The role of immigrant entrepreneurs in international new ventures

Immigrant Entrepreneurs (IE) are often portrayed as being pushed into self-employment due to employment barriers in their adopted countries. But IE have human resources, like international experience, which can help them form international new ventures (INV). We question the role of IE in INV. We use randomly selected data from 561 young firms from the Comprehensive Australian Study of Entrepreneurial Emergence (CAUSEE) project. We find that IE are overrepresented in INV and have many of the characteristics known to facilitate INV success. These findings have relevance to policy makers, IE and NE.

Human resource characteristics of international new ventures : the role of immigrant entrepreneurs

Immigrant Entrepreneurs (IE) are often portrayed as pushed into self-employment due to employment barriers in their adopted countries. But IE have human resources, like international experience, which can help them form international new ventures (INV). We question the role of IE in INV. We use randomly selected data from 561 young firms from the Comprehensive Australian Study of Entrepreneurial Emergence (CAUSEE) project. We find that IE are over-represented in INV and have many characteristics known to facilitate INV success including more founders, university degree, international connections and technical capability. These findings are relevant to policy makers, and nascent IE.

Characteristics of immigrant entrepreneurs and their involvement in international new ventures

We studied 561 young firms in Australia to understand the involvement of immigrant entrepreneurs (IE) in international new ventures (INV). We found that IE are over-represented in INV and have many characteristics known to facilitate INV success including more founders, university degree, international connections and technical capability. Our study has implications for immigration policy and economic policy and the efficient use of a nation’s human capital. This research challenges a necessity-based stereotype of immigrant entrepreneurs by identifying areas in which immigrant entrepreneurs have natural competitive advantages over native entrepreneurs. This research makes a contribution to the theory of immigrant entrepreneurship by identifying the significant role of immigrant entrepreneurs in INV and the suitability of immigrant entrepreneurs for the development INV. We inform diverse streams of research in transnational and immigrant entrepreneurship with broader strategic work on the creation of INV.

Explaining International new venture internationalisation: an innovation adoption model

The increasing prevalence of International New Ventures (INVs) during the past twenty years has been highlighted by numerous studies (Knight and Cavusgil, 1996, Moen, 2002). International New Ventures are firms, typically small to medium enterprises, that internationalise within six years of inception (Oviatt and McDougall, 1997). To date there has been no general consensus within the literature on a theoretical framework of internationalisation to explain the internationalisation process of INVs (Madsen and Servais, 1997). However, some researchers have suggested that the innovation diffusion model may provide a suitable theoretical framework (Chetty & Hamilton, 1996, Fan & Phan, 2007).The proposed model was based on the existing and well-established innovation diffusion theories drawn from consumer behaviour and internationalisation literature to explain the internationalisation process of INVs (Lim, Sharkey, and Kim, 1991, Reid, 1981, Robertson, 1971, Rogers, 1962, Wickramasekera and Oczkowski, 2006). The results of this analysis indicated that the synthesied model of export adoption was effective in explaining the internationalisation process of INVs within the Queensland Food and Beverage Industry. Significantly the results of the analysis also indicated that features of the original I-models developed in the consumer behaviour literature, that had limited examination within the internationalisation literature were confirmed. This includes the ability of firms, or specifically decision-makers, to skip stages based om previous experience.

Explaining international new venture internationalisation : an innovation adoption mode

The increasing prevalence of International New Ventures (INVs) during the past twenty years has been highlighted by numerous studies (Knight and Cavusgil, 1996, Moen, 2002). International New Ventures are firms, typically small to medium enterprises, that internationalise within six years of inception (Oviatt and McDougall, 1997). To date there has been no general consensus within the literature on a theoretical framework of internationalisation to explain the internationalisation process of INVs (Madsen and Servais, 1997). However, some researchers have suggested that the innovation diffusion model may provide a suitable theoretical framework (Chetty & Hamilton, 1996, Fan & Phan, 2007).The proposed model was based on the existing and well-established innovation diffusion theories drawn from consumer behaviour and internationalisation literature to explain the internationalisation process of INVs (Lim, Sharkey, and Kim, 1991, Reid, 1981, Robertson, 1971, Rogers, 1962, Wickramasekera and Oczkowski, 2006). The results of this analysis indicated that the synthesied model of export adoption was effective in explaining the internationalisation process of INVs within the Queensland Food and Beverage Industry. Significantly the results of the analysis also indicated that features of the original I-models developed in the consumer behaviour literature, that had limited examination within the internationalisation literature were confirmed. This includes the ability of firms, or specifically decision-makers, to skip stages based om previous experience.

