SME Internationalization and Export Performance: A Systematic Review with Bibliometric Analysis

Abstract

Building from the authors’ plan to conceptualize an artificial intelligence (AI) solution that allows SME owners to make more sustainable choices in foreign-market-entry decisions, this systematic literature review (SLR) researches the state-of-the-art in SME internationalization from 1920 to 2023 (since 2014 in more depth). The authors gather all articles in Scopus, tagged with the keyword internationalization (25,303 as of January 2023), order them by citations, and download the top 2000 papers’ metadata for analysis and debate, then narrow it to reviews and SMEs, and use bibliometric visualization and qualitative data analysis software (VOSviewer and NVivo) to identify the key players and determinants of export performance/intensity, and finally draw conclusions. The results reveal key internationalization theories, top authors, reviews, and sources and expand Werner´s determinants via several tables and figures. The findings reveal the rise of relevance regarding theories related to social narratives and corporate activism, but also show that there is still much to do in SME internationalization, namely on what makes a small firm well established in their native market and have success in other countries. The contribution to science is an update on the topic and the pinpointing of several trends and gaps, such as a focus on services, theory integration, longitudinal studies between antecedents and performance, strategic fit versus opportunism, network theory on niche marketing, born-“glocal” strategies, disruptive technologies, and discourse variables, for the future of SME export success.

1. Introduction

The area of internationalization is one which has attracted increasing attention in recent years, due also to the pandemic COVID-19 (because of the global lockdown, there are many markets where competitors are currently seeking to fill commercial gaps, existent worldwide). Hence, a more up-to-date literature review is essential and should be performed periodically, when possible.

As stated in the abstract, the purpose of this study is to allow the authors to identify variables that will serve as inputs to an AI-based platform that will help Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) to internationalize. In other words, the purpose of this work is to allow the authors, a posteriori, to idealize, design, develop, and implement an AI-based decision support system that helps firm owners to make the more long-term, economically viable, sustainable development goals (SDGs) compliant choices possible, with the information available at a given moment.

Based on that, the scope of this article is to do a state-of-the-art study on the topic of internationalization through a systematic literature review, qualitative data research, and bibliometric analysis [1,2,3].

Therefore, the article has four main objectives:

Objective 1 (O1).

to identify the most influential and up-to-date international business management theories and models.

Objective 2 (O2).

to discover the key variables of SME success [4,5,6,7] in foreign market entry [8,9,10].

Objective 3 (O3).

to gather the determinants of export performance [11,12,13,14,15,16,17].

Objective 4 (O4).

to assist the academic community in pinpointing gaps and future paths of research in the matter.

Given the global nature of internationalization [18] and that the body of internationalization literature is too extensive [19] for the length of this article, a focus on SME had to be maintained throughout the review, though still addressing some generic approaches, for the sake of internationalization theory congruence, especially those that scholars defend that still lack expanded research.

In more detail, the first aim is to conduct a state-of-the-art study in internationalization research, either by the direct analysis (tables) of Scopus results or via the analysis of metadata through the bibliometric software VOSviewer [20], and word counting and qualitative data analysis software, NVivo [21,22]. The second aim, especially focusing on SME, is to satisfy the need to identify what variables should be closely managed and how they are distributed in the decision-making process, in order for SMEs to have success in foreign markets. The third aim is to explore the key determinants that are scientifically known to positively influence export performance/intensity. Finally, the fourth aim, which is self-explanatory, is to expose gaps and propose future trends of research.

Variables related to the success of foreign market entry and export performance are investigated via a systematic literature review of determinants that allow an SME to not only start exporting but also to continue exporting with profit over the years.

Regarding the timeframe, the data was gathered between October 2021 and January 2023, using the resources of the DEGEIT Department of the University of Aveiro in Portugal.

This study is significant to academia since it improves previous reviews, not only by expanding their summarizing efforts but also by going further than 2014 and trying to solve Chen’s “lack of synthetic theoretical basis” [23].

The authors researched Mukherjee’s cross-cultural differences [24], Hennart’s gravity model of family-managed SMEs [9], Srivastava’s cultural distance [25], Chandra’s SME internationalization barriers [26], Lee’s indirect effects of digitalization on internationalization [27], Paul’s under-explored areas [28], Reuber’s global ecosystem of entrepreneurial opportunities [10], Jafari Sadeghi’s SME internationalization drivers framework [29], Chabowski’s multidimensional scaling and intellectual structure implications on exporting [30], and all the most cited documents to be able to conduct a compilation of the theories, find gaps, and propose recommendations.

The authors also focused on exploring key meta-analysis, empirical studies, and reviews, such as Vaubourg’s causality between external financial dependence and export performance [31], Ribau’s impacts of innovation capabilities on export performance [32,33], Hering’s effects of environmental policies on exports [34], and Leonidou’s work on marketing strategy variables [15], and many others, to be able to identify the determinants of export performance.

The authors’ research has made clear what are the trends and the most cited topics and authors in the internationalization area, duly mentioned above and in the text.

To sum up, this research was based on the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis.

One can find most determinants of the success of SME internationalization via research.

To validate this, the authors attempt to answer two main research questions via SLR, qualitative data, and bibliometric analysis:

Research Question 1

(RQ1): What is the state-of-art in SME internationalization research?

Research Question 2

(RQ2): What are the key determinants of a successful SME internationalization that stem from that state-of-the-art?

This article is structured as follows:

Section 1 is the introduction to the purpose and objectives of this research, along with an overview of the background of the study, why it is significant, both to the authors and academia, what were the hypotheses and research questions, and it also provides a framework of how the research was performed.

Section 2 describes the method.

Section 3 inserts the results of the SLR and bibliometric analysis and key determinants of foreign market entry and export performance (with some findings, due to size, being forwarded to Appendix A, Appendix B and Appendix C in the final part of the document).

Section 4 opens the discussion of a theoretical approach to internationalization, identifying primal theories, sources, and scholars.

Finally, conclusions are drawn in Section 5.

Figure 1 reveals the framework the authors used to write this document, which will be explained in more detail in Section 2. It is meant to be read from left to right, top to bottom, starting where it says “Purpose”. Following its connectors, linking phrases and concepts, one can have a better understanding of the structure of this study and the objectives and reasoning behind each section.

2. Materials and Methods

As depicted in the framework, and having, a priori, well-defined objectives, first, a selection of a database was made among the world’s three most renowned state-of-the-art repositories: Google Scholar (GS), Scopus, and Web of Science (WoS) [40,41]. Despite studies suggesting that all three databases provide sufficient stability of coverage to be used in detailed cross-disciplinary comparisons and GS being, by far, the source with more citations, about half of its citations are not from journal publications (48–65%, depending on the topic), which the authors consider being the type of document crucial for assuring scientific quality (at least, for this study), and also GS has been proven to miss 6.1% of Scopus citations (which, of those, 68% are journal publications and, from these, almost 1% are from Q1 journals); therefore, the authors felt this percentage was not negligible for this study and opted for Scopus, since this platform is also more prevalent than WoS (35% vs. 28%) in Business and Economics topics [42].

After selecting Scopus, an individual systematic literature review for each of the objectives was performed, using the PRISMA flow diagram as a guideline [43], to discover the current state in academic research. Several keywords where introduced, the results analyzed and debated about the need for more filtering because of the high number of documents (25,303, as of January 2023), and finally, the 425 remaining abstracts were examined to determine the causal link of the content, and then the more pertinent reviews were carefully studied, classified, and referenced via Zotero.

In the end, an effort was made to expand the determinants of exporting found in Werner’s work [35], and a bibliometric analysis inspired by previous works [2] was also performed using two software: VOSviewer and NVivo, which also have been proven helpful to academia in the past. Finally, the findings are debated, and future research is proposed.

In more detail, this paper has been subdivided into the three major areas of internationalization that this research focuses on: (a) internationalization theories or models, (b) SME internationalization success, and (c) determinants of export performance/intensity. The use of the following keywords was imposed: (a) (internationalization OR internationalisation) AND (theory OR model); (b) (internationalization OR internationalisation) AND SME AND success; and (c) (“determinants of export performance”). Although both “internationalization” and “SME” or “success” keywords are self-explanatory, the authors opted to use the keyword (determinants of “export performance”) since the keyword “export performance” has a relevance of 0.27 in Scopus “keyphrase” analysis, making it the 4th keyword in the Scival topic of “International New Ventures; Born Global; Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs)”, the academic topic more connected to the internationalization of SMEs.

PRISMA (3 in 1)

The results are demonstrated in the next PRISMA 2020 flow [43] that represents the three distinct sub-SLRs (a, b, c) that had to be made to write this study.

Figure 2 reveals the steps and filters used to find the 425 articles that were analyzed in this systematic literature review. As stated above, this three-in-one PRISMA flow represents three distinct sub-SLRs: (a) to discover the trendiest theories or models in internationalization; (b) to pinpoint what makes an SME have success in internationalization, namely while exporting onto foreign markets; and finally (c) to identify the key variables of that export performance/intensity. The first one returned 359 documents, the second 59, and the last one, only 7. The inherent PRISMA checklist and abstract may be found in the File S1 link provided in the final part of this document.

To sum up, the authors established internationalization as the thematic scope. The themes focused on include: theories, SME, and determinants of foreign market entry/export performance/intensity, searching its relevant documents via keywords such as “internationalization” “Theory” or “Model”, “SME” and “success”, and “determinants of export performance” in the SCOPUS database, producing a body of literature of 25,303 documents, later filtered by reviews, resulting in an initial list of 1378 documents, which were then filtered by theory or model in the first sub-SLR, and SME and success in the second, and by determinants of export performance in the third, returning 845, 69, and 7 documents, respectively, that were then ordered by citations. Documents were then filtered by Business, Management, and Accounting subject areas (and books and articles in press were excluded), reducing the list to 425 selected documents. After that, an analysis of the abstracts was conducted, classifying them by subtopics and relevance, and serializing and grouping the selected documents. Then, a complete in-depth reading of the more pertinent publications was performed. Finally, a bibliometric analysis with dates, sources, types, authors, schools, and impacts, was also performed.

3. Results

3.1. State-of-the-Art

Evolution of the Topic

Figure 3 shows the curve of the internationalization topic, in terms of documents published, since 1920 until 2022 (1950 papers in 2022), revealing an increasing academic interest after 1970, except for some years such as 2017 or 2019 (and others) when it registered a small decrease in the number of articles submitted. The reasons for growth or decline do not pertain to this study, but the authors perceive the topic will remain essential.

3.2. Literature Review

Table 1 reveals the top 10 most productive authors, in terms of published articles or reviews, on internationalization, with Saarenketo being the one who produced more articles (44) and Alexander, the one who made more reviews (5). Table 2 reveals top 10 article authors, regarding theories or models, ordered by citations, with Oviatt and McDougall still being the ones most cited, though more recent ones, such as Teece and Paul, are on the rise. Table 3 identifies the top 10 review authors in SME internationalization success, also ordered by citations, with Cavusgil and Knight taking the lead, followed by Paul. Table 4 shows the seven authors of reviews that resulted from the search of the keyword “determinants of export performance”, by citations, with Chen being the one most cited.

3.3. Expanding Werner’s Determinants

For this research and based on the SLR itself, the authors found that the work of Werner [35] has conducted an impressive effort to consolidate determinants of export performance, as shown in the annexes.

Figure 4 shows the determinants that the authors felt important to expand, where one can see that market size, orientation to export, location, interpersonal skills towards exporting, and the systematic feedback and review of the export process are key determinants to export performance. The authors then decided to increase the level of precision of Werner determinants, as one can see in the following figures. Numbered circles represent that Figure 5, Figure 6 and Figure 7 are a continuation, an expansion, of Figure 4.

Figure 5 is a more in-depth view of the variables found by Andersson and Fredriksson [37], related to market size, to be key determinants of export performance, such as the number of countries where the company has affiliates, the size of those affiliates, and the size of the host market.

Figure 6 delves deeper in the work of Campa and Guilléen [38] and identifies the factors these authors deemed as determinants of advantage, namely ownership factors such as R&D, being or not a mass producer and commitment and also home and host location factors, such as competitor development index or access disadvantage.

Figure 7 expands the work of Cadogan et al. [36] and identifies further research needed. It also references several tools, such as the eight-item intelligence dissemination scale, which help determine the export intelligence dissemination when analyzing export market orientation or performance.

3.4. Bibliometric Analysis

3.4.1. Author Influence

Figure 8 depicts, via item density visualization, the citation analysis of the review authors that have been cited over 20 times, by the number of normalized citations on internationalization theories. The intensity of the yellow color reveals those who have been cited more often. Because of readable format requirements, the figure cannot show the author Werner, whose influence also appeared in the VOSviewer. The scale used was 1.33, with a size variation of 0.63 and a kernel of 0.50. Data were imported from the Scopus database on 20 January 2023, regarding 359 reviews. The relatedness of items is determined based on the number of times they cite each other.

Figure 9 shows the overlay visualization of the co-authorship analysis of the authors with 20 plus citations. Relatedness is based on their number of co-authored documents.

Figure 10 represents the network visualization of bibliometric coupling by docs and citations, when analyzing theories or models of internationalization, showing the Oviatt and Cavusgil predominance in the field in terms of cited reviews. Colors reveal authors that cite the same references. The size of the nodes reflects the number of citations.

3.4.2. Affiliation Statistics

Figure 11 shows the citation analysis of the affiliations through overlay visualization. The relatedness of items is determined based on the number of times they cite each other, reflected either by the size of the text and the circles associated. One can see that the University of Georgia is the most cited (normalized citations) in terms of internationalization reviews, though new players have been acquiring recognition in recent years, such as the Universities of Reading, Toronto or Queensland.

