From fragile to agile: marketing as a key driver of entrepreneurial internationalization

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to conceptualize strategic agility in entrepreneurial internationalization and highlight the role of marketing “under particular conditions” – those of early and fast internationalizers. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on in-depth case studies of four entrepreneurial internationalizers using an inductive approach. The role of marketing is studied along a set of four key business processes, i.e. sensing through selective customer/partner intimacy; business development through selective experimentation and testing; coordination and harmonization of multiple stakeholders; and creative extension of resources. Findings Strategic agility is a composite of flexibility and selective responsiveness. Marketing thought, mainly through customer and partner interaction, plays a prominent role in achieving strategic agility. Customer- and market-centric thinking needs to be built in a key set of business processes. Marketing’s contribution to strategic agility means an ability to cope with time, relationship and functional dependencies. Strategic agility helps improve the risk profile of the entrepreneurial internationalizer. Entrepreneurial internationalizers are particularly suited to compete on and benefit from strategic agility. Practical implications The findings show managers and entrepreneurs in early and fast internationalizing ventures a path to strategic agility which helps to overcome the many parallel challenges that come with firm foundation and internationalization. Originality/value Strategic agility is a novel explanation for entrepreneurial internationalization. The study explains the prominent role played by marketing in achieving strategic agility and growth. Strategic agility is reconceptualized in the context of the young and small internationalizing firm.

Leading digital transformation through an Agile Marketing Capability: the case of Spotahome

“…We collected data from various sources, namely semi-structured interviews, Spotahome's social networking sites and official website, and archival documents (e.g., reports, press reviews) to ensure data triangulation and robustness of our research findings (Benbasat et al 1987;Dubé and Paré 2003;Eisenhardt 1989;Miles and Huberman 1984;Yin 1994). We followed a homogeneous line of inquiry (Yin 2009) to reduce the potential for misinterpretation, and to enhance the in-depth understanding of the phenomenon investigated (Hagen et al 2019).…”

“…Studies emphasize the need to "embrace change" (O'Keeffe et al 2016;p. 432), predict market needs and innovate (Rigby et al 2016), and cater to customers' needs (Bock et al 2012;Jain 1989;Theodosiou and Leonidou 2003;Vendrell-Herrero et al 2017), especially in highly competitive, international markets (Asseraf et al 2019;Hagen et al 2019). Being agile means moving quickly and flexibly (Gren et al 2015) to respond to needs and opportunities in international markets (Hagen et al 2019).…”

“…432), predict market needs and innovate (Rigby et al 2016), and cater to customers' needs (Bock et al 2012;Jain 1989;Theodosiou and Leonidou 2003;Vendrell-Herrero et al 2017), especially in highly competitive, international markets (Asseraf et al 2019;Hagen et al 2019). Being agile means moving quickly and flexibly (Gren et al 2015) to respond to needs and opportunities in international markets (Hagen et al 2019). From this perspective, agility is a dynamic capability (Felipe et al 2016;Sambamurthy et al 2003;Teece et al 2016), and specifically a firm's ability to stay up-to-date with market dynamics and adapt its strategies, tactics, and operations accordingly (Dubey et al 2018;Ravichandran 2018;Zhou et al 2018).…”

A New Dimension of Entrepreneurial Marketing and Key Challenges: A Case Study from Pakistan

“…These dimensions are proactiveness, risk management, innovation, customer intensity, resource leveraging, opportunity-driven, and value creation. These dimensions have been used as underpinning theory in many studies (e.g., Chaudhury et al, 2014;Krisjanous & Carruthers, 2018;Kurgun et al, 2011;Thomas et al, 2013;Yang & Gabrielsson, 2017) and other than that, there is a wide range of recent studies that have also used this theory at some point to support their research (e.g., Andersson et al, 2018;Hagen et al, 2019;Matthews et al, 2018). The current study has also used the dimensions of EM as the interview protocol to explore the practices of a graduate entrepreneur during the start-up phase.…”

“…Four of the EM dimensions, i.e., proactiveness, risk management, innovation-focused, and opportunity-driven, are derived by Morris et al (2002) from work on entrepreneurial orientation; two dimensions, i.e., customer intensity and value creation are derived from the work on market orientation; whereas one dimension, i.e., resource leveraging is commonly found in the entrepreneurship and marketing works of literature. Since the time seven EM dimensions are proposed, they have been used as a major underpinning theory in many studies (e.g., Chaudhury et al, 2014;Krisjanous & Carruthers, 2018;Kurgun et al, 2011;Thomas, Painbéni, & Barton, 2013;Yang & Gabrielsson, 2017), and other than that, there is a wide range of recent studies that have also used this theory at some point to support their research (e.g., Andersson, Evers, & Gliga, 2018;Crick, Chaudhry, & Crick, 2018;Hagen, Zucchella, & Ghauri, 2019;Matthews, Chalmers, & Fraser, 2018). However, despite been extensively used, rare attempts could be found in the literature to extend, upgrade, or modify these dimensions.…”