Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36

The export marketing information system: an integration

of the extant knowledge
Leonidas C. Leonidou, Marios Theodosiou*
Department of Public and Business Administration, School of Economics and Management,
University of Cyprus, Kallipoleos 75, P.O. Box 20537, CY-1678 Nicosia, Cyprus

Abstract

This article provides an integrative review of extant knowledge on the export marketing information system, based on input
received from 27 studies conducted on the subject. A detailed analysis of research into the constituent parts of the system
revealed that this is too atheoretic, fragmented, repetitive, non-programmatic, and inconsistent. Despite these weaknesses, it was
concluded that: (a) with the exception of company size, the role of antecedent factors in influencing information behavior is not
very clear; (b) the emphasis of export information needs is on customers, competitors, and pricing; (c) information is mainly
acquired on a person-to-person basis; (d) the dissemination of information, although superficially examined, tends to be bottom-
up and casual (e) proper information utilization enhances the quality of export management decisions, while at the same time
satisfying the individual needs of decision makers; and (f) export performance is positively influenced by the synergistic rather
than the individual effect of information behavior components.
# 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction and choosing promotional methods; and (e) improve

Information has always been regarded as a critical
component in making effective and efficient market-
ing decisions. This is because information can be
used to: (a) understand better the major actors in
the marketplace where the firm intends to operate;
(b) monitor changes in a business environment char-
acterized by rapidly changing market conditions, inten-
sifying competition, and increasing globalization;
(c) design reliable marketing plans and strategies by
shedding light on the desirability of the various market-
ing alternatives; (d) offer sound solutions to specific
marketing problems, such as launching new products,
changing prices, setting up distribution channels,
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ357-22892465;
fax: þ357-22892460.
E-mail address: mariosth@ucy.ac.cy (M. Theodosiou).
marketing control, through better monitoring of
marketing strategy implementation and more accurate
assessment of company performance (Churchill, 2001;
Tull & Hawkins, 1993; Zikmund, 2000).
Information is even more crucial in the case of firms
transcending national boundaries, due to the higher
risks resulting from the great diversity of foreign
business environments, the multiplicity of the para-
meters involved in selling abroad, the existence of new
variables not found in the domestic market, and the
high intensity of international competition (Czinkota
& Ronkainen, 2001). Nevertheless, many current and
potential exporters suffer from serious information
handicaps, constituting one of the most crucial export
barriers both in terms of frequency of appearance and
degree of severity (Leonidou, 1995). These handicaps
are attributable to: (a) a lack of sensitivity to variations
in consumer tastes and preferences; (b) a limited

