The realm of legitimacy literature places a specific emphasis on scrutinizing the intricate nexus between legitimacy and internationalization, particularly due to the imperative faced by organizations engaged in international operations to penetrate novel markets, overcoming inherent challenges within the internationalization process. Employing bibliometric analysis, this study examines the intersection of legitimacy and internationalization from 2008 to 2023, incorporating 1,554 documents and 84,241 references. The outcome of this analysis delineates the intellectual structure of this area of knowledge, elucidating nine primary research clusters and the evolution of the field research. Furthermore, we identify future research trajectories, providing insights into unexplored dimensions within the field. Future research aims to refine legitimacy measurement methods, broaden perspectives beyond Western firms, analyze internal legitimacy and stakeholder influence, explore sustainability, enhance communication strategies, and develop new internationalization models. This comprehensive synthesis contributes to an enhanced understanding of the dynamic interplay between legitimacy and internationalization, offering valuable implications for strategic decision-making and planning.
AdamsC. A. (2015). The international integrated reporting council: A call to action. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 27, 23–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2014.07.001
2.
AkhterF.HossainM. R.ElrehailH.RehmanS. U.AlmansourB. (2023). Environmental disclosures and corporate attributes, from the lens of legitimacy theory: A longitudinal analysis on a developing country. European Journal of Management and Business Economics, 32(3), 342–369. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJMBE-01-2021-0008
3.
BanalievaE. R.DhanarajC. (2013). Home regional orientation in international expansion strategies. Journal of International Business Studies, 44, 89–116
4.
BengtssonE. (2011). Repoliticalization of accounting standard setting—The IASB, the EU and the global financial crisis. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 22, 567–580. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CPA.2011.04.001
5.
BerrellM.WrathallJ. (2024). Psychological minefields on sustainability road: It’s people, not knowledge that matters. Journal of Management and Business Education, 7(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.35564/jmbe.2024.0001
6.
BitektineA.HaackP. (2015). The “macro” and the “micro” of legitimacy: Toward a multilevel theory of the legitimacy process. Academy of Management Review, 40(1), 49–75. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0318
7.
Blanco-GonzálezA.Cachón-RodríguezG.Hernández-PerlinesF.Prado-RománC. (2023). Effects of social responsibility on legitimacy and revisit intention: The moderate role of anxiety. Journal of Business Research, 157, 113583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113583
8.
BucheliM.SalvajE. (2018). Political connections, the liability of foreignness, and legitimacy: A business historical analysis of multinationals’ strategies in Chile. Global Strategy Journal, 8, 399–420. https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1195
9.
BuckleyP. J.DohJ. P.BenischkeM. H. (2017). Towards a renaissance in international business research? Big questions, grand challenges, and the future of IB scholarship. Journal of International Business Studies, 48, 1045–1064. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-017-0102-z
10.
BuhmannA.SchoenebornD. (2021). Envisioning PR research without taking organizations as collective actors for granted: A rejoinder and extension to Hou. Public Relations Inquiry, 10(1), 119–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/2046147X20987337
11.
ButkevicieneJ.SekliuckieneJ. (2022). Exploring the institutional pressures that affect international new ventures. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 10(1), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2022.100107
12.
ChaneyD.MartinD. (2017). The role of shared values in understanding loyalty over time: A longitudinal study on music festivals. Journal of Travel Research, 56(4), 507–520. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287516643411
13.
ChenC. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(3), 359–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20317
14.
ChenC.Ibekwe-SanJuanF.HouJ. (2010). The structure and dynamics of co-citation clusters: A multiple-perspective co-citation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(7), 1386–1409. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21309
15.
ColleoniE.ZyglidopoulosS.IlliaL. (2024). Beyond collective action: Heterogeneous stakeholders’ influence on firms in the digital age. Academy of Management Perspectives, 38(1), 132–143. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMP.2021.0124
16.
Cruz-SuárezA.MarinoD.Prado-RománC. (2020). Origin and evolution of the legitimacy management in higher education. Journal of Management and Business Education, 3(2), 93–108. https://doi.org/10.35564/jmbe.2020.0007
17.
Cuervo-CazurraA.InkpenA.MusacchioA.RamaswamyK. (2014) Governments as owners: State-owned multinational companies. Journal of International Business Studies, 45, 919–942. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2014.43
18.
DarendeliI. S.HillT. L. (2016). Uncovering the complex relationships between political risk and MNE firm legitimacy: Insights from Libya. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(1), 68–92. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2015.27
19.
DeephouseD. L.BundyJ.TostL. P.SuchmanM. C. (2017). Organizational legitimacy: Six key questions. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.LawremceT. B.MeyerR. E. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (Vol. 4, pp. 27–54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20.
