications in different aspects of entrepreneurship phenomenon: the individual, the opportunity, the organizational context, the environment and the process issues. All of them are related to various types of outcomes. The characteristics of an individual or on the role of human agency in entrepreneurship are important in studying entrepreneurship.

Much of managerial activities have been studied by a number of researchers, primarily in larger organization in terms of control aspects such as centralization, formalization, specialization, cost control and decision making aspects such as scanning, analyzing, forecasting, collaborating (Mintzberg 1979). However, existing research demonstrates that managerial activities in small enterprises are different than larger enterprises in use of information, planning activities and decision making (Shuman and Seeger 1986). McDougal and Oviatt (2003) mentioned in their study that networks analysis represents a powerful model for research in international entrepreneurship. Networks help the managers in international activities such as to find opportunity, establish relationship, to get access of knowledge about the market. By introducing an entrepreneurial orientation construct to SMEs which characterized by a low hierarchy could be useful even they may have different actors with different interests about how to develop their enterprise.

Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO)
Keupp and Gassmann’s article (2009) deals with analysis of the field of international entrepreneurship which is an important research literature at the intersection of international business (IB) and entrepreneurship theory. It is discussed that the field of international entrepreneurship (IE) is in desperate need of further theory development. The field of IE started as a starting point from Oviatt and McDougall’s 1994 article and was concerned with the study of international new venture. Making IE equivalent to the study of new small and young firms going abroad. if IE is supposed to be the intersection of IB and entrepreneurship theory neither IB nor entrepreneurship theory is specific to firm size or firm age. Definition of IE is closely toward the mainstream of IB theory while little research is grounded from the mainstream research of entrepreneurship theory. Definitions of IE have been refined again by (Oviatt and McDougall 2005) which to be concerned with „the discovery, enactment, evaluation and exploitation of opportunities – across national borders – to create future goods and service“. This definition is promising conceptual grounds to move IE research away from the context specificity of small ventures, but these attempts have been disregarded by empirical IE research. It is still today that many IE studies is restricted to analyzing small new ventures.

Vora, Vora and Polley (2012) have investigated on entrepreneurial orientation of a medium sized firm and have cited on that entrepreneurship research has three streams. The first focus on the economic and market effects of entrepreneurial actions, the second focus on psychological and social actions of individual entrepreneur and the third on process of firm through the construct of entrepreneurial orientation.

Existing literature dealing with SMEs behavior has studied many kinds of orientations and intentions when trying to explain the decision and moves of enterprises make. Entrepreneurial orientation is applied as the driver and explanatory factor behind the internationalization of the enterprises. The entrepreneurial orientation as a construct suits the SMEs context and it is not limited merely to the personas of the entrepreneurs only but also as a term for several issues, of which, many are related to internationalization. The characteristics of entrepreneurial orientation can be related to entrepreneurial orientation factors vary depending on the author and the viewpoint. The most discussed factors are innovativeness, proactiveness and risk taking. Some researchers add competitive aggressiveness and autonomy (Covin and Slevin 1989; Lumpkin and Dess 1996; Kropp, Lindsay and Shoham 2008).

Proactiveness is seen as behavior that attempts to deal with competitors by taking action either earlier than their competitors or with an action that is not employed by the competitors. Innovativeness is related to the international operations of the enterprises. But it is worth attention to something that is innovative for enterprises may not be innovative for the rest of the market. Risk taking is the enterprise’s increase tolerance and acceptance of risk regarding internationalization. Risk taking behavior can be related to strategy which considers risks as incremental part of the enterprise’s operations. Autonomy can be understood as the enterprise’s ability to operate in constantly changing environment that aims to focus on its goals such as how to proceed in international market irrespective of the external changes. Naturally market changes sometimes require an enterprise to adapt to their external circumstances, but autonomy is also considered in relation to enterprise’s ability to adapt its surroundings to its needs. Finally, competitive aggressiveness is considered as the enterprise’s will and effort to reach something more than mere to survive in business environment. Entrepreneurial orientation acts as a driver for an internationalization process and it affects entire organization (Mintzberg and Wesley 1992).

