We examine the impact of interorganizational imitation on new venture international entry and subsequent performance. Using a sample of 150 U.S.–based publicly held new ventures, we find that new venture international entry is in part an imitative response to the internationalization of other firms in the venture's home country industry and/or subsets of firms with certain traits or outcomes. We also find that interorganizational imitation moderates the relationship between new venture international entry and profitability, but not the relationship between new venture international entry and sales growth. These findings contribute to the growing body of literature on new venture internationalization.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbrahamsonE. & RosenkopfL. (1983). Institutional and competitive bandwagons: Using mathematical modeling as a tool to explore innovation diffusion. Academy of Management Review, 18(3), 487–517.
2.
AldrichH.E. & FiolC.M. (1994). Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation. Academy of Management Review, 19(4), 645–670.
3.
AnandV., GlickW.H., & ManzC.C. (2002). Thriving on the knowledge of outsiders: Tapping organizational social capital. Academy of Management Executive, 16(1), 87–101.
4.
AudretschD.B. (1998). Agglomeration and the location of innovative activity. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 14(2), 18–30.
5.
AutioE., SapienzaH.J., & AlmeidaJ.G. (2000). Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity, and imitability on international growth. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 909–925.
6.
BarretoI. & Baden–FullerC. (2006). To conform or to perform? Mimetic behavior, legitimacy–based groups and performance consequences. Journal of Management Studies, 43(7), 1559–1581.
7.
BirkinshawJ. & HoodN. (2000). Characteristics of foreign subsidiaries in industry clusters. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(1), 141–154.
8.
BloodgoodJ.M., SapienzaH.J., & AlmeidaJ.G. (1996). The internationalization of new high–potential U.S. ventures: Antecedents and outcomes. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 20(4), 61–76.
BrouthersK.D. & NakosG. (2004). SME entry mode choice and performance: A transaction cost perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(3), 229–247.
11.
BrouthersL.E., O'DonnellE., & HanjimarcouJ. (2005). Generic product strategies for emerging market exports into triad nation markets: A mimetic isomorphism approach. Journal of Management Studies, 42(1), 225–245.
12.
BurgelO. & MurrayG.C. (2000). The international market entry choices of start–up companies in high–technology industries. Journal of International Marketing, 8(2), 33–62.
13.
CarpenterM.A., PollockT.G., & LearyM.M. (2003). Testing a model of reasoned risk–taking: Governance, the experience of principals and agents, and global strategy in high–technology IPO firms. Strategic Management Journal, 24(9), 803–820.
14.
CohenJ. & CohenP. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15.
CohenJ., CohenP., WestS.G., & AikenL.S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16.
CyertR. & MarchJ. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice–Hall.
17.
DavidssonP. & WiklundJ. (2001). Levels of analysis in entrepreneurship research: Current research practice and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(4), 81–99.
18.
DavisG.F. (1991). Agents without principles? The spread of the poison pill through the intercorporate network. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(4), 583–613.
19.
DeanT.J. & MeyerG.D. (1996). Industry environments and new venture formations in U.S. manufacturing: A conceptual and empirical analysis of demand determinants. Journal of Business Venturing, 11(2), 107–132.
20.
DiMaggioP.J. & PowellW.W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
21.
DiMaggioP.J. & PowellW.W. (1991). Introduction. In PowellW.W. & DiMaggioP.J. (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 1–40). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
22.
DuncanR.B. (1972). Characteristics of organizational environments and perceived environmental uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(3), 313–326.
23.
DunningJ.H. (1995). Reappraising the eclectic paradigm in an age of alliance capitalism. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(3), 461–491.
24.
FeinbergS.E. & GuptaA.K. (2004). Knowledge spillovers and the assessment of R&D responsibilities to foreign subsidiaries. Strategic Management Journal, 25(8/9), 823–845.
25.
FernhaberS.A., McDougallP.P., & OviattB.M. (2007). Exploring the role of industry structure on new venture internationalization. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(4), 517–542.
26.
FlorinJ., LubatkinM., & SchulzeW. (2003). A social capital model of high–growth ventures. Academy of Management Journal, 46(3), 374–384.
27.
FombrunC. & ShanleyM. (1990). What's in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33(2), 233–258.
28.
ForsgrenM. (2002). The concept of learning in the Uppsala internationalization process model: A critical review. International Business Review, 11(3), 257–277.
29.
GeorgeG., WiklundJ., & ZahraS. (2005). Ownership and the internationalization of small firms. Journal of Management, 31(2), 210–233.
30.
GimenoJ., HoskissonR.E., BealB.D., & WanW.P. (2005). Explaining the clustering of international expansion moves: A critical test in the U.S. telecommunications industry. Academy of Management Journal, 48(2), 207–319.
31.
GreinerL.E. (1998). Evolution and revolution as organizations grow. Harvard Business Review, 76(3), 55–67.
GuillenM.F. (2002). Structural inertia, imitation and foreign expansion: South Korean firms and business groups in China. Academy of Management Journal, 45(3), 509–525.
34.
HaunschildP.R. & MinerA.S. (1997). Modes of interorganizational imitation: The effects of outcome salience and uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(3), 472–500.
35.
HavemanH.A. (1993). Follow the leader: Mimetic isomorphism and entry into new markets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4), 593–627.
36.
HeniszW.J. & DeliosA. (2001). Uncertainty, imitation, and plant location: Japanese multinational corporations, 1990–1996. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3), 443–475.
37.
