2020 Articles

The 2020 spreadsheet of IE articles includes papers found in:

• IE-friendly journals (n = 29) with impact factor > 1.0; and
• the Journal of International Entrepreneurship (the only journal devoted to IE).

Editorials/introductions to special issues were excluded and core exclusion criteria were as follows:

1. Studies focused on SME internationalization rather than IE per se, i.e. where entrepreneurship issues and theories are not integrated or addressed in the study;
2. Studies in which the primary focus is not international entrepreneurship. E.g. studies of biotech firms in global industries or in which the focus is on technological innovation rather than business or entrepreneurial processes;
3. Studies focused on domestic entrepreneurship in one country;
4. Cross-cultural assessments of (e.g.) EO measures that focus on scale and measure development or validation;
5. Studies on transnational and/or immigrant entrepreneurship.

The spreadsheet is in excel format, allowing you to search by keyword, date, author or journal. Each article title also contains a hyperlink to its abstract.  Final Journal list 2020

Patterns?

• We see a slight decline in the number of IE articles published in 2020 (82 in total) from 100 articles published in 2019 and 57 articles in 2018. 
• Of these 82, thirteen (16%) were from the elite group of our IE-friendly journals: JIBS (3), JBV (2), ETP (1) and JWB(7). 
• Besides JIEN, the only journal devoted to IE, IBR and JBR published the most IE articles (13 and 10 articles, respectively).
• The other journals with a high number of IE publications include IJEBR (7 articles), ISBJ (6 articles) and IMR (5 articles).
• Among the published articles, there were 5 IE-related literature reviews
• New themes: 7 articles related to digitization, 5 articles related to international social entrepreneurship

What does this mean?

It is exciting to see that IE remains a field that is of interest to highly impactful journals. It is also heartening to see that research productivity of IE scholars remained high despite the unusual circumstances brought about by the COVID-19 crisis. The number of literature review papers indicates that as a field, IE appears to be maturing. We still see quite a few papers exploring the “traditional” IE concepts such as internationalization speed, born global ventures, networks and advantages of newness. Likewise, comparative studies of entrepreneurship remain relatively common. However, we also see studies exploring relatively new topics from the IE angle. These include digitization and social entrepreneurship.

NOTE –Many, many thanks to IE Ambassadors  Sreevas Sahasranaman, Meena Chavan, Marleen McCormick Pritchard, Sinea Monaghan, Andreu Blesa, Imtiaz Mostafiz, Lasse Torkkeli and Novika Casandra Astuti for their contribution in compiling the list.

Please email Martina Musteen at mmusteen@sdsu.edu to report any errors or omissions.

2019 Articles

The 2019 spreadsheet of IE articles includes papers found in:

• IE-friendly journals (n = 29) with impact factor > 1.0; and
• the Journal of International Entrepreneurship (the only journal devoted to IE).

Editorials/introductions to special issues were excluded and core exclusion criteria were as follows:

1. Studies focused on SME internationalization rather than IE per se, i.e. where entrepreneurship issues and theories are not integrated or addressed in the study;
2. Studies in which the primary focus is not international entrepreneurship. E.g. studies of biotech firms in global industries or in which the focus is on technological innovation rather than business or entrepreneurial processes;
3. Studies focused on domestic entrepreneurship in one country;
4. Cross-cultural assessments of (e.g.) EO measures that focus on scale and measure development or validation;
5. Studies on transnational and/or immigrant entrepreneurship.

The spreadsheet is in excel format, allowing you to search by keyword, date, author or journal: Final Journal list 2019

Patterns?

• We see a big jump in IE articles published in 2019 (100 in total) from 57 articles published in 2018 and 88 articles in 2017.
• Of these 100, eleven (11%) were from the elite group of our IE-friendly journals (FT List): JIBS (7) and JBV (4). No papers were found in AMR, AMJ, ETP, JOM, SMJ, or SEJ. Another 49 (49%) were in highly regarded journals with an Impact Factor > 3 (e.g. IMR, ISBJ and JWB).
• Besides JIEN, the only journal devoted to IE, IBR and IMR published the most IE articles (10 each).
• The other journals with a high number of IE publications include JBR (9 articles) and SBE (8 articles).

What does this mean?

It seems that IE field remains vibrant. The jump in the number of articles is probably due to a number of special issues published on topics related to IE and increasing interest of IE scholars in emerging topics such as digital entrepreneurship and international funding and VC capital. Cross-country, comparative IE (often based on the GEM dataset) is also an area that is receiving a lot of attention (particularly the role on institutional environment in entrepreneurship). It is heartening to see that that top journals (i.e. JIBS, JBV, JWB) continue to see the IE field as an interesting topic.

NOTE – Many, many thanks to IE Ambassadors  Sreevas Sahasranamam, Stine Øyna, Andreu Blesa, Marleen McCormick Pritchard,  Novika Astuti, Ross Curran, Sinéad Monaghan, Nicole Coviello and Lasse Torkkeli, for their contribution in compiling the list.

Please email Martina Musteen at mmusteen@sdsu.edu to report any errors or omissions.

2018 Articles

The 2018 spreadsheet of IE articles includes papers found in:

• IE-friendly journals (n = 29); and
• the Journal of International Entrepreneurship (the only journal devoted to IE).

The set of journals was expanded from 2017 to include 29 IE-friendly journals with an Impact Factor > 1.0 (we used 5-year Impact Factor where available).

Editorials/introductions to special issues were excluded and core exclusion criteria were as follows:

1. Studies focused on SME internationalization rather than IE per se, i.e. where entrepreneurship issues and theories are not integrated or addressed in the study;
2. Studies in which the primary focus is not international entrepreneurship. E.g. studies of biotech firms in global industries or in which the focus is on technological innovation rather than business or entrepreneurial processes;
3. Studies focused on domestic entrepreneurship in one country;
4. Cross-cultural assessments of (e.g.) EO measures that focus on scale and measure development or validation;
5. Studies on transnational and/or immigrant entrepreneurship.

The spreadsheet is in excel format, allowing you to search by keyword, date, author or journal: IE-Spreadsheet-2018 v2

Patterns?

• In 2018, 57 articles were identified which is a decrease from 2017 (88 articles) and a slight increase from 2016 (55 articles).
• Of these 57, ten (18%) were from the elite group of our IE-friendly journals (FT List): JIBS (5), JBV (2), ETP (2) and JOM (1). No papers were found in SMJ or SEJ). Another 11 (19%) were in highly regarded journals with and Impact Factor > 3 (IMR, ISBJ and JWB).
• Besides JIE, the only journal devoted to IE, IBR continues to publish the most IE articles (7).
• IEMJ and SBE have also published significant numbers of IE articles – 5 and 4, respectively.
• Thanks to a Special Issue devoted to cross-border entrepreneurial opportunities, the number of articles published in JIBS is also relatively high (5).

What does this mean?

Although the number of IE-friendly journals has grown, the IE research seems to have slowed down a bit. However, it is good to see that top journals continue to see the IE field as an interesting topic.

NOTE – Many thanks to IE Ambassadors Sascha Fuerst, Sreevas Sahasranamam, Stine Oyna, Andreu Blesa, Marleen McCormick Pritchard, Eldrede Kahiya, Ross Curran, Sinead Monaghan, Nicole Coviello and Lasse Torkkeli, for their contribution in compiling the list. Please email Martina Musteen at mmusteen@sdsu.edu to report any errors or omissions.

2017 Articles

The 2017 spreadsheet of IE articles includes papers found in:

• IE-friendly journals (n = 28); and
• the Journal of International Entrepreneurship (the only journal devoted to IE).

The set of journals was expanded from 2016 to include 28 IE-friendly journals with an Impact Factor > 1.0 (we used 5-year Impact Factor where available).

Editorials/introductions to special issues were excluded and core exclusion criteria are as follows:

1. Studies focused on SME internationalization rather than IE per se, i.e. where entrepreneurship issues and theories are not integrated or addressed in the study;
2. Studies in which the primary focus is not international entrepreneurship. E.g. studies of biotech firms in global industries or in which the focus is on technological innovation rather than business or entrepreneurial processes;
3. Studies focused on domestic entrepreneurship in one country;
4. Cross-cultural assessments of (e.g.) EO measures that focus on scale and measure development or validation;
5. Studies on transnational and/or immigrant entrepreneurship.

The spreadsheet is in excel format, allowing you to search by keyword, date, author or journal: IE-Spreadsheet-2017-v5

Patterns?

• In 2017, 88 articles were identified which is an increase from 2016 (55 articles) and from 2015 (83 articles).
• Of these 88, ten (11%) were from the elite group of our IE-friendly journals (FT List): JIBS (3), JBV(3), ETP (1), SMJ (1) and SEJ(1) and 41 (47.1%) were in highly regarded journals (Impact Factor > 3).
• Besides JIE, the only journal devoted to IE, IBR continues to publish most IE articles (16). SBE and IEMJ have also published significant numbers of IE articles – 14 and 11 for SBE and IEMJ, respectively. Those published in SBE focused primarily on cross-country comparative issues.

What does this mean?

Bucking the two-year trend, the IE research seems to have picked up. This may be, in part, because of the increased numbers of journals considered in compiling the list but it is good to see that top journals continue to find the area interesting. Another factor that may be bearing on the higher number is the somewhat arbitrary/subjective criteria for inclusion/exclusion. While we made the best effort to follow these (using two raters to determine inclusion/exclusion of ambiguous cases), the definitions of what constitutes IE area and IE article can differ. One of the examples is the Meuleman et al. (2017) article which doesn’t address the “traditional” IE themes such as international sales, opportunity identification, networks, and business models but examines cross-border partner selection in venture capital syndicates.

NOTE – Many thanks to Igor Laine for his contribution in compiling the list. Please email Martina Musteen at mmusteen@mail.sdsu.edu to report any errors or omissions.

2016 Articles

Consistent with the methodology used in previous years, the 2016 spreadsheet of IE articles includes papers found in:

• IE-friendly journals (n = 25); and
• the Journal of International Entrepreneurship (the only journal devoted to IE).

The set of journals includes 25 IE-friendly journals with an Impact Factor > 1.0 (we used 5-year Impact Factor where available).

Editorials/introductions to special issues were excluded and core exclusion criteria are as follows:

1. Studies focused on SME internationalization rather than IE per se, i.e. where entrepreneurship issues and theories are not integrated or addressed in the study;
2. Studies in which the primary focus is not international entrepreneurship. E.g. studies of biotech firms in global industries or in which the focus is on technological innovation rather than business or entrepreneurial processes;
3. Studies focused on domestic entrepreneurship in one country;
4. Cross-cultural assessments of (e.g.) EO measures that focus on scale and measure development or validation;
5. Studies on transnational and/or immigrant entrepreneurship.

The spreadsheet is in excel format, allowing you to search by keyword, date, author or journal: IE-Spreadsheet-2016-v9

Patterns?

• In 2016, 58 articles were identified which is a slight drop from 2015 and a significant drop from 2014’s high of 83.
• Of these 58, nine (15.5%) were from the top group of our IE-friendly journals (Impact Factor > 3): JIBS (2), JBV (3), JWB (1), ETP (1), IMM (1) and JOM (1).
• Besides JIEN, the only journal devoted to IE, JBR and IBR published the most IE articles (9 in both cases) during the past year.

What does this mean?

The IE research is represented in a relatively large number of solid journals; however, in terms of the total number of articles, the growth of  the IE area appears to be slowing down somewhat. The same is true regarding the representation of IE in the top journals although the next year’s numbers may be better given the upcoming Special Issue on Entrepreneurial Opportunities Across National Borders in JIBS, which is due to come out this year. My other observation is that the IE is still slanted toward the “I” type of research questions. I would personally like to see more papers incorporating  the “E” by addressing topics such as  business models in IE, entrepreneurial dynamics in INVs/born globals, the role of entrepreneur in early stage international venturing, etc. I also think there are more opportunities for IE research in the context of emerging and developing economies.

NOTE – please email me at mmusteen@mail.sdsu.edu if any articles in the relevant list have been missed!

2015 Articles

The 2015 spreadsheet of IE articles continues to focus on papers found in:

• IE-friendly journals (n = 21); and
• the Journal of International Entrepreneurship (the only journal devoted to IE).

However, in 2015, we expanded our set of journals to include IE-friendly journals with a 5-year Impact Factor > 1.0 (this is more reliable than 1-year IFs).

Editorials/introductions to special issues were excluded and core exclusion criteria are as follows:

1. Studies focused on SME internationalization rather than IE per se, i.e. where entrepreneurship issues and theories are not integrated or addressed in the study;
2. Studies in which the primary focus is not international entrepreneurship. E.g. studies of biotech firms in global industries or in which the focus is on technological innovation rather than business or entrepreneurial processes;
3. Studies focused on domestic entrepreneurship in one country;
4. Cross-cultural assessments of (e.g.) EO measures that focus on scale and measure development or validation;
5. Studies on transnational and/or immigrant entrepreneurship.

The spreadsheet is in excel format, allowing you to search by keyword, date, author or journal: IE Spreadsheet 2015 v2

Patterns?

• In 2015, 59 articles were identified – quite a drop from 2014’s high of 83.
• Of these 59, eight (13.5%) were from the top group of our IE-friendly journals: JIBS (4), ETP (3), and JBV (1). At the same time, three of the JIBS papers were commentaries on Knight and Cavusgil (2004).

What does this mean? My observation is that IE researchers have solid representation in solid IB journals (e.g. JWB, IBR) and we have some traction with both solid entrepreneurship (and small business) journals such as JSBM. Journals that seem under-represented but are welcome to IE research include ISBJ and MIR (note – MIR dipped down in Impact Factor and  lost it’s place on the FT list in the last few years but is making a come-back effort).

Personally, I would like to see more IE research in JIBS, JBV and ETP. However, to accomplish this, we need to up our game in terms of theoretical framing and contribution as well as methodological rigour.

If I were to give one piece of advice to authors wishing to target these journals: read them. The more you read the top journals, the more you will become familiar with how they ‘feel’ and what the quality standards are. Of course, not all the articles will be fabulous but I am pretty sure they will be theoretically and technical stronger than papers published in lower tier journals.

NOTE – please email ncoviello@wlu.ca if any articles in the relevant list have been missed!

2014 Articles

Like 2013, the 2014 spreadsheet of IE articles focuses primarily on papers found in:

• IE-friendly journals with an impact factor over 1 (n = 20; details on 2014 spreadsheet); and
• the Journal of International Entrepreneurship (the only journal devoted to IE).

The same inclusion parameters were used as in previous years (see below), and editorials/introductions to special issues were also excluded.

The spreadsheet is in excel format, allowing you to search by keyword, date, author or journal: IE Literature (2014) v2

In 2014, 83 articles were identified – a BIG jump from 2013 (58 articles). Of these, 12% were from the top group of our IE-friendly journals: JBV (5), JIBS (4), and SMJ (1). Notably, two journals (ETP and MIR) had special issues devoted to IE.

The are categorized as follows:

• Type A (Entrepreneurial Internationalization): 57 (69%)
• Type B (International Comparisons of Entrepreneurship): 23 (28%)
• Type C (Comparative Entrepreneurial Internationalization): 3 (3%)

2013 Articles

The 2013 spreadsheet of IE articles focuses only on papers found in:

• the Journal of International Entrepreneurship (the only journal devoted to IE); and
• IE-friendly journals with an impact factor over 1 (n = 22; details on 2013 spreadsheet).

The decision to restrict the search parameters to these journals came after the review to identify the 248 IE articles published from 2010-2012 (inclusive) took a full year and enormous amounts of digging and support.

The spreadsheet is in excel format, allowing you to search by keyword, date, author or journal: IE Literature (2013)

As usual, the parameters established by Jones et al. (2011) were used. Exclusion criteria are as follows:

1. Studies focused on SMEs rather than IE per se, i.e. where entrepreneurship issues and theories are not integrated or addressed in the study;
2. Studies in which the primary focus is not international entrepreneurship. E.g. studies of biotech firms in global industries or in which the focus is on technological innovation rather than business or entrepreneurial processes;
3. Studies focused on domestic entrepreneurship in one country;
4. Cross-cultural assessments of (e.g.) EO measures that focus on scale and measure development or validation;
5. Studies on transnational and/or immigrant entrepreneurship.

In addition, the 2013 spreadsheet does not report editorials/introductions to special issues (e.g. McDougall-Covin et al. 2013).

The results for 2013 indicate that 58 articles were published in the above set of journals.  They are categorized as follows:

• Type A (Entrepreneurial Internationalization): 35 (60%)
• Type B (International Comparisons of Entrepreneurship): 19 (33%)
• Type C (Comparative Entrepreneurial Internationalization): 4 (7%)

2010-2012 Articles

To extend the list of IE research (1989-2009) reviewed by Jones, Coviello and Tang (JBV 2011), we compiled a spreadsheet of published articles for the period 2010-12. We used the same search and selection criteria from Jones et al. (2011) but during 2013, have continued searching for papers that don’t necessarily emerge through keyword search.

The spreadsheet is in excel format, allowing you to search by keyword, date, author or journal: IE Literature (2010-2012)

Note 1 – papers highlighted in colour are the new additions (by date).

Note 2 – as per Jones et al. (2011, JBV), this listing is an effort to include all IE papers published between 2010-2012. The list includes articles from both mainstream journals and many smaller, newer or hard to find journals. NOTE – I encourage you to read and use articles carefully. This is because not all journals have the high levels of review rigour as found in the main journals – at the same time, some of the lesser known journals have interesting papers!

1989-2009 Articles

Jones et al. (2011) published their domain ontology of IE, and Appendix C lists IE authors by type of research and thematic area (pp 650-651).

Due to copyright restrictions, we are unable to provide a copy of the paper, but here’s a link to the JBV URL: Jones, Coviello and Tang (2011)

You can also contact me (Nicole) if you need a copy and I’ll be happy to send it to you.

Bembom, M., & Schwens, C. (2018). The role of networks in early internationalizing firms: A systematic review and future research agenda. European Management Journal, 36(6), 679–694. 

Casillas, J., & Acedo, F. (2012). Speed in the Internationalization Process of the Firm. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(1): 15-29.

Cesinger, B., Fink, M., Madsen, T.K. & Kraus, S. (2012). Rapidly internationalizing ventures: How definitions can bridge the gap across contexts, Management Decision, 50 (10), 1816-1842.

Coviello, N., & Jones, M. (2004). Methodological issues in international entrepreneurship research,  Journal of Business Venturing. 19(4): 485-508.

de Clercq, D., Sapienza, H., Yavuz, I., & Zhou, L. (2012). Learning and knowledge in early internationalization research: Past accomplishments and future directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(1): 143-165.

Evers, N. (2011). Why do new ventures internationalise? A review of the literature of factors that influence new venture internationalisation, Irish Journal of Management, 30 (2), 17-46.

Jones, M., Coviello, N., & Tang, Y. K. (2011). International Entrepreneurship research (1989–2009): A domain ontology and thematic analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(6): 632-659.

Keupp, M. M., & Gassmann, O. (2009). The Past and the Future of International Entrepreneurship: A Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field. Journal of Management, 35(3), 600–633.

Kiss, A., Danis, W., & Cavusgil, S.T. (2012). International entrepreneurship research in emerging economies: A critical review and research agenda. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2): 266-290.

Liu, B. & Fu, Z. (2011). Relationship between strategic orientation and organizational performance in born global [sic]: A critical review, International Journal of Business and Management, 6 (3), 109-115.

Liu, J., Zhu, Y., Serapio, M., & Cavusgil, S.T. (2019). The new generation of millennial entrepreneurs: A review and call for research. International Business Review, 28(5), N.PAG. 

Mainela, T., Puhakka, V., & Servais, P. (2014). The Concept of International Opportunity in International Entrepreneurship: A Review and a Research Agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(1), 105–129. 

Paul, J., & Rosado-Serrano, A. (2019). Gradual Internationalization vs Born-Global/International new venture models: A review and research agenda. International Marketing Review. 36(6), pp 830-851.

Peiris, I.K., Akoorie, M.E.M. & Sinha, P. (2012). International entrepreneurship: A critical analysis of studies in the past two decades and future directions for research, Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 10, 279-234.

Pines, A.M., Lerner, M. &  Schwartz, D. (2010). Gender differences in entrepreneurship: Equality, diversity and inclusion in times of global crisis, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 29 (2), 186-198.

Reuber, R., & Fischer, E. (2011). International entrepreneurship in internet-enabled markets. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(6): 660-679.

Rialpa, A., Rialpa, J., & Knight, G. (2005). The phenomenon of early internationalizing firms: what do we know after a decade (1993–2003) of scientific inquiry?  International Business Review, 14(2): 147-166.

Szyliowicz, D. & Galvin, T.(2010). Applying broader strokes: Extending institutional perspectives and agendas for international entrepreneurship research, International Business Review, 19, 317-332.

Terjesen, T., Hessels, J., & Li, D. (2013). Comparative International Entrepreneurship: A Review and Research Agenda. Journal of Management, 42(1): 299-344.

Wright, M., Pruthi, S. &  Lockett, A. (2005). International venture capital research: From cross-country comparisons to crossing borders, International Journal of Management Reviews, 7 (3), 135-165.

IE Books

Please see more IE books in the Education Section.

• Acs, Z, Szerb, L and Autio, E. 2013. Global Entrepreneurship and Development Index 2013. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
• Casillas, JM, Acedo, FJ and Moreno, AM. 2008. International Entrepreneurship in Family Business. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
• Cavusgil, T and Knight, G. 2009. Born Global Firms: A New International Enterprise. New York, NY: Business Expert Press.
• Dana, L-P (ed). 2004. Handbook of Research on International Entrepreneurship. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
• Etemad, H (ed). 2012. The Process of Internationalization in Emerging SMEs and Emerging Economies. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
• Etemad, H and Wright, R (eds). 2003. Globalization and Entrepreneurship: Policy and Strategy Perspectives. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
• Fernhaber, S and Prashantham, S (eds). 2014. Routledge Companion to International Entrepreneurship. London, UK: Taylor and Francis Group.
• Gabrielsson, M and Kirpalani, VHM (eds). 2012. Handbook of Research on Born Globals. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
• JIBS Collection on IE Research
• Jones, MV, Wheeler, C and Dimitratos, P (eds). 2011. International Entrepreneurship in the Life Sciences. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
• Jones, MV and Dimitratos, P (eds). 2004. Emerging Paradigms in International Entrepreneurship. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
• Jones, MV, Dimitratos, P, Fletcher, M and Young, S. 2009. Internationalization, Entrepreneurship and the Smaller Firm: Evidence from Around the World. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
• McNaughton, RB and Bell, J (eds). 2009. Entrepreneurship and Globalization, Volumes 1-5. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
• Oviatt, BM and McDougall, PP (eds). 2007. International Entrepreneurship. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
• Shepherd, DA and Katz, JA (eds). 2005. International Entrepreneurship (from Series: Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth, Vol 8). London, UK: Elsevier Ltd.
• Smallbone, D, Welter, F and Xheneti, M (eds). 2012. Cross-Border Entrepreneurship and Economic Development in Europe’s Border Regions. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
• Zucchella, A and Scabini, P. 2007. International Entrepreneurship: Theoretical Foundations and Empirical Analysis. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
• Zucchella, A and Magnani, G. 2016. International Entrepreneurship: Theoretical Foundations and Practices. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.

The Journal of International Entrepreneurship fills the need for a journal dedicated to international issues in the context of entrepreneurship. It offers an outlet for high quality research addressing the opportunities and challenges intrinsic to the field.

Papers published in the journal combine theoretical and empirical work. Authors are encouraged to conduct comparative studies and to evaluate competing theories.

The editorial team features experts in international business and experts in entrepreneurship, ensuring that the journal has a balanced and unbiased perspective.

Please share your insights on best practice for IE research!

Generally helpful papers

Alvesson, M and J Sandberg (2011). Generating research questions through problematization, Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 247-271.

Alvesson, M and J Sandberg (2014). Habitat and habitus: Boxed-in versus box-breaking research, Organization Studies, 35(7), 867-987.

Anderson, BS, Wennberg, K and JS McMullen (2019). Enhancing quantitative theory-testing entrepreneurship research, Journal of Business Venturing, 34(5), 105928.

Cheng, J, Henisz, W and K Roth (2009), Advancing interdisciplinary research in the field of international business: Prospects, issues and challenges, Journal of International Business Studies, 40(7), 1070-1074.

Edmondson, AC and SE McManus (2007), Methodological fit in management field research, Academy of Management Review, 32 (4), 1155-1179.

Eisenhardt, KM, Graebner, ME and S Sonenshein (2016). Grand challenges and inductive methods: Rigor without rigor mortis, Academy of Management Journal (9(4), 1113-1123.

Gephart, RP (2004), Qualitative research and the Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Journal, 47 (4), 454-462.

Lévesque, M and U Stephan (2020). It’s time we talk about time in entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 44(2), 163-184. 

Locke, K and K Golden-Biddle (1997), Constructing opportunities for contribution: Structuring intertextual coherence and ‘problematizing’ in organizational studies, Academy of Management Journal, 40 (5), 1023-1062.

Maula, M and W Stam (2020). Enhancing rigor in quantitative entrepreneurship research, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 44(6), 1059-1090.

Pratt, MG (2008), Fitting oval pegs into round holes: Tensions in evaluating and publishing qualitative research in top-tier North American journals, Organizational Research Methods, 11(3), 481-509.

Sandberg, J and M Alvesson (2011). Ways of constructing research questions: Gap-spotting or problematization, Organization, 18(1), 23-44.

Shepherd, DA and J Wiklund (2020). Simple rules, templates, and heuristics! And attempt to deconstruct the craft of writing an entrepreneurship paper, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 44(3), 371-390.

Short, JC, Ketchen JR, DJ, Combs, JG, and RD Ireland (2010), Research methods in entrepreneurship: Opportunities and challenges, Organizational Research Methods, 13(1), 6-15.

Wennberg, K and BS Anderson (2020). Enhancing the exploration and communication of quantitative entrepreneurship research, Journal of Business Venturing, 35(3), 105938.

Wiklund, J, Wright, M and SA Zahra ( 2019). Conquering relevance: Entrepreneurship research’s grand challenge, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43(3), 419-436.

Research Integrity

Chen, X-P (2011), Author ethical dilemmas in the research publication process, Management and Organization Review, 7 (3), 423-432.

Colquitt, J (2013), From the editors: Data overlap policies at AMJ, Academy of Management Journal, 56 (2), 331-333.

Eden, L (2010), Letter from the Editor-in-Chief: Scientists behaving badly, Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 561-566.

Honig, B, Lampel, J, Siegel, D, and P Drnevich (2014), Ethics in the production and dissemination of management research: Institutional failure or individual fallibility? Journal of Management Studies, 51(1), 118-142.

Kirkman, BL and G Chen (2011), Maximizing your data or data slicing? Recommendations for managing multiple submissions from the same dataset, Management and Organization Review, 7 (3), 433-446.

Leung, K (2011), Presenting post hoc hypotheses as a priori: Ethical and theoretical issues, Management and Organization Review, 7 (3), 471-479.

Lewis, BR, Duchac, JE, and SD Beets (2011), An academic publisher’s response to plagiarism, Journal of Business Ethics, 102, 489-506.

Martin, BR (2013), Whither research integrity? Plagiarism, self-plagiarism and coercive citation in an age of research assessment, Research Policy, 42, 1005-1014.

Theory and Theorizing

Bacharach, S (1989), Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation, Academy of Management Review, 14 (4), 496-515.

Barney, J (2018). Positioning a theory paper for publication, Academy of Management Review, 43(3), 345-348.

Bello, DC and T Kostova (2012), Conducting high impact international business research: The role of theory, Journal of International Business Studies, 43, 537-543.

Corley, KG and DA Gioia (2011), Building theory about theory building: What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 38(1), 12-32.

Doty, DH and WH Glick (1994), Typologies as a unique form of theory building: Toward improved understanding and modeling, Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 230-251.

Fiss, PC (2011), Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organizational research, Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 393-420.

Langley, A (1999), Strategies for theorizing from process data, Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691-710.

LePine, JA and A Wilcox King (2010), Developing theoretical insight from reviews of existing theory and research, 35 (4), 506-509.

Okhuysen, G and J-P Bonardi (2011), The challenges of building theory by combining lenses, Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 6-11.

Rindova, V (2008), Publishing theory when you are new to the game, Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 300-303.

Shaw, SK and KG Corley (2006), Building better theory by bridging the quantitative-qualitative divide, Journal of Management Studies, 43(8), 1821-1835.

Sutton, RI and BM Staw (1995), What theory is not, Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.

Thomas, D, Cuervo-Cazurra, A, and M-Y Brannen (2011), Explaining theoretical relationships in international business research: Focusing on the arrows, not the boxes, Journal of International Business Studies, 42(9), 1073-1078.

Welch, C, R Piekkari, E Plakoyiannaki, and E Paavilainen-Mäntymäki (2011). Theorizing from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research, Journal of International Business Studies, 42, 740-762.

Whetten, DA (1989), What constitutes a theoretical contribution, Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 490-495.

Whetten, DA, Felin, T and BG King (2009), The practice of theory borrowing in organizational studies: Current issues and future directions, Journal of Management, 35(3), 537-563.

Zahra, SA and LR Newey (2009), Maximizing the impact of organization science: Theory-building at the intersections of disciplines and/or fields, Journal of Management Studies, 46(6), 1059-1075.

Newer Methods

Fainschmidt, S, Witt, MA, and RV Aguilera, et al. (2020). The contributions of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to international business research, Journal of International Business Studies, 51, 455–466.

Fiss, PC (2007), A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations, Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1180-1198.

Schotter, APJ & Buchel, O and Vashchilko, T (2018), Interactive visualization for research contextualization in international business, Journal of World Business, 53(3), 356-372.

Schwab, A and Z Zhang (2019). A new methodological frontier in entrepreneurship research: Big data studies, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43(5), 843-854.

Uy, MA, Foo, M-D and H Aguinis (2009), Using experience sampling methodology to advance entrepreneurship theory and research, Organizational Research Methods, 13(1), 31-54.

Qualitative Methods

Alvesson, M (2003), Beyond neopositivists, romantics and localists: A reflexive approach to interviews in organizational research, Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 13-33.

Burgelman, RA (2011), Bridging history and reductionism: A key role for longitudinal qualitative research, Journal of International Business Studies, 42, 591-601.

Eisenhardt, KM (1989), Building theories from case study research, Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.

Eisenhardt, KM and ME Graebner (2007), Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges, Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25-32.

Guest, G, Bunce, A and L Johnson (2006), How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability, Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82.

Jonsen, K and KA Jehn (2009), Using triangulation to validate themes in qualitative studies, Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 4(2), 123-150.

Ketokivi, M and S Mantere (2010), Two strategies for inductive reasoning in organizational research, Academy of Management Review, 35(2), 315-333.

Klagg, M and A Langley (2013), Approaching the conceptual  leap in qualitative research, International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(2), 149-166.

McCracken, G (1988), The long interview, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

McLellan, E, MacQueen, KM and JL Neidig (2003), Beyond the qualitative interview: Data preparation and transcription, Field Methods, 15(1), 63-84.

Morgan, G and L Smircich (1980), The case for qualitative research, Academy of Management Review, 5(4), 491-500.

Rapley, TJ (2001), The art(fulness) of open-ended interviewing: Some considerations on analyzing interviews, Qualitative Research, 1(3), 303-323.

Ryan, GW and HR Bernard (2003), Techniques to identify themes, Field Methods,15(1), 85-109.

Pratt, MG (2009), For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research, Academy of Management Journal, 52(5), 856-862.

Tsang, EWK (2014), Generalizing from research findings: The merits of case studies, International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(4), 369-383.

Welch, C, Plakoyiannaki, E, Piekkari, R and E Paavilainen-Mantymaki (2013), Legitimizing diverse uses for qualitative research: A rhetorical analysis of two management journals, International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(2), 245-264.

Quantitative Measures and Models

Baron, RM and DA Kenny (1986), The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 6, 1173-1182.

Churchill, GA and JP Peter (1984), Research design effects on the reliability of rating scales: A meta-analysis, Journal of Marketing Research, 21, 360-375.

Crook, TR, Shook, CL, Maddern, TM and ML Morris (2010), A review of current construct measurement in entrepreneurship, International Entrepreneurship Management Journal, 6, 387-398.

Diamantopoulos, A and HM Winklhofer (2001), Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development, Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 269-277.

Diamantopoulos, A and JA Siguaw (2006), Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: A comparison and empirical illustration, British Journal of Management, 17, 263-282.

diStefano, C and RW Motl (2006), Further investigating method effects associated with negatively worded items on self-report surveys, Structural Equation Modeling, 13(3), 440-464.

Edwards, JR (2011), The fallacy of formative measurement, Organizational Research Methods, 14(2), 370-388.