To sum up, networking and entrepreneurial orientation are the two dimensions to be considered that affect internationalization strategy and competitiveness of the enterprises in international markets. Networking does not only help managers to identify market opportunity but also to help managers to establish or maintain relations with customers, agents, suppliers, or other stakeholders such as government and other trade organizations. Networking provides knowledge of the market or to establish cooperation strategies. (Johanson and Vahlne 2003). Entrepreneurial orientation (proactiveness, innovativeness and risk-taking) is a basic construct to understand manager’s ability to pursuit market opportunity, to deal with new ideas or changes and to deal with risks. It is also important for the managers to convince other organizational members and partners to share the financial and business risks (Kuratko and Audretsch 2009).

Chetty and Blankenburg-Holm (2000) state, especially the managers in small and medium-sized enterprises play an important role in identifying the stimuli for the enterprise to internationalize. Important is to consider studying the role of managers’ personal and organizational level of relationship. Domestic or local networks are important in understanding the international network development. In order to get a deep understanding of this process, two companies were selected from small and medium companies, operating in manufacturing industries and how managers play an important role in internationalization of the companies.

2 Research methodology and data gathering

A qualitative case study method is used in this study. According to Möller and Wilson (1995) the qualitative case study gives a depth analysis or deep understanding of the topic under investigation. The case study approach was chosen in order to provide in depth findings on networking and entrepreneurial orientation in internationalization especially for managers who have been running their business for a longer period.

Multiple sources of data collection were used. Sources of data for theoretical framework were published articles in peer review journal but the main method of data collection was through personal interviews. The personal interviews were held with enterprise representatives. The enterprise representatives are owners, CEOs or managers of the enterprises. They were interviewed as they were likely to be strongly involved in decision making process and particularly, related with internationalization of the enterprises. Thus, in this case, the decision maker was treated as the key informant in this study. The interviews lasted from 60 to 180 minutes per respondent. The secondary data collection included written documents, such as press releases, company’s website information, internal report and company’s annual report. The enterprises represented manufacturing companies from different industries, such as boat, and machinery product. In order to get pertinent and relevance of information derived from the data collection, the enterprises were chosen being SMEs (based on EU’s definition, less than 250 employees) and export is being a dominant of enterprise business activities. Information sought included entrepreneurial orientation (innovativeness, proactiveness and risk taking) and networking which considered personal international experience or personal and organizational level of relationship of the enterprises at home and abroad as well as internationalization of the companies in terms of market entry strategy, marketing opportunities and market opportunities.

3 Findings

Case1/Enterprise X
Enterprise X is on a boat industry. A is an owner and chairman of Board of enterprise X. He has been in the industry for more than 40 years and has been working within export and sales. He first went into business as a hobby alongside his economic studies and worked for other boat company for 3,5 years. He and his wife then decided to establish their own company in 1976. Enterprise X was started mainly for export. Degree of the enterprise internationalization is high and it’s about 80 percent of its business activities. A admitted that the enterprise had no market for its products in a domestic market. A also mentioned that internationalization is a natural part of the enterprise’s activities.

To begin with, his export was to Scandinavian countries and for the last couple of years, Finland was the first time in history, their biggest market but he sees this opportunity as a temporary one. The enterprise’s employees have grown from a few to about 210 employees in 2019 in two different factories in Finland. During the early years of the enterprise the focus was Scandinavian countries but today the enterprise has capacity of manufacturing 100 boats and has agents or dealers in 13 different markets worldwide. In 2019 the total turnover was 40 million euros and main market areas are North and Western Europe. Enterprise X’s internationalization is through their products.