Figure 12 demonstrates, via overlay visualization, the citation analysis of the sources. As above, relatedness is based on the number of times they cite each other, and the size of the circles and text reveal the number of normalized citations. Color shows the average year of publication. One can see that the Journal of International Business Studies remains the most cited in internationalization reviews, though the Journal of World Business has been gaining terrain in recent years.

Figure 13 is the overlay visualization of the citation analysis of countries with over 20 citations. One can see that research locations such as India (hidden in Figure 13), Portugal, Puerto Rico, and Chile have been producing citable research in recent years, bringing them closer to traditional academic countries such as the US and the UK in terms of internationalization research. As one can see in the figure, colors represent years/novelty. Publications from countries represented in yellow frames have been the ones more cited in recent years (from 2018 to 2023). Those in darker colors represent countries who have been very cited in the past but have been losing citability.

3.4.3. Keyword Statistics (via NVivo and VOSviewer)

Figure 14 depicts, via word count visualization, the most cited keywords in reviews regarding internationalization theories and models.

From it, one can notice entrepreneurship is becoming a trend and also that 2017 saw the production of numerous reviews and that, despite being still trendy in 2021, years such as 2009 and 2011 seem to have had a significant impact on the topic.

The keywords small and marketing also seem to indicate an increase in the interest of management/marketing studies regarding SME, while maintaining a strategic focus on global, firms, and performance.

Export seems to be on the mind of scholars as well.

It also caught the authors´ attention that only one country appeared in the word cloud, China, revealing the rise in relevance of the Asian economic power in the world of academics.

Figure 15 depicts, via overlay visualization, the Co-occurrence analysis by All Keywords. Keywords such as “export intensity”, “big data analytics capabilities”, and “entrepreneurial orientation” seem to be acquiring traction. Colors reveal the year of publication.

3.4.4. Network Analysis of Publications

Figure 16 visualizes the cluster density (with a scale of 1.43 and size variation of 1 and kernel of 2.50) of the bibliometric coupling of documents by normalized citations of the 39 authors who had a minimum of 20 citations among the SLR’s 114 papers regarding determinants of export performance in the Scopus database on 20 January 2023. The relatedness of items is determined based on the number of references they share and then organized in clusters, represented by colors. The bigger the label, the higher the number of normalized citations. Colors reveal authors that cite the same references.

Figure 17 depicts the density visualization (with a scale of 1.02 and size variation or kernel of 2) of the co-citation analysis of the 44 cited authors who had a minimum of 20 citations each among the SLR’s 359 reviews regarding internationalization theories or models in the Scopus database on 20 January 2023. The relatedness of items is determined based on the number of times they are cited together and then organized in clusters, represented by colors. The bigger the label is, the higher the number of citations.

4. Discussion

4.1. Internationalization Background

The importance of having an internationalization strategy is evident as is its complexity. For this reason, authors have chosen to enunciate the theories involved and which may be followed. However, the choice of internationalization strategy will frequently depend on the partners and on the situation.

The region of the world, the national culture, the required speed of the process/the urgency, the aptitude, and receptivity to risk are all relevant factors in the process. The stage in the product life cycle will also be pertinent and will have a say in the path to be followed.

Some human intuition (or very advanced artificial intelligence) will be necessary, and we maintain that there are no readily applicable formulas to solve the internationalization problem—the where and how to internationalize products/services/businesses.

The desire to internationalize remains a real problem and is still somewhat of a “black box” conundrum (a difficult problem to solve).

Notwithstanding, we offer clear theoretical solutions and a discussion based on the current literature to help firms and academics better understand the issue and thematic.

Therefore, this section seeks to give a background on several internationalization theories. The rationale behind the choice of these theories is, not only, that they have not been focused on excessively in the literature to date but also that recently, some are showing a noticeable impact in everyday business, such as Critical, Discourse, or Equity theories. The aim is to herein make a contribution (providing a listing or compendium) regarding what exists in the realm of internationalization theory.

Theories (Trends and Roots)

In the following pages, the authors debate the trendiest theories and others that scholars have referred to as not having been fully explored and therefore are in need of more research.

• Attribution theory of internationalization

Building from social psychology research on the attributional perspectives of human behavior [68] and its causal ascriptions/beliefs [69], this theory states that experiences influence our choices and how business owners answer to opportunities. Individuals infer causes about outcomes [70], and past variables that led their companies to the desired results will determine the future decisions to internationalize. In the analysis of a company’s internationalization success, the theory establishes a framework in which the ability to adapt and expand, from one stage to the next, derives from the locus, controllability, and stability of judgments and interpretations [71], by the managers, of the factors that led to the firm’s past successes. Decisions are, therefore, determined by causal factors such as the uniqueness of the offering, a company’s financial resources, competitive pricing, expectations of success, and the international success itself [72].

• Agency theory of internationalization

This theory is based on the concept that decisions are made by agents who operate on behalf of the firm’s owners (also known as the principals) and is inspired by the principal–agent (P/A) model [73]. According to it, the agents choose to internationalize the firm to maximize their own self-interests, rather than the profit of the firm’s owners, resulting in a goal conflict because of people’s self-interest and risk aversion, called the agency problem. There is also a bounded rationality, and information is assumed as asymmetric and seen as a commodity. Some authors argue that the model lacks a more social perspective [74,75] and introduce variables such as cultural distance, lateral centralization, and commitment to parent/principal, as determinants of subsidiary/agent compensation [76].

• Behavioral decision theory of internationalization

Building from concepts such as judgment, choice, attention, memory, cognitive representation, conflict, learning, and feedback [77], this theory defends that firms and their managers are influenced by psychological factors when deciding about international expansion. These factors can include biases, heuristics [78], and other mental shortcuts that affect how managers perceive and evaluate potential opportunities in foreign markets. According to this theory, firms are more likely to internationalize when they have a positive attitude toward risk and uncertainty, when they have a strong belief in their own capabilities and resources, and when they clearly understand the potential benefits and costs of international expansion, and how it will impact their current business network relationships, which could even sometimes lead to a wait-and-see strategy [79], therefore establishing a reasons-based view of preference, since managers tend to lack the computational skills to choose the alternative that maximize the outcomes [80,81].

• Complexity theory of internationalization

The number of researchers using complexity reasoning to explain business phenomena is increasing [82], namely in the leadership context. Building from it, this theory is based on the idea that internationalization is a complex and dynamic process, which is influenced by a wide range of internal and external factors. Firms face a constantly changing environment, often chaotic as they expand into foreign markets, and must adapt to new challenges and opportunities to succeed. This may involve building new relationships with partners and customers, developing new products or services, and adapting to distinct cultural and regulatory environments. While through its four key propositions [83], it asserts that internationalization is essentially unpredictable. It also draws that it abides to rules that tend to generate order [84], with concepts such as emergence and self-organization [85], and holism and coevolution, where the whole system is qualitatively different from the sum of its parts, moving away from a linear cause-and-effect mechanistic view [86,87]. Overall, it provides a more nuanced and dynamic view of internationalization compared to other theoretical frameworks that focus on more static factors, such as motivation for decision making [88].

• Critical theory of internationalization

This theory stems from the current school of thought of the Frankfurt School [89] and its idea that internationalization is a highly political and contested process and that the actions of firms must be understood in the broader context of global power relations. It distinguishes between normative and descriptive theoretical analysis and puts forward three normative realms: ethics, morality, and legitimacy [90,91]. According to this theory, firms´ motivations to internationalize, such as the search for profit, market share, or new resources, are not always benign and can have negative consequences for communities and the environment in host countries. It also emphasizes culture [92] and the importance of the role of governments and international organizations in shaping the internationalization process, since powerful interests can influence them [93]. In sum, it offers a more critical and political perspective on internationalization and highlights the need to consider the social and environmental impacts of firms´ expansion into foreign markets.

• Decision theory of internationalization

Developed from game theory and also called the theory of choice [94], this approach uses core concepts, such as alternative, state of nature, consequence, and payoff, to analyze complexity, uncertainty, and unpredictability [95,96] and explain how business owners make rational and calculated decisions about international expansion, based on a careful analysis of potential risks and rewards, in their permanent quest to find an optimal solution that can be clarified through tools such as the CYNEFIN framework [97]. It provides a more rational and economic perspective on internationalization and emphasizes the need for firms to weigh the costs and benefits of expansion into foreign markets. It is important to say that the merit of improvisation in the decision-making process is still understudied [98].

• Deconstruction theory of internationalization

Deconstruction theory is a philosophical approach that originated in the work of French philosopher Jacques Derrida. It is because language, and the meanings that we assign to words and concepts, are inherently unstable and open to multiple interpretations. Deconstruction seeks to challenge and disrupt traditional ways of thinking by exposing the hidden assumptions and biases that underlie our use of language. It is a critical and reflexive approach that seeks to expose the contradictions and limitations of dominant perspectives and to open up new possibilities for meaning and interpretation. Deconstruction has been applied to a wide range of fields, including literature, philosophy, psychology, and cultural studies. It has also been used as a method for analyzing and critiquing social and political issues, such as power dynamics, inequality, and identity [99].

• Discourse theory of internationalization

This is a theoretical approach that focuses on the role of language and communication in shaping our understanding of internationalization. Discourse theories typically analyze how language is used to construct and maintain social and political relationships, and how it can exert power and control over individuals and groups and therefore clients [100,101].

• Equity theory of internationalization

Equity theory, on the other hand, is a psychological theory that explains how individuals evaluate and respond to the fairness of their social and professional relationships. It is based on the assumption that people have a psychological need for fairness and equity and that they will adjust their behavior to maintain a sense of fairness in their relationships [102,103,104].

• Evolutionary theory

This theory explains the idea that internationalization is a process of gradual and incremental change, driven by the adaptive responses of firms to the challenges and opportunities of the global economy. Firms start by expanding into foreign markets in a slow and cautious manner, escalating their presence and investment. As they acquire experience and learn more about the foreign market, they may take on more risks and make more significant investments, leading to further growth and expansion. The evolutionary theory of internationalization also emphasizes the role of learning and adaptation in the internationalization process. It suggests that firms are more likely to succeed when they can learn from their experiences in foreign markets and when they can adapt their strategies and operations to changing conditions [105,106,107,108].

• Exchange theory

According to this theory, firms enter international markets to exchange their products or services for other goods and services that they need. Several factors can motivate this exchange, such as the desire to access new markets, to reduce production costs, or to gain access to raw materials or other resources. It focuses on the economic benefits that firms can gain from engaging in international trade, and it emphasizes the importance of understanding the motivations and constraints that drive international business decisions [109,110,111].

• Masstige theory

The masstige theory of internationalization is a concept that explains how companies can successfully expand into new international markets by offering high-quality products at affordable prices. This approach allows companies to appeal to a wider range of consumers, including those who may not afford luxury products. The key to success with this approach is to balance the perceived value of the product with its price point, to create a product that is seen as both high-quality and affordable. This can help companies differentiate themselves from competitors and establish a powerful presence in new markets [112,113,114,115,116].

• Prospect theory

Prospect theory is a psychological theory that explains how people decide when faced with uncertainty or risk. It was developed by Kahneman and Tversky (1979), and it challenges the traditional economic “assumption that people always make rational decisions” based on expected utility. According to prospect theory, people have a tendency to overweigh small probabilities and underweigh large probabilities when deciding. This means that people are more likely to take risks to avoid losses, even if the expected value of their decision is negative. For example, people may choose to gamble on a long shot rather than accept a sure loss. Prospect theory also suggests that people have a reference point, or a starting point, when making decisions. This reference point can influence the way people perceive gains and losses and can cause them to be more risk-seeking or risk-averse depending on whether they are trying to avoid losses or secure gains. Overall, prospect theory provides a more realistic and nuanced view of how people decide under uncertainty and risk, and it has had a significant impact on the fields of economics, finance, and psychology [117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124].

• Technology acceptance model (TAM) of internationalization

The TAM model of internationalization stems from Davis [125] who scaled the variables “perceived ease of use” and “perceived usefulness” to analyze the behavioral intention of potential users of innovative technological products/services. Some researchers sustain that measuring intentions is crucial to predicting behavior [126,127,128]. Therefore, this theory focuses on the prediction of international decisions via stakeholders´ intentions, namely on determining the factors and procedures that make users decide, inspired by how they adopt technology [129]. Enjoyment was also found to be an essential factor of TAM [130], and the model has been found especially useful when complimented with the Diffusion of Innovation (DoI) [128] model, and it should not be mistaken with the concept of Total Available Market [131,132].

• SCOPE framework

Focusing on the analysis of the globalization pressures on SMEs, via a pentagon model, this approach provides internationalization guidelines for low-technology SMEs, while high-tech SMEs´ internationalization is already covered by the “born global” model. To do so, this theory proposes a new framework to suggest strategies for SMEs to succeed in the global market. SCOPE stands for Strategies to analyze the Challenges, Opportunities, and Problems to succeed in Exporting. Since SMEs face internal and external challenges, this framework could be employed as a theoretical lens to examine the antecedents and outcome of SME internationalization [133].

• Conservative, predictable, and pacemaker model (CPP model)

This is a model for conceptualizing the internationalization of firms. C stands for conservative firms, P stands for predictable firms, and the other P stands for pacemaker firms. It provides a framework for developing a model to analyze the growth path, process, pattern, and pace of the internationalization of firms. It presents the explanation of the three concepts. Conservatives are those firms remaining within the domestic boundary, as they lack the vision to take their business into foreign markets. “Predictables” are those firms mostly serving the domestic market plus the predictable markets. This could include markets which are part of legally valid regional trade agreements or markets with bilateral agreements and territories, or markets with legal agreements for international business without tariff or non-tariff barriers. Pacemakers are those firms serving not only in the closest international market but also globally for a little more than a decade and generate more revenue than the firms belonging to categories such as conservatives and “predictables” [134,135,136].