Edwards, JR and RP Bagozzi (2000), On the nature and direction of relationships between constructs and measures, Psychological Methods, 5, 2, 155-174.

Hair, JF, Sarstedt, M, Ringle, CM and JA Mena (2012), An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40, 414-433.

Hinkin, TR (1995), A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations, Journal of Management, 21, 5, 967-988.

Hinkin, TR (1998), A brief tutorial in the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires, Organizational Research Methods, 1, 1, 104-121.

Hult, GTM, Ketchen, DJ, Griffith, DA, Chabowski, BR, Hamman, MK, Dykes, BJ, Pollitte, WA and ST Cavusgil (2008), An assessment of the measurement of performance in international business research, Journal of International Business Studies, 39, 1064-1080.

Li, J, Ding, H, and Y Hu et al. (2021). Dealing with dynamic endogeneity in international business research, Journal of International Business Studies, 52, 339–362.

Lindner, T, Puck, J and A Verbeke. (2020). Misconceptions about multicollinearity in international business research: Identification, consequences, and remedies, Journal of International Business Studies, 51, 283–298.

MacKenzie, S, 2003, The dangers of poor construct conceptualization, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(3), 323-326.

Peterson, MF, Arregle, J-L and X Martin (2012), Multilevel models in international business research, Journal of International Business Studies, 43, 451-457.

Shook, CL, Ketchen, DJ, Hult, GTM and KM Kacmar (2004), An assessment of the use of structural equation modeling in strategic management research, Strategic Management Journal, 25, 397-404.

Common Method Variance

Chang, S-J, van Witteloostuijn, R, and L Eden (2010), Common method variance in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 178-184.

Brannick, JT, Chan, D, Conway, JM, Lance, CE, and PE Spector (2010), What is method variance and how can we cope with it? A panel discussion. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 407-420.

Quantitative Analysis and Results

Andersson, U, Cuervo-Cazurra, A and BB Nielsen (2014). Explaining interaction effects within and across levels of analysis, Journal of International Business Studies, 45, 1063-1071.

Ellis, PD (2010), Effect sizes and the interpretation of research results in international business, Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 1581-1588.

Kahiya ET (2017). Discriminant analysis in export research: An imperative for methodological rigor. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 29(1), 145-170.

Kingsley, AF, Noordewier, TG, and RG Vanden Bergh (2017). Overstating and understating interaction results in international business research. Journal of World Business, 52: 125-326.

Meyer, KE, van Witteloostuijn, A and S Beugelsdijk (2017). What’s in a p? Reassessing best practices for conducting and reporting hypothesis-testing research. Journal of International Business Studies, 48, 535–551.

Schwab, A (2018). Investigating and communicating the uncertainty of effects: The power of graphs, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 42(6), 823-834.

Research across Nations and Cultures

Cavusgil, ST and A Das (1997), Methodological issues in empirical cross-cultural research: A survey of the management literature and a framework, Management International Review, 37, 1, 71-96.

Chabowski, B., Samiee, S, and GTM Hult (2017). Cross-national research and international business: An interdisciplinary path. International Business Review, 26(1), 89-101.

Chidlow, A, Plakoyiannaki, E and C Welch, 2014. Translation in cross-language international business research: Beyond equivalence, Journal of International Business Studies, 45, 562-582.

Diamantopoulos, A and N Papadopoulos (2010), Assessing the cross-national invariance of formative measures: Guidelines for international business researchers, Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 360-370.

Franke, GR and RG Richey Jr (2010), Improving generalizations from multi-country comparisons in international business research, Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 1275-1293.

Hult, GTM, Ketchen, DJ Jr, Griffith, DA, Finnegan, CA, Gonzalez-Padron, T, Harmancioglu, N, Huang, Y, Talay, MB and ST Cavusgil (2008), Data equivalence in cross-cultural international business research: Assessment and guidelines, Journal of International Business Studies, 39, 1027-1044.

Jensen, NM, Li, Q and A Rahman (2010), Understanding corruption and firm responses in cross-national firm-level surveys, Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 1481-1504.

Mullen, MR (1995), Diagnosing measurement equivalence in cross-national research, Journal of International Business Studies, 26(3), 573-596.

Research in Different Contexts

Bruton, GT, Zahra, SA and L Cai (2018). Examining entrepreneurship through indigenous lenses, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 42(3), 351-361.

De Massis, A, Kotlar, J, Wright, M and FW Kellermans (2018). Sector-based entrepreneurial capabilities and the promise of sector studies in entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 42(1), 3-23. 

Le Breton-Miller, I and D Miller (2018). Beyond the firm: Business families as entrepreneurs, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 42(4), 527-536. 

Welter, F, Baker, T, Audretsch, DB and WB Gartner (2017). Everyday entrepreneurship: A call for entrepreneurship to embrace entrepreneurial diversity, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(3), 311-321.