According to A, he is responsible for customer relationship and international operations and he is the central actor in international business development process. Proactive behavior is reflected on seizing opportunities or by responding to needs of customer in product development. Business opportunities are gained through business relationships from his old customers, agents and dealers. He also mentioned that he appreciated at the time he needed money, when it’s difficult to get, the company got support from Ministry of Trade and Industry (nowadays: Ministry of Employment and the Economy) for development of its technology. He stated that in a family business, the family members’ personalities complement each other, make it possible for success without major frictions. Furthermore, he mentioned that to be successful in international markets, the enterprise must have a solid home ground.

Case 2/ Enterprise Y
Enterprise Y was established in 1992 and the enterprise struggled for its existence. In 2009 the enterprise went to corporate restructuring program and approved by district court in February 2010. But at the end of March 2012 the enterprise broke out from its corporate restructuring program earlier than estimated and so the company made good progress in getting new funding arrangement. The enterprise’s debt was cut by 60% and it got 5 years with no interest payment for the remaining debts. Now the enterprise paid everything and refinanced the enterprise, year 2019 was a record-breaking year with turnover of 48 million euros. Degree of internationalization is high and it’s about 86 percent of its business activities. The main markets are in northern and western Europe. The enterprise has sales through independent dealers or small family private enterprises that rely on the enterprise’s products all over the world.

B is partly an owner, former CEO and chairman of the Board of the enterprise from the machinery industry. B is a forester and since 1982 he has been working for Finnish Forest industries, wood harvesting, export and import. After that he jumped into forest machinery business, in marketing and business operation overseas for a multinational enterprise. He then resigned from there and started to work for a small and medium sized enterprise as a vice chairman for eight years. Since 2000 he worked as a private consultant. Under recession in 2008, he was contacted by enterprise Y to help the enterprise to run the business and was employed for a rental basis. B also mentioned that their product is excellent, and it is our competitive advantage. B stated that Enterprise Y needs to consider market development and reactive behaviors on domestic price competition. Enterprise Y has revealed a high level of risk taking in entering markets abroad where high competition exists in the market. Due to this the enterprise has invested a lot in personal sales work in convincing the customers or the dealer abroad to buy their products. Network relationship of B (customers, agents, dealers, bank, government agency) prior to establishing his enterprise helped him to acquire a customer base. The network has also helped him to work with customers and partners in research and development at the local and international levels. The aim is to be able to develop innovative ideas to market development.

Table 1: Inter case study analysis
Source: Author

Inter case study analysis
Table 1 integrates the enterprise cases by showing how the managers perceive networking and entrepreneurial orientation facilitating internationalization of SMEs in Ostrobothnia, Finland. Both enterprises have high degree of internationalization and management involvement was very relevant during the initiation and starting phase of internationalization. The reasons why the enterprises go international were relatively the same, due to a small domestic market, the enterprises have opted to grow through markets abroad with their product as their competitive advantage. Furthermore, the success of internationalization depends on engagement of executive personnel.

Even the background of the case enterprises is different, the entrepreneurial orientation is strongly related to ability of transforming proactiveness, innovativeness investment plans into real opportunities to face risk and growth in foreign market. For enterprise X proactive behavior is important by responding to needs of customer, by developing the product design based on customer feedback. Proactiveness by responding to the needs of customer can also be related to risk taking, specifically to enterprise Y when entering a new market due to customer needs. Risk taking is also about demands of resources such as capital and information in finding customers abroad. Product quality or product development was mentioned by the two enterprises as important and it was relevant connected with the image of Finland as a high-quality country. However, enterprise Y argued because of fiercely price competition in the domestic market, for market development, the enterprise had to go abroad where the customers abroad were ready to pay for higher prices. On the other hand, the same enterprise admitted that if a Finnish company makes an order, it’s always a certain order while „a yes in Sweden can be a no tomorrow“. Both enterprises mentioned that they are prepared to invest their time into studying the markets and specially to finding the right partners. Reputation was important for both the case enterprises in maintaining their business relations. If any, „we stop working with them“.