HonigB. & KarlssonT. (2004). Institutional forces and the written business plan. Journal of Management, 35(1), 29–48.
38.
KeeleyR.H. & RoureJ.B. (1990). Management, strategy, and industry structure as influences on the success of new firms: A structural model. Management Science, 36(10), 1256–1267.
39.
KothaS., RindovaV.P., & RothaermelF.T. (2001). Assets and actions: Firm–specific factors in the internationalization of U.S. Internet firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(4), 769–791.
40.
LamA. (2003). Organizational learning in multinationals: R&D networks of Japanese and US MNEs in the UK. Journal of Management Studies, 40(3), 673–703.
41.
LuJ.W. (2002). Intra– and inter–organizational imitative behavior: Institutional influences on Japanese firms‘ entry mode choice. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(1), 19–37.
42.
LuJ.W. & BeamishP.W. (2001). The internationalization and performance of SMEs. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6/7), 565–586.
43.
MarchJ., SproullL., & TamuzM. (1991). Learning from samples of one or fewer. Organization Science, 2(1), 1–13.
44.
MauriA.J. & MichaelsM.P. (1998). Firm and industry effects within strategic management: An empirical examination. Strategic Management Journal, 19(3), 211–219.
45.
McDougallP.P. (1989). International versus domestic entrepreneurship: New venture strategic behavior and industry structure. Journal of Business Venturing, 4(6), 387–400.
46.
McDougallP.P. & OviattB.M. (1996). New venture internationalization, strategic change, and performance: A follow–up study. Journal of Business Venturing, 11(1), 23–40.
47.
McDougallP.P. & OviattB.M. (2005). Defining international entrepreneurship and modeling the speed of internationalization. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(5), 537–553.
48.
McDougallP.P., OviattB.M., & ShraderR.C. (2003). A comparison of international and domestic new ventures. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 59–82.
49.
McDougallP.P., RobinsonR.B.Jr, & DeNisiA.S. (1992). Modeling new venture performance: An analysis of new venture strategy, industry structure, and venture origin. Journal of Business Venturing, 7(4), 267–289.
50.
McDougallP.P., ShaneS., & OviattB.M. (1994). Explaining the formation of international new ventures: The limits of theories from international business research. Journal of Business Venturing, 9(6), 469–487.
OviattB.M. & McDougallP.P. (1994). Toward a theory of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1), 45–65.
57.
OviattB.M. & McDougallP.P. (1995). Global start–ups: Entrepreneurs on a worldwide stage. Academy of Management Executive, 9(2), 30–45.
58.
PreeceS.B., MilesG., & BaetzM.C. (1998). Explaining the international intensity and global diversity of early–stage technology–based firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 14(3), 259–281.
59.
ReuberA.R. & FischerE. (1997). The influence of the management team's international experience on the internationalization behaviors of SMEs. Journal of International Business Studies, 28(4), 807–825.
60.
ReuberA.R. & FischerE. (2002). Foreign sales and small firm growth: The moderating role of the management team. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(1), 29–45.
61.
RobinsonK.C. (1999). An examination of the influence of industry structure on eight alternate measures of new venture performance for high potential independent new ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 14(2), 165–187.
62.
RobinsonK.C. & McDougallP.P. (1998). The impact of alternative operationalizations of industry structural elements on measures of performance for entrepreneurial manufacturing ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 19(11), 1079–1100.
63.
RobinsonK.C. & McDougallP.P. (2001). Entry barriers and new venture performance: A comparison of universal and contingency approaches. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6/7), 659–685.
64.
SandbergW.R. & HoferC.W. (1987). Improving new venture performance: The role of strategy, industry structure, and the entrepreneur. Journal of Business Venturing, 2(1), 5–28.
65.
SapienzaH.J., AutioE., GerogeG., & ZahraS.A. (2006). A capabilities perspective on the effects of early internationalization on firm survival and growth. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 914–933.
66.
SchoonhovenC.B., EisenhardtK.M., & LymanK. (1990). Speeding products to market: Waiting time to first product introductions in new firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 177–207.
ShraderR.C. (2001). Collaboration and performance in foreign markets: The case of young high–technology manufacturing firms. Academy of Management Journal, 44(3), 45–60.
69.
ShraderR.C., OviattB.M., & McDougallP.P. (2000). How new ventures exploit trade–offs among international risk factors: Lessons of the accelerated internationalization of the 21st century. Academy of Management Journal, 43(6), 1227–1247.
70.
StinchcombeA.L. (1965). Social structure and organizations. In MarchJ.G. (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 142–193). Chicago: Rand McNally.
71.
SuchmanM.C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.
72.
U.S. Small Business Administration. (1992). The state of small business. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
73.
YiuD. & MakinoS. (2002). The choice between joint venture and wholly owned subsidiary: An institutional perspective. Organization Science, 13(6), 667–683.
74.
ZaheerS. (1995). Overcoming the liability of foreignness. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 341–363.
75.
ZahraS.A. & GeorgeG. (2002). International entrepreneurship: The current status of the field and future research agenda. In HittM., IrelandR.D., & SextonD. (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset (pp. 255–288). London: Blackwell.
76.
ZahraS.A., IrelandR.D., & HittM.A. (2000). International expansion by new venture firms: International diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 925–951.
77.
ZahraS.A., NeubaumD.O., & HuseM. (1997). The effect of the environment on export performance among telecommunications new ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(5), 25–46.
78.
ZuckerL.G. (1997). The role of institutionalization in cultural persistence. American Sociological Review, 42(5), 726–743.
