Transnational entrepreneurship: a systematic review of the literature

Outward foreign investment by transnational entrepreneurs: Insights from emerging economies

“…Despite large cross-national variations that are evident in entrepreneurial activity, the field of comparative international entrepreneurship has been criticized for generating few new insights (Terjesen et al, 2013). It has been suggested that comparative international entrepreneurship remains in its infancy as a field and that additional research in the domain should persist to reduce the risk of generating results that are specific to a single country and not generalizable to others (Munoz-Castro et al, 2019). Thus, by comparing the experiences of transnational entrepreneurs from different contexts, this study also helps to identify similarities and differences in entrepreneurial activity across countries to provide a starting point for future research to investigate their sources and implications.…”

"Don't sow, grow offshoots!"

“…Providing a comprehensive examination of how 'cultural entrepreneurs' are described in the literature, Strøm et al (2020) highlighted how CE research spans multiple disciplines, including management, economics, entrepreneurship, and cultural studies. They illustrated how annual publications on CE remained relatively low before 2010 (<5 per year) and increased in the following years (5 to 13 per year until 2020).…”

“…They also brought up how the article authors' geographical affiliations pointed to origins in English-speaking countries: Half of all the publications reviewed came from scholars situated in the U.S., the U.K., and Australia. Beyond providing these descriptives, Strøm et al (2020) set out to identify the managerial, entrepreneurial, and innovation-and network-related tensions surrounding cultural entrepreneurs. Interestingly, they concluded that these tensions clearly relate to distinct academic disciplines, but also that cultural entrepreneurs operate in contexts where multiple competing logics converge.…”

“…To recapitulate, previous literature reviews have depicted the growing traction of research into CE within several academic disciplines, including management, economics, and cultural studies. Many assume this multiplicity will negatively impact a burgeoning research stream seeking to define its own agenda (e.g., Lounsbury and Glynn, 2019;Bürger and Volkmann, 2020;Strøm et al, 2020), because such variety can, for example, lead to fragmentation or a more diffuse focus. This lack of clarity has also come up in literature reviews discussing the multifarious empirical contexts and cases only loosely bound under labels such as 'the creative and cultural sector' (Hausmann and Heinze, 2016).…”

“…Rather than seeking heterogenesis, this principle focuses, I suggest, on the possibility of changing both the thinker and the thinking aimed at synthesizing knowledge from different domains (e.g., Vasko, 2022). Perhaps more importantly, transversal thinking could also help ease the issue raised by Strøm et al (2020), who called for more polyvocal and synthesizing ways to cope with the complexities of having multiple logics operate in the empirical situations where cultural entrepreneurs and, possibly, other agents traversing the ACE intersection find themselves/for cultural entrepreneurs and, possibly, other agents traversing the ACE intersection.…”