• Dynamic capability theory of internationalization

The dynamic capability theory of internationalization is a concept that explains how companies can develop the capabilities and resources they need to expand successfully into new international markets. According to this theory, companies can build their dynamic capabilities by investing in knowledge, skills, and processes that enable them to respond quickly and effectively to changes in the international market. This includes things such as understanding local consumer preferences, navigating different regulatory environments, and adapting to changing economic conditions. Having strong dynamic capabilities can help companies overcome the challenges and uncertainties associated with international expansion. For example, a company that quickly adapts to consumer preferences tends to be more competitive in new markets. This can give the company a competitive advantage and increase its chances of success. Overall, the dynamic capability theory of internationalization provides a useful framework for understanding how companies can develop the capabilities and resources they need to succeed in the global marketplace [121,137,138,139,140,141].

• Other important theories, already much debated

(a) Institutional theory of internationalization—This is a concept that explains how the institutions and norms of a particular country or region can influence a company’s decision to expand into that market. According to this theory, companies are more likely to enter a market if the institutional environment is favorable to their business. For example, if a country is politically stable and has a strong infrastructure and legal system, it may be more attractive to companies looking to expand. It also suggests that companies may face barriers to entry if the institutional environment is not favorable to their business. For example, a company may face challenges if a country has strict regulations, weak infrastructure, or political instability. In such cases, the company may need to invest more time, resources, and effort to overcome these barriers and succeed in the market. Overall, it provides a useful framework for understanding how the institutional environment of a country or region can influence a company’s decision to expand into that market and the challenges and opportunities the company may face as a result. (b) Theory of planned behavior—This is a psychological model that can be used to understand the factors that influence an individual’s behavior. This theory suggests that behavior is determined by a person’s intentions, which are influenced by their attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. In the context of internationalization, this theory can be used to understand the factors that influence a business´s decision to expand into international markets. (c) Hofstede’s theory of internationalization—Hofstede’s theory of internationalization is a cultural model that explains the differences between cultures and how they affect business practices. This theory is based on the work of Dutch social psychologist Geert Hofstede, who conducted a study of IBM employees in different countries to identify cultural dimensions that influence the way people think and behave. Though scholars have argued [142] that there is no consensus on a definition, one may consider that internationalization is the process of increasing a firm’s commitment to foreign markets and that internationalization theory is a branch of economics/business management that is used to analyze international business behavior. Some researchers suggest it is the adaptation of the firm’s resources, strategies, and tasks to international contexts [143]. Its research stems from trade theories, such as the absolute cost advantage, that propose a country should export products that have an absolute advantage, a meaning that can be manufactured with a lower cost per unit than in other countries [144,145]. (d) The comparative cost advantage instead argued that this advantage does not need to be absolute but can also be beneficial, if both countries have a comparative labor ratio advantage between two different products [146]. I The gravity model of trade is used to calculate trade flows based on the GDP and distance between two countries [147]. (f) The Heckscher–Ohlin (HO) model tried to define the point where offer meets demand, in international trade, stating that a country will export products where it has a surplus of production resources and import those where the factors are scarce. This theory gave birth to four theorems that will not be discussed here [148,149,150]. (g) The Leontief paradox refuted the HO theory by showing evidence that a capital-intensive country will instead export labor-intensive products and prefer capital-based imports [151]. (h) The Linder hypothesis suggests that the more similar the demand of two countries, the more they will trade [152]. (i) The Location theory advances that firms choose their locations to maximize their profits [153,154,155]. (j) The market imperfection theory says that imperfections create costs that interfere with otherwise rational trade decisions, and it also states that multinationals owe much of their size from taking advantage of these imperfections [156,157,158,159,160,161]. (k) The New Trade Theory (NTT) notes the importance of increasing returns to scale and network effects of international trade, arguing that if even two countries are identical, they can still profit from trade, namely when they concentrate in two different products of the same niche market that generates increasing returns of scale [162,163,164]. There are several ways to approach the analysis of internationalization, as shown below.

4.2. Approach Analysis

This section is justified as the authors herein analyze the theories according to their approach, which does indeed vary.

4.2.1. Economic Approach

• Diamond model

According to this theory, in any location, six factors combine to explain why some industries become more competitive than others: (1) factor conditions, such as skilled labor or infrastructure; (2) demand conditions, such as its strength and behavior; (3) related and supporting industries, as the existence or not of competitive suppliers and its specialization; (4) firm strategy, structure, and rivalry, as management international knowledge, or how fierce the competition is; (5) government, such as bureaucracy or trade support; and finally (6) chance, as in scientific breakthroughs or natural disasters [165,166].

• Transaction cost theory

The transaction cost concept tries to explain the existence of firms [167,168] and proposes that market transactions have costs, such as those linked to finding trade partners and winning contracts. The firm emerges because of smaller transaction costs than the market. However, it can only grow to a certain point because it also has internal costs, such as management costs. Transaction cost theory is an economic theory that can explain the decision-making process of firms regarding internationalization. This theory suggests that firms will only engage in international trade if the benefits of doing so outweigh the costs. The transaction cost theory considers the costs associated with transactions, such as search and information costs, bargaining, and decision-making costs, and policing and enforcement costs. The theory suggests that firms will choose to engage in international trade when the potential benefits, such as access to new markets and increased efficiency, outweigh the costs associated with transactions.

• Eclectic paradigm

Also known as the Ownership, Location, and Internationalization (OLI) model [169,170], this paradigm is a development of the internationalization theory, which itself is based on the transaction cost theory. Knowledge is viewed as an “ownership advantage” (OA) and claims that these OAs, such as trademarks or skills, are necessary for a firm to become a multinational.

4.2.2. Stage-Based Approach

As the sentence itself suggests, the stage-based approach defines internationalization as a sequential process with different stages [171,172,173].

• Product life cycle theory

This theory relies on a comparative cost concept, and its origin can trace back to the fifties of the last century [174], and, though other scholars [175,176,177,178,179] have put forward details that helped improve it, the concept was well established by Levitt (1965), with its four-stage curve (1—Market Development; 2—Growth; 3—Maturity; 4—Decline) and its axis of Sales value versus Time, that represent the phases of development every product has to go through, eventually. Inspired by this theory, Vernon [180] gave it an international dimension, defending the concept of the International Product Life Cycle, where the location, the maturity, and the standardization of the products determine the success of the internationalization.

• Uppsala model (U-model)

Being one of the stage-based models, Uppsala model [181] develops around two basic concepts: the learning process, which grows in several steps/stages, starting from irregular exports, then growing to regular exports via independent agents, then expanding, some years later, to an overseas sales subsidiary, and finally by establishing production or manufacturing units in foreign countries, and the psychic distance. This means that, initially, most firms internationalize to similar markets, with cultural proximity, and only afterwards do they start trying to enter different ones. Usually, over time, the more experience of internationalization a firm has, the more culturally apart will be the countries that it will be willing to enter. The U-model also embodies two essential elements: the amount of resources committed and the degree of commitment to a specific foreign market, and the knowledge needed to be there [182,183,184]. All concepts and elements together describe a static effect, while there is also a dynamic effect that derives from the influence of resources on decision making and ongoing operations [185]. To sum up, the moment a firm raises its foreign market’s knowledge, it increases the commitment to internationalization and starts investing in more distinct psychological markets [186]. The Uppsala model was revised [187,188] to include the concept of a business network which will be discussed further in this review.

• Innovation-related model (I-model)

In this model, internationalization is compared to the development and commercialization of a new product [189]. Therefore, this theory defends that internationalization has three typical stages, the pre-export stage of unsolicited exports, the export trail stage, where it exports to countries that are geographically close, and the advanced export stage of exports to more distant countries [65,190,191,192,193,194].

4.2.3. Network Approach

• Network theory model

The network approach stems from the continuity of international research in the Uppsala school. It introduces the importance of the firm network to their original model [195,196,197,198] and explains the drives and modes of internationalization by placing the firm in a multilateral framework by mobilizing the intra- and inter-organizational relations. This means that insiders have an advantage over outsiders to the access of the network knowledge and resources [199,200,201]. According to this model, internationalization can be reached by extension, penetration, or integration, and there are four variants: early and late starter, lonely, or international, among others [202].

4.2.4. Other Approaches

• The international entrepreneurship approach

The concept of international entrepreneurship is initially defined as the development of new international activities by new firms [203]. It analyzes four fundamental properties: mode, market, product, and time [44,203,204,205,206]. According to this approach, internationalization becomes an entrepreneurial decision led by an entrepreneur or a management team which possesses a strong capability to learn new concepts and ideas, manages complex networks, and has an ability to adapt to different cultures and situations.

• International new ventures (INVs) and the born global model

INVs are ‘‘born global’’ firms or a “Global Start-up” [28,207,208,209], meaning, companies that operate in multiple countries from the start and who helped develop the concept of international new ventures as an area of research [210]. Its research helped to change the focus of research from gradual internationalization to the accelerated pace of these young companies and the factors that enable these firms to internationalize quickly [211,212]. This entrepreneurship approach also allowed researchers to recognize ‘‘opportunity’’ as an important theoretical construct [10,204,213,214,215,216], namely the individual-, institutional-, and industry-level factors needed to recognize and pursue those opportunities [46,52,217,218,219].

• Approaches that are not debated in this research

Country of Origin Theory; Entrepreneurial Orientation Theory; Expectancy Theory; Human Capital Theory; Immigrant Capital Theory; Liberal Feminist Theory; Representation theory; Schwartz Personal Values Theory; Self-selection Theory; Social Capital Perspective; Social Learning Theory; Socioemotional Wealth Stewardship Theory; Sunk Costs Theory; and Upper Echelons Theory.

See Chen et al. (2016) [44] for a reference to: Competence and Capability Theory (CCT); Control Theory (CT); Contingency Theory (CoT); Economic Geography (EG); Export Managerial Psychology Theory (EMP); Firm Heterogeneity Theory (FHT); Fit Theory (FT); Home-Market Theory (HMT); Human Capital Theory (HCT); Institutional-Based View (IBV); Industrial Organization-Based Theory (IO); Internationalization Theory (IT); International Trade Theory (ITT); Industry-Based Theory (IV); Knowledge-Based View (KBV); Liberal Feminist Theory (LFT); New Growth Theory (NGT); New-New Trade Theory (NNT); Organizational Learning Theory (OLT); Principal–Principal Perspective (PPP); Pricing Theory (PT); Reciprocal Action Theory (RAT); Resource-Based View (RBV); Rational Exchange Theory (RET); Resource Dependency Theory (RDT); Relationship Marketing Theory (RMT); Real Options Theory (ROT); Social Exchange Theory (SET); Social Feminist Theory (SFT); Sales Management Theory (SMT); Social Network Theory (SNT); Stakeholder Orientation Theory (SOT); Schwartz’s Theory (ST); Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB); Threat-Rigidity Theory (TRT); and Upper Echelons Theory (UET).

4.3. Internationalization Research Clusters

• Alayo’s six major clusters

In their co-word analysis, using WoS articles from 2002 to 2018, these authors found that internationalization studies can be aggregated in six major clusters: (a) corporate governance, (b) entry mode, (c) board of directors, (d) foreign market knowledgI(e) entrepreneurship, and (f) competitive advantage [3,220].

• Hendry’s six major challenges

Hendry [39] argued that there are six major challenges that an internationalizing firm faces, which can be grouped into two topics: (a) the initial steps in internationalization, composed by its three initial challenges, (i) the leveraging of domestic competitive advantages, (ii) networking in the newly internationalizing firm, and (iii) initiating and sustaining international commitment; and (b) the more experienced ones that focus on internationalization and Human Management (HM) in the mature internationalism: (iv) developing inter-cultural competence, (v) networking and learning in alliances, and (vi) international joint ventures managing complexity in the international firm. All these challenges reveal the importance of networking, teams, and organizational learning.

• Werner´s 12 internationalization topics

Werner [35] reviewed and analyzed the trends in IB literature (1996–2000) and proposed that internationalization research can be aggregated in 12 main topics: (I) global business environment, (II) internationalization, (III) entry mode decisions, (IV) international joint ventures, (V) foreign direct investment, (VI) international exchange, (VII) transfer of knowledge, (VIII) strategic alliances and networks, (IX) multinational enterprises, (X) subsidiary–headquarters relations, (XI) subsidiary and multinational team management, and (XII) expatriate management.

5. Conclusions

As shown by the evidence above and in Appendix A, Appendix B and Appendix C, the authors could validate the hypothesis that one can find most determinants of the success of SME internationalization via research [23,35,49].

Satisfying the objectives 1, 2, 3 and 4, the authors were able to present the state-of-art in internationalization research and the key determinants of a successful SME internationalization that stem from that state-of-the-art and that can have a direct impact on the way SME owners/managers can apply their efforts, either financial or human, to the drivers that have the most impact on export performance.

Nevertheless, as also noted by several scholars, there is still much to learn about what it takes to be a success in a foreign market. This research was able to increase the precision of the focus, going further down the path of previous researchers [23,35] and expanding their determinants.

SME research still tends to be vague for the majority of non-scholar entrepreneurs. That is a gap for further research to fill. It is able to produce models that even non-scholars can clearly and quickly benefit from.

Additionally, there is space for improvement in individual factors, such as psychological traits of the successful international entrepreneur. Among the trends, there is increasing interest in examining the importance of emerging ICTs in Far Distance Internationalization [221] and also to research more about speed and synchronization in foreign market network entry [222], as portrayed in the SUPWAVE Theory [223].

