Logo: to the web site of Uppsala University

A well-established interpretation of the Uppsala model is that it predicts a slow internationalization. Research has shown that it is not inevitable. It shows that rapid internationalization can happen in some cases, suggesting that the model needs to be reassessed. In an attempt to respond to this challenge, we return to the model as it was proposed in 2009, and look to improve its temporal aspects by reexamining the process of gaining an insidership position and the impact that has on both the network and the ways firms cope with dynamics. The study advances two temporal concepts—synchronization and network entry speed—and incorporates them into the model. Because business networks are unstable, entering a foreign market’s network is not a question of establishing a position in a stable environment but rather of synchronizing a firm’s organization to the dynamics of a changing network. Combining resources across firm boundaries and developing relationships in the business network is a process that is shaped by both time and context. Thus, we use a network setting to define synchronization and speed, and make a distinction between sequential and simultaneous synchronization and integrated and separated synchronization. With these ideas in mind, we present eight new propositions for the internationalization.

In our award-winning 2009 article, we further developed the model that we originally presented in 1977. We observed that firms form relationships and that those relationships become networks, and thus in the end the business macro environment consists of networks of relationships between firms. Those relationships have far-reaching consequences, especially in terms of opportunity recognition and development. Since 2009, we have applied the Uppsala model to a number of different IB issues, most notably the process of globalization, which we believe is best understood as a driver of the evolution of the multinational business enterprise (MBE). We suggest that our model can still be improved further by recognizing the general psychological characteristics of managers, for instance, what makes them tend to shy away from radical change and to prefer instead an incremental approach? What does this mean for internationalization? Generally, we think that the closer our assumptions are to reality, the better the resulting model.

The original Uppsala model that was published in 1977 explains the internationalization process of firms. We have further developed the model several times in the intervening years. The present article is our latest effort: a general model of the evolution of the multinational business enterprise ( MBE), from early steps abroad to being a global firm. The updated, augmented model explains MBE evolution in general, not only characteristics of the internationalization process in a narrow sense. We believe that the newest iteration, anchored in process ontology, will be useful in conducting longitudinal empirical studies.

Perhaps the most striking institutional change over the last 30 years is the transition from some kind of state-governed and planned economy to a more open economic system governed by the market. This development has occurred or is currently occurring in countries that are often labelled transition economies or emerging markets. Included among these countries are China, India and Russia, as well as most other countries in the ‘communist bloc’ in the former Soviet Union, as well as Central and Eastern Europe. Within the market economies of Europe, similar, although less dramatic, changes in the mix between planned and market exchange have been implemented. Industrial sectors, for instance telecom, air transport and energy, have been transformed from plan governance to open market governance through an institutional deregulation. The plans and the associated authorities in planned economies are being abolished, prices are being liberalised and the countries, or the industrial sectors, are moving towards increasingly open market economies. The relative merits and problems of the two modes of coordination of economic life have been analysed and discussed in a number of studies. Coase (1937), Hayek (1945) and Williamson (1975) are examples of scholars who have analysed the plan (hierarchy) versus the market mechanism of economic coordination.

Based on the key assumptions that firms are opportunity seeking and that they gain critical knowledge operating in a network of relationships, this paper focuses on early expansion in foreign market networks. In particular, the paper examines the relation between experience and business-relationship value in a foreign market. While experience and experiential knowledge are central concepts in international business, little has been written about their effects on the value of business relationships. The paper formulates a set of interrelated hypotheses on the effects of international experience, experiential network knowledge and importance of customer and competitor knowledge on the value of business relationships in a foreign market. They are combined in a structural model, which is tested on a sample through LISREL. The main conclusion drawn from the study is that experiential network knowledge and knowledge about the importance of customers and competitors in the network influence the value of business relationships in a foreign market in different ways.

Purpose - This paper seeks to offer a model on the evolution of the multinational business enterprise (MBE). It is meant to be an alternative to the eclectic paradigm, the preeminent theoretical tool applied in studies of the multinational enterprise (MNE) and foreign direct investment. The label MBE aims at moving focus from structure of production to change processes in business relations and entrepreneurship. Design/methodology/approach - While the eclectic paradigm is grounded in neo-classical economics meant primarily to be applied in studies of macroeconomic interest and is based on assumptions not applicable in studies of individual firms, the model of the MBE is meant to be used in studies at the micro-level. It is rooted in assumptions consistent with behavioural theory consequently being more realistic. The model is based on the Uppsala model with input from studies on dynamic capabilities, entrepreneurship research and research on management under uncertainty. Findings - The realistic assumptions of the model imply that it is relevant for understanding the dynamics of strategy and management of the MBE. Research limitations/implications - As the model aims at enriching our understanding of the dynamics of the MBE the paper recommends empirical longitudinal studies of firms. Originality/value - Realistic and relevant assumptions imply that the model differs in critical respects from received theory in international business.

Studies of international knowledge transfer usually focus on the transfer of knowledge without loss between organizational units. However, this research has frequently been inconclusive because of the tacit nature of knowledge and the difficulties of measuring the results of knowledge transfer. Therefore, we suggest a paradigmatic shift of research from knowledge transfer without loss, to knowledge translation as a matter of modification of knowledge when transferred from one context to an other. According to this perspective, the knowledge transfer between the MNE HQ and foreign subsidiaries is a socio-cultural process in which expatriates can be expected to play an important role.In this paper, we study the impact of expatriates in knowledge translation from MNE HQ to foreign subsidiaries. Through an empirical analysis, we examine how the characteristics of expatriates influence the usefulness of knowledge transferred internationally. An important result of the study is that the expatriation experience and, in particular, the relationship development capability has significant positive effects on the international knowledge translation process. However, we did not find any statistical evidence that an expatriate's experience of the particular industry or the particular country has a significant effect.

We conceptualize the global firm as being a loosely coupled network of far-flung subsidiaries with hierarchically acting headquarters (HQ) that design a global organization to ensure support of its global strategic agenda. We argue that the process of HQ management in the global firm is a process characterized by uncertainty. Drawing on the Uppsala model for managing under uncertainty, we suggest that the source of uncertainty is a liability of outsidership derived from the fact that HQ is often not knowledgeable about the networks and actions of its subsidiaries. We then offer various actions that need to be taken by HQs to resolve that liability to improve on the efficiency of the coordination and management of the global firm.

Based on empirical studies of firm exchangeactivities in business markets, this paper outlines a businessnetwork view of the firm-market relationship, which differsfundamentally from the view assumed by neo-classicaleconomic theory. We define business networks as sets of connected business relationships. Thus business relationships and connections between relationships are the critical elements in the business network view. It is assumed, as suggested by the Uppsala internationalization process model, that an interplay between knowledge and commitment development is the mechanism that drives the relationship and network development process. Against this background the paper discusses how strategic change is analyzed in literature on alliances and networks. In conclusion the paper presents a set of propositions about strategy-making in business network settings.

This paper analytically and graphically examines the Uppsala model's risk formula (Johanson & Vahlne, 1977) in its two variables: commitment and uncertainty. The graphical treatment of the variables demonstrates the internationalization mechanism's consistency with the risk formula. In particular, commitment manipulation develops a risk management perspective to the model, wherein contingent uncertainty is a central concept. The main contribution consists in the composition of a set of hypotheses on the effects of risk contingencies on a firm's commitment behavior in different internationalization phases. A pertinent remark that emerges from this analytical exercise is the Uppsala model's contingent nature, which explains the differences in the pattern and pace of the internationalization process, as well as potential leapfrogging and market-exit moves.