The Impact of Strategic Orientations on the Born Globals' Export Performance: An Ambidexterity Approach. (RESEARCH ARTICLE)

1 Introduction

Management scholars have devoted increased attention to companies implementing early internationalization strategies and conceptualizations (Baier-Fuentes et al., 2019; Rialp et al., 2005; Romanello & Chiarvesio, 2019). While specific definitions may vary according to export intensity threshold, speed, and global reach (Evers et al., 2019; Knight & Cavusgil, 1996, 2004; Madsen & Servais, 1997; Oviatt & McDougall, 1994), scholars agree that these firms started international activities very early (Hennart, 2014). In this paper, we will refer to them as born globals (BGs) and conceptualize them as "small technology-oriented companies that operate in international markets from the earliest day of their establishment" (Knight & Cavusgil, 1996, p. 11; Cavusgil & Knight, 2015).

Several lines of empirical evidence show how BGs generally operate in high-tech industries (Freixanet & Federo, 2022; Monferrer et al., 2015), and they tend to frequently develop innovations in terms of new products or variants of existing products (Hurley & Tomas, 1998; Wang & Ahmed, 2007). Therefore, BGs' success depends on their capacity to simultaneously develop an organizational ambidexterity perspective, i.e., develop a dual function of knowledge exploration and exploitation (Lin& Si, 2019; O'Reilly & Tushman, 2008; Peng, 2019; Reese, 2019; Tirado et al., 2019). In this respect, it has been pointed out that the ambidexterity behaviour of BGs (Dhanaraj et al., 2004; Taylor & Jack, 2012) can be associated with their ability to balance the development of different strategic orientations (SOs), seen as the set of principles that directly influence a firm's business performance (Autio et al., 2000; Gatignon & Xuereb, 1997; Widjaja & Sugiarto, 2022; Zahra, 2005). Therefore, BGs represent an interesting research target since the role of SOs' typologies has rarely been addressed in this field of study (Ruokonen & Saarenketo, 2009; Zahra, 2005).

Among SOs, three typologies have mainly attracted the attention of scholars, namely, entrepreneurial orientation (EO), market orientation (MO), and learning orientation (LO) (Chen et al., 2020a, b; Widjaja & Sugiarto, 2022). EO provides organizations with a basis for addressing innovative, proactive, and risk-taking decisions and actions (Covin & Slevin, 1989; Karami & Tang, 2019; Rauch et al., 2009; Wales, 2016; Wales et al., 2013). Such behaviour assumes a critical role during the exploration phase, which is aimed at developing new organizational norms and routines (Mom et al., 2007). At the same time, MO--which aligns BGs with their own markets--leads companies to proactive behaviour, supporting both the exploration and exploitation phases (Chen et al., 2020a, b). Finally, LO (Cadogan, 2012; Martens et al., 2016) supports the process of acquiring, distributing, integrating, and creating information and knowledge among organizational members of a specific company or between different organizations (Boso et al., 2012; Huber, 1991). EO, MO and LO are assumed to be distinct firm resources that may have little relevance in terms of a direct effect on BGs' performance (Falahat et al., 2018). However, when such resources are combined, they may become a more valuable predictor of superior results (Barney et al., 2011; Ordanini & Rubera, 2008).

Authors have pointed out that performance is the key and ultimate dependent variable of interest of BGs' scholars (Huang et al., 2021; Jiang et al., 2020; Jones et al., 2011). Among the different performance areas that may be analysed within a BG, the one regarding exporting activities emerges as extremely relevant since such companies start to sell abroad very early on. In this respect, export performance has been conceptualized and measured in several ways (Papadopoulos & Martin, 2010). In this paper, the construct is defined as "the outcome of a firm's activities in export markets" (Katsikeas et al., 2000, p. 497, citing; Shoham, 1996). Such a research topic has been heavily investigated in the extant literature, as shown in several literature reviews (Aaby & Slater, 1989; Madsen, 1987; Sousa et al., 2008; Zou & Stan, 1998), independently of the firm's characteristics. However, the impact of different SOs on firms' export intensity has been investigated quite rarely. In this respect, Sousa et al. (2008) found that MO has a positive impact on firms' export intensity in 13% of sampled companies, while the company's "risk-taking propensity"--which can be assumed to be a proxy of EO--was found in only 4% of analysed cases. However, the different SOs' typologies have generally been investigated as independent variables, but not in combination. Therefore, following the resource orchestration view, this contribution aims to investigate the combined impact of resources and capabilities provided by EO, MO, and LO on BGs' export performance. Therefore, first, the significance of three dyadic interactions (namely, MO*EO, EO*LO, and MO*LO) is evaluated, followed by that of the triadic interaction (MO*EO* LO).

