Synergies and tensions between and within domestic and international market activities of firms

Proactive environmental strategy and firm performance: The moderating role of corporate venturing

“…Axiomatically, domestic venturing occurs in the home market, whereas international venturing activities take place abroad (Baum et al, 2013;Calabrò et al, 2016), these types of corporate venturing activities differ in other ways. More specifically, international venturing activities occurs in environments with unfamiliar legal systems, new supplier networks, unfamiliar customers and unknown rivals, so requires a broader strategic scope and a more aggressive competitive stance (Calabrò et al, 2016;Karafyllia and Zucchella, 2017;McDougall, 1989;Zahra et al, 2009). Given such differences, we confirm that international venturing has a stronger positive moderating effect on the link between proactive green management and firm performance, whereas domestic venturing has a greater positive moderating effect on the relationship between green political influence and firm performance.…”

“…This study suggests that the differentiation between domestic and international venturing is theoretically meaningful and practically relevant because these two types of entrepreneurial activities differ significantly in the following ways. First, international venturing is a broader and more aggressive market-based corporate strategy than domestic venturing, which has a narrower strategic scope (Calabrò et al, 2016;Karafyllia and Zucchella, 2017). When venturing across national borders, firms usually have to serve a more diverse customer base by offering a richer bundle of market offerings through collaborating with a broader range of suppliers and distributors.…”

“…For example, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD, 2019) data show that China, as an important source of greenfield investment, committed US$92.47 billion in 2018, representing more than 9.4% of the global total. International venturing activities, in comparison to domestic venturing, are more likely to occur in environments with unknown legal systems, new supplier networks, unfamiliar customers and unacquainted rivals (Calabrò et al, 2016;Zahra et al, 2009), they involve a broader strategic scope and a more aggressive competitive stance (Karafyllia and Zucchella, 2017;McDougall, 1989). The extant literature, however, has yet to examine how domestic and international venturing activities may differentially affect how internal and external PESs affect firm performance.…”

Effects of subnational regional corruption on growth strategies in emerging economies: Evidence from Russian domestic and international M&A activity

“…This finding calls for considering domestic growth when analyzing the sequential expansion of firms. Firm expansion at home can affect expansion abroad and vice versa (Karafyllia & Zucchella, 2017;Lu et al, 2014).…”

Early Internationalizing Firms' Capabilities

“…Empirical evidence shows that capabilities dealing with international operations and administration contribute to the international performance of EIFs Mathews, Bianchi, Perks, Healy, & Wickramasekera, 2016). However, capabilities related to operational and administrative activities in the domestic market matter as well (Dimitratos, Lioukas, & Carter, 2004;Karafyllia & Zucchella, 2017;Liu, Gao, Lu, & Lioliou, 2016). A firm's capabilities of combining upstream elements in the value chain to (co-)create value (with) for specific client groups and their national contacts in the business ecosystem are vital for healthy performance in international markets (Priem, Butler, & Li, 2013).…”