1090-9516/$ – see front matter # 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2003.08.005
 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
appreciation of the different character of the market-
ing environment in overseas countries; (c) a lack of
familiarity with alternative foreign and international
data sources; (d) a reluctance to absorb the costs of
conducting research abroad; and (e) doubts about the
competence of international information providers
(Douglas & Craig, 1983).
Sufficient acquisition and effective use of informa-
tion on foreign markets and operations is vital for a
firm’s export expansion (Leonidou & Katsikeas, 1996).
Export information needs exist well before the firm’s
engagement in exporting, and these usually relate to the
identification of foreign market opportunities (Wieder-
sheim-Paul, Olson, & Welch, 1978). During the initial
export stages, the firm experiences a high level of
uncertainty due to limited knowledge regarding inter-
national business and overseas market characteristics,
creating a strong need for experiential and general
information (Seringhaus, 1986). As the firm gains more
experience abroad and obtains more foreign market-
related information of a more objective and specific
nature, the level of uncertainty gradually diminishes,
encouraging progression to more advanced stages of
exporting (Welch & Luostarinen, 1988).
Export information has been at the forefront of
international and export marketing research since its
appearance in the early 1960s. This is because export
information interferes with many different internatio-
nalization parameters, such as stimulating forces (Kat-
sikeas & Piercy, 1993; Sullivan & Bauerschmidt,
1990; Tesar & Tarleton, 1982), barrier factors (Alex-
andrides, 1983; Leonidou, 2000; Pavord & Bogard,
1975; Yaprak, 1985), foreign market entry methods
(Reid, 1981, 1984), and strategic marketing elements
(Cooper & Kleinschmidt, 1985; Koh, 1991; Samiee &
Walters, 1990), which have peripherally tackled this
issue. However, the specific role of information in
developing exports has been the focus of a relatively
small, but growing, stream of scholarly contributions
in recent decades, which is scattered and not theore-
tically anchored.
The theoretical weaknesses of this stream of research
can be ascribed to four major problems endemic in the
exporting literature: (a) the habit of studying exporting
phenomena in isolation from other activities taking
place in the more developed field of domestic business;
(b) the fact that the dominant methodology in the
field of exporting is that of logical empiricism, which
13
hampers theory advancement; (c) the tendency by
researchers to employ diverse research methodologies
that leads to repetition, fragmentation, and inconsis-
tency; and (d) the emphasis on presenting the empirical
findings in isolation from a well-defined research pro-
gram (Axinn, 1994; Kamath, Rosson, Patton, & Brooks,
1987). This is in contrast to developments in the
domestic marketing field, where the issue of informa-
tion has reached relatively more theoretical maturity, as
a result of substantial contributions on the subject
(Diamantopoulos & Horncastle, 1997).
In the absence of a mid-level theory on export
information, there is a need to systematically consoli-
date knowledge on the subject, since this could be
beneficial to: corporate managers, who would be able
to identify gaps in their export information systems and
take measures to make them more useful in exploiting
profitable foreign market opportunities; pubic policy-
makers, who could design better information-based
export promotion programs that would cater for the
specific needs of current and would-be exporters; busi-
ness educators, who could develop and implement
special educational programs to train future managers
on making proper use of the export marketing informa-
tion system; and exporting researchers, who could
extract new ideas from extant knowledge in order to
promote theory-building in this field of exporting.
In light of the above benefits, the overall aim of this
study is to provide an integrative review of the extant
knowledge on export marketing information, while the
specific objectives are: (a) to identify and extract the
existing empirical knowledge on export information;
(b) to synthesize this knowledge under an overall
conceptual framework; and (c) to critically assess
the various parts of this framework, as well as the
linkages between them.1 In particular, the review
1
Although a meta-analysis could further enhance the contribu-
tion of our study, this would be difficult to implement at this stage
for three major reasons: (a) some constructs were empirically
examined by a few studies only, thus limiting the number of
observations for further analysis; (b) the measurement scales and
dimensions used differed markedly across studies, creating in this
way a very heterogeneous sample for meta-analysis; and (c) only a
few studies provided empirical results in a form suitable for meta-
analytical purposes (e.g., statistical values or p-values). However,
with the proliferation of research on the subject, it is expected that
these problems will gradually be alleviated, allowing the under-
taking of a meta-analysis that would yield useful insights into the
export marketing information system.
14 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
Fig. 1. The export marketing information system.
centers on three major areas comprising the export
marketing information system, namely: antecedent
factors, that is, background forces influencing export
information behavior; information behavior, that is,
actions taken by the firm in identifying, sourcing,
disseminating, and using information about export
markets; and performance outcome, that is, the impact
of export information behavior on the company’s
export performance (Richey & Myers, 2001; Samiee
& Walters, 1999; Seringhaus, 1993; Souchon & Dia-
mantopoulos, 1996) (see Fig. 1).2
The remainder of the paper is organized in the
following way: First, the theoretical underpinnings
of the marketing information system are provided,
based on insights from the domestic marketing dis-
cipline. Then, the methodological profile of the
empirical studies on export information incorporated
in the review is discussed. The next three sections
2
This simplified antecedent—behavior—outcome model pro-
vides the most appropriate approach to guide the review, because a
similar version has been successfully used to examine other
dimensions of exporting, such as export marketing strategy
(Leonidou, Katsikeas, & Samiee, 2002). Moreover, a parallel can
be drawn with domestic marketing information behavior where:
first, it interacts with marketing managers to assess their
information needs; next, it develops the information needed from
various sources; finally, it distributes information to managers in
the right form and at the right time to help them in marketing
planning, implementation, and control (Kotler & Armstrong, 2001).
synthesize the available knowledge on each of the
components of the export marketing information
system (antecedent factors—information behavior—
performance outcome) as this is derived from the
studies reviewed. In the final sections, some conclu-
sions are extracted from the study findings, as well as
implications for various interested parties.
2. Theoretical background
The importance of information in business activities
has been an issue of major concern for more than a
hundred years, when the first attempts to observe and
theorize about management and organizational beha-
vior appeared (Laudon & Laudon, 2000). Since then,
an enormous volume of research has been conducted
to understand the role of information systems in
organizations and their contribution to business suc-
cess. One stream of this research has focused on the
marketing information system, which has examined,
inter alia, the value of information in a marketing
context (Glazer, 1991), the antecedents of market
information processes (Deshpandé & Zaltman,
1982; Kohli & Jaworski, 1990; Moorman, 1995),
the link between market information processing and
organizational learning (Sinkula, 1994; Slater & Nar-
ver, 1995), the factors that influence information/
knowledge utilization in firms (Menon & Varadarajan,
 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
1992; Moorman, Zaltman, & Deshpandé, 1992), and
the association between environmental turbulence and
information-processing styles (Glazer & Weiss, 1993).
These attempts to understand the marketing infor-
mation systems are characterized by great diversity,
owing to the lack of previous theory on the subject, the
difficulty in conceptualizing and operationalizing the
relevant constructs, and the tendency to tackle only a
few dimensions of the subject matter (Menon &
Varadarajan, 1992; Moorman, 1995; Sinkula, 1994).
Despite this, the extant literature points to the exis-
tence of three basic components in a marketing infor-
mation system: (a) the background factors influencing
the information behavior of marketing managers; (b)
the actual processing behavior taking place in the
organization with respect to determining, acquiring,
disseminating, and utilizing information; and (c) the
role of information activities in shaping the firm’s
competitive advantage, which can be subsequently
used to enhance marketing performance (Deshpandé
& Zaltman, 1982; Menon & Varadarajan, 1992; Moor-
man, 1995; Porter & Millar, 1985).
Background factors comprise parameters pertaining
to the environment, the organization, and the manage-
ment. For instance, companies operating in highly
complex and volatile marketing environments face
greater uncertainty and, therefore, require more and
diverse information (Menon & Varadarajan, 1992).
Moreover, organizations with a less formalized or
centralized structure and an innovative culture are
more likely to seek information and appreciate its
usefulness in making sound marketing decisions
(Deshpandé & Zaltman, 1982; Menon & Varadarajan,
1992; Moorman, 1995). Furthermore, managers with
different amounts of experience, degrees of knowl-
edge, cognitive styles, and decision-making levels
tend to create different information-processing struc-
tures (Menon & Varadarajan, 1992). The above back-
ground forces do not act in isolation from each other,
but their interplay may have a serious effect on
information behavior and its outcome. For instance,
congruence between the level of marketplace turbu-
lence and the manager’s information-processing style
is vital in determining performance (Glazer & Weiss,
1993; Wright & Ashill, 1998).
Information-processing behavior consists of four
dimensions centering on the determination, acquisi-
tion, dissemination, and utilization of information
15
(Day, 1994; Moorman, 1995). Information determina-
tion is the actual identification of the marketing man-
ager’s information needs. This is a crucial dimension
since the way managers define the marketing problem
and sense what information is really wanted will
largely affect the effectiveness and efficiency of their
company’s future operations. However, managers are
often accused of requesting information without think-
ing whether it is really needed, omitting to ask for
some types of important information, or cutting down
information requirements because of a misconception
that information is an unnecessary expense (Kotler &
Armstrong, 2001). There are also a number of situa-
tion-specific factors that may affect the nature and
