Emerging market entry node pattern and experiential knowledge of small and medium‐sized enterprises

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to conceptualize “entry node”, to describe the entry node pattern (i.e. the initial entry node and changes in it) of small to medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) entering emerging market business networks, and to determine how network nodes are associated with experiential knowledge.

Design/methodology/approach

Using data from an on‐site survey based on a standardized questionnaire, hypotheses were tested using ANOVA on 197 SMEs in southern Sweden that entered the emerging markets of the Baltic States, Poland, Russia, or China.

Findings

The entry node is the establishment point into a foreign market network. In total, four entry situations are defined – triad via home market; triad via host market; dyad from home market; and dyad at host market – each using different entry nodes. After initial entry, one third of the firms changed their nodes, primarily into a more committed node. Various nodes display significant differences in the level of accumulated societal, business network and customer‐specific experiential knowledge. A more committed node is associated with more experiential knowledge.

Research limitations/implications

Knowledge is complex to measure, since various factors influence the level of accumulated experiential knowledge. This study examines the association between types of nodes and experiential knowledge, but does not aim to explain knowledge accumulation. Perceptual measures are used and possible method biases involved are safeguarded through an on‐site survey method.

Originality/value

This paper conceptualizes the novel concept of entry node, provides insight into the SME node pattern in emerging markets and examines the association between nodes and experiential knowledge.

Citation

Sandberg, S. (2013), "Emerging market entry node pattern and experiential knowledge of small and medium‐sized enterprises", International Marketing Review, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 106-129. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651331311314547