Do strategy choices matter for nascent firms? A study on effectuation and causation impacts on new ventures outcomes

Principal Topic : Nascent entrepreneurship has drawn the attention of scholars in the last few years (Davidsson, 2006, Wagner, 2004). However, most studies have asked why firms are created focussing on questions such as what are the characteristics (Delmar and Davidsson, 2000) and motivations (Carter, Gartner, Shaver & Reynolds, 2004) of nascent entrepreneurs, or what are the success factors in venture creation (Davidsson & Honig; 2003; Delmar and Shane, 2004). In contrast, the question of how companies emerge is still in its infancy. On a theoretical side, effectuation, developed by Sarasvathy (2001) offers one view of the strategies that may be at work during the venture creation process. Causation, the theorized inverse to effectuation, may be described as a rational reasoning method to create a company. After a comprehensive market analysis to discover opportunities, the entrepreneur will select the alternative with the higher expected return and implement it through the use of a business plan. In contrast, effectuation suggests that the future entrepreneur will develop her new venture in a more iterative way by selecting possibilities through flexibility and interaction with the market, affordability of loss of resources and time invested, development of pre-commitments and alliances from stakeholders. Another contrasting point is that causation is ''goal driven'' while an effectual approach is ''mean driven'' (Sarasvathy, 2001) One of the predictions of effectuation theory is effectuation is more likely to be used by entrepreneurs early in the venture creation process (Sarasvathy, 2001). However, this temporal aspect and the impact of the effectuation strategy on the venture outcomes has so far not been systematically and empirically tested on large samples. The reason behind this research gap is twofold. Firstly, few studies collect longitudinal data on emerging ventures at an early enough stage of development to avoid severe survivor bias. Second, the studies that collect such data have not included validated measures of effectuation. The research we are conducting attempts to partially fill this gap by combining an empirical investigation on a large sample of nascent and young firms with the effectuation/causation continuum as a basis (Sarasvathy, 2001). The objectives are to understand the strategies used by the firms during the creation process and measure their impacts on the firm outcomes. Methodology/Key Propositions : This study draws its data from the first wave of the CAUSEE project where 28,383 Australian households were randomly contacted by phone using a specific methodology to capture emerging firms (Davidsson, Steffens, Gordon, Reynolds, 2008). This screening led to the identification of 594 nascent ventures (i.e., firms that are not operating yet) and 514 young firms (i.e., firms that have started operating from 2004) that were willing to participate in the study. Comprehensive phone interviews were conducted with these 1108 ventures. In a likewise comprehensive follow-up 12 months later, 80% of the eligible cases completed the interview. The questionnaire contains specific sections designed to distinguish effectual and causal processes, innovation, gestation activities, business idea changes and ventures outcomes. The effectuation questions are based on the components of effectuation strategy as described by Sarasvathy (2001) namely: flexibility, affordable loss and pre-commitment from stakeholders. Results from two rounds of pre-testing informed the design of the instrument included in the main survey. The first two waves of data have will be used to test and compare the use of effectuation in the venture creation process. To increase the robustness of the results, temporal use of effectuation will be tested both directly and indirectly. 1. By comparing the use of effectuation in nascent and young firms from wave 1 to 2, we will be able to find out how effectuation is affected by time over a 12-month duration and if the stage of venture development has an impact on its use. 2. By comparing nascent ventures early in the creation process versus nascent ventures late in the creation process. Early versus late can be determined with the help of time-stamped gestation activity questions included in the survey. This will help us to determine the change on a small time scale during the creation phase of the venture. 3. By comparing nascent firms to young (already operational) firms. 4. By comparing young firms becoming operational in 2006 with those first becoming operational in 2004. Results and Implications : Wave 1 and 2 data have been completed and wave 2 is currently being checked and 'cleaned'. Analysis work will commence in September, 2009. This paper is expected to contribute to the body of knowledge on effectuation by measuring quantitatively its use and impact on nascent and young firms activities at different stages of their development. In addition, this study will also increase the understanding of the venture creation process by comparing over time nascent and young firms from a large sample of randomly selected ventures. We acknowledge the results from this study will be preliminary and will have to be interpreted with caution as the changes identified may be due to several factors and may not only be attributed to the use/not use of effectuation. Meanwhile, we believe that this study is important to the field of entrepreneurship as it provides some much needed insights on the processes used by nascent and young firms during their creation and early operating stages.

ACE research vignette 041: Business Planning and the emergence of new ventures

This series of research vignettes is aimed at sharing current and interesting research findings from our team of international Entrepreneurship researchers. In this vignette, Christophe Garonne and Per Davidsson examine the value of business planning for business start-ups.

Does venture opportunity variation matter? investigating systematic process differences between innovative and imitative new ventures

The central thesis in the article is that the venture creation process is different for innovative versus imitative ventures. This holds up; the pace of the process differs by type of venture as do, in line with theory-based hypotheses, the effects of certain human capital (HC) and social capital (SC) predictors. Importantly, and somewhat unexpectedly, the theoretically derived models using HC, SC, and certain controls are relatively successful explaining progress in the creation process for the minority of innovative ventures, but achieve very limited success for the imitative majority. This may be due to a rationalistic bias in conventional theorizing and suggests that there is need for considerable theoretical development regarding the important phenomenon of new venture creation processes. Another important result is that the building up of instrumental social capital, which we assess comprehensively and as a time variant construct, is important for making progress with both types of ventures, and increasingly, so as the process progresses. This result corroborates with stronger operationalization and more appropriate analysis method what previously published research has only been able to hint at.

Does venture opportunity variation matter? Investigating systemic process differences between innovative and imitative new ventures

The central thesis in the article is that the venture creation process is different for innovative versus imitative ventures. This holds up; the pace of the process differs by type of venture as do, in line with theory-based hypotheses, the effects of certain human capital (HC) and social capital (SC) predictors. Importantly, and somewhat unexpectedly, the theoretically derived models using HC, SC, and certain controls are relatively successful explaining progress in the creation process for the minority of innovative ventures, but achieve very limited success for the imitative majority. This may be due to a rationalistic bias in conventional theorizing and suggests that there is need for considerable theoretical development regarding the important phenomenon of new venture creation processes. Another important result is that the building up of instrumental social capital, which we assess comprehensively and as a time variant construct, is important for making progress with both types of ventures, and increasingly, so as the process progresses. This result corroborates with stronger operationalization and more appropriate analysis method what previously published research has only been able to hint at.

Strategic renewal and competitive advantage in opportunity-driven and conservative new ventures

Strategic renewal has received relatively little attention in the context of new ventures. We examine the relationship among strategic renewal, competitive advantage and performance in opportunity-driven and conservative new ventures. Based on longitudinal data of a random sample of almost 373 new ventures, the link between strategic renewal and performance can be better understood by adding the mediating role of competitive advantage. Our results indicate that increased levels of strategic renewal positively relate to competitive advantage in conservative ventures, but not in opportunity-driven ventures. These findings place a different perspective on the dominant view that entrepreneurs should be opportunity maximizers. It suggests that both conservative and opportunity-driven new ventures can be successful if they follow different paths of strategic renewal in shaping competitive advantage.

Innovation and change in new ventures

This paper examines the innovativeness of nascent and young entrepreneurial firms in Australia. Findings of interest in this paper include: • The vast majority of new ventures offer some degree of innovation in some aspect of their business, be it the product, the process, their market selection or their marketing approach. • With close to 75 per cent claiming they do more than taking mere imitations to the market, novelty in the product/service is the type of innovation most commonly offered by start-up firms. • The innovativeness of start-ups varies by industry. Construction start-ups stand out as particularly low in innovation across all indicators, while Manufacturing stands out the most in the positive direction. • Team start-ups other than spouse teams have higher novelty, as do ventures started by founders with prior start-up experience. • There is no association between the founders’ level of education and the novelty of the ventures they (try to) create.

International corporate entrepreneurship among SMEs : a test of Stevenson's notion of entrepreneurial management

Geographical market expansion is included in various definitions of entrepreneurship as it entails the opening up of new markets (for example, Davidsson 2003). Expansion into new international markets and launch of new products in international markets are also consistent with definitions of entrepreneurship which center on the pursuit of opportunities {e.g.\Stevenson, 1983 #922;Gartner, 1993 #931}. Accordingly, the decision by managers of small, internationally active businesses to continue to internationalize can be viewed as an entrepreneurial act. In spite of the fact that both start-ups and existing firms can behave entrepreneurially by expanding into new international markets, the attention of entrepreneurship researchers interested in international activities has largely focused on international new ventures (INVs); that is, business organizations that internationalize from inception (Oviatt, and McDougall 1994; Oviatt, and McDougall 1997). Consequently, pursuit of international opportunities by established small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) lacks theoretical understanding and empirical investigation through an entrepreneurship lens. This paper contributes to the body of knowledge at the entrepreneurship-internationalization interface by testing whether Stevenson’s opportunity-based conceptualization of entrepreneurial management (Stevenson 1983; Stevenson and Gumpert 1985; Stevenson and Jarillo 1990) can explain the attainment of continued entrepreneurial outcomes by SMEs operating in foreign markets. We choose Stevenson’s conceptualization as it gauges firm-level characteristics that are theorized to facilitate the pursuit of entrepreneurial opportunities, which arguably is at the heart of SMEs’ continued venturing into international markets.

Does Venture Opportunity Variation Matter? Investigating Systematic Process Differences Between Innovative and Imitative New Ventures

The central thesis in the article is that the venture creation process is different for innovative versus imitative ventures. This holds up; the pace of the process differs by type of venture as do, in line with theory-based hypotheses, the effects of certain human capital (HC) and social capital (SC) predictors. Importantly, and somewhat unexpectedly, the theoretically derived models using HC, SC, and certain controls are relatively successful explaining progress in the creation process for the minority of innovative ventures, but achieve very limited success for the imitative majority. This may be due to a rationalistic bias in conventional theorizing and suggests that there is need for considerable theoretical development regarding the important phenomenon of new venture creation processes. Another important result is that the building up of instrumental social capital, which we assess comprehensively and as a time variant construct, is important for making progress with both types of ventures, and increasingly, so as the process progresses. This result corroborates with stronger operationalization and more appropriate analysis method what previously published research has only been able to hint at.