For networking, both enterprises stressed on their personal earlier experience. Business opportunities are gained through business relationships from his old customers, agents and dealers. They used their own knowledge and personal networks to go abroad. So, both the enterprises seemed to agree that a person responsible mentally or financially for the enterprises has to be a forerunner, who has the vision to go abroad. Otherwise the enterprise stays in the home market: „We are in management who are drivers, we want to grow, it is up to us where and how we grow“.
Both enterprises were satisfied with the bank or governmental support as well as cooperation with customer regarding research and Development. They mentioned also importance of maintaining relationships with their agents, dealer and their clients. The role of networking is not only about problems where to go abroad, the market oriented one but also on customer oriented one, that is on how to deal with specific clients, dealers or with their suppliers.

4 Discussions and Conclusions

The objective of this paper was to gain an understanding of how networking and entrepreneurial orientation facilitate internationalization of SMEs. Based on literature review and the case study of Ostrobothnia companies in Finland, patterns of internationalization have common features of small and medium sized enterprises that entrepreneurial orientation is a driver and an explanatory factor behind the internationalization process of companies (McDougall and Oviatt 2000). Limitation of this study can be found as the research was relied on only two enterprises from the same manufacturing industry so generalization of the study cannot be made. However, the study contributes an understanding of how networking and entrepreneurial orientation facilitate internationalization of SMEs.

Entrepreneurial orientation represents the policies and practices that provide a basis for decisions and actions (Rauch, Wiklund, Lumkin and Frese 2009; Taylor 2013). Decision to grow in the more competitive environment will heavily depend on ability of entrepreneurs to establish networks (Johanson and Vahlne 2003). If the enterprise wants to grow the management commitment towards the enterprise´s internationalization activities is considered important which is also confirmed by Aaby and Slater (1989) and Cavusgil (1984). International expansion depends on enterprises ability of innovative and proactive behaviors to learning process of developing and maintaining networking with customers, agents, dealers, government agency and other stakeholders.

Based on the two-case study, there is a strong evidence about importance of entrepreneurs and networking as the key factors for understanding company internationalization. Networking have value adding benefits to the companies and the role of entrepreneur in strategic vision included into access to foreign market information and they used their personal experience and personal networks. „Product has a competitive advantage“ this is in line with Madsen (1989) which described that products with particular characteristics (quality, innovative etc.) tend to perform better in foreign markets, thus the products have competitive advantages. This also means that any kind of uniqueness of the exported product, such as brand name or image is preconditions to succeed in international market. The entrepreneur’s international personal experience is important element in SMEs internationalization (Leonidou and Katsikeas 1996). Madsen (1989) suggests that more personal contacts increases the understanding of customer behavior and this also was confirmed by the two enterprises in the study that networking and active participation of managers in finding market (Holmlund and Kock 1998). So, both enterprises confirmed that a decision maker is directly and personally involved in the vision to go abroad, otherwise the enterprise stays in the home market. Reputation of relationships was also mentioned in this study, thus, highlighting the importance of such for the company when expanding in existing markets or entering new markets. Good reputation decreases risk in international business activities of the companies. Jorn,Høst, Jaensson, Kock and Selnes 2003; Verhees and Meulenberg 2004 stressed knowledge as a strategic resource and enterprises are advised to invest in understanding their markets, competitors and customers.

Future studies could be examined to expand the analysis both theoretically and empirically in one hand, to examine how an enterprise can stay competitive by utilizing their network relationship with other domestic enterprises in the same industry by collaborating with them to enter foreign markets. In other hand, to investigate organizational and environmental factors that facilitate or inhibit the entrepreneurial orientation of small and medium sized enterprises.

