Conceptual and contextual issues in SME internationalisation

Citation

Matlay, H. (2006), "Conceptual and contextual issues in SME internationalisation", Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 13 No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1108/jsbed.2006.27113daa.001

Conceptual and contextual issues in SME internationalisation

I spent a long time reflecting upon the state of contemporary entrepreneurship research before deciding to go ahead and gather together the required number of specialised papers for the 2006 Special Issue on the Internationalisation of SMEs. Many of the considerations in favour of positive action were affected by personal nostalgia and memories of better and more constructive times in my academic and research career. Similarly, some of the negative aspects relating to this topic impacted largely upon personal considerations and some disappointments: for instance, none of the individuals that I had approached during 2004 and 2005 were overly keen to take on the guest editorship of the proposed special issue. Some appeared to question the timing of the special issue, others raised objections on less tangible aspects of publishing or doubted the wisdom of collating a large number of interrelated papers on an emergent aspect of entrepreneurship. There were hints that I would be wise to leave the task of publishing special issues on emerging or controversial aspects of small business and enterprise development to better rated and more established journals in this field. Recently, a number of contributors have pointed out to me that we were mainly a UK and European journal and that we ought to concentrate on publishing general issues on a wide variety of topics relevant to our readership. Such a strategy would make my life easier, but also less challenging in terms of publishing “cutting edge” research…

There is no doubt in my mind that I could have eventually found somebody of international standing to front the proposed special issue – leaving all the work to me – but I was not that interested in manoeuvring around the main reason why I wanted a knowledgeable and dynamic guest editor to take on a leadership role for this onerous and apparently risky task. Interestingly, however, none of my contacts queried either the research topic per se, or the probability of sourcing the necessary papers for a quality and timely special issue on international entrepreneurship. Furthermore, I have been receiving a steady flow of contributions on this aspect of entrepreneurship research and I knew that I could call upon a number of authors for more papers on this expanding topic. Eventually, I approached Paul Westhead (Centre for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises, Warwick University) and David Crick (UCE Birmingham Business School) for advice and guidance on how to proceed. I am pleased to say that both provided me with constructive advice and generous support throughout the prolong period of gestation…

There are many factors that have contributed to the emergence of “International Entrepreneurship” as an independent topic of research. One could attribute this phenomenon to the liberalisation of trade, the rapid globalisation and internationalisation of markets and the emergence of the Internet and related advances in e-Commerce. While I acknowledge that various technical advances and business developments have contributed significantly to the internationalisation process of firms of various sizes (including SMEs), I do feel that much credit is due to a relatively small number of academics and researchers who have contributed significantly to the emergence and formalisation of “International Entrepreneurship” as a topic of research in its own right. There exists some controversy as to which aspects of entrepreneurship could be incorporated into this topic and also, how it differentiates from existing and well established aspects of other disciplines. There is nothing new in such controversy and it is, to a large extent, its inheritance as a multi- and cross-discipline topic of research. Almost all new and emerging topics have traditionally been the subject of “inherent controversy” at least until such times that they became established and/or recognised as independent fields of research. Some topics, including entrepreneurship, still carry the fallout of previous “ownership” issues, long after they have been recognised or acknowledged in their own right.

Arguably, the activities of internationally-oriented entrepreneurs and cross-border small business developments could be usefully integrated in the conceptual and contextual field of “traditional entrepreneurship”. Indeed, some researchers view internationalisation as rightfully the domain of “international business”, just as entrepreneurship used to be regarded as just another aspect of “business studies”, “economics” or “management sciences”. Nowadays, few of my contemporaries would still insist that entrepreneurship is just a sub-field of any one of these disciplines… Personally, I take a more holistic perspective on international entrepreneurship and its development. To me, it matters less in which field we ought to ground relevant contextual and conceptual issues relating to this emergent field of research, as long as we insist that it is underpinned by an empirically rigorous specialism and a critical mass of relevant literature. I would rather subscribe to a unifying and flexible convergence of multi-disciplinary research than seek an exclusive and divergent specialism which results in a fragmented, rarefied and overly complex body of knowledge. Thus, it is my conviction as well as my experience that research undertaken by, and exclusively for the benefit of, academics – invariably ends in conceptual and contextual inflexibility, isolation and knowledge obsolescence.

Even a cursory search on this theme can reveal the richness, depth and width that are encompassed within the international entrepreneurship field of research. Conceptual aspects range from emerging paradigms in international entrepreneurship to learning, innovation and knowledge management in SMEs. Other conceptual aspects revisit cross-disciplinary topics, as applicable to the internationalisation tendencies of entrepreneurs, including: relevant typologies, resource-based entrepreneurship, educational achievements, competencies, gender, age, marketing, franchising and collaborative tendencies. Contextual issues cover a wide range of geographical perspectives on international entrepreneurship as well as competitive aspects of collaborative efforts in this field. Methodological issues that affect this emerging topic of research also contribute to the critical mass of specialist that is building steadily around it. Considering the relative recentness of this area of research, the future of it is not only promising but also exciting.

Despite some initial difficulties and setbacks, I am increasingly confident that academic freedom and individual choice will prevail and guide the growing ranks of those researchers who embark on international entrepreneurship research and ensure its long-term success despite the limitations and constraints of current wisdom, policy myopia and publishing restrictions. We must beware, however, of the dangers that such emergent topics pose for those insiders who persevered in their approach: it is relatively easy to forget the hardship and the limitations of pioneering work and become remote, obstructive and perhaps as arrogant as those who are now trying to dissuade us from our chosen path… It has become a well known cliché that in academia we tend to ignore what has been done before and often try to reinvent the wheel or even improve upon it…

I would like to extend my gratitude to contributors, referees and advisors – for their hard work and commitment to our journal. This special issue concludes volume 13 and the fifth under my editorship. This year, we have achieved a great deal and I am already looking forward with some trepidation to the challenges and excitement of the next volume of JSBED.

Harry Matlay