Re-internationalisation: Exploration and conceptualisation Catherine L. Welch a , Lawrence S. Welch b, * a Faculty of Business and Economics, The Institute Building, University of Sydney, 2006, Australia b Melbourne Business School, The University of Melbourne, 200 Leicester Street, Carlton, Victoria, 3053, Australia 1. Introduction Over the past four decades, internationalisation has grown as a distinct area in international business research—often associated with what has been described as the internationalisation process school and, more recently, the emerging field of international entrepreneurship (Bell, McNaughton, Young, & Crick, 2003; Johanson & Vahlne, 1990; Johanson & Vahlne, 2006; Jones & Coviello, 2005; Westhead, Wright, & Ucbasaran, 2001). The overwhelming focus of research – and likewise of policymakers and government trade facilitation agencies (e.g., Korhonen, Luostarinen, & Welch, 1996) – has been on internationalisation as an outward process from countries (Crick, 2002; Fletcher, 2001; Welch & Luostarinen, 1988). Key drivers and patterns of this outward movement – such as psychic distance (e.g., Brewer, 2007; Ellis, 2007) and experiential knowledge (Blomstermo & Sharma, 2003; Lindstrand, Eriksson, & Sharma, 2009) – continue to dominate the research agenda. In contrast, there has been only limited research on inward processes and their connection to outward operations, and on de-internationalisation activity (Benito & Welch, 1997; Holmlund, Kock, & Vanyushyn, 2007; Korhonen et al., 1996; Pauwels & Matthyssens, 1999). In the latter case, this is despite widespread research showing a high drop-out rate from international operations, particularly by those companies in the early stages of internationalisation and among small firms (Bonaccorsi, 1992). Recent evidence indicates that international new ventures (or so-called born globals) may have a higher failure rate than companies pursuing more conservative international development paths (Mudambi & Zahra, 2007). Even less is known about the process surrounding the re-engagement in international operations by firms which have previously exited—what has been termed re-internationalisation (Luostarinen, 1979; Luostarinen & Welch, 1990). A search International Business Review 18 (2009) 567–577 ARTICLE INFO Article history: Received 7 January 2008 Received in revised form 24 June 2009 Accepted 8 July 2009 Keywords: International entrepreneurship International heritage Learning Networks Re-internationalisation Relationships Sporadic exporters ABSTRACT Re-internationalisation represents a research challenge for the internationalisation process and international entrepreneurship fields. Many companies withdraw from international operations, go through an international time-out period and later re-enter the international arena. Little is known about this process, and whether re-internatio- nalisers behave differently from those starting out for the first time. The limited, sketchy evidence is considered and it is argued that some re-internationalisers will go into the re- entry process with a significant international heritage from previous activities, including relevant knowledge and networks, enabling faster re-entry and take-off. However, other firms will have exited in such negative circumstances that international re-entry initially is rejected as an option, and may be slow to respond to new international opportunities. Much depends on what happens during the international time-out period, particularly in terms of changes in management and/or ownership; the nature and strength of new re- entry influences; and how the re-entry process unfolds. ß 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. * Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 393498454; fax: +61 393498414. E-mail addresses: c.welch@econ.usyd.edu.au (C.L. Welch), l.welch@mbs.edu (L.S. Welch). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Business Review journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ibusrev 0969-5931/$ – see front matter ß 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2009.07.003