quantity of information needed, namely: (a) availabil-
ity—can the information needed to support a specific
decision be made available in due time? (b) cost versus
benefit—is the cost of obtaining the specific informa-
tion higher than the benefit that the firm will ultimately
enjoy? (c) time—how urgent is it to provide a solution
to a marketing problem for which information is
required? (d) uncertainty—how does the diversity
or volatility of the business environment of the target
market affect the life-span of information? and (e) cost
of error—what will be the consequences of a wrong
decision made without sufficient information?
(Wright & Ashill, 1998; Zikmund, 2000).
Information acquisition is the collection of infor-
mation for the purpose of detecting and/or solving a
specific marketing problem. Obviously, this process is
closely connected with the previous stage of identify-
ing information needs and is expressed in terms of the
sources available when gathering this information.
Information can be collected from primary sources
for the first time to serve the specific purpose in hand
(e.g., market research surveys), or can be derived from
secondary sources, where it has already been collected
for another purpose (e.g., government statistics)
(Zikmund, 2000). Information sources can also be
classified as formal, where the data-gathering process
is characterized by formal actions (e.g., focus group
discussions), or informal, where there is a casual
approach to data collection (e.g., salespeople’s inter-
actions with customers) (Wright & Ashill, 1998).
Information can also be derived from internal com-
pany sources (e.g., financial accounts) or from
sources external to the organization (e.g., interviews
with potential customers) (Sinkula, 1994). Finally,
16 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
information can be distinguished as: tacit, that is,
implicit know-how or a social relationship needed
to complete a task accumulated after years of personal
experience in either designing marketing strategies or
specific market activities, and explicit, that is, knowl-
edge which is acquired through conscious attempts
involving, either formal or informal sources of infor-
mation (Athanassiou & Nigh, 2000; Dienes & Perner,
1999).
Information dissemination is the degree to which
information is diffused among relevant users, not only
within the marketing department, but also within the
organization as a whole. In fact, widespread informa-
tion dissemination is vital in getting people from
different posts and functions to have a better under-
standing of marketing problems, stimulating discus-
sion about the trade-offs in meeting these problems,
and coordinating actions toward providing effective
and efficient solutions to these problems (Cravens,
2000). The dissemination of information among com-
pany personnel may occur formally through the estab-
lished communication channels in the organizations
(e.g., formal reports), or informally, occurring during
interpersonal interactions (e.g., casual conversations
among employees) (Moorman, 1995). Information
dissemination can also be: (a) top-down, that is from
people at higher levels to people at lower levels in the
organizational hierarchy; (b) bottom-up, that is, from
subordinates to superiors and continuing up the orga-
nization hierarchy; (c) horizontal, that is, among
people at the same or similar organizational levels;
and (d) diagonal, that is, among persons at different
levels who have no direct reporting relationships with
one another (Koontz & Weihrich, 1990; Moorman,
1995). Information can also be disseminated in a
written (e.g., handouts), oral (e.g., speech), or non-
verbal (e.g., body language) way (Koontz & Weihrich,
1990).
The fourth dimension of the information process is
information utilization, which is the actual use of the
information disseminated in the making of decisions
(Moorman et al., 1992). This can be expressed in two
complementary ways: underlying forms of use and the
extent of use (Menon & Varadarajan, 1992). The
underlying forms of use can be: (a) instrumental, that
is, the direct application of information to solve a
specific marketing-related problem; (b) conceptual,
that is the indirect application of information to
broaden the managerial knowledge base without ser-
ving any specific project; or (c) symbolic, that is the
distortion of information to support the decision-
maker’s opinion against others, or justify a decision
already taken (Souchon & Diamantopoulos, 1996).
With regard to the extent of use, this can be viewed as
the degree to which each of the above three forms of
information utilization affects the decision-making
process (Menon & Varadarajan, 1992). Notably, both
the form and extent of information utilization is
determined to a large extent by the perceived useful-
ness, credibility, and usability of the information
acquired, as well as the time and effort expended to
acquire it (Menon & Varadarajan, 1992).
The final component of the marketing information
system is marketing performance, which is influenced
by the previously mentioned information-processing
activities. Specifically, information is considered as a
strategic resource (like human, technological, or finan-
cial resources) that enables the organization to
strengthen its market-sensing capabilities and achieve
a positional advantage over its competitors in the
marketplace (Day, 1994; Porter & Millar, 1985). In
fact, the challenge facing managers in today’s fast-
changing business environment is to encourage an
open-minded inquiry, widespread information disse-
mination, and mutually informed visions about the
market within the organization, as well as to create
proactive information behavior that will involve all
business functions, not just marketing and sales per-
sonnel, with the ultimate aim of offering superior
customer value (Coyne, 1986; Zikmund, 2000). Cul-
tivating such a spirit in the organization will help the
firm to design and implement sound marketing stra-
tegies which can lead to superior performance (Cra-
vens, 2000). The profits gained from this performance
can subsequently be used to sustain its information-
related advantages.
3. Review profile
The review covered all studies on export informa-
tion published in English since the inception of this
body of research. Although there is a possibility that
some export information studies have appeared in
non-English publication outlets, such as German,
French, and Spanish, it was difficult to include these
 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
in the review for three major reasons: (a) non-avail-
ability of the printed form of these studies outside the
countries of publication; (b) non-inclusion of most of
the journals publishing these studies in electronic data
banks; and (c) linguistic limitations in reviewing the
content of these papers in non-English languages.
Altogether, 27 studies were identified, using a combi-
nation of manual and computerized literature search
methods. The latter combined three different sources:
(a) ABI/INFO, which provides information about
articles already published; (b) SWETSCAN, which
reports on recent publications or papers in print; and
(c) the INTERNET (e.g., Science Direct, Emerald
Fulltext, and Expanded Academic ASAP Interna-
tional) which contains both existing and forthcoming
publications.
The studies were located in 16 North American and
European sources, specializing mainly in international
business, export marketing, and information manage-
ment. A full list of the sources and studies reviewed is
provided in Appendix A. For a study to be included in
the review, five major criteria had to be met: (a) to
focus on the exporting stage of the firm’s internatio-
nalization process; (b) to deal with manufactured
exports of consumer and/or industrial goods; (c) to
examine exporting from a micro-business perspective;
(d) to study export information either as a core issue or
as part of a wider research problem; and (e) to provide
sufficient data extracted from primary research. Based
on these criteria, studies such as those by Darling &
Postnikoff (1985), Belich & Dubinsky (1995), Pike &
Ross (1997), and Nijssen, Douglas, & Calis (1999)
were excluded from the review. Table 1 summarizes
the methodological characteristics of the studies
selected for the review, while more details about each
study are presented in Appendix B.
The first attempt to systematically study export
information behavior was in the mid-1970s, with
the work of Tesar and Tarleton (1982). Since then,
research on the subject has grown slowly but steadily,
indicating an increasing interest in shedding light on
this crucial aspect of export marketing, probably due
to growing globalization of world markets and the
resulting intensifying competition. With the exception
of one study (Tesar & Tarleton, 1982), all other studies
were of a one-shot nature, not attempting to monitor
information changes over time by using longitudinal
research. The bulk of this research took place in
17
developed countries, particularly North America
and Europe, attributable mainly to: (a) their greater
involvement in the international trade of manufactured
goods; (b) the existence of government and other
agencies with an interest in promoting exports; and
(c) the availability of research institutions possessing
the means to carry out this type of analysis effectively.
Studies were mainly conducted in single countries, or
even in states within countries, while cross-cultural
research took place in only one study (Seringhaus,
1993).
The overwhelming majority of export information
studies focused on small- and medium-sized firms,
which are more likely to be engaged in exporting, as
opposed to larger companies that can be found at more
advanced stages of internationalization, such as licen-
sing, joint venturing, or wholly own production. How-
ever, some studies (e.g., Benito, Solberg, & Welch,
1993; Bodur & Cavusgil, 1985; Cavusgil, 1984;
Samiee & Walters, 1990) have incorporated large
exporting firms in their samples in order to identify
differences in information behavior caused by size
variations. Seven studies covered a small number of
industries (up to three), while the remainder focused
on a cross-section of industrial sectors. With only a
few exceptions (e.g., Bodur & Cavusgil, 1985; Czin-
kota & Ursic, 1983; Hart, Webb, & Jones, 1994;
Leonidou, 1997), the research emphasis was on both
consumer and industrial goods, covering a wide range
of product categories.
Twenty-three studies investigated the information
behavior of exporting firms, while the remaining four
studies examined the information practices of non-
exporters vis-à-vis exporters (Brooks & Rosson, 1982;
Chaudhry & Crick, 1998; Naor & Cavusgil, 1981;
Tesar & Tarleton, 1982). Interestingly, the results of
these studies revealed that, although exporters exhib-
ited a more active information search behavior, in
most dimensions the differences between exporters
and non-exporters were not significant. In all studies
examined, the emphasis was on the firm rather than the
export venture or product/export market level, thus
making it difficult to identify variations in information
behavior at lower levels of analysis.
Two studies have approached the total population of
exporting firms (i.e., Czinkota & Ursic, 1983; Walters,
1983), while the remaining studies were more or less
equally divided between those adopting probability
18 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36

