This paper uses a unique, longitudinal data set of UK and German new technology-based firms (NTBFs) to investigate the determinants of internationalization and firm survival. Specifically, it tests the influence of absorptive capacity, inter-firm specific relationships and international exposure on survival. Its key findings are that high absorptive capacity increases survival probabilities; specific customer–supplier relationships enhance survival; and the greater the firm’s exposure to internationalization activity, the higher its subsequent chance of survival. Thus, the paper provides evidence that young firms are more likely to survive when they pursue an internationalization strategy based on resource consolidation.
AgarwalRAudretschD (2001) Does entry size matter? The impact of the life cycle and technology on firm survival. Journal of Industrial Economics49(1): 21–43.
2.
AldrichHAusterE (1986) Even dwarfs started small: Liabilities of age and size and their strategic implications. In: StawBCummingsL (eds) Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 8). Greenwich: CT JAI Press, 165–198.
3.
AmarioJRuizDAmarioE (2008) Market orientation and internationalization in small and medium-sized enterprises. Journal of Small Business Management46(4): 485–511.
4.
AndersonECoughlanA (1987) International market entry and expansion via independent or integrated channels of distribution. Journal of Marketing51(1): 71–82.
5.
AudretschDMahmoodT (1995) New-firm survival: New results using a hazard function. Review of Economics and Statistics77(1): 97–103.
6.
AutioE (2005) Creative tension: The significance of Ben Oviatt’s and Patricia McDougall’s article toward a theory of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies36(1): 9–19.
7.
AutioESapienzaHAlmeidaJ (2000) Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity and imitability on international growth. Academy of Management Journal43(5): 909–924.
8.
BantelKA (1997) Performance in adolescent, technology-based firms: Product strategy, implementation and synergy. Journal of High Technology Management Research8(2): 243–262.
9.
BirleyS (1985) The role of networks in the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing1(1): 107–117.
10.
BlankenburgHErikssonKJohansonJ (1996) Business networks and cooperation in international business relationships. Journal of International Business Studies27: 1033–1053.
11.
BurgelOMurrayG (2000) The international market entry choices of start-up companies in high-technology industries. Journal of International Marketing8(2): 33–62.
12.
BurgelOFierALichtG. (2004) The internationalization of young high-tech firms. In: FranzW (ed.) ZEW Economic Studies22. Mannheim: Physica-Verlag.
13.
ButchartR (1987) A new UK definition of high-technology industries. Economic Trends400: 82–88.
14.
CoeurderoyRMurrayG (2008) Institutional environments and the location decisions of start-ups: Evidence from the first international market entries of new technology-based firms. Journal of International Business Studies39(4): 670–687.
15.
CovielloNMunroH (1995) Growing the entrepreneurial firm: Networking for international market development. European Journal of Marketing29(7): 49–62.
16.
CowlingMFrygesHLichtG. (2007) The Survival and Growth of Adolescent High-tech Firms in Germany and the UK, 1997–2003. London: Anglo-German Foundation Report.
17.
CressyR (2006) Why do most firms die young?Small Business Economics26(2): 103–116.
18.
Cuervo-CazurraAMaloneyMManrakhanS (2007) Causes of difficulty in internationalization. Journal of International Business Studies38(5): 709–725.
19.
FernhaberGMcDougallP (2008) International entrepreneurship and geographic location: An empirical examination of new venture internationalization. Journal of International Business Studies39(1): 267–290.
20.
FreelMRobsonP (2004) Small firm innovation, growth and performance. International Small Business Journal22(6): 561–575.
21.
GompersPLernerJ (2001) The venture capital revolution. Journal of Economic Perspectives15(2): 145–168.
22.
JohansonJVahlneJ (1977) The internationalization process of the firm: A model of knowledge development and increasing market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies8(1): 23–32.
23.
JohansonJVahlneJ (1990) The mechanism of internationalization. International Marketing Review7(4): 11–24.
24.
LagesLJapSGriffithD (2008) The role of past performance in export ventures: A short-term reactive approach. Journal of International Business Studies39: 304–325.
25.
LarsonA (1992) Network dyads in entrepreneurial settings: A study of governance of exchange relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly37(2): 76–104.
26.
LichtGHippJKukukM. (1997) Innovationen im Dienstleistungssektor. In: Schriftenreihe des ZEW (Vol. 24). Nomos: Baden–Baden.
27.
ManigartSBaeyensKVan HyfteW (2002) The survival of venture capital backed companies. Venture Capital4(2): 103–124.
28.
MooreG (1999) Crossing the Chasm: Marketing and Selling High-tech Products to Mainstream Customers. London: HarperBusiness.
29.
Morgan-ThomasAJonesM (2009) Post-entry internationalization dynamics: differences between SMEs in the development speed of their international sales. International Small Business Journal27(1): 71–97.
30.
MudambiRZahraS (2007) The survival of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies38(2): 333–352.
31.
OviattBMcDougallP (1994) Toward a theory of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies25(1): 45–64.
32.
PenroseE (1959) The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. New York: Wiley.
33.
PorterM (1985) Comparative Advantage. New York: Free Press.
34.
RialpARialpJKnightG (2005) The phenomenon of early internationalizing firms: What do we know after a decade (1993–2003) of scientific enquiry?International Business Review14(2): 147–166.
RootF (1994) Entry Strategies for International Markets. London: Lexington Books.
37.
SapienzaHAutioEGeorgeGZahraS (2006) A capabilities perspective on the effects of early internationalization on firm survival and growth. Academy of Management Review31(4): 914–933.
38.
ShraderROviattBMcDougallP (2000) How new ventures exploit trade-offs among international risk factors: Lessons from the accelerated internationalization of the 21st Century. Academy of Management Journal43(6): 1227–1247.
39.
StinchcombeA (1965) Social structure and organizations. In: MarchJ (ed.) Handbook of Organizations. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, 142–193.
40.
Vega-JuradoJGutierrez-GraciaAFernandez-de-LucioI (2008) Analyzing the determinants of firms’ absorptive capacity: Beyond R&D. R&D Management38(4): 392–405.
41.
ThornhillSAmitR (2003) Learning about failure: Bankruptcy, firm age and the resource-based view. Organisational Science14(5): 497–509.
42.
Von HippelE (1988) The Sources of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
43.
WilliamsonO (1985) The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: Free Press.
44.
ZaheerSMosakowskiE (1997) The dynamics of the liability of foreignness: A global study of survival in financial services. Strategic Management Journal18(6): 439–464.
45.
ZahraS (2005) A theory of international new ventures: A decade of research. Journal of International Business Studies36(1): 20–28.
46.
ZahraSGeorgeG (2002) Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization and extension. Academy of Management Review27(2): 185–203.
47.
ZahraSHaytonJ (2007) The effect of international venturing on firm performance: The moderating influence of absorptive capacity. Journal of Business Venturing23(2): 195–220.
48.
ZahraSKorriJYuJ (2004) A cognitive approach to international entrepreneurship. International Business Review14(2): 129–146.
49.
ZhangMMacphersonAJonesO (2006) Conceptualising the learning process in SMEs: Improving innovation through external orientation. International Small Business Journal24(3): 299–323.
