There is currently no consensus about what the term Fintech means. This paper explores the complexity of Fintech, and attempts a definition, drawn from a process of reviewing more than 200 scholarly articles referencing the term Fintech and covering a period of more than 40 years. The objective of this study is to offer a definition which is distinct as well as succinct in its communication, yet sufficiently broad in its range of application. As the origins of the term can neither be unequivocally placed in academia nor in practice, the definition concentrates on extracting out the quintessence of Fintech using both spheres. Applying semantic analysis and building on the commonalities of 13 peer-reviewed definitions of the term, it is concluded that Fintech is a new financial industry that applies technology to improve financial activities. The implications as well as the shortcomings of this definition are discussed.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate key contingencies affecting the internationalization of young ventures, and to shed light on early internationalization's implications for organizational survival and growth.Design/methodology/approachA previously suggested conceptual framework is tested based on a quantitative study of UK firms before explorative analysis takes the analysis further.FindingsContrary to the model suggested by Sapienza et al. that internationalization is of increasing importance at young ventures' founding stage, no such indications were found in this study. Further statistical tests revealed interesting insights into the relationship between other organizational factors and a young firm's survival and growth prospects.Research limitations/implicationsThe empirical results suggest that internationalization is a largely overrated theoretical factor as far as young ventures' short‐term survival and performance are concerned. As internationalization paths differ contingent upon country of origin and other factors, further empirical tests are needed beyond the UK sample.Originality/valueEmpirical tests of previously suggested conceptual frameworks are needed to advance the body of knowledge on successful internationalization. Next to this initial test, further exploratory analysis suggests a refined framework.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify factors that influence so-called born-again global firms’ internationalization behavior. Specifically, this article explores the following questions: why do mature, domestically focused firms suddenly turn into born-again global firms, how do they do so and what elements are needed for born-again global firms to be sustainable. Design/methodology/approach – Using an established international entrepreneurship model as a starting point, we extract relevant factors for a conceptual framework on born-again global firms’ internationalization activities. Case study research among a cross-sectional sample of born-again global firms is being applied for that purpose. Findings – Driven by the insufficient size of their domestic market, born-again global firms typically embark on internationalization after a generational change at the chief executive officer level. Throughout their internationalization journey, they flexibly adapt toward new needs of their foreign environments. Due to their idiosyncratic characteristics, born-again global firms deserve consideration as a separate group of research objects in the field of international entrepreneurship. Research limitations/implications – The investigated sample of case study firms was drawn across a variety of industries. As such, industry-specific conditions could not be observed and the findings from case study research run the risks of being generalized too broadly. In addition, the accuracy of the case study results may suffer from a certain degree of hindsight bias as the internationalization event took place in the past. Practical implications – Openness to learning from other markets and the flexibility to modify products according to client needs strengthen born-again global firms’ competitiveness. To endure, born-again global firms have to be innovative in adapting to changes, which makes it easier for them to launch their products in new markets. Originality/value – To date, international entrepreneurship has focused on the activities of small and newly established firms, largely neglecting the behavior of somewhat larger and established firms in traditional sectors. This study shows that established companies can exhibit the same innovative, proactive and risk-seeking behavior across borders as new ventures do. Despite their strongly rooted structures, strategies and cultures, born-again globals can flexibly adapt to new environments.

The volume of Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) had risen steeply with an all-time high market capitalisation of close to 1 trillion USD in December 2017. Since then the digital asset market has slumped, retreating to approximately 200 billion USD by mid-2018. Stakeholders of the crypto industry have pondered the reasons for this retrenchment and are increasingly focusing on the notion that many ICOs could be scams. A recent industry study even went as far to claim that 80% of all ICOs are indeed scams. In this paper, we investigate the question whether these scams are as common as claimed. We do so by first defining what a scam is and secondly, by drawing on empirical data to assess the number of cases fitting such a definition. Building on Principal Agent Theory and based on the statistical analysis of our empirical data set we attempt to establish the current state of affairs with regards to scams in the crypto-currency world. The results of our study divert from salient beliefs.

Despite the fact that it could help to overcome the current global financial crisis, the concept of open innovation is only very scarcely applied in the financial services sector. This international literature review covering the past decade provides an overview of the relevant body of literature on this topic. Two questions represent the starting point of this work: (1) Why is open innovation so scarcely applied in the banking, wealth management and insurance industries? and (2) Should the financial services sector use open innovation more widely? Our findings show that various organizational factors as well as monetary reasons prevent financial services companies from applying open innovation processes. Yet, by taking into account the potential benefits that the concept of open innovation may yield, this approach should indeed be applied more widely in the financial services industry.