Literatúra/List of References

1. Aaby, N. E. and Slater, S. F., 1989. Management influences on export performance: a review of the empirical literature 1978-88. In: International marketing review. 1989, 6(4), pp. 7-26. ISSN 0265-1335.
2. Asemokha, A., Musona, J., Torkkeli, L. and Saarenketo, S., 2019. Business model innovation and entrepreneurial orientation relationships in SMEs: Implications for international performance. In: Journal of International Entrepreneurship. 2019, 17(3), pp.425-453. ISSN 1570-7385.
3. Cavusgil, T. S., 1984. Differences among exporting firms based on their degree of internationalization. In: Journal of Business Research. 1984, 12(2), pp. 195-208. ISSN 0148-2963.
4. Chetty, S. and Blankenburg-Holm, D., 2000. The role of business networks in the internationalisation of manufacturing firms: a longitudinal case study. In: Advances in International Marketing. 2000, 8(3), pp. 205-222. ISSN 1474-7979.
5. Chetty, S. and Campbell-Hunt, C., 2003. Paths to Internationalization among Small- to Medium-Sized Firms: A global versus regional approach. In: European Journal of Marketing. 2003, 37(5 and 6), pp. 796-820. ISSN 0309-0566.
6. Coviello, N. B. and Munro, H. J., 1995. Growing the entrepreneurial firm: networking for international market development. In: European Journal of Marketing. 1995, 29(7), pp. 49-61. ISSN 0309-0566.
7. Coviello, N. and McAuley, A., 1999. Internationalization and the smaller firm: a review of contemporary empirical research. In: Management International Review. 1999, 39(3), pp. 223-242. ISSN 0938-8249.
8. Covin, J. G. and Slevin, D. P., 1989. Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. In: Strategic Management Journal. 1989, 10(1), pp. 75-87. ISSN 0143-2095.
9. Davidsson, P. and Wiklund, J., 2000. Conceptual and empirical challenges in the study of firm growth. In: D. Sexton, H. Landström (Eds.). The Blackwell handbook of entrepreneurship, pp. 26-44.
10. Davidsson, P. and Wiklund, J., 2001. Levels of analysis in entrepreneurship research: Current research practice and suggestions for the future. In: Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice. 2001, 25(4), pp. 81-99. ISSN 1042-2587.
11. Fletcher, D., 2000. Learning to „think global and act local“: Experiences from the small business sector. In: Education + Training. 2000, 42 (4 and 5), pp. 211-219. ISSN 0040-0912.
12. Fletcher, D., 2004. International entrepreneurship and the small business. In: Entrepreneurship and Regional Development. 2004, 16 (4), pp. 289-305. ISSN 1464-5114.
13. Harveston, P. D., Osborne, D. and Kedia, B. L., 2002. Examining the mental models of entrepreneurs from born global and gradual globalizing firms. In:  Proceedings of the High Technology Small Firms Conference. Enschede, Netherlands: University of Twente, 2002, pp. 333-346.
14. Hoang, H. and Antoncic, B., 2003. Network-based research in entrepreneurship: A critical review. In: Journal of Business Venturing. 2003, 18(2), pp. 165-187. ISSN 0883-9026.
15. Holmlund, M. and Kock, S., 1998. Relationships and the internationalization of Finnish small and medium-sized companies. In: International Small Business Journal. 1998, 16(4), pp. 46-63. ISSN 0266-2426.
16. Johanson, J. and Vahlne, J. E., 1977. The internationalization process of the firms – a model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. In: Journal of International Business Studies. 1977, 8 (1), pp. 23-32. ISSN 0047-2506.
17. Johanson, J. and Vahlne, J. E., 1990. The mechanism of internationalization. In: International Marketing Review. 1990, 7(4), pp. 11-24. ISSN 0265-1335.
18. Johanson, J. and Vahlne, J. E., 2003. Business relationship learning and commitment in the internationalization process. In: Journal of International Entrepreneurship. 2003. 1(1), pp. 83. ISSN 1570-7385.
19. Jorn, F. N., Host, V., Jaensson, J. E., Kock, S. and Selnes, F., 2003. Market orientation in nordic banks: Does nationality matter? In: European Journal of Marketing. 2003, 37(11), pp. 1818-1841. ISSN 0309-0566.
20. Katz, R. L., 1974. Skills on an effective administrator. In: Harvard Business Review. 1974, 52(5), pp. 90-102.
21. Keupp, M. M. and Gassmann, O., 2009. The past and future of international entrepreneurship: A review and suggestions for developing the field. In: Journal of Management. 2009, 35(3), pp. 600-633. ISSN 0149-2063.
22. Knight, G. A., 2000. Entrepreneurship and marketing strategy. The SME under globalization. In: Journal of International Marketing. 2000, 8(2), pp. 12-32. ISSN 1069-031X.
23. Knight, G. A., 2001. Entrepreneurship and strategy in the international SME. In: Journal of International Management. 2001, 7(3), pp. 155-172. ISSN 0149-2063.
24. Kropp, F., L., Noel. J. and Shoham, A., 2008. Entrepreneurial orientation and international entrepreneurial business venture startup. In: International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research. 2008, 14(2), pp. 102-11. ISSN 1355-2554.
25. Kuratko, D. F. and Audretsch, D. B., 2009. Strategic entrepreneurship: Exploring different perspectives of an emerging concept. In: Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 2009. 33(1), pp. 1-17. ISSN 1042-2587.
