1. Is IE Research Legitimate?
Nicole Coviello
Wilfrid Laurier University, Canada
University of Turku, Finland

2. Hambrick and Chen (2008): My question: Approach:
New academic fields are advanced through the process of differentiation, mobilization and legitimacy building
My question:
Is IE ‘legitimate’?
Approach:
Assess all IE articles ( ) relative to a set of criteria from Hambrick and Chen (2008)
Extend Coviello, Jones and McDougall-Covin (in press)
See also Jones et al. (JBV 2011), Coviello et al (JBV 2011), Galkina (2013)

3. 1. Is IE ‘intellectually persuasive’?
Numerous high profile awards:
2000 AMJ Best Paper Award 2000: Zahra, Ireland and Hitt
2004 JIBS Decade Award: Oviatt and McDougall (1994)
2014 JIBS Decade Award: Knight and Cavusgil (2004)
Journal of International Marketing ‘Thorelli Award’:
Jones (1999), Knight (2000), Burgel and Murray (2000), Moen and Servais (2002), Chetty and Campbell-Hunt (2004)
Numerous papers in ‘top 10’ lists of strong journals
Academy of International Business Conference 2014:
19 sessions; tied for largest area of interest

4. But… Damaging reviews of IE (e.g. Keupp and Gassmann 2009)
Powerful critics in parent disciplines:
E.g. Rugman et al (2011) argue there is little or no robust empirical evidence of ‘born global’ firms
Lack of visibility in key conferences:
Babson 2014:
236 papers; only 15 IE (6%)
AoM 2014
110 paper/symposium sessions on Entrepreneurship; only 4 IE (1%)
72 paper/symposium sessions on International Management; 0 IE; 1 PDW

5. 2. Does IE emulate acceptable norms and styles?
IE published in top journals and outside parent disciplines
(n = 248)
AMJ 1
JIBS 9
ETP 13
JIMgt 3
ERD 4
JIMktg 7
IBR 18
JMS 2
IMM
JSBM
IMR
JWB 8
ISBJ
SBE
JBR
SEJ
JBV
SMJ
44% in strong journals
Only 13% in the strongest journals

6. What I see as an editor? Qualitative studies Survey studies
Demand for robust data collection and analysis procedures & detail often not met
Papers are:
very descriptive
atheoretical
Survey studies
Authors re-label constructs across papers
Inadequate reporting of how measures are adopted, adapted or developed
Inadequate recognition of how retained items change the meaning of a construct

7. Survey and database studies
Mismanagement of papers emerging from a single database
Authors slicing data too thinly
Reliance on questionable proxies
Inconsistent or confused used of terms
Examples?
Writing that states or implies: BG = INV
Studying older firms that happened to internationalize early
…but calling them BGs
Using the term ‘global’ when ‘international’ or ‘regional’ is more appropriate
Using the term ‘rapid’ when ‘early’ is more appropriate

8. What does this suggest? Element Criteria IE Legitimacy Building
Intellectual persuasion ?
Emulation of norms and styles of adjacent established fields X

9. Implications? Improve legitimacy through visibility
We are informed by (e.g.) entrepreneurship as well as IB
Be visible at key conferences beyond AIB (e.g. Babson, AoM)
Improve legitimacy through methodological decisions:
Thoroughly apply best-practice qualitative methods
Use, report and interpret measures carefully and correctly
Adopt best-practice when managing large data bases
Improve legitimacy through careful use of IE terminology