Global entrepreneurship and supply chain management: a Chinese exemplar

Lifang Wu,Daewoo Park,Ravi Chinta,Margaret Cunningham
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/17561391011019014
2010-03-02
Journal of Chinese Entrepreneurship
Abstract:Purpose Global entrepreneurship study is primarily concerned with why, when, and how entrepreneurial opportunities are discovered and exploited in the global market. The purpose of this paper is to present a framework for pursuing global entrepreneurship where supply chain management (SCM) can often serve as a platform for resource acquisition, market development, and risk mitigation. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents a case study to show how SCM is utilized by entrepreneurs in China for developing two formats of entrepreneurship: domestic private companies through horizontal supply chain clustering and vertical (forward and/or backward) supply chain extensions. In particular, the paper explores firm‐level behavior in supply clusters to discern patterns at the collective level of supply clusters. Findings Entrepreneurs rely on their existing supply chain networks to pursue new venturing opportunities. Two types of supply chain expansions (horizontal supply chain clustering and vertical supply chain extensions) are found in China. Competitive rivalry in this paper of supply clusters is found to demonstrate “co‐opetition” (collaboration amongst competitors). Originality/value This paper's theoretical framework offers unique perspectives towards global entrepreneurship, and is empirically supported by numerous real business examples. The paper integrates SCM with international entrepreneurship and identifies two distinct patterns that are evident in China. In particular, the paper describes the specific contexts in which each of the two patterns is successful. These patterns provide valuable guidance for future Chinese entrepreneurs interested in globalization. The paper is a harbinger to future research on collective behavior of competitors in supply clusters. This could potentially redefine competitive rivalry (in Porter's 5‐forces) in more cooperative terms.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?