26. Leonidou, L. C. and Katsikeas, C. S., 1996. The export development process: An integrative review of empirical models. In: Journal of International Business Studies. 1996, 27(3), pp.517-551. ISSN 0047-2506.
27. Leonidou, L. C., 1998. Organizational determinants of exporting: Conceptual, methodological, and empirical insights. In: Management International Review. 1998, 38, Special Issue, pp. 7-52. ISSN 0938-8249.
28. Leonidau, L. C. and Kaleka, A. A., 1998. Behavioural aspects of international buyer-seller relationship: Their association with export involvement. In: International Marketing Review. 1998, 15(5), pp. 373-397. ISSN 0265-1335.
29. Leonidou, L. C., Katsikeas, C. S., Palihawadana, D. and Spyropoulou, S., 2007. An analytical review of the factors stimulating smaller firms to export. In: International Marketing Review. 2007, 24(6), pp. 735-770. ISSN 0265-1335.
30. Lumpkin, T. G. and Dess, G., 1996. Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. In: Academy of Management Review. 1996, 21(1), pp. 135-173. ISSN 0363-7425.
31. Madsen, T. K. and Servais, P., 1997. The Internationalization of born globals: An evolutionary process? In: International Business Review. 1997, 6(6), pp. 561-583. ISSN 0969-5931.
32. Mathews, J. A. and Zander, I., 2007. The international entrepreneurial dynamics of accelerated internationalization. In: Journal of International Business Studies. 2007, 38(3), pp. 387-403. ISSN 0047-2506.
33. McDougall, P. P. and Oviatt, B. M., 2000. International entrepreneurship: The intersection of two research paths. In: Academy of Management Journal. 2000, 43(5), pp. 902-906. ISSN 0001-4273.
34. McDougall, P. P. and Oviatt, B. M., 2003. Some fundamental issues in international entrepreneurship. In: Enterpreneurship Theory and Practice. 2003, 18(1), pp. 27. ISSN 1042-2587.
35. McDougall, P. P., Oviatt, B. M. and Shrader, R. C., 2003. A comparison of international and domestic new ventures. In: Journal of International Entrepreneurship. 2003, 1(1), pp. 59-82. ISSN 1099-9264.
36. Mintzberg, H., 1979. The structuring of organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1979. ISBN 978-0138552701.
37. Moen, Ø. and Servais, P., 2002. Born global or gradual global? Examining the export behavior of small and medium-sized enterprises. In: Journal of International Marketing. 2002, 10(3), pp. 49-72. ISSN 1069-031X.
38. Mohamed, A. and Rocha, F. F. A., 2010. Internationalization of small- and medium-sized enterprises: A multi case study. In: European Business Review. 2010, 22(6), pp. 608-623. ISSN 0955-534X.
39. Mudalige, D., Noor, A. I. and Marlin, A. M., 2019. Exploring the role of individual level and firm level dynamic capabilities in SMEs’ internationalization. In: Journal of International Entrepreneurship. 2019, 17(1), pp. 41-74. ISSN 1570-7385.
40. Möller, K. and Wilson, D. T. (Eds), 1995. Business relationships – an interaction perspective. In: Business Marketing: An Interaction and Network Perspective. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995, pp. 23-52. ISBN 978-0-7923-9504-1.
41. Oviatt, B. M. and McDougall, P. P., 2005. The internationalization of entrepreneurship. In: Journal of International Business Studies. 2005, 36(1), pp. 2-8. ISSN 0047-2506.
42. Pavett, C. and Lau, A. W., 1983. Managerial work: The influence of hierarchical level and functional specialty. In: Academy of Management Journal. 1983, 26(1), pp. 170-177. ISSN 0001-4273.
43. Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumkin, G. T. and Frese, M., 2009. Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: an assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. In: Enterpreneurship Theory and Practice. 2009, 33(3), pp. 761-787. ISSN 1042-2587.
44. Sanyal, R. N. and Guvenli, T., 2004. Perception of managerial characteristics and organizational performance: Comparative evidence from Israel, Slovenia, and the USA. In: Cross Cultural Management. 2004, 11(2), pp. 35-57. ISSN 1352-7606.
45. Shane, S. and Venkataraman, S., 2000. The Promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. In: Academy of Management Review. 2000, 25(1), pp. 217-226. ISSN 0363-7425.
46. Shuman, J. C. and Seeger, J. A., 1986. The theory and practice of strategic management in smaller rapid growth firms. In: American Journal of Small Business. 1986, 2(1), pp. 7-18. ISSN 1935-5181.
47. Taylor, P., 2013. The effect of entrepreneurial orientation on the internationalization of SMEs in developing countries. In: African Journal of Business Management. 2013, 7(19), pp. 1927-1937. ISSN 1993-8233.
48. Verhees, F. and Meulenberg, M., 2004. Market orientation, innovativeness, product innovation, and performance in small firms. In: Journal of Small Business Management. 2004, 42(2), pp. 134-54. ISSN 0047-2778.
49. Vora, D., Vora, J. and Polley, D., 2012. Applying entrepreneurial orientation to a medium sized firm. In: International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research. 2012, 18(3), pp. 352-379. ISSN 1355-2554.

