Family firms and internationalization in the Asia-Pacific: the need for multi-level perspectives

Abstract

We address the challenges in understanding how family ownership shapes international business across institutional contexts in and beyond the Asia-Pacific, a region with diverse and often contradictory approaches to internationalization and family firms. We begin by introducing the topic and summarizing the papers in the special issue. We then develop a multi-level framework for understanding internationalization of family firms consisting of individual/family, family firm and institutional levels. We emphasize the importance of recognizing the complex and varying interrelationships between these levels. The paper concludes by setting out a research agenda for family firms and internationalization based on these three inter-related levels.The Asia-Pacific region has been described as 'the new frontier of the 21 st century' with its unprecedented growth in international trade and foreign direct investment (Islam, 2015). For example, intra-regional trade between East Asian countries recently reached 55% of total global trade volume. With 85% of companies in the Asia-Pacific being family-owned (EY Family Business Yearbook, 2014), it appears that these family

Behind the internationalization of family SMEs: A strategy tripod synthesis

“…Second, we begin a dialogue between two important and growing literature streams: SME internationalization (Knight & Liesch, 2016;Laufs & Schwens, 2014;Lu & Beamish, 2001;McDougall & Oviatt, 1996) and FF internationalization (Arregle et al, 2017;Carney et al, 2015;Duran et al, 2017Duran et al, , 2019Eddleston et al, 2019aEddleston et al, , 2019bGedajlovic, Carney, Chrisman, & Kellermanns, 2012). In bringing these together, we draw on insights from the traditional IB literature, which primarily deals with non-SME/non-FFs.…”

Riding the waves of family firm internationalization: A systematic literature review, integrative framework, and research agenda

“…In other words, high-quality products are influenced by the country-of-origin cues that embody symbolic values and influence customer choice. Eddleston et al (2020) and Eddleston et al (2019) also found that FFs selling high-quality products abroad benefit from professionalization practices that allow them to overcome bifurcation bias. Coherently, De Massis, Audretsch et al (2018) in their study of FFs in the German Mittelstand found that these firms adopt a niche-focused globalization strategy: they are especially proactive in recognizing and exploiting global opportunities, helping keep their product portfolio focused and their resource requirements “controllable” while reducing market risk and increasing revenue.…”

“…Second, research on internationalization decisions has ignored the related process, hence not providing “process-based explanations, explanations of post-entry outcomes, and explanations involving tension and conflict among family firm actors” ( Reuber, 2016 : 1272). Third, research has overlooked the specific sources of competitive advantages that FFs might leverage when internationalizing, which might emerge from the business model they adopt ( Hennart et al, 2019 ), but also from the specificity of the context ( Eddleston et al, 2020 ; Eddleston et al, 2019 ). Coherently with these trajectories and the growth of this literature stream, research questions addressed in this wave are more variegated, including “How do family aspects influence FF internationalization?”, “How does FF internationalization unfold over time?” , and “What makes FF internationalization unique?”.…”

“…They also explained that FFs are more prone to repeating the same entry modes, hence challenging the more rational decision-making model of accumulated international experience that the Uppsala model proposed ( Johanson & Vahlne, 1977 , 2009 ) and generally ascribed to FFs ( Cesinger et al, 2016 ; Kontinen & Ojala, 2012 ). Distinctive contextual traits are also at the core of interest in this fourth wave, with studies calling for a multilevel approach to examining FF internationalization ( Eddleston et al, 2020 ; Eddleston et al, 2019 ), considering distinctive cultural aspects, such as social capital ( Zahra, 2019 ). Furthermore, scholars have started taking into account the role of the “chrono” context, for instance, considering the FF succession process as a specific contextual factor that affects internationalization ( De Massis, Audretsch et al, 2018 ).…”

“…They dominate the global scenario, representing more than one third of S&P 500 firms in the US, over 90% of European firms, and significantly contribute to the growth of economies in Asia, Latin America, and Africa (e.g. De Massis, Audretsch, Uhlaner, & Kammerlander, 2018 ; Eddleston, Jaskiewicz, & Wright, 2020 ; Eddleston, Sarathy, & Banalieva, 2019 ). Notably, FFs combine and balance seemingly contradictory forces, facing tensions between the desire to preserve the family values, control, and tradition by staying grounded in the local region ( Bird & Wennberg, 2014 ; Gómez-Mejía, Makri, & Kintana et al, 2010 ) and the need to search and exploit the benefits of global expansion ( Arregle, Duran, Hitt, & van Essen, 2017 ).…”