Search results

Compares the different models of behaviour between exportation and internationalisation in an organization. Examines other studies on the subject of export behaviour and looks at the lessons and opportunities which arise from these. Attempts to résumée the different models and studies and also to evaluate their implications for government policy and export management. Proposes these points for further exploration.

The study aims to develop and test a model of export performance, focusing on the degree to which firms have different types of export flexibility and the degree to which firms adopt market‐oriented behavior in their export operations (i.e. their degree of export market‐oriented [EMO] behavior). Furthermore, the study seeks to examine the moderating roles that EMO behavior and export environment play with respect to the relationships between export flexibility dimensions and export performance.

The model is tested on a sample of 783 exporting firms. Data were collected via mail survey. Analysis was undertaken using structural equation modeling.

EMO behavior moderates the relationship between export flexibility and export sales performance. However, EMO behavior's moderating role differs depending on (a) the source of the export flexibility, and (b) the environmental conditions the firms face. Increasing levels of EMO behavior are associated with increased export sales performance under all conditions studied.

Reliance on cross‐sectional data may limit generalizability, as may the reliance on single country data. Additional sources of export flexibility should be modeled, as should more complex models of the export environment.

The findings identify several situations when EMO behavior is most beneficial and others where it is beneficial (but less so). Similarly, the results pinpoint situations where greater levels of export flexibility are a necessity. Managers should look to exploit this knowledge by enhancing EMO behavior and export flexibility.

This study is one of the very few that explicitly identifies export flexibility as a source of competitive advantage in the exporting literature. It is also the first study to suggest that EMO behavior's ability to shape export success is determined in part by other factors internal to the firm (e.g. export flexibility), as well as factors external to the firm (environment).

Focuses on the relationship between managerialattitudes towards exporting and exporting behaviour. A basic premiss is that the widely held assumption of a positive relationship between managerial attitudes and behaviour in exporting does not hold true in all circumstances, implying that in some cases a negative or no relationship between attitude and behaviour in exporting can be expected. Survey responses from a sample of manufacturing firms in Illinois support the basic premiss herein. Furthermore, the magnitude of attitude‐behaviour discrepancy among industrial firms was estimated to be sizeable among non‐exporting firms. Concludes with research, managerial, and policy implications of these findings.

This study examines the issue of how export market‐oriented behaviors influence export success. Using survey data obtained from Hong Kong based manufacturing exporters, our findings suggest that export market‐oriented behaviors are important predictors of several dimensions of export performance. In particular, it appears that this behavior is most important for exporters operating under conditions of high environmental turbulence. The export market‐oriented behavior – export performance relationship for these firms, was generally positive and strong. However, under conditions of low environmental turbulence, the costs of developing and implementing high levels of export market‐oriented behavior may outweigh the benefits accrued.

The activities of service and product firms are compared in terms of their market‐oriented behavior in their export operations (i.e. their export market‐oriented (EMO) behavior). Empirical analysis conducted on a sample of 783 Finnish exporters containing both service and product firms uncovered several interesting differences: service and product firms differed in their level of EMO behavior; the direct effects from EMO behavior to various dimensions of export success were invariant across the samples; however, the export environment moderated the link between EMO behavior and export profit performance in different ways across the samples. The results indicate that EMO behavior may be more appropriate under certain environmental conditions, and less appropriate under others. However, the nature of the relationship between EMO behavior and export success may also depend on whether the firm’s core export market offerings are services or physical products.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the role of innovation on the export behavior of firms.

Using two waves of Swedish Community Innovation Survey merged with register data on firm-level, the authors estimate the influence of the innovation output and innovation input of firms on their export propensity and intensity.

The authors find that the innovation output of firms (measured as sales due to innovative products) has a positive and significant effect on their subsequent export behavior, particularly on export intensity. The results also show that there is no direct effect of innovation input (innovative efforts) on export behavior.

This is one of the first paper that clearly distinguishes between input and output parts of innovation process and empirically investigate their differentiated impact on export behavior of a representative sample of firms in an entire economy.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the marketing “processes” of governing multiple export relationships under the theoretical framework of governance value analysis (GVA). Specifically, this work examines the internal exchange attributes of transaction-specific investments and psychic distance on the adaptation/standardization of relational behavior and detailed contracting and how process adaptation/standardization influences new product outcomes and jointly created value in the focal export relationship.

A survey was conducted of 151 US manufacturers regarding their relationship with their primary foreign buyers. Data were analyzed with partial least squares estimation.

The results indicate that high levels of transaction-specific investments lead to the adaptation of relational behaviors whereas high levels of psychic distance lead to less adaptation of detailed contracting. The adaptation of relational behaviors and detailed contracting reflect differential direct effects on export performance. Furthermore, the results indicate that there is a significant positive interaction effect between the adaptation of relational behavior and detailed contracting on jointly created value in the focal export relationship.

The findings of the study reveal that adaptation of the marketing process related to relationship governance strategies can play an important role in the export marketing process, but managers must proceed with caution in balancing relational behavior and detailed contract adaptation. The results also point to the importance of understanding the underlying source of uncertainty and adapting appropriate aspects of governance for enhancing jointly created value in the export relationship.

The value of this research lies in its goal to highlight the issue of marketing process adaptation across multiple export relationships. Less attention has been paid to the marketing “processes” of governing multiple export relationships in the international marketing strategy literature relative to “program” standardization/adaptation. This is one of the first empirical studies on marketing process adaptation of governance employing the theoretical framework of GVA.

Examines the characteristics of firms which undertake exporting under their own volition and in the absence of external stimuli. In this context, internally‐induced export initiation is viewed as an innovative behaviour. The classification scheme employed in this study has a high degree of internal and discriminant validity with successful classification of 86 per cent of innovative firms by the resultant discriminant model. The findings indicate that innovative firms do not vary significantly with regard to general firm characteristics from other exporters, but that they do vary significantly with regard to critical export‐related activities. Innovative firms consider exporting an ongoing activity, have greater export proportion of sales and average export order size, make greater use of export information, and tend to use different sources of data from other exporting firms. In addition, they are more likely to maintain export‐specific organizations.

Attempts to provide a better explanation of differences in diverse export behaviour among similar operating firms in the same country. Wishes to compensate for deficiencies by analysing determinants of behaviour of exporting firms by: controlling for country‐specific; and industry‐specific influences on them. Tests the hypothesis and chosen research approaches which are based on earlier results. Discusses the use of a four‐part questionnaire designed with 194 independent variables and how this was sent to 1,500 managing directors of British and German food‐processing and mechanical engineering firms ‐ there were, by June 1982, 310 replies. Compares extracted sets of discriminating variables to validate by test established hypothesis. Identifies six key influences on export behaviour and concludes that the chosen research approach is an important step towards model building. Finally, states that future researchers will find scope to refine results further, and in more detail and uses a Likert scale with nine concepts.