We focus on supply and the under-explored demand-side factors that help explicate crossborder expansion, the Multinational Enterprise (MNE) and organization. We explore how appropriability-informed and legacy-shaped entrepreneurial imagination motivates a process of creation and co-creation of the cross-border business context (such as markets, demand, and supporting infrastructures, including business ecosystems), and when feasible the wider institutional, regulatory and even cultural one, that conventional International Business (IB) literature takes as a datum. This is examined conceptually and by drawing on illustrative case examples. We claim that by focusing on agency, learning, intentionality and demand-side factors, our approach complements, and also challenges extant sometimes static, supply-side, agent-agnostic theories of the MNE and helps appreciate better phenomena such as market, demand and value creation, and co-creation, MNEs without firm specific advantages and born-global firms.Keywords: entrepreneurship, imagination, history, appropriability, market and demand creation, cross-border expansion and organisation, MNE 3 "Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand." Albert Einstein (1931) "Apple itself, which Jobs considered his greatest creation, a place where imagination was illustrated, applied and executed…." Walter Isaacson (2011) In critiquing the role of the multinational enterprise (MNE) in global organization and governance, Stephen Hymer (1972), arguably the father figure of the theory of the MNE and foreign direct investment (FDI), suggested that through what he called a 'correspondence principle', MNEs shape the world to their 'image', creating a hierarchical world order, involving 'superior' and 'inferior' states (a 'core' and a 'hinterland'), and even 'superior' and 'inferior' classes of peoples both within nations and cross-border (Dunning & Pitelis, 2008).Edith Penrose (1955;1959, arguably the mother figure of the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm and the MNE, explained firm growth in terms of the concept of 'productive opportunity', defined as the dynamic interaction between the perceived external environment (such as demand and competition), and the internal one (such as resources and capabilities). Drawing on Boulding (1956), Penrose suggested that the perceived 'productive opportunity' of firms was an 'image' in the minds of entrepreneurial managers. That 'image', however, was formed in the context of a real-life history-based, path dependent, evolutionary change, shaped by purposive action by economic actors, notably entrepreneurs.
4Penrose also observed that "there would seem to be a complementarity between theory and history" (Penrose, 1989:11) and that 'theory is needed precisely because reality is so complicated' (ibid). We submit that this observation is accurate, yet limited in that learning as...