DeephouseD. L.CarterS. M. (2005). An examination of differences between organizational legitimacy and organizational reputation. Journal of Management Studies, 42(2), 329–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2005.00499.x
21.
DeephouseD. L.HaackP. (2025). Legitimacy foundations. In A. Zavyalova & R. Younger (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational social evaluations. Oxford University.
22.
Del-Castillo-FeitoC.Blanco-GonzálezA.Díez-MartínF. (2021). The effect of implementing environmental policies and employees’ environmental training in multinational companies’ legitimacy level in emerging countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 312, 127817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127817
23.
Delgado-AlemanyR.Blanco-GonzálezA.Díez-MartínF. (2022). Exploring the intellectual structure of research in codes of ethics: A bibliometric analysis. Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, 31(2), 508–523. https://doi.org/10.1111/BEER.12400
24.
DesaiV. (2008). Constrained growth: How experience, legitimacy, and age influence risk taking in organizations. Organization Science, 19(4), 594–608. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0335
25.
Díez-MartínF.MiottoG.Del-Castillo-FeitoC. (2024). The intellectual structure of gender equality research in the business economics literature. Review of Managerial Science, 18, 1649–1680. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11846-023-00671-8
26.
Díez-MartínF.Blanco-GonzálezA.Díez-de-CastroE. (2021). Measuring a scientifically multifaceted concept. The jungle of organizational legitimacy. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 27(1), 100131. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IEDEEN.2020.10.001
27.
Díez-MartínF.Blanco-GonzálezA.Prado-RománC. (2021). The intellectual structure of organizational legitimacy research: A co‑citation analysis in business journals. Review of Managerial Science, 15, 1007–1043. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-020-00380-6
28.
DonthuN.KumarS.MukherjeeD.PandeyN.LimW. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2021.04.070
29.
Escamilla-SolanoS.Diez-MartinF.Blanco-GonzálezA.Fernández de las PeñasC. (2023). What have we learned from Covid-19 in business and management and what are the future challenges?American Behavioral Scientist. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642231191752
30.
Escamilla-SolanoS.Paule-VianezJ.Blanco-GonzálezA. (2022). Disclosure of gender policies: Do they affect business performance?Heliyon, 8, e08791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08791
31.
EtterM.ColleoniE.IlliaL.MeggiorinK.D’EugenioA. (2018). Measuring organizational legitimacy in social media: Assessing citizens’ judgments with sentiment analysis. Business & Society, 57(1), 60–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650316683926
32.
FiaschiD.GiulianiE.NieriF. (2017). Overcoming the liability of origin by doing no-harm: Emerging country firms’ social irresponsibility as they go global. Journal of World Business, 52, 546–563. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2016.09.001
33.
GhoseB.GogoiN.SinghP. K.GopeK. (2024). Impact of corporate climate change disclosure on firm performance: Empirical evidence from an emerging economy. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 16(2), 389–414. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-09-2023-0714/FULL/XML
34.
Gordo MolinaV.Diez MartinF.Del Castillo FeitoC. (2022). Legitimacy in entrepreneurship. Intellectual structure and research trends. Cuadernos de Gestión, 22(1), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.5295/CDG.211471VG
35.
HaackP.SchilkeO.ZuckerL. (2021). Legitimacy revisited: Disentangling propriety, validity, and consensus. Journal of Management Studies, 58(3), 749–781. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12615
36.
IlliaL.ColleoniE.EtterM.MeggiorinK. (2021). Finding the tipping point: When heterogeneous evaluations in social media converge and influence organisational legitimacy. Business and Society, 62(1), 117–150.
37.
JacqueminetA.DurandR. (2020). Ups and downs: The role of legitimacy judgment cues in practice implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 63(5), 1485–1507. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2017.0563
38.
JohansonJ.VahlneJ. E. (2008). Business relationship learning and commitment in the internationalization process. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1, 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023219207042
39.
KimM. C.ChenC. (2015). A scientometric review of emerging trends and new developments in recommendation systems. Scientometrics, 104, 239–263.
40.
KleinbergJ. (2003). Bursty and hierarchical structure in streams. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 7(4), 373–397.
41.
KostovaT.RothK.DacinM. T. (2008). Institutional theory in the study of multinational corporations: A critique and new directions. The Academy of Management Review, 33(4), 994–1006. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20159458
42.
KumarS.SharmaD.RaoS.LimW. M.ManglaS. K. (2022). Past, present, and future of sustainable finance: Insights from big data analytics through machine learning of scholarly research. Annals of Operations Research, 345(2), 1061–1104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04410-8
43.
LawtonT.McGuireS.RajwaniT. (2013). Corporate political activity: A literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(1), 86–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2012.00337.x
44.