Table 1
Methodological summary of studies on export information

Study demographics Total (n ¼ 27)a Field work timeb Geographic focusc

1970s 1980s 1990s North America Europe Other

Methodological aspects (n ¼ 4) (n ¼ 11) (n ¼ 13) (n ¼ 15) (n ¼ 9) (n ¼ 4)

Company size
Small 19 4 8 7 12 6 1
Medium 14 3 5 6 8 5 1
Large 6 – 3 3 3 1 2
NA 8 – 4 4 3 3 2
Industrial coverage
One to three industries 7 1 3 3 3 2 2
Four to seven industries 4 – 1 3 3 1 1
Eight industries or more 5 1 2 2 3 1 1
NA 11 2 4 6 6 5
Units of analysis
Exporters 27 4 11 13 15 9 4
Non-exporters 4 3 2 – 4 – –
Sampling size
Probability 11 3 1 7 7 4 1
Nonprobability 8 – 4 4 3 2 3
Whole population/NA 8 1 5 3 5 3 –
Sample size
Below 150 19 1 8 10 9 7 4
150 or above 8 3 2 4 6 2 –
Effective responsive rate
Below 30% 8 – 2 6 2 6 1
30% or above 16 3 6 7 11 2 3
NA 3 1 2 1 2 1 –
Nonresponse bias
Tested 5 – 1 4 3 2 –
Nontested 22 4 10 9 12 7 4
Data collection
Mail 20 4 7 10 12 6 3
Personal 9 – 5 4 3 3 3
Telephone – – – – – – –
Key informant
CEO/president 12 1 4 7 6 4 2
Export officer 12 – 4 8 5 4 3
Marketing manager 7 – 2 5 2 4 1
Other executive 4 – 2 2 3 1 –
NA 10 3 3 5 6 5 –
Information types
Up to 9 – – – – – – –
10–14 4 – l 3 1 3 –
15–19 6 1 2 4 1 2 3
20 or more 3 – 1 2 2 1 –
 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36 19

Table 1 (Continued )