We test our hypotheses on a sample of 100 Italian hi-tech BGs located inside a technological cluster near Rome, which has been investigated in earlier studies (Presutti & Odorici, 2019; Presutti et al., 2007, 2016). The sample assumes specific relevance because of its multi-industry nature; moreover, embedded firms belong to different high-risk sectors (i.e. the ones in which BGs traditionally operate), such as the computer, electronics (in the strictest sense), telecommunications, and so-called new economy industries. This issue assumes further relevance when it is considered that very few studies have specifically investigated the export performance of service firms (Sousa et al., 2008), which are the large majority (approximately 95%) of our sample. Moreover, the selected technological cluster assumes a special role within the BGs context since its creation was supported--since 1980--by several local authorities (i.e. Roma Capitale municipality, Chamber of Commerce of Rome Province, Lazio Region) to promote the industrial reconversion of more traditional manufacturing activities located in the area since the 1940s. To support such a reconversion towards information and communication technologies, stronger links to publicly-owned research centres located in the area (e.g., the National Agency for Alternative and Renewable Energy and the Earth Observation Center of the European Space Agency (ENEA)were promoted and supported (Statista Research Department, 2021).

On a more macro level, the study of an Italian sample is of interest since Italian small and micro sized enterprises play a pivotal role in the national economy (European Investment Bank, 2021). There are approximately 4.3 m companies, 95% of which are micro ones (fewer than 10 employees). Moreover, they account for approximately 80% of total national employment and 70% of the Italian added value. Finally, their contribution to exports (40% of the total national sales in foreign markets) is greater than that of other EU countries (around 25% in both France and Germany). Finally, from an academic perspective, it is worth noting that Italy was among the countries in which no previous studies were explicitly conducted to evaluate the determinants of export performance, at least between 1998 and 2005 (Sousa et al., 2008).

In order to shed new light on the impact (if any) of different SOs on the BGs' export performance, we implemented several innovative methodological approaches. The first is regarding the adoption of three different measures of export performance, namely, foreign sales as a percentage of total BG sales (which is a proxy of the BG's international scale), the number of foreign markets served (geographic scope) and finally, the number of foreign customers--which is a relevant feature in the case of BGs operating in B2B markets (Furlan & Grandinetti, 2008). The chosen measures are consistent with those of Jiang et al. (2020), who preferred those related to market share over those related to financial performance when investigating BGs' ability to penetrate foreign markets (Gerschewski et al., 2015; Khan & Lew, 2018). Moreover, adopting three variables related to foreign market penetration allowed us to obtain more robust results. Second, we enrich the empirical analysis by performing a longitudinal analysis, as suggested by Buccieri and Park (2022). At the same time, following the orchestration approach, we assumed BGs implement an ambidexterity approach; therefore, we tested the impact of the three SOs in all possible dyadic and triadic combinations. This approach allowed us to verify which single SO has a more relevant impact, as it is still an open question in the extant literature on export performance (Evers et al., 2019; Hakala, 2011; Wahyuni & Sara, 2020).

The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. In the next section the theoretical background is described, and four hypotheses developed. After this, the methodology adopted is illustrated and the findings obtained are presented and discussed. In the last section, theoretical and managerial implications are summarized, and future research directions developed on the basis of the paper's limitations.

2 Literature Review and Hypothesis Development

2.1 EO, MO and LO as Firms' Resources

The resource orchestration theory represents an extension of the resource-based theory and combines resources and managerial acumen to realize superior firm performance (Chadwick et al., 2015). Thus, resource orchestration focuses on the combined effects--rather than on the single ones--of resources and capabilities on a company's performance (Haddoud et al., 2018). Within the international business literature, such a theoretical approach has been adopted to investigate combinations of innovation types (conceptualized as a firm's resources) and export performance (Lopez et al., 2022). For the aims of our paper, EO, MO and LO are assumed to be...