Kľúčové slová/Key words

networking, entrepreneurial orientation, SME, international markets
sieťovanie, podnikateľská orientácia, MSP, medzinárodné trhy

JEL klasifikácia/JEL Classification

M16, M31

Résumé

Sieťovanie a podnikateľská orientácia v internacionalizácii malých a stredných podnikov: Dve prípadové štúdie spoločností z Ostrobothnia vo Fínsku
Cieľom tohto príspevku je získať lepšie pochopenie toho, ako vytváranie sietí a podnikateľské orientácie uľahčujú internacionalizáciu malých a stredných podnikov (MSP). Táto štúdia je kvalitatívnym výskumom a výskum sa opiera o zistenia vzorky dvoch malých a stredných podnikov nachádzajúcich sa vo fínskom regióne Ostrobothnia. Kvalitatívne údaje sa zhromažďujú prostredníctvom osobných rozhovorov s manažérmi podnikov. Štúdia ukázala dôležitosť vytvárania sietí a podnikateľských orientácií pre pochopenie modelu internacionalizácie malých a stredných podnikov. Moje zistenia naznačujú, že ak majú byť podniky úspešné na medzinárodných trhoch, musia brať do úvahy zložky podnikateľských orientácií, ktoré tieto dva podniky odrážajú v ich internacionalizácii. Úspešnosť podnikov ďalej závisí vo veľkej miere od schopnosti spoločností zamerať sa na podnikateľskú orientáciu a vytváranie sietí pri uľahčení internacionalizácie spoločností.

Recenzované/Reviewed

10. March 2020 / 17. March 2020