Study demographics Total (n ¼ 27)a Field work timeb Geographic focusc

1970s 1980s 1990s North America Europe Other

Methodological aspects (n ¼ 4) (n ¼ 11) (n ¼ 13) (n ¼ 15) (n ¼ 9) (n ¼ 4)

Information sources
Up to 9 7 3 4 – 5 – 2
10–14 6 – 1 5 3 4 –
15–19 4 – 1 3 2 2 –
20 or more 2 – 1 1 1 1 –
Measurement dimension
Usage/acquisition 14 2 7 5 8 4 2
Importance/utility 19 2 8 10 11 6 3
Measurement scale
Dichotomous 10 2 6 2 6 2 2
Three-point scale 1 – – 1 – 1 –
Four-point scale 4 – 2 2 2 1 2
Five-point scale 17 1 5 11 9 7 1
Statistical analysis
Descriptive 24 4 11 10 14 6 4
Uni-/bivariate 20 3 7 11 10 7 4
Multivariate 8 1 1 6 4 5 –
a
Only three out of the 27 studies examined issues pertaining to export information use (i.e., Diamantopoulos & Horncastle, 1997; Hart
et al., 1994; Souchon & Diamantopoulos, 1997).
b
Tesar and Tarleton’s (1982) study reports the results of two surveys, the first conducted in 1974 in Wisconsin and the other in 1981 in
Virginia.
c
A study by Seringhaus (1993) was conduced in two different countries, namely Austria and Canada.