Other gaps involve patterns, generations (founders vs subsequent), internet (tenders, marketplaces), and context (level of national development, political stability, openness to foreign trade, national competitiveness, level of education, culture, institutional support, and incentives to entrepreneurship).

Much can be done also in initial entry mode versus advanced stages. In the realm of concepts such as liability of foreignness and liability of outsidership, more empirical studies must be developed to confirm the real importance of social network theory axioms, such as network structure and position, testing the impact on sales of network closure or if one can take shortcuts via structural holes, by learning to overcome insider reluctance or cloning homophily.

On the other hand, one must develop more forms of testing if smaller hierarchical structures, such as the flexible SMEs, can be a wildcard to overcome the liability of smallness. As in the psychic distance paradox, being small also allows an SME to adapt faster to the needs of the foreign market, though this is clearly a setback when dealing with foreign business and institutional knowledge.

Either way, except on new markets that are blockchain related, trust and commitment continue to be key to success, though their impact will tend to fade in the future, with the arrival of the era of hyperledgers.

Identifying more mediating variables, such as the export marketing strategy, and moderators, such as firm size, experience, and environment turbulence [23], allows one to be able to better combine or even cautiously try to integrate theoretical views, such as the static RBV with IBV or CT, to better dynamically explain why some SMEs have success and others do not.

More longitudinal studies are also lacking—in higher order relationships among internationalization antecedents and export performance—as well as a strategic fit between ITO and entrepreneur opportunism, the impact of network theory on niche marketing, inter-firm relations, born-“glocal”/regional strategies, and other accelerated internationalization models, and more attention to the service sector is also necessary.

With this research, the authors were able to identify the key variables of SME success (79 determinants, plus 36 expanded and 65 export performance measures, in a total of 180 variables) that will be used (a posteriori, after being crosschecked with the results of semi-structured interviews of SME owners and other experts in internationalization) as inputs in the conceptualization of the mentioned AI-based platform, that will be trained with real world trade transactions data, therefore permitting more scientific, thus more sustainable, foreign entry market decisions.

Limitations

As stated in the introduction, due to the extension of the body of literature versus the length of this document, this study had to focus on SMEs. Determinants that are primarily linked with multinationals (MNCs), but that may still indirectly affect SMEs, were not pinpointed in this study, but should also be analyzed for correlations. Furthermore, because of the newness of some theories, and the new impacts some recent worldwide events have had on traditional theories, and the scarcity of articles focusing on them, a more descriptive approach, rather than reasoning, had to be made. Scholars may benefit from expanding such theories and the comparison between them.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.C.-L., J.V.F. and M.A.-Y.-O.; methodology, N.C.-L., J.V.F. and M.A.-Y.-O.; software, N.C.-L.; validation, J.V.F. and M.A.-Y.-O.; formal analysis, N.C.-L.; investigation, N.C.-L., J.V.F. and M.A.-Y.-O.; resources, N.C.-L., J.V.F. and M.A.-Y.-O.; data curation, N.C.-L.; writing—original draft preparation, N.C.-L., J.V.F. and M.A.-Y.-O.; writing—review and editing, N.C.-L., J.V.F. and M.A.-Y.-O.; visualization, N.C.-L.; supervision, J.V.F. and M.A.-Y.-O.; project administration, J.V.F.; funding acquisition, M.A.-Y.-O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Footnotes

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Figures and Tables

Figure 1. Framework for the SLR (CmapTools 6.04 software) [3,35,36,37,38,39] (authors’ own elaboration).

Figure 2. SLR PRISMA flow—last accessed on 20 January 2023.

Figure 3. Internationalization, number of documents per year, since 1920 (Scopus).

Figure 4. Determinants of exporting, adapted from Werner (2002) [35,36,37,38,64,65] (GitMind software used).

Figure 5. Determinants of exporting, adapted by the authors [37] (GitMind software used).

Figure 6. Determinants of exporting, adapted by the authors [38] (GitMind software used).

Figure 7. Determinants of exporting, adapted by the authors [36,66,67] (GitMind software used).

Figure 8. Scopus ((internationalization OR internationalisation) AND (theory OR model))—authors by normalized citations—last accessed on 20 January 2023.

Figure 9. Scopus ((internationalization OR internationalisation) AND (theory OR model))—co-authorship by authors—last accessed on 20 January 2023.

Figure 10. Scopus ((internationalization OR internationalisation) AND (theory OR model))—network visualization of bibliometric coupling by docs and citations.

Figure 11. Scopus ((internationalization or internationalisation) AND (theory OR model))—citation analysis by organizations.

Figure 12. Scopus ((internationalization OR internationalisation) AND (theory OR model))—sources.

Figure 13. Scopus ((internationalization OR internationalization) AND (theory OR model))—citation analysis by countries—last accessed on 20 January 2023.

Figure 14. Scopus ((internationalization OR internationalisation) AND (theory OR model))—word count via NVivo.

Figure 15. Scopus (determinants of export performance)—Co-occurrence analysis by All Keywords—last accessed on 20 January 2023.

Figure 16. Scopus (“determinants of export performance”)—density visualization of bibliometric coupling by documents—last accessed on 20 January 2023.

Figure 17. Scopus ((internationalization OR internationalisation) AND (theory OR model))—density visualization of co-citation analysis of cited authors—last accessed on 20 January 2023.

Table 1

Scopus (internationalization OR internationalisation).

Author	Articles	Author	Reviews
Saarenketo, S.	44	Alexander, N.	5
Kuivalainen, O.	39	McDougall, P.P.	4
Yemini, M.	35	Oviatt, B.M.	4
Dana, L.P.	34	Anwar, S.T.	3
Vissak, T.	34	Brand, U.	3
Buckley, P.J.	33	Cavusgil, S.T.	3
Crick, D.	32	Chan, G.	3
Johanson, J.	32	Etemad, H.	3
Etemad, H.	31	Finardi, K.R.	3
Alon, I.	30	Kumar, S.	3

Top 10 authors by number of documents (articles vs. reviews)—last accessed on 20 January 2023.

Table 2

Scopus ((internationalization OR internationalisation) AND (theory OR model)).

Authors	Year	Cited by
Oviatt B.M. and McDougall P.P. [44]	2005	1206
Teece D.J. [45]	2014	627
Zahra S.A. [46]	2005	585
Cavusgil, S.T. and Knight G. [47]	2015	497
Delios, A. and Henisz, W.J. [48]	2003	491
Paul, J. & Parthasarathy, S. & Gupta, P. [49]	2017	373
Cazurra, A.C. & Inkpen, A. and Musacchio, A. and Ramaswamy, K. [50]	2014	331
Brannen, M.Y. [51]	2004	331
Autio, E. [52]	2005	317
Nummela, N., Saarenketo, S., Puumalainen, K. [53]	2004	294

Top 10 authors by number of documents (reviews)—last accessed on 20 January 2023.

Table 3

Scopus ((internationalization OR internationalisation) AND (sme AND success)).

Authors	Year	Cited by
Cavusgil S.T. and Knight G. [47]	2015	497
Paul J. & Parthasarathy S. and Gupta P. [49]	2017	373
Nummela N. & Saarenketo S. and Puumalainen K. [53]	2004	294
Wolff J.A. and Pett T.L. [54]	2006	274
Paul J. and Rosado-Serrano A. [28]	2019	243
Etemad H. [55]	2004	201
Bausch A. and Krist M. [56]	2007	197
Kocak A. and Abimbola T. [57]	2009	125
Luostarinen R. and Gabrielsson M. [58]	2006	105
Reuber, A.R. and Knight, G.A. and Liesch, P.W. and Zhou, L. [10]	2018	104

Top 10 authors, by citations (reviews)—last accessed on 20 January 2023.

Table 4

Scopus (“determinants of export performance”).

Authors	Year	Cited by
Chen, J. and Sousa, C.M.P. and He, X. [23]	2016	164
Brouthers, L.E. and Nakos, G. [59]	2005	164
Valos, M. and Baker, M. [60]	1996	13
Mysen, T. [61]	2013	12
Vaubourg, A.-G. [31]	2016	9
Din, M.U.D. and Ghani, E. and Mahmood, T. [62]	2009	4
Love J. [63]	1982	3

Top 10 Authors, by citations (reviews)—last accessed on 20 January 2023.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su15118473/s1, File S1. Prisma 2020 + Abstract Checklist.

References

1. Donthu, N.; Kumar, S.; Mukherjee, D.; Pandey, N.; Lim, W.M. How to Conduct a Bibliometric Analysis: An Overview and Guidelines. J. Bus. Res.; 2021; 133, pp. 285-296. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070]

2. Fahimnia, B.; Sarkis, J.; Davarzani, H. Green Supply Chain Management: A Review and Bibliometric Analysis. Int. J. Prod. Econ.; 2015; 162, pp. 101-114. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.01.003]

3. Alayo, M.; Iturralde, T.; Maseda, A.; Aparicio, G. Mapping Family Firm Internationalization Research: Bibliometric and Literature Review. Rev. Manag. Sci.; 2021; 15, pp. 1517-1560. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11846-020-00404-1]

4. Nayyar, R. Advancing Research on the Determinants of Indian MNEs: The Role of Sub-National Institutions. Int. J. Emerg. Mark.; 2018; 13, pp. 536-556. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJoEM-11-2016-0304]

5. Dyer, J.H.; Chu, W. The Determinants of Trust in Supplier-Automaker Relationships in the US, Japan, and Korea. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2000; 31, pp. 259-285. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490905]

6. Lee, T.; Caves, R.E. Uncertain Outcomes of Foreign Investment: Determinants of the Dispersion of Profits after Large Acquisitions. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1998; 29, pp. 563-582. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490007]

7. Gomez-Mejia, L.R.; Balkin, D.B. Determinants of Faculty Pay: An Agency Theory Perspective. Acad. Manag. J.; 1992; 35, pp. 921-955. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256535]

8. Cuypers, I.R.P.; Patel, C.; Ertug, G.; Li, J.; Cuypers, Y. Top Management Teams in International Business Research: A Review and Suggestions for Future Research. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2021; 53, pp. 481-515. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41267-021-00456-9]

9. Hennart, J.-F.; Majocchi, A.; Forlani, E. The Myth of the Stay-at-Home Family Firm: How Family-Managed SMEs Can Overcome Their Internationalization Limitations. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2019; 50, pp. 758-782. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41267-017-0091-y]

10. Reuber, A.R.; Knight, G.A.; Liesch, P.W.; Zhou, L. International Entrepreneurship: The Pursuit of Entrepreneurial Opportunities across National Borders. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2018; 49, pp. 395-406. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41267-018-0149-5]

11. Zucchella, A.; Strange, R.N.; Mascherpa, S. Which Organisational Capabilities Matter for SME Export Performance?. Eur. J. Int. Manag.; 2019; 13, pp. 454-478. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1504/EJIM.2019.10018432]

12. Sousa, C.M.P.; Martínez-López, F.J.; Coelho, F. The Determinants of Export Performance: A Review of the Research in the Literature between 1998 and 2005. Int. J. Manag. Rev.; 2008; 10, pp. 343-374. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2008.00232.x]

13. Pla-Barber, J.; Alegre, J. Analysing the Link between Export Intensity, Innovation and Firm Size in a Science-Based Industry. Int. Bus. Rev.; 2007; 16, pp. 275-293. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2007.02.005]

14. Majocchi, A.; Bacchiocchi, E.; Mayrhofer, U. Firm Size, Business Experience and Export Intensity in SMEs: A Longitudinal Approach to Complex Relationships. Int. Bus. Rev.; 2005; 14, pp. 719-738. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2005.07.004]

15. Leonidou, L.C.; Katsikeas, C.S.; Samiee, S. Marketing Strategy Determinants of Export Performance: A Meta-Analysis. J. Bus. Res.; 2002; 55, pp. 51-67. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00133-8]

16. Katsikeas, C.S.; Leonidou, L.C.; Morgan, N.A. Firm-Level Export Performance Assessment: Review, Evaluation, and Development. J. Acad. Mark. Sci.; 2000; 28, pp. 493-511. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0092070300284003]

17. Hundley, G.; Jacobson, C.K. The Effects of the Keiretsu on the Export Performance of Japanese Companies: Help or Hindrance?. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1998; 19, pp. 927-937. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199810)19:10<927::AID-SMJ989>3.0.CO;2-1]

18. Buckner, E.; Stein, S. What Counts as Internationalization? Deconstructing the Internationalization Imperative. J. Stud. Int. Educ.; 2020; 24, pp. 151-166. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1028315319829878]

19. Hatzigeorgiou, A.; Lodefalk, M. A Literature Review of the Nexus between Migration and Internationalization. J. Int. Trade Econ. Dev.; 2021; 30, pp. 319-340. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09638199.2021.1878257]

20. van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. VOSviewer: A Computer Program for Bibliometric Mapping. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 14–17 July 2009; pp. 886-897.

21. Auerbach, C.; Silverstein, L.B. Qualitative Data: An Introduction to Coding and Analysis. Qualitative Data: An Introduction to Coding and Analysis; NYU Press: New York, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 1-202.

22. Richards, L. Data Alive! The Thinking behind NVivo. Qual. Health Res.; 1999; 9, pp. 412-428. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104973239900900310]

23. Chen, J.; Sousa, C.M.P.; He, X. The Determinants of Export Performance: A Review of the Literature 2006–2014. Int. Mark. Rev.; 2016; 33, pp. 626-670. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IMR-10-2015-0212]

24. Mukherjee, D.; Kumar, S.; Donthu, N.; Pandey, N. Research Published in Management International Review from 2006 to 2020: A Bibliometric Analysis and Future Directions. Manag. Int. Rev.; 2021; 61, pp. 599-642. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11575-021-00454-x] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34658534]

25. Srivastava, S.; Singh, S.; Dhir, S. Culture and International Business Research: A Review and Research Agenda. Int. Bus. Rev.; 2020; 29, 101709. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2020.101709]

26. Chandra, A.; Paul, J.; Chavan, M. Internationalization Barriers of SMEs from Developing Countries: A Review and Research Agenda. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res.; 2020; 26, pp. 1281-1310. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-03-2020-0167]

27. Lee, Y.Y.; Falahat, M. The Impact of Digitalization and Resources on Gaining Competitive Advantage in International Markets: Themediating Role Ofmarketing, Innovation and Learning Capabilities. Technol. Innov. Manag. Rev.; 2019; 9, pp. 26-38. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1281]

28. Paul, J.; Rosado-Serrano, A. Gradual Internationalization vs. Born-Global/International New Venture Models: A Review and Research Agenda. Int. Mark. Rev.; 2019; 36, pp. 830-858. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IMR-10-2018-0280]

29. Jafari Sadeghi, V.; Biancone, P.P. How Micro, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises Are Driven Outward the Superior International Trade Performance? A Multidimensional Study on Italian Food Sector. Res. Int. Bus. Finance; 2018; 45, pp. 597-606. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2017.07.136]

30. Chabowski, B.; Kekec, P.; Morgan, N.A.; Hult, G.T.M.; Walkowiak, T.; Runnalls, B. An Assessment of the Exporting Literature: Using Theory and Data to Identify Future Research Directions. J. Int. Mark.; 2018; 26, pp. 118-143. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jim.16.0129]

31. Vaubourg, A.-G. Finance and International Trade: A Review of the Literature. Rev. Econ. Polit.; 2016; 126, pp. 57-87. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3917/redp.261.0057]

32. Ribau, C.P.; Moreira, A.C.; Raposo, M. SME Internationalization Research: Mapping the State of the Art: SME Internationalization Research: Mapping the State of the Art. Can. J. Adm. Sci. Rev. Can. Sci. Adm.; 2018; 35, pp. 280-303. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cjas.1419]

33. Ribau, C.P.; Moreira, A.C.; Raposo, M. SMEs Innovation Capabilities and Export Performance: An Entrepreneurial Orientation View. J. Bus. Econ. Manag.; 2017; 18, pp. 920-934. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2017.1352534]

34. Hering, L.; Poncet, S. Environmental Policy and Exports: Evidence from Chinese Cities. J. Environ. Econ. Manag.; 2014; 68, pp. 296-318. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2014.06.005]

35. Werner, S. Recent Developments in International Management Research: A Review of 20 Top Management Journals. J. Manag.; 2002; 28, pp. 277-305. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920630202800303]

36. Cadogan, J.W.; Diamantopoulos, A.; De Mortanges, C.P. A Measurement of Export Market Orientation: Scale Development and Cross-Cultural Validation. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1999; 30, pp. 689-707. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490834]

37. Andersson, T.; Fredriksson, T. International Organization of Production and Variation in Exportation from Affiliates. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1996; 27, pp. 249-263. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490134]

38. Campa, J.M.; Guilléen, M.F. The Internationalization of Exports: Firm- and Location-Specific Factors in a Middle-Income Country. Manag. Sci.; 1999; 45, pp. 1463-1478. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.45.11.1463]

39. Hendry, C. Continuities in Human Resource Processes in Internationalization and Domestic Business Management. J. Manag. Stud.; 1996; 33, pp. 475-494. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1996.tb00165.x]

40. Harzing, A.-W.; Alakangas, S. Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A Longitudinal and Cross-Disciplinary Comparison. Scientometrics; 2016; 106, pp. 787-804. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9]

41. Adriaanse, L.S.; Rensleigh, C. Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar a Content Comprehensiveness Comparison. Electron. Libr.; 2013; 31, pp. 727-744. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EL-12-2011-0174]

42. Martín-Martín, A.; Orduna-Malea, E.; Thelwall, M.; Delgado López-Cózar, E. Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A Systematic Comparison of Citations in 252 Subject Categories. J. Informetr.; 2018; 12, pp. 1160-1177. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002]

43. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E. et al. The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. BMJ; 2021; 372, n71. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33782057]

44. Oviatt, B.M.; McDougall, P.P. Defining International Entrepreneurship and Modeling the Speed of Internationalization; Blackwell Publishing Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2005; Volume 29.

45. Teece, D.J. A Dynamic Capabilities-Based Entrepreneurial Theory of the Multinational Enterprise. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2014; 45, pp. 8-37. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2013.54]

46. Zahra, S.A. A Theory of International New Ventures: A Decade of Research. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2005; 36, pp. 20-28. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400118]

47. Cavusgil, S.T.; Knight, G. The Born Global Firm: An Entrepreneurial and Capabilities Perspective on Early and Rapid Internationalization. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2015; 46, pp. 3-16. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2014.62]

48. Delios, A.; Henisz, W.J. Political Hazards, Experience, and Sequential Entry Strategies: The International Expansion of Japanese Firms, 1980–1998. Strateg. Manag. J.; 2003; 24, pp. 1153-1164. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.355]

49. Paul, J.; Parthasarathy, S.; Gupta, P. Exporting Challenges of SMEs: A Review and Future Research Agenda. J. World Bus.; 2017; 52, pp. 327-342. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2017.01.003]

50. Cazurra, A.C.; Inkpen, A.; Musacchio, A.; Ramaswamy, K. Governments as Owners: State-Owned Multinational Companies. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2014; 45, pp. 919-942. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2014.43]

51. Brannen, M.Y. When Mickey Loses Face: Recontextualization, Semantic Fit, and the Semiotics of Foreignness. Acad. Manag. Rev.; 2004; 29, pp. 593-616. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/20159073]

52. Autio, E. Creative Tension: The Significance of Ben Oviatt’s and Patricia McDougall’s Article “Toward a Theory of International New Ventures”. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2005; 36, pp. 9-19. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400117]

53. Nummela, N.; Saarenketo, S.; Puumalainen, K. A Global Mindset—A Prerequisite for Successful Internationalization?. Can. J. Adm. Sci.; 2004; 21, pp. 51-64. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1936-4490.2004.tb00322.x]

54. Wolff, J.A.; Pett, T.L. Small-Firm Performance: Modeling the Role of Product and Process Improvements. J. Small Bus. Manag.; 2006; 44, pp. 268-284. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2006.00167.x]

55. Etemad, H. Internationalization of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: A Grounded Theoretical Framework and an Overview. Can. J. Adm. Sci.; 2004; 21, pp. 1-21. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1936-4490.2004.tb00319.x]

56. Bausch, A.; Krist, M. The Effect of Context-Related Moderators on the Internationalization-Performance Relationship: Evidence from Meta-Analysis. Manag. Int. Rev.; 2007; 47, pp. 319-347. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11575-007-0019-z]

57. Kocak, A.; Abimbola, T. The Effects of Entrepreneurial Marketing on Born Global Performance. Int. Mark. Rev.; 2009; 26, pp. 439-452. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02651330910971977]

58. Luostarinen, R.; Gabrielsson, M. Globalization and Marketing Strategies of Born Globals in SMOPECs. Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev.; 2006; 48, pp. 773-801. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tie.20122]

59. Brouthers, L.E.; Nakos, G. The Role of Systematic International Market Selection on Small Firms’ Export Performance. J. Small Bus. Manag.; 2005; 43, pp. 363-381. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2005.00142.x]

60. Valos, M.; Baker, M. Developing an Australian Model of Export Marketing Performance Determinants. Mark. Intell. Plan.; 1996; 14, pp. 11-20. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02634509610117311]

61. Mysen, T. Towards a Framework for Controls as Determinants of Export Performance: A Review and Analysis of Empirical Literature 1995–2011. Eur. Bus. Rev.; 2013; 25, pp. 224-242. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09555341311314807]

62. Din, M.U.D.; Ghani, E.; Mahmood, T. Determinants of Export Performance of Pakistan: Evidence from the Firm-Level Data. Pak. Dev. Rev.; 2009; 48, pp. 227-240. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.30541/v48i3pp.227-240]

63. Love, J. The Determinants of Export Performance of Developing Countries. J. Econ. Stud.; 1982; 9, pp. 55-60. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb002546]

64. Ellis, P.D. Social Ties and Foreign Market Entry. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2000; 31, pp. 443-469. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490916]

65. Leonidou, L.C.; Katsikeas, C.S. The Export Development Process: An Integrative Review of Empirical Models. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1996; 27, pp. 517-551. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490846]

66. Jaworski, B.J.; Kohli, A.K. Market Orientation: Antecedents and Consequences. J. Mark.; 1993; 57, pp. 53-70. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002224299305700304]

67. Narver, J.C.; Slater, S.F. Market Orientation and Customer Service: The Implications For Business Performance. E—European Advances in Consumer Research; Van Raaij, W.F.; Bamossy, G.J. Association for Consumer Research: Provo, UT, USA, 1993; Volume 1, pp. 317-321.

68. Martinko, M.J.; Mackey, J.D. Attribution Theory: An Introduction to the Special Issue. J. Organ. Behav.; 2019; 40, pp. 523-527. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.2397]

69. Heider, F. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations; Lawrence Earlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1958.

70. Harvey, P.; Madison, K.; Martinko, M.; Crook, T.; Crook, T. Attribution Theory in the Organizational Sciences: The Road Traveled and the Path Ahead. Acad. Manag. Perspect.; 2014; 28, pp. 128-146. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0175]

71. Saleh, M.I. Attribution Theory Revisited: Probing the Link Among Locus of Causality Theory, Destination Social Responsibility, Tourism Experience Types, and Tourist Behavior. J. Travel Res.; 2022; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00472875221119968]

72. Cort, K.T.; Griffith, D.A.; Steven White, D. An Attribution Theory Approach for Understanding the Internationalization of Professional Service Firms. Int. Mark. Rev.; 2007; 24, pp. 9-25. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02651330710727169]

73. Lubatkin, M.; Lane, P.J.; Collin, S.; Very, P. An Embeddedness Framing of Governance and Opportunism: Towards a Cross-Nationally Accommodating Theory of Agency. J. Organ. Behav.; 2007; 28, pp. 43-58. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.402]

74. Doherty, A.M. Explaining International Retailers’ Market Entry Mode Strategy: Internalization Theory, Agency Theory and the Importance of Information Asymmetry. Int. Rev. Retail Distrib. Consum. Res.; 1999; 9, pp. 379-402. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/095939699342480]

75. Zahra, S.A. An Embeddedness Framing of Governance and Opportunism: Towards a Cross-Nationally Accommodating Theory of Agency—Critique and Extension. J. Organ. Behav.; 2007; 28, pp. 69-73. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.404]

76. Roth, K.; O’Donnell, S.W. Foreign Subsidiary Compensation Strategy: An Agency Theory Perspective. Acad. Manag. J.; 1996; 39, pp. 678-703. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256659]

77. Einhorn, H.J.; Hogarth, R.M. Behavioral Decision Theory: Processes of Judgement and Choice. Annu. Rev. Psychol.; 1981; 32, pp. 53-88. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.000413]

78. Slovic, P.; Fischhoff, B.; Lichtenstein, S. Behavioral Decision Theory. Annu. Rev. Psychol.; 1977; 28, pp. 1-39. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.28.020177.000245]

79. Clarke, J.E.; Liesch, P.W. Wait-and-See Strategy: Risk Management in the Internationalization Process Model. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2017; 48, pp. 923-940. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41267-017-0110-z]

80. Belhadi, A.; Kamble, S.S.; Mani, V.; Venkatesh, V.G.; Shi, Y. Behavioral Mechanisms Influencing Sustainable Supply Chain Governance Decision-Making from a Dyadic Buyer-Supplier Perspective. Int. J. Prod. Econ.; 2021; 236, 108136. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108136]

81. Davis-Sramek, B.; Thomas, R.W.; Fugate, B.S. Integrating Behavioral Decision Theory and Sustainable Supply Chain Management: Prioritizing Economic, Environmental, and Social Dimensions in Carrier Selection. J. Bus. Logist.; 2018; 39, pp. 87-100. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12181]

82. Kumar, S.; Sahoo, S.; Lim, W.M.; Kraus, S.; Bamel, U. Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (FsQCA) in Business and Management Research: A Contemporary Overview. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.; 2022; 178, 121599. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121599]

83. Wu, P.-L.; Yeh, S.-S.; Huan, T.C.; Woodside, A.G. Applying Complexity Theory to Deepen Service Dominant Logic: Configural Analysis of Customer Experience-and-Outcome Assessments of Professional Services for Personal Transformations. J. Bus. Res.; 2014; 67, pp. 1647-1670. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.03.012]

84. Rosenhead, J.; Franco, L.A.; Grint, K.; Friedland, B. Complexity Theory and Leadership Practice: A Review, a Critique, and Some Recommendations. Leadersh. Q.; 2019; 30, 101304. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.07.002]

85. Pina Cunha, M.; Vieira Cunha, J. Towards a Complexity Theory of Strategy. Manag. Decis.; 2006; 44, pp. 839-850. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00251740610680550]

86. Lindsay, V.J. The Development of International Industry Clusters: A Complexity Theory Approach. J. Int. Entrep.; 2005; 3, pp. 71-97. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10843-005-0307-2]

87. Turner, J.R.; Baker, R.M. Review Complexity Theory: An Overview with Potential Applications for the Social Sciences. Systems; 2019; 7, 4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/systems7010004]

88. Brenes, E.R.; Ciravegna, L.; Woodside, A.G. Taking the Complexity Turn in Strategic Management Theory and Research. The Complexity Turn: Cultural, Management, and Marketing Applications; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 21-66. ISBN 9783319470283

89. Overall, J. All around the Mulberry Bush: A Theory of Cyclical Unethical Behaviour. Int. J. Bus. Glob.; 2018; 20, pp. 251-267. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJBG.2018.089870]

90. Reed, D. Stakeholder Management Theory: A Critical Theory Perspective. Bus. Ethics Q.; 1999; 9, 453. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3857512]

91. Reed, D. Employing Normative Stakeholder Theory in Developing Countries: A Critical Theory Perspective. Bus. Soc.; 2002; 41, pp. 166-207. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0007650302041002003]

92. Ng, S.W. Rethinking the Mission of Internationalization of Higher Education in the Asia-Pacific Region. Compare; 2012; 42, pp. 439-459. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2011.652815]

93. Kratochwil, F. Looking Back from Somewhere: Reflections on What Remains ‘Critical’ in Critical Theory. Rev. Int. Stud.; 2007; 33, pp. 25-45. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0260210507007383]

94. Almeida, A.T.; Bohoris, G. Decision Theory in Maintenance Decision Making. J. Qual. Maint. Eng.; 1995; 1, pp. 39-45. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552519510083138]

95. Alexander, A.; Walker, H.; Naim, M. Decision Theory in Sustainable Supply Chain Management: A Literature Review. Supply Chain Manag.; 2014; 19, pp. 504-522. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/SCM-01-2014-0007]

96. Alexander, A.; Kumar, M.; Walker, H. A Decision Theory Perspective on Complexity in Performance Measurement and Management. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag.; 2018; 38, pp. 2214-2244. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-10-2016-0632]

97. Snowden, D.J.; Boone, M.E. A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making. Harv. Bus. Rev.; 2007; 85, pp. 68-76. [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18159787]

98. Nemkova, E.; Souchon, A.L.; Hughes, P.; Micevski, M. Does Improvisation Help or Hinder Planning in Determining Export Success? Decision Theory Applied to Exporting. J. Int. Mark.; 2015; 23, pp. 41-65. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jim.14.0071]

99. Frank, E.O. An Assessment of the Conceptual Linkages between the Qualitative Characteristics of Useful Financial Information and Ethical Behavior within Informal Institutions. Econ. Horiz.; 2020; 22, pp. 137-148. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5937/ekonhor2002145F]

100. Ault, J.; Newenham-Kahindi, A.; Patnaik, S. Trevino and Doh’s Discourse-Based View: Do We Need a New Theory of Internationalization?. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2021; 52, pp. 1394-1406. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41267-021-00431-4]

101. Treviño, L.J.; Doh, J.P. Internationalization of the Firm: A Discourse-Based View. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2021; 52, pp. 1375-1393. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41267-020-00344-8]

102. Hart, T.A.; David, P.; Shao, F.; Fox, C.J.; Westermann-Behaylo, M. An Examination of the Impact of Executive Compensation Disparity on Corporate Social Performance. Strateg. Organ.; 2015; 13, pp. 200-223. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1476127015585103]

103. Saleh, M.A.; Ali, M.Y.; Quazi, A.; Wickramasekera, R. A Critical Appraisal of the Relational Management Paradigm in an International Setting: A Future Research Agenda. Manag. Decis.; 2015; 53, pp. 268-289. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MD-02-2014-0097]

104. Wang, L.; Jiang, W. How CEO Underpayment Influences Strategic Change: The Equity Perspective. Manag. Decis.; 2017; 55, pp. 2277-2292. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2017-0240]

105. Geels, F.W. Technological Transitions as Evolutionary Reconfiguration Processes: A Multi-Level Perspective and a Case-Study. Res. Policy; 2002; 31, pp. 1257-1274. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00062-8]

106. Mees-Buss, J.; Welch, C.; Westney, D.E. What Happened to the Transnational? The Emergence of the Neo-Global Corporation. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2019; 50, pp. 1513-1543. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41267-019-00253-5]

107. Santangelo, G.D.; Meyer, K.E. Internationalization as an Evolutionary Process. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2017; 48, pp. 1114-1130. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41267-017-0119-3]

108. Santangelo, G.D.; Stucchi, T. Internationalization through Exaptation: The Role of Domestic Geographical Dispersion in the Internationalization Process. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2018; 49, pp. 753-760. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41267-018-0151-y]

109. Oparaocha, G.O. Towards Building Internal Social Network Architecture That Drives Innovation: A Social Exchange Theory Perspective. J. Knowl. Manag.; 2016; 20, pp. 534-556. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JKM-06-2015-0212]

110. Pizanti, I.; Lerner, M. Examining Control and Autonomy in the Franchisor-Franchisee Relationship. Int. Small Bus. J.; 2003; 21, pp. 131-159. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0266242603021002001]

111. Zhou, K.Z.; Xu, D. How Foreign Firms Curtail Local Supplier Opportunism in China: Detailed Contracts, Centralized Control, and Relational Governance. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2012; 43, pp. 677-692. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2012.7]

112. Das, M.; Saha, V.; Jebarajakirthy, C.; Kalai, A.; Debnath, N. Cultural Consequences of Brands’ Masstige: An Emerging Market Perspective. J. Bus. Res.; 2022; 146, pp. 338-353. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.081]

113. Das, M.; Saha, V.; Roy, A. Inspired and Engaged: Decoding MASSTIGE Value in Engagement. Int. J. Consum. Stud.; 2022; 46, pp. 781-802. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12726]

114. Kumar, A.; Paul, J. Mass Prestige Value and Competition between American versus Asian Laptop Brands in an Emerging Market—Theory and Evidence. Int. Bus. Rev.; 2018; 27, pp. 969-981. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2018.02.007]

115. Paul, J. Masstige Marketing Redefined and Mapped: Introducing a Pyramid Model and MMS Measure. Mark. Intell. Plan.; 2015; 33, pp. 691-706. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MIP-02-2014-0028]

116. Paul, J. Toward a “masstige” Theory and Strategy for Marketing. Eur. J. Int. Manag.; 2018; 12, pp. 722-745. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1504/EJIM.2018.094466]

117. Jung, J.C.; Bansal, P. How Firm Performance Affects Internationalization. Manag. Int. Rev.; 2009; 49, pp. 709-732. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11575-009-0014-7]

118. Krause, R.; Whitler, K.A.; Semadeni, M. Power to the Principals! An Experimental Look at Shareholder Say-on-Pay Voting. Acad. Manag. J.; 2014; 57, pp. 94-115. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0035]

119. Li, H.; Yi, X.; Cui, G. Emerging Market Firms’ Internationalization: How Do Firms’ Inward Activities Affect Their Outward Activities?. Strateg. Manag. J.; 2017; 38, pp. 2704-2725. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.2679]

120. Matta, E.; Beamish, P.W. The Accentuated CEO Career Horizon Problem: Evidence from International Acquisitions. Strateg. Manag. J.; 2008; 29, pp. 683-700. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.680]

121. Paul, J.; Rosenbaum, M. Retailing and Consumer Services at a Tipping Point: New Conceptual Frameworks and Theoretical Models. J. Retail. Consum. Serv.; 2020; 54, 101977. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101977]

122. Saebi, T.; Lien, L.; Foss, N.J. What Drives Business Model Adaptation? The Impact of Opportunities, Threats and Strategic Orientation. Long Range Plann.; 2017; 50, pp. 567-581. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2016.06.006]

123. Schmuck, A.; Lagerström, K.; Sallis, J. Turning the Tables: The Relationship Between Performance and Multinationality. Manag. Int. Rev.; 2022; 62, pp. 3-26. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11575-022-00464-3]

124. Senyo, P.K.; Osabutey, E.L.C. Unearthing Antecedents to Financial Inclusion through FinTech Innovations. Technovation; 2020; 98, 102155. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102155]

125. Davis, F.D. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Q.; 1989; 13, pp. 319-340. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/249008]

126. Jayasingh, S.; Eze, U.C. An Empirical Analysis of Consumer Behavioural Intention Towards Mobile Coupons in Malaysia. Int. J. Bus. Inf.; 2009; 4, 2.

127. Porter, C.E.; Donthu, N. Using the Technology Acceptance Model to Explain How Attitudes Determine Internet Usage: The Role of Perceived Access Barriers and Demographics. J. Bus. Res.; 2006; 59, pp. 999-1007. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.06.003]

128. Mehra, A.; Paul, J.; Kaurav, R.P.S. Determinants of Mobile Apps Adoption among Young Adults: Theoretical Extension and Analysis. J. Mark. Commun.; 2021; 27, pp. 481-509. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2020.1725780]

129. Venkatesh, V.; Davis, F.D. A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Manag. Sci.; 2000; 46, pp. 186-204. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926]

130. Höflich, J.R.; Rössler, P. Mobile Written Communication Or: E-mail for the Mobile. The Importance of Electronic Short Messages (Short Message Service) Using the Example of Young Mobile Phone Users. M K Media Commun. Sci.; 2001; 49, pp. 437-461.

131. Fourati-Jamoussi, F.; Niamba, C.-N.; Duquennoy, J. An Evaluation of Competitive and Technological Intelligence Tools: A Cluster Analysis of Users’ Perceptions. J. Intell. Stud. Bus.; 2018; 8, pp. 5-15. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.37380/jisib.v8i1.301]

132. Oh, K.-Y.; Cruickshank, D.; Anderson, A.R. The Adoption of E-Trade Innovations by Korean Small and Medium Sized Firms. Technovation; 2009; 29, pp. 110-121. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2008.08.001]

133. Paul, J. SCOPE Framework for SMEs: A New Theoretical Lens for Success and Internationalization. Eur. Manag. J.; 2020; 38, pp. 219-230. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2020.02.001]

134. Avioutskii, V.; Tensaout, M. Comparative Analysis of FDI by Indian and Chinese MNEs in Europe. Eur. Bus. Rev.; 2020; 32, pp. 893-907. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EBR-09-2019-0202]

135. Chen, M.; Ni, P.; Reve, T.; Huang, J.; Lu, R. Sales Growth or Employment Growth? Exporting Conundrum for New Ventures. Rev. Int. Bus. Strategy; 2020; 31, pp. 482-506. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/RIBS-04-2020-0048]

136. Paul, J.; Sánchez-Morcilio, R. Toward A New Model For Firm Internationalization: Conservative, Predictable, and Pacemaker Companies and Markets. Can. J. Adm. Sci.; 2019; 36, pp. 336-349. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cjas.1512]

137. Andersson, S.; Evers, N. International Opportunity Recognition in International New Ventures—A Dynamic Managerial Capabilities Perspective. J. Int. Entrep.; 2015; 13, pp. 260-276. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10843-015-0149-5]

138. Bocconcelli, R.; Cioppi, M.; Fortezza, F.; Francioni, B.; Pagano, A.; Savelli, E.; Splendiani, S. SMEs and Marketing: A Systematic Literature Review. Int. J. Manag. Rev.; 2018; 20, pp. 227-254. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12128]

139. Chi, T.; Seth, A. A Dynamic Model of the Choice of Mode for Exploiting Complementary Capabilities. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2009; 40, pp. 365-387. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2008.65]

140. Evers, N. International New Ventures in “Low Tech” Sectors: A Dynamic Capabilities Perspective. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev.; 2011; 18, pp. 502-528. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14626001111155682]

141. Liu, H.; Jiang, X.; Zhang, J.; Zhao, X. Strategic Flexibility and International Venturing by Emerging Market Firms: The Moderating Effects of Institutional and Relational Factors. J. Int. Mark.; 2013; 21, pp. 79-98. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jim.12.0047]

142. Susman, G.I. Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises and the Global Economy. Young Al; 2007; 281. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4337/9781847204431]

143. Calof, J.L.; Beamish, P.W. Adapting to Foreign Markets: Explaining Internationalization. Int. Bus. Rev.; 1995; 4, pp. 115-131. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0969-5931(95)00001-G]

144. Smith, A. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations; Alex Catalogue: Raleigh, NC, USA, 1776.

145. Ingham, B. International Economics: A European Focus; Pearson Education: Boston, MA, USA, 2004; ISBN 0-273-65507-8

146. Hunt, E.K. History of Economic Thought: A Critical Perspective; M.E. Sharpe: Armonk, NY, USA, 2002; ISBN 0-7656-0607-0

147. Isard, W. Location Theory and Trade Theory: Short-Run Analysis. Q. J. Econ.; 1954; 68, pp. 305-320. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1884452]

148. Jones, R. Specific Factors and Heckscher–Ohlin: An Intertemporal Blend. Singap. Econ. Rev.; 2007; 52, pp. 1-6. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S021759080700252X]

149. Blaug, M. The Methodology of Economics, or, How Economists Explain; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1992; ISBN 0-521-43678-8

150. Heckscher, E. The Effect of Foreign Trade on the Distribution of Income. Ekon. Tidskriff; 1919; 21, pp. 497-512.

151. Leontief, W. Domestic production and foreign trade; the American capital position re-examined. Econ. Internazionale; 1954; 7, pp. 3-32.

152. Linder, S. An Essay on Trade and Transformation; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1961.

153. Dicken, P.; Lloyd, P.E. Location in Space: Theoretical Perspectives in Economic Geography; Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, CA, USA, 1990.

154. Berry, B.J.; Neils, E. Location, Size and Shape of Cities as Influenced by Environmental Factors: The Urban Environment Writ Large; Routledge: London, UK, 1967.

155. Isard, W. Location and Space-Economy; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1956.

156. Sharma, V.M.; Erramilli, M.K. Resource-Based Explanation of Entry Mode Choice. J. Mark. Theory Pract.; 2004; 12, pp. 1-18. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2004.11658509]

157. Caves, R.E. Research on International Business: Problems and Prospects. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1998; 29, pp. 5-19. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490022]

158. Dunning, J.H.; Rugman, A.M. The Influence of Hymer’s Dissertation on the Theory of Foreign Direct Investment. Am. Econ. Rev.; 1985; 75, pp. 228-232.

159. Caves, R.E. International Corporations: The Industrial Economics of Foreign Investment. Economica; 1971; 38, pp. 1-27. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2551748]

160. Kindleberger, C.P. American Business Abroad: Six Lectures on Direct Investment; Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, USA, 1969.

161. Hymer, S.H. The International Operations of National Firms, a Study of Direct Foreign Investment. Ph.D. Thesis; Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1960.

162. Krugman, P.; Wells, R. Economics; Worth Publishers: New York, NY, USA, 2006.

163. Krugman, P.R. The Narrow and Broad Arguments for Free Trade. Am. Econ. Rev.; 1993; 83, pp. 362-366.

164. Dixit, A.; Norman, V. Theory of International Trade: A Dual, General Equilibrium Approach; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1980.

165. Porter, M. Competitive Strategy Techniques for Analyzing Industries And Competitors; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1980.

166. Vlados, C. Porter’s Diamond Approaches and the Competitiveness Web. Int. J. Bus. Adm.; 2019; 10, pp. 33-52. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5430/ijba.v10n5p33]

167. Coase, R.H. The Nature of the Firm. Economica; 1937; 4, pp. 386-405. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0335.1937.tb00002.x]

168. Williamson, O.E. The Transaction Cost Economics Project: Origins, Evolution, Utilization. The Elgar Companion to Ronald H. Coase; Menard, C.; Bertrand, E. Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, UK, 2016; pp. 34-42.

169. Dunning, J.H. The Eclectic (OLI) Paradigm of International Production: Past, Present and Future. Int. J. Econ. Bus.; 2001; 8, pp. 173-190. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13571510110051441]

170. Eden, L.; Dai, L. Rethinking the O in Dunning’s OLI/Eclectic Paradigm. Multinatl. Bus. Rev.; 2010; 18, pp. 13-34. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/1525383X201000008]

171. Coviello, N.E.; McAuley, A. Internationalisation and the Smaller Firm: A Review of Contemporary Empirical Research. MIR Manag. Int. Rev.; 1999; 39, pp. 223-256.

172. Stremtan, F.; Mihalache, S.-S.; Pioras, V. On the Internationalization of the Firms-from Theory to Practice. Ann. Univ. Apulensis Ser. Oeconomica; 2009; 11, 1025.

173. Melin, L. Internationalization as a Strategy Process. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1992; 13, pp. 99-118. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250130908]

174. Dean, J. Pricing Policies for New Products. Harv. Bus. Rev.; 1950; 28, pp. 45-53.

175. Levitt, T. Exploit the Product Life Cycle; Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1965; Volume 43.

176. Patton, A. Stretch Your Product’s Earning Years: Top Management’s Stake in the Product Life Cycle. Manag. Rev.; 1959; 48, pp. 9-14.

177. Forrester, J. Industrial Dynamics: A Major Breakthrough for Decision Makers. Harv. Bus. Rev.; 1958; 36, pp. 37-66.

178. Polli, R.; Cook, V. Validity of the Product Life Cycle. J. Bus.; 1969; 42, pp. 385-400. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/295215]

179. Cox, W.E. Product Life Cycles as Marketing Models. J. Bus.; 1967; 40, pp. 375-384. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/295003]

180. Vernon, R. International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle. Q. J. Econ.; 1966; 80, pp. 190-207. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1880689]

181. Johanson, J.; Vahlne, J.-E. The Internationalization Process of the Firm: A Model of Knowledge Development and Increasing Foreign Market Commitments. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1977; 8, pp. 23-32. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490676]

182. Johanson, J.; Vahlne, J.-E. The Mechanism of Internationalisation. Int. Mark. Rev.; 1990; 7, [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02651339010137414]

183. Collinson, S.; Houlden, J. Decision-Making and Market Orientation in the Internationalization Process of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. Manag. Int. Rev.; 2005; 45, pp. 413-436.

184. Ruzzier, M.; Antoncic, B.; Hisrich, R.D.; Konecnik, M. Human Capital and SME Internationalization: A Structural Equation Modeling Study. Can. J. Adm. Sci.; 2007; 24, pp. 15-29. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cjas.3]

185. Bose, T.K. Critical Success Factors of SME Internationalization. J. Small Bus. Strategy; 2016; 26, pp. 87-109.

186. Belso-Martínez, J.A. Why Are Some Spanish Manufacturing Firms Internationalizing Rapidly? The Role of Business and Institutional International Networks. Entrep. Reg. Dev.; 2006; 18, pp. 207-226. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08985620600565409]

187. Johanson, J.; Vahlne, J.-E. Commitment and Opportunity Development in the Internationalization Process: A Note on the Uppsala Internationalization Process Model. Manag. Int. Rev.; 2006; 46, pp. 165-178. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11575-006-0043-4]

188. Johanson, J.; Vahlne, J.E. The Uppsala Internationalization Process Model Revisited: From Liability of Foreignness to Liability of Outsidership. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2009; 40, pp. 1411-1431. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.24]

189. Dhanaraj, C.; Beamish, P.W. A Resource-Based Approach to the Study of Export Performance. J. Small Bus. Manag.; 2003; 41, pp. 242-261. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-627X.00080]

190. Bilkey, W.J.; Tesar, G. The Export Behavior of Smaller-Sized Wisconsin Manufacturing Firms. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1977; 8, pp. 93-98. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490783]

191. Cavusgil, S.T. On the Internationalization Process of Firms. Eur. Res.; 1980; 8, pp. 273-281.

192. Czinkota, M.R. Export Development Strategies: US Promotion Policy; Praeger: New York, NY, USA, 1982; Volume 151.

193. Reid, S.D. The Decision-Maker and Export Entry and Expansion. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1981; 12, pp. 101-112. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490581]

194. Andersen, O. On the Internationalization Process of Firms: A Critical Analysis. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1993; 24, pp. 209-231. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490230]

195. Johanson, J.; Mattsson, L.-G. International Marketing and Internationalization Processes—A Network Approach Jan Johanson and Lars Gunnar—Mattsson University of Uppsala and Stockholm School of Economics. Res. Int. Mark.; 1986; pp. 234-252. Available online: https://books.google.com/books?hl=pt-PT&lr=&id=e_yYUxC8t3oC&oi=fnd&pg=PA234&ots=P3TB3NkOdo&sig=m4_GV35A14Jvq8NWlStURgX4cgA (accessed on 15 January 2023).

196. Blankenburg Holm, D.; Eriksson, K.; Johanson, J. Creating Value through Mutual Commitment to Business Network Relationships. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1999; 20, pp. 467-486. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199905)20:5<467::AID-SMJ38>3.0.CO;2-J]

197. Chetty, S.; Blankenburg Holm, D. Internationalisation of Small to Medium-Sized Manufacturing Firms: A Network Approach. Int. Bus. Rev.; 2000; 9, pp. 77-93. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0969-5931(99)00030-X]

198. Etemad, H. SME’ Internationalization Strategies Based on a Typical Subsidiary Evolutionary Life Cycle in Three Distinct Stages”. Manag. Int. Rev.; 2005; 45, pp. 145-186.

199. Laghzaoui, S. SMEs’ Internationalization: An Analysis with the Concept of Resources and Competencies. J. Innov. Econ.; 2011; 7, pp. 181-196. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3917/jie.007.0181]

200. Forsgren, M. A Note on the Revisited Uppsala Internationalization Process Model—The Implications of Business Networks and Entrepreneurship. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2016; 47, pp. 1135-1144. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41267-016-0014-3]

201. Forsgren, M.; Holm, U.; Johanson, J. Managing the Embedded Multinational: A Business Network View; Edward Elgar Publishing Limited: Cheltenham, UK, 2005.

202. Hadley, R.D.; Wilson, H.I.M. The Network Model of Internationalisation and Experiential Knowledge. Int. Bus. Rev.; 2003; 12, pp. 697-717. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2003.01.001]

203. McDougall, P.P.; Oviatt, B.M. International Entrepreneurship: The Intersection of Two Research Paths. Acad. Manag. J.; 2000; 43, pp. 902-906. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1556418]

204. Jones, M.V.; Coviello, N.; Tang, Y.K. International Entrepreneurship Research (1989–2009): A Domain Ontology and Thematic Analysis. J. Bus. Ventur.; 2011; 26, pp. 632-659. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2011.04.001]

205. Ruzzier, M.; Hisrich, R.D.; Antoncic, B. SME Internationalization Research: Past, Present, and Future. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev.; 2006; 13, pp. 476-497. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14626000610705705]

206. Young, S.; Dimitratos, P.; Dana, L.-P. International Entrepreneurship Research: What Scope for International Business Theories?. J. Int. Entrep.; 2003; 1, pp. 31-42. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1023286232541]

207. Jean, R.-J.; Kim, D.; Cavusgil, E. Antecedents and Outcomes of Digital Platform Risk for International New Ventures’ Internationalization. J. World Bus.; 2020; 55, 101021. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2019.101021]

208. Andersson, S.; Evers, N.; Kuivalainen, O. International New Ventures: Rapid Internationalization across Different Industry Contexts. Eur. Bus. Rev.; 2014; 26, pp. 390-405. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EBR-05-2014-0040]

209. Di Gregorio, D.; Musteen, M.; Thomas, D.E. International New Ventures: The Cross-Border Nexus of Individuals and Opportunities. J. World Bus.; 2008; 43, pp. 186-196. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2007.11.013]

210. McDougall, P.P.; Shane, S.; Oviatt, B.M. Explaining the Formation of International New Ventures: The Limits of Theories from International-Business Research. J. Bus. Ventur.; 1994; 9, pp. 469-487. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(94)90017-5]

211. Knight, G.A.; Cavusgil, S.T. Innovation, Organizational Capabilities, and the Born-Global Firm. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2004; 35, pp. 124-141. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400071]

212. Knight, G.A.; Liesch, P.W. Internationalization: From Incremental to Born Global. J. World Bus.; 2016; 51, pp. 93-102. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2015.08.011]

213. Acedo, F.J.; Jones, M.V. Speed of Internationalization and Entrepreneurial Cognition: Insights and a Comparison between International New Ventures, Exporters and Domestic Firms. J. World Bus.; 2007; 42, pp. 236-252. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2007.04.012]

214. Keupp, M.M.; Gassmann, O. The Past and the Future Ofinternational Entrepreneurship: A Review and Suggestions Fordeveloping the Field. J. Manag.; 2009; 35, pp. 600-633.

215. Mainela, T.; Puhakka, V.; Servais, P. The Concept of International Opportunity in International Entrepreneurship: Areview and a Research Agenda. Int. J. Manag. Rev.; 2014; 16, pp. 105-129. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12011]

216. Mathews, J.A.; Zander, I. The International Entrepreneurial Dynamics of Accelerated Internationalisation. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2007; 38, pp. 387-403. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400271]

217. Coviello, N. Re-Thinking Research on Born Globals. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2015; 46, pp. 17-26. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2014.59]

218. Zander, I.; McDougall-Covin, P.; L Rose, E. Born Globals and International Business: Evolution of a Field of Research. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2015; 46, pp. 27-35. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2014.60]

219. Falahat, M.; Knight, G.; Alon, I. Orientations and Capabilities of Born Global Firms from Emerging Markets”. Int. Mark. Rev.; 2018; 35, pp. 936-957. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IMR-01-2017-0021]

220. Alayo, M.; Maseda, A.; Iturralde, T.; Arzubiaga, U. Internationalization and Entrepreneurial Orientation of Family SMEs: The Influence of the Family Character. Int. Bus. Rev.; 2019; 28, pp. 48-59. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2018.06.003]

221. Moen, Ø.; Rialp, A.; Rialp, J. Examining the Importance of Social Media and Other Emerging ICTs in Far Distance Internationalisation: The Case of a Western Exporter Entering China. Int. Bus. Emerg. Econ. Firms Vol. Univers. Issues Chin. Perspect.; 2020; pp. 221-251. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24482-8_8]

222. Johanson, J.; Johanson, M. Speed and Synchronization in Foreign Market Network Entry: A Note on the Revisited Uppsala Model. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2021; 52, pp. 1628-1645. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41267-021-00407-4]

223. Calheiros-Lobo, N.; Ferreira, J.V.; Au-Yong-Oliveira, M. The SUPWAVE Theory of International Marketing: An Analogy between Catching the Best Waves and Foreign Market Entry Decisions. ICIEMC Proc.; 2021; pp. 11-21. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.34624/iciemc.v0i2.29848]

224. Makhija, M.V.; Kim, K.; Williamson, S.D. Measuring Globalization of Industries Using a National Industry Approach: Empirical Evidence across Five Countries and over Time. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1997; 28, pp. 679-710. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490115]

225. Ramaswamy, K.; Kroeck, K.G.; Renforth, W. Measuring the Degree of Internationalization of a Firm: A Comment. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1996; 27, pp. 167-177. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490131]

226. Sullivan, D. Measuring the Degree of Internationalization Ofa Firm: A Reply. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1996; 27, pp. 179-192. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490132]

227. Autio, E.; Sapienza, H.J.; Almeida, J.G. Effects of Age at Entry, Knowledge Intensity, and Imitability on International Growth. Acad. Manag. J.; 2000; 43, pp. 909-924. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1556419]

228. Delios, A.; Beamish, P.W. Geographic Scope, Product Diversification, and the Corporate Performance of Japanese Firms. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1999; 20, pp. 711-727. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199908)20:8<711::AID-SMJ41>3.0.CO;2-8]

229. Doh, J.P. Entrepreneurial Privatization Strategies: Order of Entry and Local Partner Collaboration as Source of Competitive Advantage. Acad. Manag. Rev.; 2000; 25, pp. 551-571. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/259309]

230. Eriksson, K.; Johanson, J.; Majkgård, A.; Sharma, D.D. Experiential Knowledge and Cost in the Internationalization Process. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1997; 28, pp. 337-360. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490104]

231. Fiegenbaum, A.; Shaver, J.M.; Yeung, B. Which Firms Expand to the Middle East: The Experience of US Multinationals. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1997; 18, pp. 141-148. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199702)18:2<141::AID-SMJ849>3.0.CO;2-Y]

232. Liesch, P.W.; Knight, G.A. Information Internationalization and Hurdle Rates in Small and Medium Enterprise Internationalization. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1999; 30, pp. 383-394. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490075]

233. Martin, X.; Swaminathan, A.; Mitchell, W. Organizational Evolution in the Interorganizational Environment: Incentives and Constraints on International Expansion Strategy. Adm. Sci. Q.; 1998; 43, 566. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393676]

234. Reuber, A.R.; Fischer, E. The Influence of the Management Team’s International Experience on the Internationalization Behaviors of SMEs. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1997; 28, pp. 807-825. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490120]

235. Sambharya, R.B. Foreign Experience of Top Management Teams and International Diversification Strategies of U.S. Multinational Corporations. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1996; 17, pp. 739-746. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199611)17:9<739::AID-SMJ846>3.0.CO;2-K]

236. Sarkar, M.B.; Cavusgil, S.T.; Aulakh, P.S. International Expansion of Telecommunication Carriers: The Influence of Market Structure, Network Characteristics, and Entry Imperfections. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1999; 30, pp. 361-382. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490074]

237. Tihanyi, L.; Ellstrand, A.E.; Daily, C.M.; Dalton, D.R. Composition of the Top Management Team and Firm International Diversification. J. Manag.; 2000; 26, pp. 1157-1177. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600605]

238. Athanassiou, N.; Nigh, D. The Impact of US Company Internationalization on Top Management Team Advice Networks: A Tacit Knowledge Perspective. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1999; 20, pp. 83-92. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199901)20:1<83::AID-SMJ10>3.0.CO;2-Y]

239. Athanassiou, N.; Nigh, D. Internationalization, Tacit Knowledge and the Top Management Team of MNCs. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2000; 3, 471487. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490917]

240. Daily, C.M.; Certo, S.T.; Dalton, D.R. International Experience in the Executive Suite: Path to Prosperity?. Strateg. Manag. J.; 2000; 21, pp. 515-523. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200004)21:4<515::AID-SMJ92>3.0.CO;2-1]

241. Geringer, J.M.; Tallman, S.; Olsen, D.M. Product and International Diversification among Japanese Multinational Firms. Strateg. Manag. J.; 2000; 21, pp. 51-80. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200001)21:1<51::AID-SMJ77>3.0.CO;2-K]

242. Gomes, L.; Ramaswamy, K. An Empirical Examination of the Form of the Relationship between Multinationality and Performance. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1999; 30, pp. 173-188. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490065]

243. Gomez-Mejia, L.R.; Palich, L.E. Cultural Diversity and the Performance of Multinational Firms. J. Int. Stud.; 1997; 28, pp. 309-335. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490103]

244. Hitt, M.A.; Hoskisson, R.E.; Kim, H. International Diversification: Effects on Innovation and Firm Performance in Product-Diversified Firms. Acad. Manag. J.; 1997; 40, pp. 767-798. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256948]

245. Kwok, C.C.K.; Reeb, D.M. Internationalization and Firm Risk: An Upstream-Downstream Hypothesis. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2000; 31, pp. 611-629. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490925]

246. Luo, Y. Timing of Investment and International Expansion Performance in China. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1998; 29, pp. 391-408. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490042]

247. Luo, Y. Time-Based Experience and International Expansion: The Case of an Emerging Economy. J. Manag. Stud.; 1999; 36, pp. 505-534. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00147]

248. Meznar, M.B.; Nigh, D.; Kwok, C.C.Y. Announcements of Withdrawal from South Africa Revisited: Marking Sense of Contradictory Event Study Findings. Acad. Manag. J.; 1998; 41, pp. 715-730. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256967]

249. Mishra, C.S.; Gobeli, D.H. Managerial Incentives, Internalization and Market Valuation of Multinational Firms. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1998; 29, pp. 583-598. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490008]

250. O’grady, S.; Lane, H.W. The Psychic Distance Paradox. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1996; 27, pp. 309-333. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490137]

251. Palich, L.E.; Gomez-Mejia, L.E. A Theory of Global Strategy and Firm Efficiencies: Considering the Effects of Cultural Diversity. J. Manag.; 1999; 25, pp. 587-606. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920639902500406]

252. Sanders, W.G.; Carpenter, M.A. Internationalization and Firm Governance: The Roles of CEO Compensation, Top Team Composition, and Board Structure. Acad. Manag. J.; 1998; 41, pp. 158-178. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/257100]

253. Syam, S.S. Multiperiod capacity expansion in globally dispersed regions. Decis. Sci.; 2000; 31, pp. 173-196. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2000.tb00929.x]

254. Tallman, S.; Li, J. Effects of International Diversity and Product Diversity on the Performance of Multinational Firms. Acad. Manag. J.; 1996; 39, pp. 179-196. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256635]

255. Zahra, S.A.; Ireland, R.D.; Hitt, M.A. International Expansion by New Venture Firms: International Diversity, Mode of Market Entry, Technological Learning, and Performance. Acad. Manag. J.; 2000; 43, pp. 925-950. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1556420]

256. Arora, A.; Fosfuri, A. Wholly Owned Subsidiary vs. Technology Licensing in the Worldwide Chemical Industry. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2000; 31, pp. 555-572. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490922]

257. Buckley, P.J.; Casson, M. Models of the Multinational Enterprise. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1998; 29, pp. 21-44. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490023]

258. Chi, T.; McGuire, D.J. Collaborative Ventures and Value of Learning: Integrating the Transaction Cost and Strategic Option Perspectives on the Choice of Market Entry Modes. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1996; 27, pp. 285-307. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490136]

259. Contractor, F.J.; Kundu, S.K. Modal Choice in a World of Alliances: Analyzing Organizational Forms in the International Hotel Sector. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1998; 29, pp. 325-358. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490039]

260. Davis, P.S.; Desai, A.B.; Francis, J.D. Mode of International Entry: An Isomorphism Perspective. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2000; 31, pp. 239-258. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490904]

261. Hagedoorn, J.; Narula, R. Choosing Organizational Modes of Strategic Technology Partnering: International and Sectoral Differences. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1996; 27, pp. 265-284. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490135]

262. Hennart, J.; Reddy, S. The Choice between Mergers/Acquisitions and Joint Ventures: The Case of Japanese Investors in the United States. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1997; 18, pp. 1-12. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199701)18:1<1::AID-SMJ862>3.0.CO;2-R]

263. Hennart, J.; Reddy, S. Digestibility and Asymmetric Information in the Choice between Acquisitions and Joint Ventures: Where’s the Beef?. Strateg. Manag. J.; 2000; 21, pp. 191-193. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200002)21:2<191::AID-SMJ78>3.0.CO;2-E]

264. Madhok, A. Cost, Value and Foreign Market Entry Mode: The Transaction and the Firm. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1997; 18, pp. 39-61. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199701)18:1<39::AID-SMJ841>3.0.CO;2-J]

265. Makino, S.; Neupert, K.E. National Culture, Transaction Costs, and the Choice between Joint Venture and Wholly Owned Subsidiary. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2000; 31, pp. 705-713. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490930]

266. Melewar, T.C.; Saunders, J. International Corporate Visual Identity: Standardization or Localization?. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1999; 30, pp. 583-598. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490084]

267. Padmanabhan, P.; Cho, K.R. Decision Specific Experience in Foreign Ownership and Establishment Strategies: Evidence from Japanese Firms. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1999; 30, pp. 25-41. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490059]

268. Pan, Y.; Li, S.; Tse, D.K. The Impact of Order and Mode of Market Entry on Profitability and Market Share. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1999; 30, pp. 81-104. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490061]

269. Pan, Y.; Tse, D.K. The Hierarchical Model of Market Entry Modes. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2000; 31, pp. 535-554. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490921]

270. Penner-Hahn, J.D. Firm and Environmental Influences on the Mode and Sequence of Foreign Research and Development Activities. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1998; 19, pp. 149-168. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199802)19:2<149::AID-SMJ944>3.0.CO;2-I]

271. Swan, P.F.; Ettlie, J.E. U.S.-Japanese Manufacturing Equity Relationships. Acad. Manag. J.; 1997; 40, pp. 462-479. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256891]

272. Tse, D.K.; Pan, Y.; Au, K.Y. How MNCS Choose Entry Modes and Form Alliances: The China Experience. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1997; 28, pp. 779-805. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490119]

273. Barkema, H.G.; Vermeulen, F. International Expansion through Start-up or Acquisition: A Learning Perspective. Acad. Manag. J.; 1998; 41, pp. 7-26. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256894]

274. Brouthers, K.D.; Brouthers, L.E. Acquisition or Greenfield Start-up? Institutional, Cultural and Transaction Cost Influences. Strateg. Manag. J.; 2000; 21, pp. 89-97. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200001)21:1<89::AID-SMJ85>3.0.CO;2-8]

275. Delios, A.; Henisz, W.J. Japanese Firms’ Investment Strategies in Emerging Economies. Acad. Manag. J.; 2000; 43, pp. 305-323. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1556397]

276. Erramilli, M.K. Nationality and Subsidiary Ownership Patterns in Multinational Corporations. J. Int. Bus.; 1996; 27, pp. 225-248. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490133]

277. Erramilli, M.K.; Agarwal, S.; Kim, S. Are Firm-Specific Advantages Location-Specific Too?. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1997; 28, pp. 735-757. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490117]

278. Hennart, J.; Larimo, J. The Impact of Culture on the Strategy of Multinational Enterprises: Does National Origin Affect Ownership Decisions?. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1998; 29, pp. 515-538. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490005]

279. Pan, Y. Influences on Foreign Equity Ownership Level in Joint Ventures in China. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1996; 27, pp. 1-26. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490123]

280. Anand, J.; Delios, A. Location Specificity and the Transferability of Downstream Assets to Foreign Subsidiaries. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1997; 28, pp. 579-603. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490112]

281. Barkema, H.G.; Bell, J.H.J.; Pennings, J.M. Foreign Entry, Cultural Barriers, and Learning. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1996; 17, pp. 151-166. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199602)17:2<151::AID-SMJ799>3.0.CO;2-Z]

282. Bogner, W.C.; Thomas, H.; McGee, J. A Longitudinal Study of the Competitive Positions and Entry Paths of European Firms in the US Pharmaceutical Market. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1996; 17, pp. 85-107. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199602)17:2<85::AID-SMJ785>3.0.CO;2-D]

283. Brouthers, L.E.; Brouthers, K.D.; Werner, S. Is Dunning’s Eclectic Framework Descriptive or Normative?. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1999; 30, pp. 831-844. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490842]

284. Busija, E.C.; O’Neil, H.M.; Zeithaml, C.P. Diversification Strategy, Entry Mode, and Performance: Evidence of Choice and Constraints. Strateg. Manag. J.; 1997; 18, pp. 321-327. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199704)18:4<321::AID-SMJ874>3.0.CO;2-Y]

285. Choi, C.J.; Lee, S.H.; Kim, J.B. A Note on Countertrade: Contractual Uncertainty and Transaction Governance in Emerging Economies. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1999; 30, pp. 189-202. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490066]

286. Liang, N.; Parkhe, A. Importer Behavior: The Neglected Counterpart of International Exchange. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1997; 28, pp. 495-530. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490109]

287. Rangan, S. Search and Deliberation in International Exchange: Microfoundations to Some Macro Patterns. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2000; 31, pp. 205-222. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490902]

288. Balabanis, G.I. Factors Affecting Export Intermediaries’ Service Offerings: The British Example. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 2000; 31, pp. 83-99. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490901]

289. Peng, M.W.; Hill, C.W.; Wang, D.Y.L. Schumpeterian Dynamics vs. Williamsonian Considerations: A Test of Export Intermediary Performance. J. Manag. Stud.; 2000; 37, pp. 167-184. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00176]

290. Peng, M.W.; Ilinitch, A.Y. Export Intermediary Firms: A Note on Export Development Research. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1998; 29, pp. 609-620. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490010]

291. Aulakh, P.S.; Kotabe, M.; Teegen, H. Export Strategies and Performance of Firms from Emergingeconomies: Evidence from Brazil, Chile, and Mexico. Acad. Manag. J.; 2000; 43, pp. 342-361. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1556399]

292. Ito, K. Domestic Competitive Position and Export Strategy of Japanese Manufacturing Firms: 1971–1985. Manag. Sci.; 1997; 43, pp. 610-622. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.43.5.610]

293. Myers, M.B. Incidents of Gray Market Activity among US Exporters: Occurrences, Characteristics, and Consequences. J. Int. Bus. Stud.; 1999; 30, pp. 105-126. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490062]

294. Paul, J. New Impact Factors Announced Today for Publishing IB Related Papers. Res. Int. Bus.; 2020; Available online: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ibresearch/permalink/884747938685453/ (accessed on 3 March 2023).