How Digitalization Changes the Internationalization of Entrepreneurial Firms: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Evidence



The internationalization of firms has mainly been analyzed and explained by considering observations in a pre-digital business environment. Thus, the applicability of the internationalization theories to digital ways of conducting business needs to be challenged. Recent research on the internationalization of digital firms attempts to adapt existing international business literature to the digital market. However, these studies consider internet-based companies predominantly as a homogeneous group. It is a popular opinion that digital internationalization is faster, cheaper, and easier for digital companies. The purpose of this article is to develop a comprehensive understanding of how internet-based companies internationalize in the digital market and why their internationalization processes differ from one another. Based on an overview of the specificities of the digital marketplace and their impacts on the applicability of the traditional international business theories, we develop a differentiated view of digital internationalization. Subsequently, the theoretical results are compared with primary data derived from six semi-structured interviews with representatives of digital companies. So far, the business internationalization theory has focused on variables such as efficiencies of the value chain, internal capabilities, and resource endowments. Our results show that even if these theories still have high impacts on the internationalization strategies of internet-based companies, in the highly dynamic digital markets, further variables need to be considered. In addition to the impacts of value creation and delivery infrastructure (e.g., firm-specific capabilities and resources), the specific way of creating value and the individual customer interface used by a digital business play key roles in digital internationalization.


Afuah, A. (2003). Redefining firm boundaries in the face of the internet: Are firms really shrinking? Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 34–53.

Andersson, S. (2011). International entrepreneurship, born globals and the theory of effectuation. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 18(3), 627–643.

Autio, E., and Zander, I. (2016). Lean internationalization. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1, 2-27.

Brouthers, K.D., Geisser, K.D., and Rothlauf, F. (2015). Explaining the internationalization of ibusiness firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(5), 513–534.

Bunduchi, R. (2005). Business relationships in internet-based electronic markets: The role of goodwill trust and transaction costs. Information Systems Journal, 15(4), 321–341.

Cao, L., Navare, J., and Jin, Z. (2018). Business model innovation: How the international retailers rebuild their core business logic in a new host country. International Business Review, 27(3), 543-562.

Coase, R.H. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4(16), 386–405.

Foss, N.J., and Saebi, T. (2017). Fifteen years of research on business model innovation: how far have we come, and where should we go? Journal of Management, 43(1), 200-227.

Hagen, B., and Zucchella, A. (2014). Born global or born to run? The long-term growth of born global firms. Management International Review, 54(4), 497–525.

Hazarbassanova, D.B. (2016). The value creation logic and the internationalisation of internet firms. Review of International Business and Strategy, 26(3), 349–370.

Hennart, J.-F. (2014). The accidental internationalists: A theory of born globals. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(1), 117–135.

Johanson, J., and 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), 23–32.

Johanson, J., and Vahlne, J.-E. (1990). The mechanism of internationalisation. International Marketing Review, 7(4), 11-25.

Knight, G.A., and Cavusgil, S.T. (2004). Innovation, organizational capabilities, and the born-global firm. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(2), 124–141.

KPMG (2009). Emerging Business Models to Help Serve Tomorrow’s Digital Tribes. Retrieved from

Lewin, A.Y., and Volberda, H.W. (2011). Co-evolution of global sourcing: The need to understand the underlying mechanisms of firm decisions to offshore. International Business Review, 20(3), 241–251.

Mahnke, V., and Venzin, M. (2003). The internationalization process of digital information good providers. Management International Review, 43(1), 115–143.

Mayring, Ph. (2000). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 1(2). Retrieved from

Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., and Tucci, C.L. (2005). Clarifying business models: Origins, present, and future of the concept. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 16(1), 1-13.

Porter, M.E., and Heppelmann, J.E. (2015). How smart, connected products are transforming companies. Harvard Business Review, 93(10), 96-114.

Richardson, J. (2008). The business model: An integrative framework for strategy execution. Strategic Change, 17(5–6), 133–144.

Schallmo, D. (2015). Bestehende Ansätze zu Business Model Innovationen: Analyse und Vergleich der Geschäftsmodelle. Berlin: Springer.

Stabell, C.B., and Fjeldstad, Ø.D. (1998). Configuring value for competitive advantage: On chains, shops, and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 413–437.

Teece, D.J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.

Weill, P., and Woerner, S.L. (2015). Thriving in an increasingly digital ecosystem. MIT Sloan Management Review, 56(4), 27-34.

Yin, R.K. (2017). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.




How to Cite

WITTKOP, A., ZULAUF, K., & WAGNER, R. (2018). How Digitalization Changes the Internationalization of Entrepreneurial Firms: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Evidence. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 6(2), 193–207. Retrieved from