LiJ.XiaJ.LinZ. (2017). Cross-border acquisitions by state-owned firms: How do legitimacy concerns affect the completion and duration of their acquisitions?Strategic Management Journal, 38(9), 1915–1934. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2609
45.
LiouR. S.TingP. H.ChenY. Y. (2023). The cost of foreign ownership: Voluntary sustainability reporting and financial performance in an emerging economy. Cross Cultural and Strategic Management, 30(3), 581–612. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-09-2021-0165/FULL/XML
46.
LuoY.TungR. (2007). International expansion of emerging market enterprises: A springboard perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 38, 481–498. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400275
47.
MaranoV.TashmanP.KostovaT. (2017). Escaping the iron cage: Liabilities of origin and CSR reporting of emerging market multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(3), 386–408. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2016.17
48.
MeyerK.DingY.LiJ.ZhangH. (2014). Overcoming distrust: How state-owned enterprises adapt their foreign entries to institutional pressures abroad. Journal of International Business Studies, 45, 1005–1028. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2014.15
49.
MolaL.KaminskaR.RichebéN.CarugatiA. (2023). Social strategies for information technology adoption: Social regulation process of mandated enterprise social network systems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 192, 122570. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHFORE.2023.122570
50.
MukherjeeD.LimW. M.KumarS.DonthuN. (2022). Guidelines for advancing theory and practice through bibliometric research. Journal of Business Research, 148, 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2022.04.042
51.
PanickerV. S.GeorgiadouE.HodgkinsonI. R. (2024). Generous to a fault: Differential impact of CSR investments on financial gains in Indian market multinationals. Journal of International Management, 30(3), 101142. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INTMAN.2024.101142
52.
PasamarS.Bornay-BarrachinaM.Morales-SánchezR. (2023). Institutional pressures for sustainability: A triple bottom line approach. European Journal of Management and Business Economics. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJMBE-07-2022-0241
53.
PaulJ.LimW. M.O’CassA.HaoA. W.BrescianiS. (2021). Scientific procedures and rationales for systematic literature reviews (SPAR-4-SLR). International Journal of Consumer Studies, 45(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/IJCS.12695
54.
PengM.WangD.JiangY. (2008). An institution-based view of international business strategy: A focus on emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 39, 920–936. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400377
55.
PhillipsD.BylundP. L.RutherfordM. W.MooreC. B. (2022). Cryptocurrency legitimation through rhetorical strategies: An institutional entrepreneurship approach. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development an International Journal, 35(1–2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2022.2121859
56.
Plaza-CasadoA.Blanco-GonzálezA.Rivero-GutiérrezL.Gómez-MartínezR. (2024). Does the legitimacy of countries influence the internationalization of emerging market multinationals. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 30(1), 100233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2023.100233
57.
Prado-RománC.Diez-MartínF.Blanco-GonzálezA. (2020). The effect of communication on the legitimacy and performance of organizations. Review of Business Management (RBGN), 22(3), 565–581. https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v22i3.4071
58.
RathertN. (2016). Strategies of legitimation: MNEs and the adoption of CSR in response to host-country institutions. Journal of International Business Studies, 47, 858–879. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2016.19
59.
Rivero-GutiérrezL.CabanelasP.Díez-MartínF.Blanco-GonzálezA. (2024). How can companies boost legitimacy in international markets?International Marketing Review, 41(1), 273–301. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2022-0215
60.
ScottW. R. (2005). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests and identities. Sage.
SirazS. S.ClaesB.De CastroJ. O.VaaraE. (2023). Theorizing the grey area between legitimacy and illegitimacy. Journal of Management Studies, 60(4), 924–962. https://doi.org/10.1111/JOMS.12901
63.
SmallH. (1973). Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406
64.
StevensC. E.XieE.PengM. W. (2016). Toward a legitimacy-based view of political risk: The case of Google and Yahoo in China. Strategic Management Journal, 37, 945–963. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2369
65.
SuchmanM. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.2307/258788
TashmanP.MaranoV.KostovaT. (2019). Walking the walk or talking the talk? Corporate social responsibility decoupling in emerging market multinationals. Journal of International Business Studies, 50, 153–171. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-018-0171-7
68.
Torres-PruñonosaJ.BatlleA. A.De Esteban CurielJ.Díez-MartínF. (2024). The intellectual structure of destination image research in tourism (2001–2023): Background, pre-pandemic overview, shifts during Covid-19 and implications for the future. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 30(1), 143–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/13567667231205065
69.
TostL. P. (2011). An integrative model of legitimacy judgments. The Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 686–671.
70.
Web of Sicence. (2024). clarivate.com.
71.
ZhangJ. (2022). Liability of emergingness and EMNEs’ cross-border acquisition completion: A legitimacy perspective. International Business Review, 31(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2021.101951
72.
ZupicI.CaterT. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629