sampling designs and those employing nonprobability
samples. Sample size ranged from a low 18 to a high
1,248, with 19 out of the total 27 studies having a
sample of less than 150 firms. This indicates a ten-
dency to use relatively small samples which, coupled
with their nonprobabilistic nature, calls into question
the representability of the study findings. Effective
response rates were in the majority of cases high,
usually exceeding 30%. However, the fact that 22 (of
the total 27) studies did not check for nonresponse bias
casts some doubt on the robustness of the data
obtained.
Data were mainly collected using mail survey
methods, as reported by 18 of the studies reviewed.
Personal interviews were employed in seven other
studies, mainly with small samples. Two studies used
both mail surveys and personal interviews. None of the
studies used telephone surveys for collecting data,
probably due to difficulties in administering ques-
tionnaires containing multiple items and scales. The
major source for obtaining the data required was the
CEO/chairman or export officer, while other company
executives were less frequently used. It is worth noting
that only one of the studies reported procedures
checking for key informant bias (Benito et al.,
1993), although this can be justified by the fact that
in smaller firms these were impractical and to some
extent unnecessary due to their centralized manage-
ment structure.
Six studies focused exclusively on export informa-
tion needs, twelve concentrated on export information
acquisition, while another six examined concurrently
both the needs for and the sources of export informa-
tion. The issue of information dissemination was
peripherally tackled by only one study (e.g., Benito
et al., 1993). Two studies exclusively examined export
information use (Diamantopoulos & Horncastle,
1997; Souchon & Diamantopoulos, 1997). None of
the studies reviewed examined all four dimensions of
export information behavior, while three of the dimen-
sions were simultaneously investigated in one study
(Hart et al., 1994). Moreover, 18 studies examined the
20 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
differentiating role of antecedent factors on export
information behavior, while the effect of the latter on
export performance was the subject of six studies.
The average number of items used to operationalize
information needs was 19.2, while of information
sources it was 12.2. In the overwhelming majority
of cases, the emphasis was on measuring the impor-
tance/utility of the type or source of export informa-
tion, while half of the studies also measured the
frequency of using export information types or
sources. These dimensions were usually measured
on a five-point scale, although scales with a lower
number of intervals were also employed. The disse-
mination of information was measured in terms of
formal or informal modes of communication within
the organization (Benito et al., 1993). Information use
was operationalized in a variety of ways, such as the
uses to which export information is put (Hart et al.,
1994), dimensions reflecting use/non-use situations
(Souchon & Diamantopoulos, 1997), or dimensions
of decision relevance, information surplus, recom-
mendations implemented, general quality, uncertainty
reduction, and decision confidence (Diamantopoulos
& Horncastle, 1997).
The principal method of data analysis was mainly of
a descriptive nature, such as percentage frequencies
and mean scores. Univariate/bivariate methods,
usually Student-t test and ANOVA, were also fre-
quently used in order to check for variations among
groups of exporters on a number of discriminating
antecedent parameters. Only a few studies used multi-
variate analytical techniques, such as factor analysis,
which proved useful in reducing the large number of
information items (either types or sources) into several
conceptually meaningful groups. Interestingly, the
level of statistical sophistication, although poor at
the early stages of this body of research, has improved
recently.
4. Antecedent factors
Antecedent factors refer to all those environmental,
organizational, managerial, and other background
forces with a possible direct or indirect effect on
export information behavior. Several studies have
tried to explore the role of these factors empirically,
particularly that of company size, industry type, export
experience, expansion strategy, and psychic distance.
However, these attempts suffer from a number of
flaws: (a) the interest was in only a few of the many
dimensions, with a possible effect on information; (b)
in most cases, these factors were examined in isolation
from the others, thus not capturing their concurrent
impact; and (c) the emphasis was on certain aspects of
information behavior, usually requirements in or
sources of information. Despite these problems, an
attempt is made in the following to analyze each of
these antecedent factors.
Company size, defined as the number of full-time
employees and/or total annual sales turnover, was the
focus of several studies, which attempted to identify
information differences caused by variations in finan-
cial, human, technological, and allied resources.
While some studies found that larger firms are con-
siderably more active in information gathering (of
almost any type) compared to smaller units (Benito
et al., 1993; Culpan, 1989; Samiee & Walters, 1990),
other studies revealed no major differences between
these two groups of firms (Hart et al., 1994; Leonidou,
1997; Walters, 1983; Yeoh, 2000). With regard to the
sources of information used, the consensus is that
smaller firms tend to use less expensive, easily acces-
sible, and more informal sources compared to their
larger counterparts (Benito et al., 1993; Hart et al.,
1994; Leonidou & Katsikeas, 1997; Walters, 1983).
Yeoh’s (2000) study also revealed that, as opposed to
small companies, the main source of information for
large companies was personal. Finally, the use of
information to back hunches was found to correlate
negatively with company size, suggesting that larger
companies may use market research data in a more
objective fashion (Hart et al., 1994).
The discriminating role of industry type on export
information has been explored in three studies.
Although Wood and Goolsby (1987) found significant
variations in information about foreign business envir-
onments across all five industries examined, other
studies reported more or less similar information
needs among exporters, irrespective of their specific
industrial classification (Evirgen, Bodur, & Cavusgil,
1993; Koh, Chow, & Smittivate, 1993; Leonidou,
1997; Wood & Robertson, 2000). Another study con-
cluded that, in general, industry type did not have a
substantial discriminating effect on the sources used to
obtain information (Leonidou & Katsikeas, 1997).
 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
The above conflicting or non-significant results can be
the outcome of an arbitrary selection of the number
and type of industries examined, rather than a pure
industry effect on export information behavior.
The ethnic background of the exporter was also
used to identify variations in export information beha-
vior. This was the subject of a study by Chaudhry and
Crick (1998) which examined information differences
between Asian-owned and indigenous British-export-
ing firms. The study revealed significant variations in
half of the information sources examined, with a
tendency by Asian exporters to rate them lower in
terms of usefulness. With regard to information types,
significant differences were observed between the two
groups in all items examined, with Asian-owned firms
systematically attributing greater importance com-
pared to their indigenous counterparts. Despite these
differences in the emphasis given to information
sources and types, their rank order was more or less
the same between the two groups of exporters.
Export experience was also used as a potential
discriminator of information behavior. Interestingly,
most studies investigating this issue found no serious
differences in information requirements between
novice and established exporters (Hart et al., 1994;
Koh et al., 1993; Leonidou, 1997; McAuley, 1993),
although one study reported that newer exporters tend
to be more aggressive in seeking export information
(Ursic & Czinkota, 1984). Results on the effect of
export experience on information channels used were
contradictory: while most studies found no major
variations between experienced and inexperienced
exporters (Hart et al., 1994; Leonidou & Katsikeas,
1997; Walters, 1996), one established that the more
experienced the exporting firm, the fewer the number
of information providers used (McAuley, 1993).
Finally, export experience was found to have no
discriminating effect whatsoever on the use of export
information (Hart et al., 1994).
The export market expansion strategy followed,
whether concentration or spreading, seems to have
some influence on both the need for and sources of
export information. Specifically, Koh et al. (1993)
found that companies selling to many markets tend
to investigate more frequently issues pertaining to the
foreign business environment, customer characteris-
tics, and the elements of the marketing mix, while Hart
et al. (1994) argued that market spreaders tend to seek
21
more background information about overseas markets.
With regard to information sources, while one study
found only few differences between market concen-
trators and market spreaders (Leonidou & Katsikeas,
1997), another concluded that the more the different
geographic regions covered by the exporter, the more
informal the market research activities performed
(Hart et al., 1994). The last study also examined the
impact of foreign market expansion on market
research information use, revealing inconsistent
results: although there was general agreement that,
as the number of geographic markets served increases,
export decisions cannot be taken without market
research, it was also agreed that there is a tendency
for the data collected to go largely unused by decision-
makers.
Psychic distance, that is the sum of factors prevent-
ing or disturbing the flow of information between the
firm and its overseas markets (Johanson & Vahlne,
1977), produced contradictory results with regard to
export information requirements. For instance, while
one study reported significant differences in informa-
tion needs between exporters to North Africa/Middle
East and exporters to OECD countries (particularly as
regards population statistics, political situation, reli-
gious beliefs, infrastractural facilities, and documen-
tation procedures) (Bodur & Cavusgil, 1985), another
found no variations by export destination in six envir-
onmental information groups (Wood & Robertson,
2000). Significant differences in information needs
also emerged in another study which drew compar-
isons between firms exporting to Europe and those
targeting Islamic countries (Bodur & Cavusgil, 1985).
Finally, two studies examined the effect of psychic
distance on the type of information channels used,
revealing no significant results (Bodur & Cavusgil,
1985; Walters, 1996).
5. Export information behavior
Export information behavior includes all the infor-
mation-related activities undertaken by exporting
firms in an attempt to enhance the effectiveness and
efficiency of their export management decisions. As
demonstrated in Section 2, this consists of four major
dimensions: (i) information determination, that is,
types of information required to tackle a specific
22 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
export business problem faced by company manage-
ment; (ii) information acquisition, that is, the sources
of information from where export information can be
collected; (iii) information dissemination, that is, the
diffusion of the information gathered among relevant
users within the exporting firm; and (iv) information
utilization, that is, the degree to which the information
collected affects the user’s management decision-
making. The knowledge derived from the extant lit-
erature on each of these components is presented in the
following.
5.1. Export information determination
Before searching can be conducted, export man-
agers must first determine their needs in information,
which should be relevant to the exporting problem in
hand. Export information needs can be classified into
four major groups: (a) macroenvironmental, incorpor-
ating forces that are usually beyond the control of
managers and constitute either opportunities or threats
for the firm in overseas markets; (b) task environment-
related, including factors close to the company that
affect its ability to satisfactorily serve its foreign
customers; (c) market-related, comprising character-
istics of the export market(s) where the firm operates
or is planning to operate; and (d) marketing mix,
consisting of controllable variables that the firm
blends to produce the response it wants in the target
market (Kotler & Armstrong, 2001). Information
needs were the focus of twelve empirical studies,
the findings of which are presented in Table 2, ranked
in descending order of frequency used and/or per-
ceived usefulness.3
Macroenvironmental forces refer to the elements of
the foreign economic, sociocultural, political-legal,
technological, demographic, and physical environ-
ment of the firm. Of these, the first three dimensions
3 tomer preferences (Chaudhry & Crick, 1998; Hart
For each information need or source item a total mean score
was estimated by adding together the score attached to its rank in
each study (ranging from 10 points for first ranking, 9 points for
second ranking, 8 points for third ranking, and so on, up to 1 point
for items ranked in the tenth position or less) and dividing by the
number of studies investigating the specific item (Dichtl,
Koglmayr, & Muller, 1990). This total mean score was subse-
quently broken down by time period (1970s, 1980s, and 1990s) and
by geographical region (i.e., North America, Europe, and other
regions), revealing only negligible time or spatial variations.
were the most widely studied, while the remaining
three received marginal empirical attention. However,
the impact of macroenvironmental parameters on
export information behavior was relatively mild, both
in terms of frequency of use and perceived usefulness.
The only exception were two studies, which found that
information on sociocultural issues was the most
important for decision-making purposes (Evirgen
et al., 1993; Tesar & Tarleton, 1982). These results
are somewhat surprising, taking into consideration the
serious limitations imposed by environmental factors
on export marketing strategy in the form of mandatory
and/or voluntary adaptations.
Task environment-related factors comprise the com-
pany itself, its suppliers, marketing intermediaries,
competitors, customers, and publics. Of these, the
most commonly researched were both customers
and competition. Information on customers was both
sought after very often (Leonidou, 1997; Samiee &
Walters, 1990) and considered useful (Benito et al.,
1993; Leonidou, 1997; McAuley, 1993; Tesar & Tar-
leton, 1982) by exporters. The same was also true of
information about competitors in foreign markets
(Bodur & Cavusgil, 1985; Koh et al., 1993; Samiee
& Walters, 1990). Marketing intermediaries were the
object in only two studies (Benito et al., 1993; Leo-
nidou, 1997), where exporters rated this type of infor-
mation very low in terms of importance. The three
remaining components of the task environment—the
company itself, its suppliers and its publics—were
examined in only one study, which concluded that
information needs on these issues are relatively mod-
est (Leonidou, 1997).
Market-related characteristics refer to: the size and
growth patterns, structure, entry conditions, prefer-
ences, potential, and company position/share in over-
seas markets. However, information needs on these
characteristics varied markedly across studies. For
example, in some studies exporters rated highly cus-
et al., 1994; Leonidou, 1997), in others market poten-
tial (Robertson & Wood, 2001; Tesar & Tarleton,
1982; Wood & Goolsby, 1987), and in yet others
market entry conditions (Chaudhry & Crick, 1998;
Samiee & Walters, 1990). However, in many cases
only a modest use and/or usefulness was ascribed to
this set of information requirements, implying that
exporters do not always consider them important in
Table 2
Rank order of export information types in various empirical studies

L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36

Notes. Shaded columns refer to information types acquisition/usage, and unshaded columns to their perceived importance/utility.
a
The first two columns show the results of the Wisconsin study and the other two of the Virginian study. Also, the first and third columns refer to aggressive exporters, the
second and fourth to passive exporters.
b
The first two columns show the results of the perceived usefulness and the other two of the frequency of implementation. Also, the first and third columns show the results of
exports to O.E.C.D. countries, the second and fourth to North Africa and the Middle East.
c
The first column shows the results of small exporters and the second of large exporters.
d
The first column shows the results of the perceived importance, and the second of frequency of use.
e
The first column shows the results of Asian-owned firms and the second of indigenous firms.

23
24 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
their foreign business operations. This was particu-
larly true for information on market position/share
abroad, which most exporters find unnecessary.
Marketing mix consists of the product, pricing,
distribution, logistics, and promotion. Of these, pri-
cing was the most widely studied element and one of
the most appreciated by exporters, as demonstrated by
the relatively high ranks of usage and usefulness it
received (e.g., Bodur & Cavusgil, 1985; Koh et al.,
1993; Samiee & Walters, 1990). Product character-
istics have also attracted significant research attention,
although the empirical results show that exporters
have a relatively moderate appreciation of this type
of information (e.g., Chaudhry & Crick, 1998; Leo-
nidou, 1997; Tesar & Tarleton, 1982). Information
pertaining to distribution channels, logistics, and pro-
motion was of much less interest to exporting firms.
These findings can be attributed to the fact that most
exporters ate ‘‘sellers of production capacity,’’ inter-
ested only in selling their products at competitive
prices, leaving the task of distributing and promoting
them to their foreign representatives (Wortzel &
Wortzel, 1981).
5.2. Export information acquisition
The degree of usage and/or usefulness of export
information sources to export managers was also exam-
ined in 19 empirical studies, the results of which are
presented in descending rank order in Table 3. For
analytical purposes, information sources can be
grouped into six different categories: (a) company
efforts, that is, information generated by the firm’s
own resources and people; (b) other firms and indivi-
duals, that is, organizations or persons collaborating
directly or indirectly with the exporting firm; (c) com-
mercial associations, that is, associations providing
information to their members or to a wider audience;
(d) service organizations, that is, organizations offering
information services as a main or peripheral task; (e)
information providers, that is, international business
information provided through print, electronic, or other
media; and (f) government outlets, that is, home or host
governmental organizations or actions supplying or
exposing exporters to international trade data.
Both personal contacts in and visits to overseas
markets by company personnel were systematically
ranked highly among information sources contained
in the company efforts category (Bodur & Cavusgil,
1985; Kaynak, 1992; Kaynak & Erol, 1989; Leonidou
& Katsikeas, 1997; Naor & Cavusgil, 1981; Reid, 1984;
Seringhaus, 1993; Walters, 1983). Such an approach,
while costly, permits the collection of experiential
information, which can be customized to the specific
requirements of the company and enhance the validity
of other information collected (Cavusgil, 1985). Market
research undertaken by the firm itself is a less preferable
method, due to the fact that it is more expensive, time
consuming, and difficult to carry out, although in some
studies it was considered the most useful source of
export information (Bodur & Cavusgil, 1985;
Chaudhry & Crick, 1998). The two remaining sources
contained in this category, namely internal company
records and salespeople/sales offices abroad, were both
rarely used and considered only moderately important.
The firm’s collaborators in foreign markets, such as
distributors, agents, and representatives, were among
the most frequently used and useful sources of export
information under the other firms and individuals cate-
gory (e.g., Chaudhry & Crick, 1998; Hart et al., 1994;
Howard & Herremans, 1988; Kleischmidt & Ross,
1984; McAuley, 1993; Walters, 1983). These provide
useful information about economic-political condi-
tions, market characteristics, and competitors’ move-
ments, and are particularly crucial when decisions must
be taken rapidly under conditions of high uncertainty
(Welch & Wiedersheim-Paul, 1980). Foreign custo-
mers were also a valuable source of information, parti-
cularly as regards market trends, consumer preferences,
and buyer behavior, as indicated by the high ranks
received in all studies that examined this source (Hart
et al., 1994; Kleischmidt & Ross, 1984; Leonidou &
Katsikeas, 1997). Other firms in the industry, even the
competitors of the company, were overall less important
information providers, although two early studies on the
subject arrived at the opposite conclusion (Czinkota &
Ursic, 1983; Cavusgil, 1984). Information obtained
from the company’s suppliers was neither used fre-
quently nor considered important.
Under the commercial associations group three
information sources were included: chambers of com-
merce, trade/industry associations, and exporters’
unions. Although chambers of commerce, from their
position and experience, can offer first-hand informa-
tion about foreign markets, these were neither exten-
sively used nor regarded as useful by exporting firms.
Table 3
Rank order of export information sources in various empirical studies

L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36

Notes. Shaded columns refer to information sources acquisition/usage, and unshaded columns to their perceived importance/utility.
a
The first column gives the results for nonexporting firms and the second for exporters.
b
The first column refers to nonexporting firms which are interested in export information, the second to nonexporting firms which are not interested in export information and the third to exporting firms.
c
The first column indicates the findings among growth companies and the second among non-growth firms.
d
The first column denotes usage of information sources and the second refers to their utility.
e
The first column refers to experimental exporters, the second to active, and the third to committed exporters.
f
The first column shows the usage of information sources and the second refers to their importance.
g
The first column presents the results for manufacturing exporters and the second for trading house exporters.
h
The first column indicates the results for the Atlantic region and the second for the Prairie region.
i
The first column denotes utility of information sources and the second refers to their frequency of use.
j
The first column shows the results of the Canadian study and the second of the Austrian study.
k
The first column shows the results of the perceived importance, and the second of frequency of use.
l
The first column shows the results of Asian-owned firms and the second of indigenous firms.

25
NA, Not available.
26 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
Similar findings also exist for trade/industry associa-
tions, despite the fact that one of their major tasks is to
assist their member-firms through the provision of
international business information. As opposed to
the above two sources of information, which were
extensively researched, the third source, exporters’
union, was examined by two studies only, revealing
conflicting results: while one study found that this was
the most frequently used source (Walters, 1996), the
other considered it very infrequent and insignificant
(Leonidou & Katsikeas, 1997).
In the service organizations category, the role of
commercial banks as an information source was exam-
ined by many researchers. However, with a few excep-
tions (e.g., Czinkota & Ursic, 1983; Kaynak & Erol,
1989), empirical findings revealed that this source was
rarely used to provide input for export business deci-
sions. The same picture also emerged with reference to
consultancy/research agencies: of the eight studies
investigating this source, only one concluded that it
was important for exporters, although stressing at the
same time that it was rarely used, probably due to the
high cost of the services offered (Walters, 1983). The
use of brokers/freight forwarders as providers of
export information was examined by three studies,
which ranked it in low positions (Kleischmidt & Ross,
1984; Leonidou & Katsikeas, 1997; Walters, 1996).
Low ratings were also observed in the case of inter-
national agencies, such as the World Bank, the Inter-
national Monetary Fund, and the World Trade
Organization, although this information source was
examined in only two studies.
Compared to other categories of export information
sources, information providers received least empiri-
cal attention. Here, information gained via trade
journals/publications was highly regarded by expor-
ters in three of the four studies examining this source
(Cavusgil, 1984; Hart et al., 1994; Kleischmidt &
Ross, 1984), because they are usually characterized
by high educational quality, targeting special interest
groups. The remaining three items in this category,
namely computerized databases/directories, mass
media, and public/commercial libraries, were neither
frequently used nor considered useful sources for
extracting information about export markets. This
can be partly explained by the fact that these sources
are both too general and not always available to export
managers.
The most widely studied source under the govern-
ment outlets category was government offices/minis-
tries, which in many countries act as the principal
government source for foreign market information.
Interestingly, although early studies have shown that
this was extensively used and found valuable by expor-
ters (e.g., Brooks & Rosson, 1982; Cavusgil, 1984;
Czinkota & Ursic, 1983; Naor & Cavusgil, 1981; Reid,
1984; Walters, 1983), in later studies the impact of this
source has diminished (Chaudhry & Crick, 1998; Kay-
nak, 1992; Leonidou & Katsikeas, 1997; Seringhaus,
1993; Walters, 1983). Trade fairs/exhibitions and trade
missions were also greatly appreciated by exporters for
gathering foreign market data, probably due to the
opportunities offered to come in direct contact with
prospective customers (Howard & Herremans, 1988;
Leonidou & Katsikeas, 1997; McAuley, 1993; Serin-
ghaus, 1993). Finally, embassies/diplomatic services
and export promotion organizations were not consid-
ered particularly useful sources of export information.
5.3. Export information dissemination
Determining the export information needs and gath-
ering the correct information from the right sources
are not sufficient in themselves to make better export
marketing decisions. The information gathered must
be distributed to the right people, at the right time, and
in the right place. Compared to domestic markets, the
dissemination of information to users in export mar-
kets is a complex task mainly because of: (a) the
constraints associated with establishing data compar-
ability and equivalence in different contexts (b) pro-
blems in coordinating the personnel involved in export
operations due to great geographical distances; (c)
cultural diversities among the individuals to whom this
information needs to be communicated; and (d) the
difficulties involved in clearing the information col-
lected so as to conform to the strong inter-functional
nature of export decisions (Douglas & Craig, 1983).
Although crucial and complex, the dissemination
process of export information has received scant atten-
tion by exporting scholars. In fact, only the study of
Benito et al. (1993) gave any consideration to this
dimension of export information behavior, albeit in a
peripheral manner. Specifically, this study examined the
way export information is handled and communicated
within the exporting organization and concluded that
 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
oral reporting to both top management and marketing
management is the method preferred. Written reports
among company personnel were employed less fre-
quently, while computer-based communication tools or
other forms of reporting were seldom encountered. It
can be inferred from the findings of this study that the
direction of the information disseminated is mainly
‘‘bottom-up,’’ namely from company salespeople visit-
ing overseas markets and foreign representatives to the
export marketing manager and/or general manager.
5.4. Export information utilization
Mere possession of information does not ensure
effective and efficient management actions, but it is
important to develop skills associated with their eva-
luation and subsequent utilization in decision-making
(Souchon & Diamantopoulos, 1996). In fact, export
managers are often confronted with an overload of
international market information, which makes it dif-
ficult, and in many cases frustrating, to sort out what is
relevant, useful, timely, and consistent for the specific
export management problem in hand (Cavusgil, 1985;
Wood & Goolsby, 1987). As explained in the Theo-
retical Background section, the use of information can
be instrumental, conceptual, or symbolic. However, a
recent empirical study concluded that within the
exporting context, instrumental and conceptual uses
of information can be part of a single dimension
(Diamantopoulos & Souchon, 1999). It has been
postulated that the choice of each of the above forms
will depend on such factors as environmental effects,
organizational influences, export-specific elements,
information-specific parameters, and information-
acquisition modes.
The effective use of information is essential in
gaining competitive advantage, in the sense that the
firm can better understand its foreign markets and in
this way create a heightened customer value (Diaman-
topoulos & Souchon, 1999). However, compared to
information needs and sources, there is a dearth of
research on export information use. In fact, only three
studies examined this issue, all focusing on the prac-
tises of British exporters. The first study was con-
ducted by Hart et al. (1994) and revealed inconsistent
results as to export information use: on the one hand,
export decisions were modified in light of the infor-
mation acquired, with the decision-makers showing a
27
tendency to use such information; on the other,
although research information was used to back
hunches, this was not a prerequisite when taking
export management decisions. These results were
partly justified by the idiosyncratic organizational
cultures and politics surrounding the use of export
information.
The second study, conducted by Diamantopoulos
and Horncastle (1997), investigated the factors affect-
ing export marketing information use. Two factors
were found to negatively affect information use,
namely the degree of centralization of export manage-
ment decision-making and the level of exporters’
dependence on the foreign market targeted. In con-
trast, two other factors positively influenced informa-
tion use: the extent to which information acquired was
unforeseen, counter-intuitive, or unanticipated and the
profitability of the target export market vis-á-vis
domestic market profitability. Interestingly, the results
of this study contradicted most of the findings of
similar studies conducted in a domestic context, sug-
gesting that the determinants of information can be
context-specific and be of a different nature in export,
as opposed to domestic, operations.
The third study focused on the use versus non-use of
export information, as well as its association with
information source awareness, information overload,
and information-acquisition modes (Souchon & Dia-
mantopoulos, 1997). The study revealed that: (a)
contrary to the authors’ expectations, there was no
relationship between awareness of information
sources and the use/non-use of export information;
(b) information overload does not pose difficulties in
using information for export decision-making; and (c)
information acquired through various information
modes (i.e., export marketing research, export assis-
tance, and export marketing intelligence) is used in
export decisions, although in different types of use/
non-use information situations (i.e., immediate use,
future use, considered but rejected, and rejected).
These findings, however, should be treated with cau-
tion, due to the exploratory nature of this study.
6. Export performance outcome
Several researchers have tried to test the assertion
that a planned information-based approach to overseas
28 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
business can be an important correlate of superior
export performance, while the absence of adequate
foreign market knowledge may cause difficulties and
business failures (Christensen, Rocha, & Gerner,
1987; Cunningham & Spiegel, 1971; Hart & Tzokas,
1999; Kothari, 1983; Richey & Myers, 2001; Samiee
& Walters, 1990; Yeoh, 2000). These studies have
indeed confirmed that such a strong association exists
between information and success, and that firms with-
out information do not fully exploit their potential in
overseas markets, experiencing less than anticipated
results. Although this finding seems to be intuitively
appealing, paradoxically the effect of specific ele-
ments of information behavior on export performance
was relatively weak.
For instance, some studies tried to associate the
nature of the information requested with export inten-
sity, the proportion of export sales to total sales,
revealing only few significant results. Specifically,
one study found that exporters who rely heavily on
exports were making greater use (although not finding
it more useful) of information on sociocultural factors,
competitive situation, market size estimates, consu-
mer preferences, and product/pricing features (Koh
et al., 1993). Another study showed that export
intensifiers were interested more in foreign market
preferences, company’s position/market share, and
promotional activity (Leonidou, 1997). With regard
to information sources, Walters (1983) found that
firms with high export intensity ratio made greater
use of export agents, statistical agencies, departments
of commerce, and company executives, while Benito
et al. (1993) reported greater use of formal procedures
and service people, but less use of international jour-
nals/newspapers, management consultants, and sales
representatives by export intensifiers.
Export profitability, the degree of making profits
from foreign market operations, was the other com-
mon performance indicator linked with export infor-
mation behavior. In investigating the export practises
of US manufacturing firms, Koh (1991) found that the
greater the use of international marketing information,
the more likely they were to use competitive pricing,
sell directly to overseas buyers, and have their own
export department, which in turn led to higher export
profitability. However, with regard to the impact of
information types and sources on export profitability,
results were weak: of the various information items
examined, only information on economic environment
and product characteristics varied significantly
between firms with high and low profitability, while
among information sources only personal contacts of
managers, trade missions, and quasi-government ser-
vices were used more extensively by exporters whose
profitability was high (Leonidou, 1997; Leonidou &
Katsikeas, 1997; Yeoh, 2000). Finally, with respect to
export information use, no significant associations
between various dimensions of export information
utilization and export profitability were noted,
although there was a negative relationship between
the use of information acquired through marketing
intelligence and export assistance and growth of
export profits (Souchon & Diamantopoulos, 1997).
7. Summary and conclusions
One general conclusion that can be drawn from the
preceding review is that extant knowledge on export
information is still in its early stages of development,
and that there is a long way to go before a concrete
theory on the subject can be built. Indeed, our
integrated review has amply demonstrated that this
stream of scholarly research is: (a) atheoretic, lack-
ing the theoretical background and linkage to a wider
conceptual framework of exporting; (b) fragmented,
covering only certain, and in many cases isolated,
aspects of the export information process; (c) repe-
titive, examining more or less the same information
issues in different spatial, time, and industry frames;
(d) non-programmatic, being the outcome of unco-
ordinated efforts among exporting researchers; and
(e) inconsistent, offering partial, and sometimes con-
flicting, results on the subject. Despite these weak-
nesses, some useful insights can be extracted from
the analysis of the export marketing information
system.
First, the effect of antecedent factors on export
information behavior is not very clear. In fact, most
of these factors (i.e., industry type, ethnic background,
export experience, export expansion, and psychic
distance) exhibited either some or no discriminating
effect at all on behavior pertaining to the needs,
sources, dissemination, or use of export information.
One exception is company size where, due to resource
constraints, smaller firms display more cautious and
 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
restrictive export information behavior. Although this
has to be seen within the framework of the effect of
other antecedent factors, such as the company’s stage
of internationalization, there is a need to guide these
firms toward better identifying their information
requirements, selecting a broader range of information
sources, disseminating information to the right people,
and making proper use of the information collected.
With regard to the first dimension of export infor-
mation behavior, export information determination,
irrespective of time and spatial characteristics of the
studies reviewed, the emphasis was on three key areas:
customers, competitors, and prices. However, many
other issues useful for export decision-making, such as
macroenvironmental forces, other elements of the task
environment, market characteristics, and non-price
marketing factors, were not so highly appreciated.
This exemplifies a rather casual and superficial
approach to identifying export information needs,
revolving around price competitiveness and accep-
tance of the exporter’s products in overseas markets.
It also shows that the marketing audit process is not
sufficiently conducted in export markets, with all the
negative consequences that this may entail in making
solid export marketing decisions. The above reflect the
tendency of many firms, especially those in the early
stages of export development, to view exporting as a
peripheral business activity.
In the case of export information acquisition, there
is a general trend among exporters to gather informa-
tion mainly on a person-to-person basis from their
foreign distributors, agents, representatives, and cus-
tomers, and this was more or less true across all studies
reviewed. They also tend to take advantage of parti-
cipation in trade fairs/exhibitions and trade missions
in gathering first-hand information about overseas
markets. However, these sources provide only experi-
ential data to exporters, which, although helpful, lack
the scientific rigor of objective information. These
findings indicate that exporters tend to rely on more
informal and opportunistic methods of foreign data
collection, thus calling into question the relevance,
accuracy, and impartiality of the data collected. This in
turn has serious repercussions on gaining an all-round
picture of the targeted export markets and taking the
correct marketing actions.
Surprisingly, only one of the studies reviewed pro-
vided some insights into export information dissemi-
29
nation, thus making the drawing of conclusions rather
unsafe. From the limited insights available it seems
that the mode of distributing information in the orga-
nization is bottom-up (i.e., from the subordinates to
the top management) and casual (i.e., relying mainly
on oral reporting). To some extent, this can be
explained by the large geographical distance separat-
ing exporters form their foreign markets, necessitating
the use of speedier methods of transferring informa-
tion to key decision-makers. However, this pattern of
information dissemination may not result in an effec-
tive absorption of all relevant information by members
of the organization, nor the prompt supply of this
information to other individuals with a direct or
indirect interest in it.
Export information utilization, the most crucial
dimension of export information behavior, revealed
that there are many contingency factors that determine
which export information is taken into consideration
and in what way. It also seems that export information
is not only used in a ‘‘rational’’ way to strengthen
export-related decisions (i.e., instrumental/conceptual
use), but also in ways that satisfy the individual needs
of the decision-maker (i.e., symbolic use). Moreover,
the way information is used largely depends on the
nature of the information requested, the particular
sources from where it is acquired, as well as the extent
to which it is disseminated to the right people (Sou-
chon & Diamantopoulos, 1997).
The adoption of the right export information beha-
vior seems to lead to a positive performance outcome,
implying that information is critical in initiating,
developing, and sustaining successful export opera-
tions. The fact, however, that there were neither con-
sistent nor strong associations between certain aspects
of information needs, sources, dissemination, and use
and export performance, denotes that what matters in
export success is not the individual role of each of
these components, but the synergistic effect of their
interplay. To gain maximum performance, all four
components of export information behavior should
act as a whole and, therefore, a systematic information
planning approach is required in order to secure high
levels of consistency, coherence, and correspondence
among them.
In conclusion, it seems that the export marketing
information system is not properly used by the vast
majority of export managers, probably due to the great
30 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
diversity, complexity, and difficulty of the interna-
tional business environment (Czinkota & Ronkainen,
2001; Douglas & Craig, 1983). However, to gain
familiarity, increase understanding, and cope effec-
tively with this environment, it is essential to have the
right information, from the right sources, directed to
the right people, and used in the right way. It is also
important to realize that many export decisions are
situation-specific, contingent upon managerial, orga-
nizational, and environmental factors. Hence, the
adoption of particular export information behavior
should be seen within the context of these factors
(Leonidou et al., 2002).
8. Review implications
Several implications for corporate managers, public
policy-makers, business educators, and academic
researchers can be extracted from the previous ana-
lysis. Corporate managers should realize that building
a sound export information system is crucial in devel-
oping the export side of their business, since this will
enable them to avoid costly mistakes of inappropriate
strategy and the possibility of lost opportunities (Dou-
glas & Craig, 1983). This is particularly true nowa-
days, when world markets are characterized by
increasing volatility attributable to intensive competi-
tion, technological advancements, and shifts in con-
sumer preferences. However, this necessitates: (a) a
systematic assessment of the exact types of informa-
tion required to obtain a sufficient foreign market
audit; (b) identification of the various sources avail-
able to collect this information, as well as an evalua-
tion of the reliability of each data source; (c)
dissemination of the information collected to the right
managers, in the right place, and at the right time; and
(d) proper utilization of information in making sound
export marketing decisions. In doing this, export
managers should not regard information as an
expense, but as a key investment with promising future
returns.
Public policymakers should also realize that the
existing information assistance provided to current
and would-be exporters is partial, insufficient, and
diffused. Hence, there is room for improvement by:
(a) tailoring export information programs according to
the specific resource capabilities and internationaliza-
tion stage of the firms targeted; (b) making aware the
array of information services offered to national
exporters, and thoroughly explaining the type and
usefulness of each piece of information provided;
(c) subsidizing the cost of collecting expensive mar-
keting research information and/or sponsoring the
execution of collaborative studies about foreign mar-
kets; (d) creating an interactive electronic database
system where exporters can have direct, online access
and request customized information at any time; and
(e) providing counseling assistance to exporting firms
in analyzing and exploiting usefully the information
collected from various sources (Seringhaus & Rosson,
1990).
Business educators should adjust their international
business curricula or even design entirely new courses,
stressing the role of the export marketing information
system in making effective and efficient marketing
decisions. Although existing programs provide some
highlights on international marketing research, it is
important to provide more ‘‘hands-on’’ training of
how to conduct this type of research in foreign mar-
kets, through, for example, the assignment of special
export marketing research projects, participation in
simulation exercises, and student placement in inter-
national marketing research agencies. Special empha-
sis should be given to recent advances in information
technology as a means of retrieving, analyzing, and
using useful information about export markets (Pra-
sad, Ramamurthy, & Naidu, 2001). Vocational train-
ing should also be provided for managers interested in
foreign markets, focusing on the analysis of the com-
ponents of the export marketing information system,
and how these can interact to improve export perfor-
mance levels. In this respect, the provision of case
studies illustrating successful determination, acquisi-
tion, dissemination, and use of export information
would prove particularly helpful.
Finally, export researchers should capitalize on the
findings of this review and take several courses of
action that would improve knowledge on the subject:
(a) