a study on the internationalization barriers to incubated … · 2019. 4. 19. · health (lais \...

$: A Study on the Internationalization Barriers to Incubated … · 2019. 4. 19. · Health (LAIS \ UFRN) in subjects of informatics in health with focus on medical images; Head of the$
European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X / 1450-202X Vol. 152 No 3 April, 2019, pp. 334-359 http://www. europeanjournalofscientificresearch.com

A Study on the Internationalization Barriers to Incubated

Companies: Defining the Constructs to Develop an

Effective Research Instrument

João Florêncio da Costa Junior Master's Degree in Production Engineering

Graduate Program in Production Engineering at UFRN / Natal-RN, Brazil

E-mail: [email protected]

Eric Lucas dos Santos Cabral Master's degree in Production Engineering


Technology Center, Department of Production Engineering, Natal / RN, Brazil


Wilkson Ricardo Silva Castro Master's Degree in Production Engineering


Technology Center, Department of Production Engineering, Natal / RN, Brazil


Davidson Rogério de Medeiros Florentino Master's degree in Production Engineering



Renêr Ribeiro Taveira de Souza Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte

Technology Center Graduation in Production Engineering (UFRN)


Francisco de Cássio de Oliveira Mendes Master's Degree in Technological Management and Innovation in Health from the Federal University

of Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)Researcher of the Laboratory of Technological Innovation in

Health (LAIS \ UFRN) in subjects of informatics in health with focus on medical images; Head

of the Diagnostic Imaging Center (CDI) of the University Hospital Onofre Lopes (HUOL)


Júlio Francisco Dantas de Rezende Ph.D to Business at Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN).

Professor, Graduate Program in Production Engineering at UFRN / Natal-RN, Brazil

Department of Production Engineering – DEP/UFRN

Av. Sen. Salgado Filho, 3000 - Campus Universitário, 59072-970 - Natal/RN

Tel/fax: +55-84-3086-0204 CV: http://lattes.cnpq.br/7433758989886841


A Study on the Internationalization Barriers to Incubated Companies: Defining the Constructs to Develop an Effective Research Instrument 335

Abstract

Due to the global economic, political and technological transformations of the last decades, there is a constant need for companies and entrepreneurs to seek the internationalization of their business models as a strategy of expansion and survival. Such internationalization imperative is not restricted to large businesses only, having also a direct impact on SMEs’ strategy and operations. Business incubators have a seminal role within this process, as they act both to protect and accelerate new businesses, offering alternatives to increase competitive advantage through international expansion. The present article endeavours to understand the different facets related to the internationalization of incubated companies, especially the internationalization barriers associated with the phenomenon, in order to identify the main constructs necessary to develop a research instrument that could be used to identify and study the internationalization barriers to incubated companies. The research was primarily documental and exploratory, following a content analysis approach as to allow for the codification of results and the definition of categories, examining the constructs in a replicable and systematic manner and identifying their relevant phenomena, objects and attributions. As a result of this, four key interrelated constructs were identified and categorized: Strategic Management of Internationalization, Business Incubators Management, Internal Barriers (Operational Barriers) and External Barriers; thus, offering a robust framework to build a research instrument that could be used to the development of a greater and more detailed understanding about the internationalization barriers to incubated companies.

Keywords: Internationalization, Internationalization Barriers, Business Incubators

1. Introduction Due to the global reality of constant transformations and increased competitiveness, in which organizations become progressively more dynamic and innovative; there is a constant need for companies and entrepreneurs to find alternatives to internationalize their business models as a strategy not only of expansion, but also survival (Kotler and Amstrong 1993; Axinn and Matthyssens 2002; Gjellerup 2000).

This reality is imperative not exclusively to large corporations, but also to small and medium enterprises that can no longer rely on their local market to guarantee their existence neither have the competitive advantages of large scale organizations, thus being prone to encounter several physical and cultural barriers within and without the internationalization process (Kahiya 2013; Zimmerer and Scarborough 2008).

Business incubators have a seminal role in the internationalization process of incubated companies, offering to entrepreneurs the tools, know-how and facilities for international development and expansion as to accelerate growth in a sustainable way. In Brazil, incubation affects positively the internationalization process, as around 10% of incubated businesses do internationalize, which is considerably higher than the average 2% of non-incubated SMEs that follow that path (Engelman et al. 2015; Theodorakopoulos et al. 2014).

Therefore, the present article proposes to identify the main constructs necessary to develop a research instrument that could be used to analyse the internationalization barriers to incubated companies. The authors acknolwedge the importance of understanding the different barriers that make internationalization a challenge in order to optimize the social and economic contributions of SMEs to society and to guide public policy to support internationalization and entrepreneurship (Kasabov 2015; Schwart, 2008; Bell et al 2001; Madsen 1997).

336 João Florêncio da Costa Junior, Eric Lucas dos Santos Cabral, Wilkson Ricardo Silva Castro, Davidson Rogério de Medeiros Florentino,

Renêr Ribeiro Taveira de Souza, Francisco de Cássio de Oliveira Mendes and Júlio Francisco Dantas de Rezende

2. Internalization – Concepts and Theories Given the complexity and scope of the internationalization phenomenon, there is an abundance of theories that seek to explain the phenomenon of internationalization presenting the most different perspectives. However, it is possible to summarize them in two essential approaches: one focused on the economic criteria, that is, on the maximization of resources and profit and another on a more subjective cultural/behavioural approach, which explains internationalization as a process of risk mitigation (Knight and Liesch, 2016; Andersen and Buvik 2002).

Both approaches are valid and to some extent interrelated, converging towards the central point relative to the conceptualization of internationalization which is the rate of involvement of a given organization in the international market (Johanson and Kao 2010; Johanson and Vahlne, 1977).

The Uppsala Model – the most traditional approach – adopts a method focusing on different degrees of uncertainty and information, pointing the steps to the internationalization process as incremental stages, arguing that domestic experience precedes the expansion to foreign markets, which are primarily chosen by focusing on countries geographically and culturally close to the country to which the company belongs, moving only then to more distant cultures and geographies (Jones and Coviello, 2005; Johanson and Vahlne 1977). The process is characterized by the constant uncertainty that needs to be mitigated by the rationalization of corporate decisions based on the accumulation of experience. The process becomes organic after its inception, that is, it tends to grow and become more complex if strategic decisions based on long-term prospects and present performances are favourable (Knight and Liesch, 2016; Johanson and Vahlne 2009).

The Uppsala Model also defines the essential abilities for the managers to succeed in internationalizing their organization, despite the evolution of the concept, those basic abilities remain seminal for the success of the internationalization process: a) Knowledge management – strategic and operational competencies; b) Learning culture – the company needs to adopt a continuous and systematic teaching-learning approach, focusing on cooperation and knowledge sharing; c) Gradualism and incrementalism - time and process management; d) Commitment - the level of the organization's involvement with internationalization; e) Social skills - the skills needed to interact with different cultures and markets, mobilizing change and creating new partnerships (Knight and Liesch 2016; Johanson and Kao 2010; Pessoa et al 2008).

Gankeman et al. (2000) argue that within the gradualist approach there are five distinct stages of the internationalization process, these stages, given the ideal conditions, progress linearly: a) Focus on domestic markets; b) Pre-export stage (research phase and opportunity evaluation); c) Experimental export (only a small portion of production); d) Active involvement (the strategy of increasing sales through export becomes central to the company's growth strategy; and e) Committed involvement (the company relies heavily on the foreign market, the export/sales ratio is above of 40%).

From the Uppsala model, several concepts have been developed, taking different approaches and focusing on different specificities to analyse the internationalization phenomenon. Many authors argue that internationalization is a process focused on an innovation model – I-models; that is, they kept the initial understanding of internationalization as a gradual process but have expanded its understanding as a process of strategic and operational innovation, internationalization and innovation, therefore, are not entirely distinct in a conceptual level (Bilkey and Tesa 1977; Cavusgil 1980; Welch and Luostarinen 1988; Reid 1981; Czinkota 1982; Andersen 1993; Leonidou and Katsikeas 1996).

Some authors direct their studies to the growing involvement of the organization operations into the process of internationalization. From local to foreign markets but also from foreign to local, thus taking into account many more factors than product sales (Welch and Luostarinen 1988).

Other authors concentrate their studies on the growth of foreign direct and indirect investment in international transactions (Calof and Beamish 1995). Resource allocation on international activities


– mobilization, accumulation and development – also offers a different approach to study internationalization (Ahokangas 1998).

Networking is considered by many as the fundamental aspect in the study of internationalization; it is understood as a phenomenon of continuous and systematic establishment of business relationships on an international level, making use of extension, penetration and integration in order to meet organizational goals (Johanson and Mattsson, 1988; Johanson and Vahlne 1990; Korsakienė et al. 2015).

Despite the variety of theories and models to study internationalization, it is a phenomenon that does not fit well predetermined categories of ideas, as it may occur in a very different manner depending on the nature of the company or the market to which it belongs. The swift changes in the global business environment of recent years, the new realities of mergers and acquisitions, the global nature of competition and the influence of the information revolution on consumer behaviour have had a strong impact on the internationalization process of most companies around the world. The incremental model as well as the study of internationalization based on a restricted number of aspects is increasingly obsolete, even for SMEs. In other words, a growing number of companies are internationalizing their processes rapidly, some even emerging from an international business model, seeking a superior international performance and focusing on a strategy of global expansion in which knowledge is their main resource, those companies can be classified as born global (Knight and Liesch 2016; Gabrielsson et al 2008; Axinn and Matthyssens 2002; Chang 2011; Wood et al. 2011; Mort et al. 2012; Knight: Cavusgil 2004).

It seems that the most prominent feature of new organizations is their immediate international character, contrary to what occurred with enterprises just some decades ago; such phenomenon demands the analysis of its driving forces, its impact on knowledge and innovation management as well as the understanding of how to measure the performance of organizations and their impact upon society from the born global perspective (Knight: Liesch 2016; Gabrielsson et al. 2008; Madsen et al. 1997; Mcdougall et al. 2003).

Around 20% of new businesses in the European Union were composed of born global organizations with projections that it could reach over 40% before 2020; however, in some locations such as Belgium, Denmark and Romania, those figures rose up to 50% (Eurofound, 2012; OECD, 2013).

Theory and research on born global organizations are still in their initial stages, they are rather incomplete, focused on exploratory and descriptive analyses, without robust theories (Knight and Liesch 2016; Santos, 2015; Clerk et al. 2012; Jones et al. 2011). Nonetheless, as a guide for the initial comprehension of the phenomenon, it is possible to argue that born global organizations have several distinctive qualities such as:

• They tend to be SMEs that go through rapid internationalization due to their unique expertise (Ries, 2011; Bell et al. 2001).

• One of their main competitive advantage is the possibility of using multiple sales channels (Agostinho et al., 2015; Oviatt and Mcdougal 1994).

• Companies in which the strategic vision of globalization and internationalization is part of their corporate mission (Blank, 2013; gabrielsson et al., 2008).

• Their marketing model has the essential trait of seeking to create new opportunities through innovative and personalized products (Blank, 2013; Mort et al., 2012).

• Their networking process is centred on foreign direct investments, which are their main access point to strategic assets (Agostinho et al., 2015; Chen and Chen, 1998).

• High level of failures – 50% to 75% – given that they are high-tech start-ups that need to achieve a feasible scalable model to remain relevant internationally (Stayton and Mangemati 2016; Burke and Morley 2016; Marmer et al 2011; Ries 2011; Giardino et



al., 2015; Freeman and Engel, 2007; Radas and Božić, 2009; Colombelli et al., 2016; Tanev et al., 2015).

• Their CEOs and founders are culturally prone to internationalization, having personal business or academic international experience which leads them to become less averse to the risks intrinsic to that process (Knight and Liesch 2015; Luostarinen and Gabrielsson 2006; Mcdougall et al., 2014; Mcgaughey et al., 2011).

• The entrepreneurs reasoning process is effectual, not causal, focusing on a perspective of strategy as a flexible response to the availability of resources (Sarasvathy, 2009; Harms and Schiele, 2012, Nummela et al., 2014).

Notwithstanding such idiosyncratic traits, the barriers the born global organizations face throughout the internationalization process are quite similar to the challenges faced by traditional organizations such as lack of resources (capital, experience and networks); problems with the innovation process (aggravated by the lack of resources for R&D) and also lack of brand awareness in the market, they are not known even in their own country (Stayton and Mangemati 2016; Gabrielsson et al 2008; Knight and Cavusgil 2004; Rennie 1993; Moen and Servais 2002).

It is possible to summarize the following key points a company should attend in order to initiate and go through the internationalization process: a) Entrepreneurs focused on international markets; b) Adequacy of the organizational structure to the external market; c) Highly developed networking channels; d) Awareness towards cultural differences and the challenges of adaptation (Engelma and Fracasso 2013; Hofstede et al. 2010; Oviatt and Mcdougal 1994). 2.1. Barriers to the Internationalization Process

It is a fact that the barriers to the internationalization of companies, even SMEs, have been reduced considerably thanks to the globalization of the economy. Nonetheless, they remain multifaceted and to a certain extent, due to the capital limitations of SMEs, in certain circumstances virtually unsurmountable (Narayanan 2015; Andersson and Evers, 2015; Anderson et al 2013; Liesch et al. 2011; Hollenstein 2005).

The most basic classifications about internationalization barriers is related to their nature, they can either be internal – managerial and resource barriers – or external, related to institutional elements that are completely outside the entrepreneurs’ control on a political, geographical, legal, economic, environmental and cultural level (Cahen et al, 2016; Sekliuckien, 2013; Paunovic and Prebezac, 2010).

On comparing traditional companies with born global companies Kahiya (2013) has pointed that in the current literature there is 42 barriers, the 10 most prominent based on the number of studies are the following: (1) Competition in foreign markets, (2) language and cultural barriers; (3) foreign exchange risk, (4) location of distributors, (5) lack of government support, (6) working capital financing, (7) lack of flexible / skilled labour, (8) documentation requirements for exporting (9) identification of foreign markets, (10) Collecting and transfer of funds.

The importance of those factors tends to vary according to the intrinsic characteristics of a given company or market, nonetheless, it is possible to argue, based on the academic consensus that constant legislation changes and high taxation are the main external barriers whereas the main internal barriers are related to the lack of initial capital and working capital as well as human resources limitations (Hessels and Parker 2013).

For SMEs the situation is rather more complex, as the lack of time for strategic thinking, the weight of perceived barriers on the managerial top echelon, the little or no experience of employees and management with foreign markets, the high promotion costs and the sometimes poor availability of information about external markets constitute further barriers to the internationalization process (Shoham and Albaum 1995; Aaby and Slater 1989; Shaw and Darroch 2004; Xie and Suh, 2014;


Brambilla et al., 2012; Love and Roper, 2015; Toulouva et al. 2015). The main barriers and strands of thought are summarized on Table 1: Table 1: Barriers to Internationalization

Type of

Barriers

Variations Authors analysed

Lack of non-financial resources

Lack of human resources Lack of trained R&D personnel Lack of information about external markets Inadequate sales channels Lack of access to new technologies

Engelman et al. (2015); Charry et al (2016); Coviello and McAuley (1999); Dana (2004); Matlay and Mitra (2004); Eriksson et al (1997); Mayer and Skak (2002); Hollenstein (2005); Rialp and Rialp (2001); Toulova et al. (2015); Hessels and Parker (2013); Zimmerer and Scarborough (2008); Singh et al (2010); Ahokangas (1998); Kahiya (2013); Kahiya, (2017).

Financial restrictions

Inadequate funds Difficulty in getting government credit Long and complicated processes to get bank credit Little access to FDI Low working capital

Ray and Neck (2007); Harvie (2008); Harvie and Lee (2002); Eriksson et al (1997); Mayer and Skak (2002); Hollenstein (2005); Rialp and Rialp (2001), Chen and Chen, (1998); Paunovic and Prebezac (2010); Zimmerer and Scarborough (2008) ; Singh et al (2010).

Low entrepreneurial orientation

Non-entrepreneurial attitude (risk aversion and reliance on government subsidies) Absence of risk mitigation strategies Resources allocated exclusively in the exploitation of the internal market

Kahiya (2013); Kahiya (2017), Shepherd; Wiklund (2005); Zahra and George (2002); Jones et al. (2011); Rashid and Tan (2002); Alvarez and Busenitz (2001); Autio et al., (2000); Ghauri and Tesfom (2003); Paunovic and Prebezac (2010); Drucker (2011); Matanda and Freeman (2009).

Lack of competitiveness

Poor knowledge and innovation management Lack of product quality (international accreditations and reputation) Logistics and marketing limitations Inadequate technology Deficiencies in the R&D process

Bell et al (2003); Rashid and Tan, (2002); Ahlstrom et al (2006); Benzing et al (2009); Toulova et al., (2015); Hessels and Parker (2013); Singh et al (2010); Majocchi et al (2010), Porter (2008); Jalonen (2013); Brambilla et al., 2012; Love and Roper, (2015).

Political interference

Barriers to trade and customs Variation in regulations between countries Unstable Governments High bureaucracy rate High taxation

Kahiya (2013), Kahiya (2017), Narayanan (2015); Adhikari et al (2006); Paunović and Prebežac (2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Zimmerer and Scarborough, (2008); Porter (2008).

Managerial restrictions

Difficulty in gaining the stakeholders’ trust Lack of expertise in the area High turnover rates Time constraints on strategic planning Lack of an international expansion strategy Poor budget planning

Benzing et al., 2009; Hashim and Hassan (2008); Stayton and Mangemati (2016); Marsden and Forbes (2003); Beaver (2007); Love and Roper (2015); Toulova et al. (2015); Paunović and Prebežac (2010); Hessels and Parker, (2013); Rashid and Tan (2002); Alvarez and Busenitz (2001); Autio et al., (2000); Ghauri; Tesfom (2003);Ojasalo, (2011). Drucker (2001), Majocchi et al (2010), Porter (2008); Matanda; Freeman (2009).

Cultural distances

Cultural barriers Language restrictions Religious differences Problems with leadership and management styles

Rashid and Tan (2002); Calof and Beamish (1995); Dana (2004); Toulova et al. (2015); Johanson and Vahlne (1990).

Physical distances

Precarious infrastructure, High travel costs, Logistical and transportation barriers

Toulova et al. (2015); Johanson and Vahlne (1977); Calof and Beamish (1995).

Low level of international networking

Low international recognition Restrictive Benchmarking Failures in the development, identification and communication with customers,

Agostinho et al (2015); Kasabov (2015); Ghauri and Tesfom (2003); Hashim and Hassan (2008); Zain and Ng, (2006); Coviello and Mcauley (1999); Coviello and Munro, (1997); Chetty et al. (2000); Johanson and Kao



partners, suppliers and investors. Failures in the identification of potential customers Difficulty with technology transfers

(2010); Wallin et al (2015), Hashim and Hassan (2008); Ojala and Ojala (2009); Zain and Ng (2006) Camison and Villar-Lopez (2010).

Source: Elaborated by the authors.

There is a consensus in the academic community that points out to effective networking as an

essential element to overcome many of those barriers and, on the other hand, lack of networking as a pervasive factor that increments the natural difficulties of the existing barriers for isolating the companies in their internal markets, leaving them vulnerable to predatory competition (D’angelo et al. 2013; Schweizer 2013; Agostinho et al., 2015; Wallin et al. 2015; Ghauri 2003; Hashim and Hassan, 2008;Ojala, 2009; Zain and Ng, 2006).

Despite the SMEs’ ability to respond more promptly to external changes due to their dynamic decision marking structure and natural facility to networking, those organizations struggle to overcome specific barriers usually related to human and financial resources. Thus, the size of the company may be considered barriers or a driving force for internationalization, depending exclusively on other factors such as entrepreneurial competence, access to external resources, effective networking and strategic planning (Korsakiene and Tvaronaviciene 2012; Toulova et al. 2015; Hutchinson et al. 2006).

3. Business Incubators There are well over 7000 business incubators in the world, almost 2000 only in the United States and around 1000 in Europe. Such numbers could increase dramatically depending on the concept of business incubator utilized in the analysis. In Brazil, there are about 370 active business incubators, raising more than 2300 companies with over 200 graduated companies, generating over 50.000 jobs (Al-Mubarak and Busler, 2014; Engelman et al. 2015; Chandra and Fealey 2009)

Business incubators are essentially a structure of resource sharing – office facilities, knowledge sharing, access to networking, monitoring, technical support and training – that foment the creation and development of SMEs in general and born global start-ups in particular (Tzafestas 2018; Engelman et al 2015). Their raison d'être lies on the control and support that occur during the incubation periods in order to facilitate the consolidation process of the companies and reduce the mortality rate – from around 70% to slightly over 20% – providing the development of competitive advantage for SMES (Silva et al 2013; Aunović and Prebezac 2010; Etzkowitz 2008; Dias, 2007).

Business incubators contribute to the sustainability of companies by training, resource sharing and network optimization, all three elements that are vital for the development of the internationalization process which is a becoming an imperative for companies to survive, especially high tech companies (Paunović; and Prebežac2010; Zimmerer and Scarborough; 2008).

The evolution of business incubators is patent in the development of their core activities and the range of value added services, following the dynamics of the market in terms of competitiveness, internationalization and new business models (Bruneel et al. 2012; Mian et al, 2016). Table 2 resumes the different generations of business incubators, their nature, focus and services: Table 2: Different Generations of Business Incubators – Nature, Focus and Services

Nature Focus Services

1st Generation Facilities and infrastructure • Spaces with subsidized costs.

• Shared facilities - meeting room, auditorium, cafeteria, etc.

• Telephone, internet, secretarial services, etc.


2nd Generation Corporate intelligence • Training in relevant management areas (sales, marketing, strategy, budget planning, etc.).

• Support in the recruitment and selection of skilled labour.

• Generation of intellectual capital through market research, content creation, etc.

• Specialized consultancy services (integrated to the incubator or outsourced) in legal or governmental matters

3rd Generation Network • Facilitation of networking between incubated companies and other stakeholders.

• Support for the internationalization process.

• Integration of incubated companies with investors, business angels and venture capitalists.

• Involvement in international events

4th Generation Virtual • Dissemination of information.

• Support for the formation of online networks.

• Online business supporting services.

• Creation of intellectual capital.

Source: Created by the author based on Mian et al. (2016); Engelman et al. (2015); Bruneel et al., (2012), Abduh et al. (2007); Bollingfort and Ulhoi (2005)

Most of the services provided from the second generation onwards can and should be integrated

into strategic actions directed to the process of internationalization. Services related to networking should have no boundaries and their main objective should lie in reducing the limitation of geographic barriers. Over 50% of the European incubators give direct support to the internationalization process through technical training and networking development, focusing on exporting and business partnerships. Business incubators are gradually becoming centres of knowledge dissemination and business internationalization (Engelman et al 2015; Mian et al. 2016; Aerts et al. 2007).

Following that trend, it is possible to point out to the main constructs related to the services of incubators that contribute to the internationalization of incubated businesses, bringing out key performance indicators (Engelman 2015). Such constructs are summarized on Table 3: Table 3: Constructs, Factors and Services Associated with the Actions of the Incubators that Contribute to

the Internationalization and Competitiveness of Incubated Companies

Constructs Factors Related Services

Entrepreneurs • International Focus

• Tolerance to risk taking

• Ability to mitigate risks

• Proactivity

• Ability to coordinate activities globally

• Industry experience

• International experience

• Digital tools for business creation and growth management

• Stimulation of technology transfers

• Support through HR technologies

• Basic and advanced training in entrepreneurship

• Career Counseling

Organizational Characteristics

• International Mission

• Innovative products and services

• Differentials and unique features

• Multiple sales channels

• Emphasis on innovation

• Emphasis on marketing

• Emphasis on quality

• International strategies

• Resource allocation

• Skilled labor

• I.T. Structure

• Shared physical structure (auditorium, meeting room, etc.)

• Organizational Development Consulting

• Facilities with subsidized costs

• Training to build a digital culture

• Shared resources strategy

• Virtualization of services



Network • National networks

• International networks

• Technology transfers

• Access to angel investors and seed capital

• Facilitating access to credit and investors

• Marketing aimed at attracting new talents

• Association and network with external businesses and research bodies

External markets

• Characteristics of the global environment

• Specific market characteristics

• Megatrends

• Intensive Technology Vs. regional development

• Born globals Vs. Traditional SMEs

• Contacts with international incubators

• Research on external and internal market trends

• Follow-up of graduated companies

• Formation of international partnerships

• Training focused on matters of relevance (export, budget planning, languages, logistics, etc.)

Source: Adapted from Engelman et al. (2015), Charry et al (2016); Mian et al. (2016), Ahmad, 2014; Bruneel et al., (2012); Etzkowitz, (2002)

3. Research Method Given the business related nature of the research, the authors followed the precepts highlighted by Saunders et al. (2016), seeking to identify primary, secondary and tertiary sources. Thus, Scopus/Embase, Web of Science, Periódicos Capes/MEC, Google Academics and SciFinder were analysed on March 2, 2018 for relevant literature both in English and Portuguese. The following search terms were utilized: “Internationalization”, “Internationalization Barriers” and “Business Incubators”.

Titles and abstracts were revised by the authors in order to identify the studies that brought relevant information to address the research objective. Following the initial screening, the relevant articles were analysed following a content analysis approach (Bardin, 2011), leading to the codification of results and the definition of categories, examining the constructs in a replicable and systematic manner. It was noted that the articles selected fit into four main themes: (1) Internationalization models – characteristics and limitations; (2) Barriers to internationalization; (3) Born global enterprises/Startups; (4) Internationalization of SMEs; (5) Innovation management; (6) Network management. It is important to notice that most articles fit into more than one of those categories as they are profoundly interlinked.

The resultant definition and validation of the constructs followed several methodological steps – presented as questions and answers on Table 5 – as to determine their conceptual and logical rigour. Table 4: Construct Validation

Question Answer

• The process of identification of the construct occurred through the definition of phenomenon, object and attribute?

• Yes, the analysis and development of the construct followed that logical order. See tables 6, 7, 8, and 9.

• Is the universe to which the construct refers clearly defined?

• Yes, each construct refers to a specific universe identified in the research.

• Are the constructs based on some theory? • Yes, all constructs were developed to address the relevant theories studied.

Source: Adapted from Chapa and Stringer (2013); Bryman and Bell (2011); Bardin, (2011).


5. Results Based on the research undertaken, it is feasible to argue that in order to develop a research instrument able to aid to the identification and measurement of the barriers to the internationalization of incubated companies, it is necessary to focus on 4 interrelated constructs, each carrying particular phenomena, objects and attributes that are profoundly interconnected.

The first construct is related to the phenomenon of the Strategic Management of Internationalization, having as objects economic, cultural and managerial criteria as seen in the relevant literature. Their attributes are directly related to the strategic management response to internal and external barriers, to the driving forces that compel internationalization and to the effectiveness of the networking undertaken by their leaders. The key element of the construct is the inter-relation of the strategic management to these internal and external attributes and how that can affect the internationalization process. Table 5 specifies the phenomenon, objects and attributes related to the construct as well as the main authors studied: Table 5: Construct 1 – Strategic Management of Internationalization

Object Attribute Authors

Economic Criteria

Global Demand Agostinho et al., (2015); Drucker (2011); Andersen and Buvik (2002); Axinn and Matthyssens (2001); Chang (2011); Kotler and Armstrong (1993); Gjellerup (2000); Ernst and Young (2015); Andersson and Evers (2015); Anderson et al. (2013); Liesch et al., (2011).

Economic Criteria

International Competition

Agostinho et al (2015); Zimmerer and Scarborough (2008); Wattanasupachoke (2002); Ball et al (2004); Oslo (2012); Axinn and Matthyssens: (2001); Chang: (2011); Ernst and Young, (2015); Andersson and Evers (2015); Anderson et al (2013); Liesch et al (2011).

Strategic Planning

Growth Strategy (Incremental or Born Global)

Carneiro and Dib (2006); Johanson and Vahlne, (1977; 2009); Oviatt and Mcdougall (2003); Madsen and Servais (1997) Gabrielsson and Kirpalani (2012); Gabrielsson et al (2008); Madesen; Servais (1997); Rennie (1993); Mort et al., (2012); Knight and Cavusgil, (2004); Guerrero et al (2015); Autio et al., (2000); Weerawardena et al (2007).

Strategic Planning

Networking Planning

Johanson and Mattsson (1988); Johanson and Vahlne, (1990); Coviello (2006); Vapola (2011); Soderqvist (2013); Agostinho et al (2015); Kasabov (2015); Ghauri and Tesfom (2003); Hashim; Hassan (2008); Zain and Ng (2006); Coviello and Mcauley (1999); Coviello; Munro, (1997); Chetty et al.(2000); Johanson and Kao (2010); Wallin et al (2015), Hashim; Hassan (2008); Ojala and Ojala (2009); Zain and Ng (2006) Camison; Villar-Lopez (2010).

Strategic Planning

Multiple Sales Channels

Oviatt and Mcdougall (1994); Wallin et al., (2015); Lutz et al., (2010; Bartkus, (2010); Coviello and Mcauley (1999); Dana, (2004); Matlayand Mitra (2004); Rashid and Tan, (2002).

Strategic Planning

Adequacy of the Organizational Structure for the External Market

Engelman and Fracasso (2012); Engelman et al (2015): Hofsted, (2010); Oviatt and Mcdougall (1994); Toulova et al (2015); Rashid and Tan, (2002);

Cultural Criteria

Consumers’ behaviour

Andersen and Buvik (2002); Matthyssens (2001); Kotler and Armstrong (1993), Drucker (1977); Cuervo-Cazurra, (2007); Gassmann and Keupp; (2007); Barney; (1991)

Cultural Criteria

Cultural Proximities

Waswoska, 2016; Chinta et al., 2015; Gabrielsson (2004); Johanson and Vahlne (1977; 2009); Andersen and Buvik, (2002); Bilkey; Tesar, (1977); Cavusgil, (1980); Czinkota, (1982); Reid, (1981).

Cultural Criteria

Corporate Mission

Carneiro and Dib (2006); Johanson and Vahlne (1977; 2009); Gabrielsson et al., (2008); Mian et al. (2016) Baraldi and Havenvid, (2016).

Cultural Criteria

Previous International Activities

Engelman and Fracasso (2012) Engelman; Zen; Fracasso (2015); Hofsted, (2010); Oviatt and Mcdougall (1994); Charry et al 2016; Engelman and Fracasso (2012); Engelman et al. (2015); Mian et al. (2016); Schwartz (2008); Abdhu et al (2007); Aerts (2007); Etzkowitz (2002); Baraldi and Havenvid (2016).




Knowledge and Innovation Management

Knowledge Accumulation

Johanson; Vahlne (1977; 2009); Pessoa et al (2008); Gans; Stern (2003); Warren et al (2009); Drucker (1995); Autio et al (2000) De Clercq, (2012) Eriksson et al (1997); Grant (2002); Jalonen (2013).


Unique Nature of Expertise

Bell et al (2001); Gansand Stern (2003); Warren et al (2009); ORT et al., 2012; Agostinho et al., (2015); Giardino et al., (2015); Sarasvathy (2009).


High Tech Start-ups/E-Businesses

Lemminger et al (2014); Gans and Stern (2003); Warren et al (2009); Blank, (2013); Agostinho et al., (2015); Colombelli et al., (2016); Tanev et al., (2015); Kolvereid and Isaksen, (2006); Ries, (2011); Giardino et al., (2015); Freeman and Engel, 2007; Radas and Božić, (2009).


Entrepreneurial Activity Focused on the International Market

Engelman and Fracasso (2012); Hofsted (2010); Oviatt and Mcdougall (1994); Gans and Stern (2003); Warren et al (2009); Baum et al. (2013); Moreno and Casillas, (2008); Nummela (2004)


Innovation Efficiencies and Deficiencies

Rennie (1993); OSLO (2012); Levitt (1963); Schumpeter (1951); Engelman et al. (2015); Camison et al. (2010); Coviello (2006).


Oriented Action Levitt (1963); Misses (1949); Schumpeter, 1951; Pinto et al.(2010); Kotler and Armstrong (1993); Camison; Villar-Lopez, (2010); Coviello (2006).


Resource Planning

Bessant et al (2009); Ahokangas (1998); Alvarez and Busenitz (2001); Shepherd (2005); Wiklund (2005); Xie (2014); Suh (2014); Hall (1993); Barney (1991).


Innovative Products/Services

Rennie (1993); OSLO (2012); Levitt (1963); Schumpeter (1951); Balan; and Lindsay (2007); Etzkowitz (2008); Freeman and Engel (2007); Knight; Cavusgil (2004); Rogers (2003)


New Production Methods

OSLO (2012); Dunning (1988); Levitt (1963); Schumpeter (1951); Balan; and Lindsay (2007); Etzkowitz (2008); Freeman and Engel (2007); Knight and Cavusgil (2004); Calof and Beamish (1995); Sekliuckien1 (2013); Wood (2011).


Focus on New Markets

Bessant and Tidd (2009); Rogers (2003); OSLO (2012); Axinn and Matthyssens, (2002); Gjellerup, (2000); Johanson and Vahlne (1999).


Industrial Sector Restructuring

Balan and Lindsay (2007); OSLO (2012); Schumpeter (1951).


The second construct is related to the phenomenon of the business incubators management,

having as objects their strategic positioning in relation to the internationalization imperative and networking management, focusing on attributes related to their services, nature and structure. Given that the vast majority of business incubators in Brazil belong to public institutions of high education, it was chosen to leave out the construct objects related to financial performance – costs and profitability. Details can be seen on Table 6: Table 6: Construct 2 – Business Incubators Management


Incubators Management

Physical Resources Engelman and Fracasso (2012); Engelman et al. (2015); Mian et al, (2016); Schwartz (2008) Anprotec (2016); Charry et al (2016); Barahona, (2016); Mian (2011); Barbero et al (2012) Hoffman, Mais ; Amal (2010); Bruneel et al (2012); Phan et al (2003), Rice (2002), NBIA, 2014




Consulting Services, Counseling, Research and Training

Charry et al (2016); Engelman and Fracasso (2012); Anprotec (2016); Engelman et al.(2015); Mian et al, (2016); Schwartz (2008), Bruneel et al (2012); Gans and Stern (2003); Warren et al (2009); Phan et al (2003); Rice (2002); NBIA (2014); Ahmad(2014); Bergek and Norman (2008).


Focus on International Quality Standards

Charry et al (2016); Barahona (2016) ; Engelman and Fracasso (2012); Engelman et al. (2015); Mian et al (2016); Schwartz (2008); Mian (2011); Barbero et al (2012) Hoffman et al (2010); Bergek and Norman, 2008

Entrepreneurial Orientation

Recruitment focusing on Entrepreneurial Skills

Charry et al (2016); Barahona (2016); Dias (2007); Etzkowitz (2008); Engelman and Fracasso (2012); Engelman et al (2015); Mian et al. (2016); Schwartz (2008); Shah and Pahnke (2014); Coviello and Munro (1997); Coviello (2006); Musteen et al (2010); Yuan-Chien et al., (2011); Mian (2011); Barbero et al (2012) Hoffman et al. (2010); Etzkowitz (2002); Baraldi and Havenvid (2016)


International Business Selection Criteria

Charry,Arias-Pérez ; Barahona 2016; Engelman and Fracasso (2012); Engelman et al (2015); Mian et al (2016); Schwartz (2008); Abdhu et al (2007); Aerts (2007); Etzkowitz (2002); Baraldi and Havenvid (2016)


Focus on Internationalization and Exportation

Charry et al (2016); Barahona (2016); Engelman and Fracasso (2012); Engelman et al.(2015); Mian et al, (2016); Schwartz (2008); Shah ; Pahnke (2014); Coviello ; Munro (1997); Coviello (2006); Musteen et al., (2010); Yuan-Chien et al., (2011); Bruneel et al (2012); Abdhu et al (2007); Aerts (2007); Bergek and Norman, 2008

Networking Management

Participation and Guidance in Networking Events

Charry et al 2016; Engelman and Fracasso (2012); Engelman et al. (2015); Mian et al (2016); Schwartz (2008); Bruneel et al (2012)


Guidance on Technology Transfer Initiatives

Charry et al 2016; Engelman and Fracasso (2012); Engelman et al. (2015); Mian et al (2016); Schwartz (2008); Shah and Pahnke (2014); Coviello and Munro (1997); Coviello (2006); Musteen et al., (2010); Yuan-Chien et al., (2011), Bruneel et al (2012); Abdhu et al (2007); Gans and Stern (2003); Warren et al (2009)


Inter-relation with Graduated Companies, other Incubators and Stakeholders

Charry et al 2016; Engelman and Fracasso (2012); Engelman et al. (2015); Mian et al (2016); Baraldi and Havenvid, (2016), Ahmad, 2014.


The third construct is related to phenomenon of internal and operational/managerial barriers.

Their objects are intimately related to the first construct of strategic management internationalization; however, they are conceptually distinct, focusing on resource restrictions, specifically, inappropriate workforce and operational barriers within the organizations. They look at similar problems from a different angle, emphasizing the need for process and resources optimization. The detailed construct can be seen on Table 7: Table 7: Construct 3 – Internal (Managerial and Operational) Barriers


Resource Restrictions

Lack of Human Resources

Wallin et al., (2015); Lutz et al., (2010); Bartkus, (2010); Coviello and Mcauley (1999); Dana, (2004); Matlay; Mitra (2004); Rashid and Tan, (2002)


Low focus on R&D Wallin et al., (2015); Lutz et al., (2010); Bartkus, (2010); Coviello and Mcauley (1999); Dana, (2004); Matlay; Mitra (2004); Rashid and Tan, (2002)


Lack of Information About External Markets






Inappropriate Sales Channels



Lack of Access to New Technologies


Poor Networking

Failures in the Development, Identification and Communication with Clients, Partners, Suppliers and Investors

Agostinho et al., (2015); Kasabov, (2015); Wallin et al., (2015), Ghauri, (2003); Hashim and Hassan (2008); Ojala, (2009); Zain and Ng (2006)

Poor Networking

Failure to identify potential customers


Poor Networking

Difficulty with Technology Transfer


Low Entrepreneurial Orientation

Negative Attitude (Risk Aversion and Dependence on Government Grants)

Paunović; and Prebežac(2010); Toulova et al (2015); Rashid and Tan, (2002); Alvarez; Busenitz, (2001); Autio et al (2000); Ghauri, (2003); Ojasalo; Jasalo, (2011).


Attention Aimed Only at the Exploitation of the Internal Market

Paunović; and Prebežac(2010); Toulova et al (2015); Rashid and Tan, (2002); Alvarez and Busenitz(2001); Autio et al (2000); Ghauri, (2003); Ojasalo; Jasalo, (2011).


Lack of international Experience from the human resources

Paunović; and Prebežac(2010); Toulova et al (2015); Rashid and Tan, (2002); Alvarez and Busenitz(2001); Autio et al (2000); Ghauri, (2003); Ojasalo; Jasalo, (2011).


Poor Perception of Cost/Benefit and Profitability

Paunović; and Prebežac(2010); Toulova et al (2015); Rashid and Tan, (2002); Alvarez and Busenitz(2001); Autio et al (2000); Ghauri, (2003); Ojasalo and Jasalo (2011).

Lack of Competitiveness

Poor Knowledge and Innovation Management

Stayton and Mangematin (2016); Balan; and Lindsay (2007); Freeman and Engel (2007); Jalonen (2013); Knight; Cavusgil (2004); Matlay; Mitra (2004); Ries, (2011); Rogers (2003); Vossen (1998)


Lack of Product Quality (International Accreditations and Reputation)

Bell, (2003); Rashid and Tan, (2002); Ahlstrom et al., (2006); Benzing et al., (2009); Leavit 1963


Logistic Limitations Toulova et al.(2015); Johanson and Vahlne (1977); Calof and Beamish (1995); Bell, (2003); Rashid and Tan, (2002); Ahlstrom et al., (2006); Benzing et al., (2009)


Inadequate Technology Cahen et al (2016);Tanevet al (2015);Gassmann and Keupp (2007); Corona et al.(2006); Kogut and Zander (1992)


Deficiencies in the Process of R&D

Bell, (2003); Rashid and Tan, (2002); Ahlstrom et al., (2006); Benzing et al., (2009); Aspelund et al (2007)


Little Time dedicated to Internationalization Operations

Costa et al., (2018); Brambilla et al (2012); Love and Roper (2015); Ahlstrom et al., (2006); Benzing et al., (2009)

Management Restrictions

Difficulty in gaining the trust of stakeholders

Agostinho et al., (2015); Giardino et al., (2015); Benzing et al., (2009); Hashim and Hassan (2008)


Lack of International Expertise – External Trade

Agostinho et al., (2015); Giardino et al., (2015); Benzing et al., (2009); Hashim and Hassan (2008); Sarasvathy (2009); Carneiro and Dib (2007)


High Turnover Levels Agostinho et al., (2015); Giardino et al., (2015); Benzing et al., (2009); Hashim and Hassan (2008)




Difficulties in the Recruitment, Selection and Development of workers

Majogoro and Mgabo (2012): Kolvereid and Isaksen (2006); Agostinho et al., (2015); Giardino et al., (2015); Benzing et al., (2009); Hashim and Hassan (2008)


The fourth construct is related to the phenomenon of the external barriers to the

internationalization process. Its essential characteristic is to focus on objects that are literally out of the entrepreneurs’ control; however, their potential risks could be mitigated through a strategic planning driven towards internationalization and growth. Their main objects are microeconomic (market) barriers as well as macroeconomic elements – political, legal, technical, social and cultural. Details can be seen on Table 8: Table 8: Construct 4 – External Barriers


Market Restrictions

Different Product / Service Applications

Kasabov, (2015); Paunović; and Prebežac (2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Ojasalo and Ojasalo, (2011); Fombrun, (1996); Crick, (2002); Kotler and Armstrong (1993)

Market Restrictions

Competitive Local Markets

Kasabov, (2015); Paunović; and Prebežac (2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Ojasalo and Ojasalo, (2011); Fombrun, (1996); Crick, (2002); Johanson and Vahlne (1977)

Market Restrictions

Different Quality Standards

Kasabov, (2015); Paunović; and Prebežac (2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Ojasalo and Ojasalo, (2011); Fombrun, (1996); Crick, (2002)

Market Restrictions

Restrictions on Intellectual Property

Kasabov, (2015); Paunović; and Prebežac (2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Ojasalo and Ojasalo, (2011); Chang and Breitzman (2009) Fombrun, (1996); Crick, (2002)

Market Restrictions

Monopolistic Markets Kasabov, (2015); Paunović; and Prebežac(2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Ojasalo and Ojasalo, (2011); Fombrun, (1996); Crick, (2002)

Market Restrictions

Low Quality Local Labour

Kasabov, (2015); Paunović; and Prebežac(2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Ojasalo and Ojasalo, (2011); Fombrun, (1996); Crick, (2002)

Market Restrictions

Difficulty in Adapting the Marketing Mix

Kasabov, (2015); Paunović; and Prebežac (2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Ojasalo and Ojasalo, (2011); Fombrun, (1996); Crick, (2002); Kotler and Armstrong (1993)

Political / Governmental Barriers

Trade and Customs Barriers

Adhikari et al., (2006); Paunović; and Prebežac (2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Kahiya (2013); Kahiya (2017); Narayanan (2015); Ojasalo and Ojasalo (2011); Sekliuckien (2013); Shaw and Darroch (2004); Shoham and Albaum (1995)


Variation in Country Regulations

Adhikari et al., (2006); Paunović; and Prebežac(2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Kahiya (2013); Kahiya (2017); Narayanan (2015); Ojasalo and Ojasalo (2011); Sekliuckien (2013); Shaw and Darroch (2004); Shoham and Albaum (1995)


Complex Legal Restrictions



Difficulties in the Transfer of Funds

Adhikari et al., (2006); Paunović; and Prebežac(2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Kahiya (2013); Narayanan (2015); Ojasalo and Ojasalo (2011); Sekliuckien (2013); Shaw and Darroch (2004); Shoham and Albaum (1995)


Unstable Governments Adhikari et al., (2006); Paunović; and Prebežac(2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Kahiya (2013); Narayanan (2015); Ojasalo and Ojasalo (2011); Sekliuckien (2013); Shaw and Darroch (2004); Shoham and Albaum (1995)


High Bureaucracy Levels






High Taxation Adhikari et al., (2006); Paunović; and Prebežac(2010); Sekliuckien, (2013); Kahiya (2013); Narayanan (2015); Ojasalo and Ojasalo (2011); Sekliuckien (2013); Shaw and Darroch (2004); Shoham and Albaum (1995)

Physical Distances

Precarious Infrastructure Toulova et al (2015); Waswoska, 2016; Chinta et al., 2015; Cuervo-Cazurra, 2007

Physical Distances

High Transportation Costs

Toulova et al (2015); Kahiya (2017)

Physical Distances

Logistics Barriers Toulova et al (2015); Kahiya (2013); Johanson and Vahlne (1977); Calof and Beamish (1995)

Cultural Distances

Lack of Knowledge about Local Culture

Toulova et al, (2015); Rashid and Tan, (2002); Calof and Beamish, (1995); Dana, (2004); Johanson and Vahlne (1977); Johanson and Vahlne (1999); Mejri and Umemoto (2010); Hofstede et al (2005); Zimmerer and Scarborough, (2008); Wattanasupachoke (2002); Ball et al., (2004); Andersen and Buvik, (2002); Axelsson and Johanson (1992); Forsgren et al., (2005)

Cultural Distances

Language barriers Toulova et al, (2015); Rashid and Tan, (2002); Calof and Beamish, (1995); Dana, (2004); Hofstede et al (2005); Zimmerer and Scarborough, (2008); Wattanasupachoke (2002)

Cultural Distances

Religious Barriers Toulova et al, (2015); Rashid and Tan, (2002); Hofstede et al (2005); Zimmerer and Scarborough, (2008)

Cultural Distances

Difficulty in adapting Management Styles

Andersson and Evers (2015); Toulova et al (2015); Rashid and Tan, (2002); Calof and Beamish, (1995); Dana, (2004); Hofsted et al. (2010)


6. Conclusion It is important to point out that the four constructs discussed are not isolated forces within and without the internationalization process, but rather, essentially interrelated phenomena; thus, whilst a preliminary analysis can benefit from studying those constructs separately; a robust and inclusive research instrument must encompass a global analysis of all constructs interrelations.

The present study was carried out to identify the constructs to create a research instrument suitable to analyse the internationalization barriers that incubated companies have to face, thus such research instrument should be not only apt to identify the internationalization barriers from the entrepreneurs’ perspective; but also, to probe into the very competitiveness of the business incubators, recognizing internationalization as a key performance indicator. Moreover, the instrument should be useful as checklist to guide incubators and entrepreneurs alike.

In order to obtain reliable results in future research, it is also necessary to establish some criteria to determine amongst the incubated companies and incubators, which ones are relevant for the study, given that some companies do not offer products/services that can be taken beyond the local market, which would ultimately distort any results reached by the research.

Finally, the criteria for the development of the research instrument should be decided obeying a strict methodological approach, ensuring that que research instrument translates the constructs into the right questions, in logical sequence and in an interrelated manner conducive of obtaining measurable results.


References [1] Adhikari, A., Derashid, C.,& Zhang H. (2006). Public policy, political connections, and

effective tax rates: Longitudinal evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy , 25, 574-595.

[2] Aernoudt, R. (2004). Incubators: tool for entrepreneurship?. Small Business Economics, 23(2), 127-135.

[3] Aerts, K., Matthyssens, P., & Vandenbempt, K. (2007). Critical role and screening practices of European business incubators. Technovation, 27(5), 254-267.

[4] Agostinho, C., Lampathaki, F., Jardim-Goncalves, R., & Lazaro, O. (2015). Accelerating Web-Entrepreneurship in Local Incubation Environments. International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, 215, 183-194.

[5] Ahlstrom, D., Bruton G., & Yeh K. (2008). Private firms in China: Building legitimacy in an emerging economy.. Journal of World Business , 43(4), 385-399.

[6] Al-dajani, H., Dedoussis, E., Watson, E., & Tzokas, N. (2014). Graduate Entrepreneurship Incubation Environments: A Framework of Key Success Factors. Industry and Higher Education, 28(3), 201-213.

[7] Aliaga, M.,& Gunderson, B. (2006).Interactive statistics.Upper Saddle River, N.J.:Pearson Prentice Hall

[8] Al-mubaraki, H., & Busler, M. (2014). Incubator successes: Lessons learned from successful incubators towards the twenty-first century. World Journal of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 11, 44-52.

[9] Alvarez, S., & Busenitz, L. (2001). The entrepreneurship of resource-based theory. Journal of Management , 27, 755-775.

[10] Andersen, O. (). On the internationalization process of firms: a critical analysis. International Business Study, 24(2), .

[11] Andersen, O. (1977). Internationalization and market entry mode: a review of theories and conceptual frameworks. Management International Review, 37(2), 27-42.

[12] Andersen, O., Buvik, A. (2002). Firm’s internationalization and alternative approaches to the international customer/market selection. International Business Review, 11(3), 347-363.

[13] Andersson, S., & Evers, N. (2015). International opportunity recognition in international new ventures—a dynamic managerial capabilities perspective. International Entrepreneurship Journal, 13, 260-276.

[14] Andersson, S., Evers, N., & Griot, C. (2013). Local and international networks in small firm internationalization: cases from the Rhone-Alpes medical technology regional cluster. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 25(9-10), 867-888.

[15] Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Razavieh, A., & Sorensen, C. K. (2009).Introduction to Research in Education.Wadsworth:Cengage Learning

[16] Aspelund, A. Madsen, T., & Moen, O. (2007). A review of the foundation, international marketing strategies, and performance of international new ventures. European Journal of Marketing, 41(11-12), 1423-1448.

[17] Associação nacional de entidades promotoras de empreendimentos inovadores. (2016).Estudo de impacto econômico: segmento de incubadoras de empresas do brasil.http://www.anprotec.org.br/Relata/18072016%20Estudo_ANPROTEC_v6.pdf. Accessed 8 Fev 2018.

[18] Autio, E., Sapienza, H., & Almeida, J. (2000). Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity, and imitability on international growth. Academy of Management Journal , 43(5), 909-924.

[19] Axelsson, B., & Johanson, J. (1992).Industrial Networks.London, UK:Routledge [20] Axinn, C., & Matthyssens, P. (2002). Limits of internationalization theories in an unlimited

world. International Marketing Review , 19(5), 436-449.



[21] Ball, D. A., Mcculloch, W. H., Frantz, P. L., Geringer, J. M., & Minor, M. S. (2004).International business: the challenge of global competition.New York:McGraw Hill

[22] Baum, M., Schwens, C., & Kabst, R. (2013). International as opposed to domestic new venturing: The moderating role of perceived barriers to internationalization. International Small Business Journal, 31(5), 536-562.

[23] Beaver, G. (2007). The strategy payoff for smaller enterprises. Journal of Business Strategy, 28(1), 11-17.

[24] Bendig A. (1954). Reliability and the Number of Rating Scale Categories. Journal of Applied Psychology, 38, 38-40.

[25] Benzing, C., Chu, H., & Kara, O. (2009). Entrepreneurs in Turkey: A factor analysis of motivation, success factors, and problems. Journal of Small Business Management , 47, 58-91.

[26] Blank, S. (2013). Why the lean start-up changes everything. Harvard business review, 91(5), 63-72.

[27] Boone, H., & Boone, D. (2012). Analyzing Likert data. Journal of Extension, 50(2), 30. [28] Boote A. (1981). Reliability testing of psychographic scales: Five-point or seven-point?

Anchored or labeled? . Journal of Advertising Research, 21, 53-60. [29] Bowling A. (1997). Buckingham: Open University Press. Research Methods in Health, , . [30] Box, G., Hunter, W., & Hunter, j. (1978). Statistics for Experimenters: An Introduction to

Design, Data Analysis, and Model Building. Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics, 1, 653.

[31] Bunge, M. (1976).La investigación científica: su estrategia y su filosofia.London:Macmillan [32] Calof, J., & Beamish, P. (1995). Adapting to foreign markets: Explaining internationalization.

International Business Review, 4(2), 115-131. [33] Camison, C., & Villar-lopez, A. (2010). Effect of SMEs' international experience on foreign

intensity and economic performance: the mediating role of internationally exploitable assets and competitive strategy. Journal of Small Business Management, 48(2), 116-151.

[34] Cantillon, R. (2011).Essai sur la nature du commerce en général.Paris:Institut Coppet [35] Carneiro, J., & Dib, L. (). Avaliação comparativa do escopo descritivo e explanatório dos

principais modelos de internacionalização de empresas. Revista Eletrônica de Negócios Internacionais da ESPM, 2, 2007.

[36] Cavusgil S. (1980). On the internationalization process of firms. European Research, 8(6), 273-281. [37] Cervo, A. L., & Bervian, P. A., (1996).Metodologia Científica.São Paulo:Makron [38] Chandra, A., & Fealey, T. (2009). Business Incubation in the United States, Brazil and China:

A comparison of role of government, incubator funding and financial services. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 13, .

[39] Chang, C., & Breitzman, A. (2009). Using patents prospectively to identify emerging, high-impact technological clusters. Research Evaluation, 18(5), 357-364.

[40] Choo, C., & Bontis, N. (eds.). (2002).The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge.New York:Oxford University Press

[41] Czinkota, M. (1982).Export Development Strategies: US Promotion Policies.New York:Praeger Publishers

[42] Dana, L.P. (2004).Handbook of Research on International Entrepreneurship.Cheltenham, UK:Edward Edgar

[43] D'angelo, A., Majocchi, A., Zucchella, A., & Buck, T. (2012). Geographical pathways for SME internationalization: insights from an Italian sample. International Marketing Review, 27, 143-165.


[44] Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.

[45] ()..: [46] Dosi, G., Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (2000).Introduction: The Nature and Dynamics of

Organizational Capabilities.New York:Oxford [47] Drake, J. E., & Miller, F. J. (1969).Marketing research: Intelligence and

management.:international textbooks [48] Drucker, P. (2001).The Essential Drucker. Selections of the Management Works of Peter F.

Drucker.Oxford:Butterworth-Heinemann [49] Drucker, P. (1977).Uma era de Descontinuidade.Rio de Janeiro:Zahar [50] Drucker, P. (1995).Sociedade Pós-Capitalista.Rio de Janeiro:Zahar [51] Dunning, J. (1994).Multinational enterprises and the global economy.England:Addisson-

Wesley [52] Engelman, R., & Fracasso, M. (2013). Contribuição das incubadoras tecnológicas na

internacionalização das empresas incubadas. Revista de Administração, 48, 165-178. [53] Engelman, R., Fracasso, E., Schmidt, S., & Zen, A. (2017). Intellectual capital, absorptive

capacity and product innovation. Management Decision, 55(3), 474-490. [54] Engelman, R., Zen, A., & Fracasso, E. (2015). The impact of the incubator on the

internationalization of firms. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 10, 29-39. [55] Eriksson, K., Johanson, j., Majkgård, A., & Sharma, D. (1997). Experiential knowledge and

cost in the internationalization process. Journal of International Business Studies, 28(2), 337. [56] Ernst & Young. (2015).Megatrends 2015 [57] Making sense of a world in motion.https://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/ey-

megatrends-report-2015/$FILE/ey-megatrends-report-2015.pdf. Accessed 12 Jan 2018. [58] Etemad, H. (2004). Internationalization of small and medium-sized enterprises: A grounded

theoretical framework and an overview. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 21(1), 1-21. [59] Gracioli, C., Godoy, L., Lorenzett, D., & Godoy, T. (2012). Capital intelectual: uma ferramenta

inovadora na busca por vantagens competitivas. Revista de Administração e Inovação, 9(4), 96-120. [60] Green, P., & Rao V. (1970). Rating scales and information recovery: How many scales and

response categories to use? . Journal of Marketing, 34, 33-39. [61] Junaid, A. (2014). A mechanisms-driven theory of business incubation. International Journal of

Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 20(4), 375-405. [62] Kahiya, E. (2017). Export barriers as liabilities: near perfect substitutes. European Business

Review, 29, 61-102. [63] Knight, G., & Cavusgil, T. (2004). Innovation, Organizational Capabilities, and the Born-

Global Firm. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(2), 124-141. [64] Knight, G., & Liesch, P. (2016). Internationalization: From incremental to born global. Journal

of World Business , 51, 93-102. [65] Korsakienė, R., & Tvaronavičienė, M. (2012). The internationalization of SMEs: an integrative

approach. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 13(2), 294-307. [66] Kotler, P., & Amstrong, G. (1993).Princípios de Marketing.Rio de Janeiro:Prentice-Hall do

Brasil [67] Kraus, P. (2006). O processo de internacionalização das empresas: o caso brasileiro. Revista de

Negócios, 11(2), 25-47. [68] Krogh, G. V., Ichijo, K., & Nonaka, I. (2001).Facilitando a criação de conhecimento -

Reinventando a empresa com o poder da inovação contínua.Rio de Janeiro:Campus [69] Lakatos, E. M., & Marconi, M. A. (2003).Fundamentos da Metodologia Científica.São

Paulo:Atlas



[70] Lakatos, I. (1978).The Methodology of Scientic Research Programmes.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press

[71] Lalkaka, R. (2003). Business incubators in developing countries: characteristics and performance. Entrepreneurship, Innovation and SMEs, 3(1-2), 31-55.

[72] Lall, s., Bowles, L., & Baird, R. (2013). Bridging the “Pioneer Gap”: The Role of Accelerators in Launching High-Impact Enterprises. Innovations, 8(3-4), 105-137.

[73] Langvinienė, N., Sekliuckienė, J., & Vengrauskas, P. (2010). Tarptautinis verslas. Technologija, , .

[74] Liesch, P., Håkanson, L., McGaughey, S., Middleton, S., & Cretchley, J. (2011). The evolution of the international business field: A scientometric investigation of articles published in its premier journal. Scientometrics, 88, 17-42.

[75] Lissitz, R., & Green, S. (1975). Effect of the number of scale points on reliability: A Monte-Carlo approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 10-13.

[76] Luostarinen, R., & Gabrielsson, M., (2006). Globalization and marketing strategies of born globals in SMOPECs. Thunderbird International Business Review, 48(6), 773-801.

[77] Madsen, T., & Servais, P. (1997). The internationalization of born globals: an evolutionary process? . International Business Review, 6(6), 561-583.

[78] Majocchi, A., Bacchiocchi, E., & Mayrhofer, U. (2005). Firm size, business experience and export intensity in SMEs: A longitudinal approach to complex relationships. International Business Review, 14(6), 719-738.

[79] Majogoro, K., & Mgabo, M. (2012). ‘Self-employment intention among university students: testing Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior (TPB)’. International Journal of Physical and Social Sciences, 2(8), 67-84.

[80] Matlay, H., & Mitra, J. (2004).Handbook of Research on International Entrepreneurship.:Edward Elgar

[81] Mattar, F. N. (1997).Pesquisa de marketing: metodologia, planejamento.São Paulo:Atlas [82] Mcadam, M., & Marlow, S. (2007). Building futures or stealing secrets? Entrepreneurial

cooperation and conflict within business incubators. International Small Business Journal, 25(4), 361-382.

[83] Mian, S., Fayolle, A., & Lamine, W. (2012). Building sustainable regional platforms for incubating science and technology businesses: Evidence from US and French science and technology park. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovaton, 13(4), 235-247.

[84] Mian, S., Lamine, W., & Fayolle, A. (2016). Technology Business Incubation: An overview of the state of knowledge. Technovation, 50-51, 1-12.

[85] Miguel, P. A. C., Fleury, A., Mello, C. H. P., Nakano, D. N., Lima, E. P., Pureza, V., et al. (2010).Metodologia de pesquisa em engenharia de produção e gestão de operações.Rio de Janeiro:Elsevier - Campus

[86] Miller G. (1956). The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information. The Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.

[87] Mises, L. (1949).Human Action.:Yale University Press [88] Moen, Ø., & Servais P. (2002). Borm Global or Gradual Global? Examining the export behavior

of Small and Medium sized enterprises. Journal of International Marketing, 10(3), 49-72. [89] Montgomery, D. C., Runger, G. (1993).Applied Statistics and Probability for Engineers.John

Wiley :Hoboken [90] Moreno, A., & Casillas, J. (2008). Entrepreneurial orientation and growth of SMEs: A causal

model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice , 32(3), 507-528.


[91] Mort, G., Weerawardena, J., & Liesch, P. (2012). Advancing entrepreneurial marketing: Evidence from born global firms. European Journal of Marketing, 46(3/4), 542-561.

[92] Nowak, M., & Grantham, C. (2000). The virtual incubator: Managing human capital in the software industry. Research Policy, 29(2), 125-134.

[93] Nummela, N. Saarenketo, S., Jokela, P., & Loane, S. (1989). Strategic decision-making of a born global: A comparative study from three small open economies. Management International Review, 54(4), 527-550.

[94] Nummela, N., Saarenketo, S., & Puumalainen, K. (2004). Global mind-set: A prerequisite for successful internationalization?. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 21(1), 51-64.

[95] Oaster T. (1989). Number of alternatives per choice point and stability of Likert-type scales. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 68(2), 549-550.

[96] Ojasalo, J., & Ojasalo, K., (2011). Barriers to internationalization of b-to-b services: theoretical analysis and empirical findings. International Journal of Systems Applications. Engineering &; Development , 1(5), 109-116.

[97] Oliveira, D. P. R. (1996).Planejamento Estratégico - Conceitos, Metodologia, Práticas.São Paulo:Atlas

[98] Oliveira, S. L. (1999).Tratado de metodologia científica.São Paulo:Pioneira [99] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013).Fostering SMEs'

Participation in Global Markets: Final Report.http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=CFE/SME(2012) 6/FINAL&docLanguage=Em. Accessed 18 may 2018.

[100] Rudio, F. V. (1986).Introdução ao projeto de pesquisa científica.Petrópolis:Vozes [101] Ruzzier, M., Antoncic, R., Hisrich D., & Konecnik, M. (2007). Human capital and SME

internationalization: a structural equation modelling study. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 24, 15-29.

[102] Ruzzier, M., Hisrich, R., & Antoncic, B. (2006). SME Internationalization Research: Past, Present, and Future. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 13(4), 476-497.

[103] Salvador, R., Porto, L., & Pessoa, F. (2008). Análise do Modelo Uppsala com foco nas competências requeridas para sua operacionalização. Revista Eletrônica Gestão e Sociedade, 2(3), .

[104] Sarantakos, S. (1993).Social Research.Brisbane:MacMillan Education [105] Sarasvathy, S. (2009).Effectuation: Elements of entrepreneurial expertise.Northampton,

MA:Edward Elgar Publishing [106] Schrader, A. (1974).Introdução à pesquisa social empírica: um guia para o planejamento, a

execução e a avaliação de projetos de pesquisa não experimentais.Porto Alegre:Globo [107] Schumpeter, J. (1942).Capitalism, socialism, and democracy.London:Allen & Unwin [108] Schumpeter, J. A. (1951).Essays on Entrepreneurs, Innovations, Business Cycles and the

Evolution of Capitalism.New Brunswick:Transaction Publishers [109] Schweizer, R. (2013). SMEs and networks: overcoming the liability of outsidership.. Journal of

International Entrepreneurship, 11(1), 80-103. [110] Sebrae--serviço brasileiro de apoio às micro e pequenas empresas. (2014).Abertura de

empresas-ramos e atividades.http://www.sebrae.com.br/sites/portalsebrae/artigos/ramos-de-atividades%208ef89e665b182410%20vgnvcm100000b272010arcrd. Acessed05 jul de 2018.

[111] Sekliuckien J. (2013). Lithuanian companies in emerging markets: internationalization motives and barriers. Economics and Management , 18(1), 124-133.

[112] Senik, Z., Isa, R., Sham, R., & Ayob, A. (2014). A Model for Understanding SMEs Internationalization in Emerging Economies. Jurnal Pengurusan , 41(2014), 25-42.

[113] Shepherd, D., & Wiklund, J. (2005). A Resource-Based Perspective. UK. Northampton, Massachusetts USA: Edward Edgar Publishing Limited. Entrepreneurial Small Business, , .



[114] Singh, G., Pathak, R., & Naz, R. (2010). Issues faced by SMEs in the internationalization process: results from Fiji and Samoa. International Journal of Emerging Markets , 5(2), 153-182.

[115] Singh, Y. K. (2006).Fundamental of Research Methodology and Statistics.New Delhi:Newage International Ltd

[116] Söderqvist, A., & Chetty, S. (2013). Strength of ties involved in international new ventures. European Business Review, 25(6), 536-552.

[117] Stayton, J. , & Mangematin, V. (2016). Startup time, innovation and Organisational emergence: A study of USA-based international technology ventures. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 14(3), 373-409.

[118] Theodorakopoulos, N., Kakabadse, N., & Mcgowan, C. (2014). What matters in business incubation? A literature review and a suggestion for situated theorizing. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 21(4), 602-622.

[119] Tocqueville, A. (1998).A democracia na América: Leis e Costumes.São Paulo:Martins Fontes [120] Toulova, M., Votoupalova, M., & Kubickova, L. (2015). Barriers of SMEs internationalization

and strategy for success in foreign markets. International Journal of Management Cases, 17, 4-20. [121] Toulova, M., Votoupalova, M., & Kubickova, L. (2015). Barriers of SMEs internationalization

and strategy for success in foreign markets. International Journal of Management Cases, 17, 4-20. [122] Turrioni, J. B., & Mello, C. H. P. (2012).Metodologia de pesquisa em engenharia de

produção.Itajubá:Universidade Federal de Itajubá [123] Tzafestas, S. (2018). The art and impact of physical and virtual enterprise incubators: the Greek

paradigm. Communications in Computer and Information , 19, 549-559. [124] Vanderstraeten, J., & Matthyssens, P. (2010). Measuring the performance of business

incubators A critical analysis of effectiveness approaches and performance measurement systems. International Council for Small Business (ICSB) World Conference Proceedings; Washington, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1254/fpj.118.334

[125] Vapola, T. (2011). The laws of attraction: What attracts innovative start-up firms to partnerships with global MNCs? . Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 9, 39-61.

[126] Viswanathan, M., Sudman, S., & Johnson, M. (2004). Maximum versus meaningful discrimination in scale response: Implications for validity of measurement of consumer perceptions about products. Journal of Business Research, 57(2), 108-124.

[127] Wąsowska, A. (2016). Perception of Export Barriers at Different Stages of the Internationalization Process -Evidence from European SMEs. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 12(4), 29-49.

[128] Wattanasupachoke, T. (2002). Internationalisation: motives and consequences. ABAC Journal , 22(30), 16-30.

[129] Weerawardena, J., Mort, G., Liesch, P., & Knight, G. (2007). Conceptualizing accelerated internationalization in the born global firm: a dynamic capabilities perspective. Journal of World Business , 42(3), 294-306.

[130] Welch, L., & Luostarinen, R. (1988). Internationalization: evolution of a concept. Journal of General Management, 14(2), 34-55.

[131] Wood, E., Khavul, S., Perez‐Nordtvedt, L., Prakhya, S., Dabrowski, R., & Zheng, C. (2011). Strategic Commitment and Timing of Internationalization from Emerging Markets: evidence from China, India, Mexico, and South Africa. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(2), 252-282.

[132] Xie, Y., & Suh, T. (2014). "Perceived resource deficiency and internationalization of small- and medium-sized firms," . Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 12(3), 207-229.


[133] Xie, Y., Suh, T. (2014). "Perceived resource deficiency and internationalization of small- and medium-sized firms," . Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 12(3), 207-229.

[134] Zahra, S. A., & GEORGE, G. (2002).Strategic Entrepreneurship.Oxford, UK:Blackwell [135] Zahra, S., Ireland, R., & Hitt, M. (2000). International expansion by new venture firms:

International diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning and performance. Academy of Management Journal , 43(5), 925-950.

[136] Zain, M., & Ng, S. (2006). The impact of network relationships on SMEs’ internationalization process. Thunderbird International Business Review , 48(2), 183-205.

[137] Zimmerer, T. W., & Scarborough, N. M. (2008).Essentials of entrepreneurship and small business management.Londres:Prentice Hall

[138] Aaby, N. E., Slater, S.F. (1989). Management influences on export performance: a review of the empirical literature 1978–88. International Marketing Review, 4, 7–26.

[139] Aerts, K., Matthyssens, P., Vandenbempt, K. (2007). Critical role and screening practices of European business incubators. Technovation, 27(5), 254–267.

[140] Agostinho, C., et al., (2015) Accelerating Web-Entrepreneurship in Local Incubation Environments. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, 183-194. Springer International Publishing.

[141] Ahokangas, P. (1998). Internationalization and resources: An analysis of processes in Nordic 9 SMSs. PhD PhD, Vaasa: Universitas Wasaensis.

[142] Al-Mubaraki, H. M., Busler, M. (2014). Incubator successes: Lessons learned from successful incubators towards the twenty-first century. World Journal of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 11(1), 44 – 52.

[143] Andersen, O. (1993). On the internationalization process of firms: a critical analysis, Journal of International Business Study, 24(2), 209-231.

[144] Andersen, O., Buvik, A. (2002). Firm’s internationalization and alternative approaches to the international customer/market selection. International Business Review, 11(3), 347–363.

[145] Andersson, S., Evers, N., Griot, C. (2013). Local and international networks in small firm internationalization: cases from the Rhone-Alpes medical technology regional cluster. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development,. 25(9–10), 867–888.

[146] Axinn, C. N., Matthyssens, P. (2002). Limits of internationalization theories in an unlimited world. International Marketing Review (online), 19(5), 436–449.

[147] Bell, J., Mcnaughton, R., Young, S. (2001). Born-again global’firms - an extension to the “Borm global” phenomenon. Journal of International Management, 7(3), 173–189.

[148] Bilkey, J., Tesar, G. (1977). The export behavior of smaller Wisconsin manufacturing firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 9 (1), 93-98.

[149] Blank, S. (2013). The four steps to the epiphany. Pescadero: K;S Ranch. [150] Blank, S. Why the lean start-up changes everything. Harvard business review, 91(5), 63-72. [151] Brambilla, I., Lederman, D., Porto, G. (2012). Exports, export destinations, and skills.

American Economic Review 102, 3406–3438. [152] Burke, C. M., Morley, M. J. (2016). On temporary organisations: A review, synthesis and

research agenda. Human relations, 69(6), 1235-1258. [153] Cahen, F. R., Lahiri, S., Borini, F. M. (2016). Managerial perceptions of barriers to

internationalization: An examination of Brazil's new technology-based firms. Journal of Business Research, 69(6), 1973-1979.

[154] Calof, J., Beamish, P. W. (1995). Adapting to foreign markets: Explaining internationalization. International Business Review, 4(2), 115–131.

[155] Cavusgil, S. T. (1980). On the internationalization process of firms. European Research, 8(6), 273-281.



[156] Chandra, A., Fealey, T. (2009). Business Incubation in the United States, Brazil and China: A comparison of role of government, incubator funding and financial services. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 13.

[157] Chang, J. (2011). The early and rapid internationalization of Asian emerging MNEs. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 21(2), 171–187.

[158] Chen, H., Chen, T. J. (1998). Network linkages and location choice in Foreign Direct investment. Journal of International Business Studies, 29(3), 445-468.

[159] Colombelli, A., Krafft, J., Vivarelli, M. (2016). To be born is not enough: the key role of innovative start-ups. Small Business Economics, 1-15.

[160] Czinkota, M. (1982). Export Development Strategies: US Promotion Policies. Praeger Publishers, New York.

[161] D'angelo, A., Majocchi, A., Zucchella, A., Buck, T. (2015). Geographical pathways for SME internationalization: insights from an Italian sample. International Marketing Review. 30(2), 80–105.

[162] Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. New York: Henry Holt ; Company. [163] Dias, D. C. (2008). A Importância das Incubadoras de Empresas no Processo de Inovação nas

Empresas de Base Tecnológica – O Caso da Incubadora de Empresas de Base Tecnológica CENTEV/UFV. IV Simpósio Acadêmico de Engenharia de Produção SAEPRO, 1–15.

[164] Engelman, R., Zen, A. C., Fracasso, E. M. (2015). The impact of the incubator on the internationalization of firms. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 10(1), 29–39.

[165] Etzkowitz, H. (2008). The Triple Helix: Industry, University, and Government in Innovation. Nova York: Routledge.

[166] Eurofound. (2012). Born global: The potential of job creation in new international businesses. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

[167] Freeman, J., Enegl, J. S. (2007). Models of innovation: Startups and mature corporations. California Management Review, 50(1), 94-119.

[168] Gabrielsson, M. et al., (2008). Born global: Propositions to help advance the theory. International Business Review, 17(4), 385–401.

[169] Gankema, H. G., Snuif, H. R., Zwart, P. S. (2000). The internationalization process of small and medium-sized enterprises: An evaluation of stage theory. Journal of Small Business Management, 38(4), 15-27.

[170] Ghauri, P., L, C. Tesfom, G. (2003). Using network to solve export-marketing problems of small-and medium-sized firms from developing countries. European Journal of Marketing, 37(5/6), 728-752.

[171] Giardino, C. et al. (2015). Key Challenges in Early- Stage Software Startups. In Agile Processes, in Software Engineering, and Extreme Programming (pp. 52-63). Springer International Publishing.

[172] Harms, R., Schiele, H. (2012). Antecedents and consequences of effectuation and causation in the international new venture creation process. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 10(2), 95–116.

[173] Hashim, M. K., Hassan, R. (2008). Internationalization of SMEs: Options, incentives, problems and business strategy. Malaysian Management Review 43(1), 63-76.

[174] Hessels, J., Parker, S. C. (2013). Constraints, internationalization and growth: a cross – country analysis of European SMEs. Journal of World Business, 48, 137–148.

[175] Hollentein, H. (2005). Determinants of international activities: Are SMEs different? Small Business Economics, 24, 431-450.


[176] Hutchinson, K., Quinn, B. Alexander, N. (2006). SME Retailer Internationalization: Case Study Evidence from British Retailers. International Marketing Review. 23(1), 2553.

[177] Johanson, J. Mattsson, L. (1998). Internationalization in industrial systems: a network approach. London: Croom Helm.

[178] Johanson, J., Vahlne, J. E. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm: a model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(1).

[179] Johanson, J., Vahlne, J. E. (1990). The mechanism of internationalization. International Marketing Review (online), 7(4), 23–32.

[180] Johanson, J., Vahlne, J. E. (2009). The Uppsala internationalization process model revisited: from liability of foreignness to liability of outsidership. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(10).

[181] Johanson, M., Kao, P. T. (2010). Networks in internationalization. In: Pla-Barber, J., and Alegre, J. (Eds), Reshaping the boundaries of the firm in an era of global interdependence. Progress in international business research (5, 119-142), Emerald, Bingley.

[182] Jones, M., Coviello, N., Tang, Y. (2011). International entrepreneurship research (1989–2009): A domain ontology and thematic analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(6), 632–659.

[183] Jones, M. V., Coviello, N. E. (2005). Internationalization: Conceptualizing an entrepreneurial process of behaviour in time. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(3), 284-303.

[184] Kahiya, E. (2013). Export barriers and path to internationalization: A comparison of conventional enterprises and international new ventures, Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 11, issue 1, 3-29.

[185] Kasabov, E. (2015). Start‐Up Difficulties in Early‐Stage Peripheral Clusters: The Case of IT in an Emerging Economy. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(4), 727-761.

[186] Knight, G. A., Liesch, P. W. (2016). Internationalization: From incremental to born global. Journal of World Business Elsevier, 51(1), 93-102.

[187] Knight, G. A., Cavusgil, T. (2004). Innovation, Organizational Capabilities, and the Born-Global Firm. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(2), 124–141.

[188] Korsakiené, R., Diskiené, D., Smaliukiené, R. (2015). Institutional theory perspective and internationalization of firms. How institutional context influences internationalization of SMEs?, Entrepreneurship and Sustainability, 2(3), 142–153.

[189] Korsakiene, R.; Tvaronaviciené, M. (2012). The internationalization of SMEs: an integrative approach. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 13(2), 294–307.

[190] Kotler, P., Amstrong, G. (1993). Princípios de Marketing. Rio de Janeiro: Prentice-Hall do Brasil.

[191] Leonidou, L. C., KATSIKEAS, C. S. (1996). The export development process: An integrative review of empirical models. Journal of International Business Studies, 3, 517-551.

[192] Liesch, P. W., et al. (2011). The evolution of the international business field: A scientometric investigation of articles published in its premier journal. Scientometrics, 88(1), 17–42.

[193] Loustarinen, R., Gabrielsson, M. (2006). Globalization and marketing strategies of born globals in SMOPECs. Thunderbird International Business Review, 48(6), 773–801.

[194] Madsen, T. K., Servais, P. (1997). The internationalization of born globals: an evolutionary process? International Business Review, 6(6), 561–583.

[195] Marmer, M. et al., Startup genome report extra: Premature scaling. Startup Genome, 10, 2011. [196] Mcdougall, P., Jones, M., Serapio, M. High-potential concepts, phenomena, and theories for the

advancement of international entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship: Theory &; Practice, 38(1), 1–10.

[197] Mcdougall, P. P., Oviatt, B. M., Shrader, R. A(2003). comparison of international and domestic new ventures. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 58–82.



[198] Mcgaughey, S. A., Middleton, S. A., Cretchley, J. (2011). The evolution of the international business field: A scientometric investigation of articles published in its premier journal. Scientometrics, 88(1), 17–42.

[199] Mian, S., Fayolle, A., Lamine, W. (2016). Technology Business Incubation: An overview of the state of knowledge. Technovation, 50–51, 1–12

[200] Moen, Ø., Servais, P. (2002). Borm Global or Gradual Global? Examining the export behavior of Small and Medium sized enterprises. Journal of International Marketing, 10(3), 49–72.

[201] Mort, G., Weerawardena, J., Liesch, P. (2012). Advancing entrepreneurial marketing: Evidence from born global firms. European Journal of Marketing, 46, 542–561.

[202] Narayanan, V. (2015). Export Barriers for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises: A Literature Review based on Leonidou’s Model. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 3(2), 105-123.

[203] Nummela, N., Saarenketo, S., Jokela, P., Loane, S. (2014). Strategic decision-making of a born global: A comparative study from three small open economies. Management International Review, 54(4), 527–550.

[204] OECD. (2013). Fostering SMEs’ participation in global markets: Final report. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs and Local Development.

[205] Oviatt, B. M., Mcdougall, P. P. (1994). Towards a theory of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1), 45–64.

[206] Paunovic, Z., Prebezac, D. (2010). Internationalization of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises. Tržiště. 22 (1), 5776.

[207] Radas, S., Bozic, L. (2009). The antecedents of SME innovativeness in an emerging transition economy. Technovation, 29(6), 438-450.

[208] Reid, S. D. (1981). The decision-maker and export entry and expansion. Journal of International Business Studies, 12 (2), 101 – 112.

[209] Rennie, M. W. (1993). No Global competitiveness: born global. McKinsey Quarterly, 4(4), 45–52.

[210] Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: How today's entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. Random House LLCL.

[211] Rudio, F. V. (1986). Introdução ao projeto de pesquisa científica. 17. ed. Petrópolis: Vozes. [212] Salvador, R. L. DE C. D., Porto, L., Pessoa, F. L. (2008). Análise do Modelo Uppsala com foco

nas competências requeridas para sua operacionalização. Revista Eletrônica Gestão e Sociedade, 2(3).

[213] Santos, B. M. (2015). Diferentes Abordagens Conceptuais Sobre A Internacionalização Das Empresas: Uma Revisão Bibliométrica. Revista Ibero-Americana De Estratégia - Riae, 14(4), 1–27.

[214] Sarasvathy, S. (2009). Effectuation: Elements of entrepreneurial expertise. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

[215] Saunders, M., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A. (2016). Research Methods for Business Students, (7th edition). Essex: Pearson Education Limite.

[216] Schrader, A. (1974). Introdução à pesquisa social empírica: um guia para o planejamento, a execução e a avaliação de projetos de pesquisa não experimentais. Porto Alegre: Globo.

[217] Schwartz, M. (2018). Incubator Age and Incubation Time: Determinants of Firm Survival after Graduation? Halle Institute for Economic Research, 14.

[218] Schweizer, R. (2013). SMEs and networks: overcoming the liability of outsidership. Journal of International Entrepreneurship. 11(1), 80–103.


[219] Sekliuckien, J. (2013). Lithuanian companies in emerging markets: internationalization motives and barriers, Economics and Management 18(1), 124–133.

[220] Shaw, V., Darroch, J. (2004). Barriers to internationalisation: a study of entrepreneurial new ventures in New Zealand. Journal of International Entrepreneurship. 2(4), 327–343.

[221] Shoham, A., Albaum, G. S. (1995). Reducing the impact of barriers to exporting: a managerial perspective. Journal of International Marketing, 3(4), 85–105.

[222] Silva, R. L. S. et al., (2013). Incubadora e gestão: uma percepção das empresas incubadas. HOLOS, 3, 27–37.

[223] Stayton, J., Mangematin. (2016). Startup time, innovation and Organisational emergence: A study of USA-based international technology ventures. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 14(3), 373-409.

[224] Tanev, S., et al. (2015). Lean and Global Technology Start-ups: Linking the Two Research Streams. International Journal of Innovation Management, 19(3).

[225] Theodorakopoulos, N., Kakabadse, N. K., Mcgowan, C. (2014). What matters in business incubation? A literature review and a suggestion for situated theorizing. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 21(4), 602–622.

[226] Toulova, M., Votoupalova, M., Kubickova, L. (2015). Barriers of SMEs internationalization and strategy for success in foreign markets. International Journal of Management Cases, 17(1), 4–20.

[227] Tzafestas, S. (2018). The art and impact of physical and virtual enterprise incubators: the Greek paradigm, Communications in Computer and Information Science, 19, 549–559.

[228] Wallin, A., Still, K., Komi, M. (2015). Start-up entrepreneurs' key concerns on path of entrepreneurial innovation. In ISPIM Conference Proceedings, 1, The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM).

[229] Welch, L. S., Luostarinen, R. (1988). Internationalization: evolution of a concept. Journal of General Management, 14(2), 34–55.

[230] Wood, E. et al., (2011). Strategic Commitment and Timing of Internationalization from Emerging Markets: evidence from China, India, Mexico, and South Africa. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(2), 252–282, 2011.

[231] Xie, Y., Suh, T. (2014). "Perceived resource deficiency and internationalization of small- and medium-sized firms," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, 12(3), 207-229.

[232] Zain, M., N., G., S., I. (2006). The impact of network relationships on SMEs’ internationalization process. Thunderbird International Business Review 48(2), 183-205.

[233] Zimmerer, T. W., Scarborough, N. M. (2008). Essentials of entrepreneurship and small business management. 5. ed. Londres: Prentice Hall.

a study on the internationalization barriers to incubated … · 2019. 4. 19. · health (lais \...

Documents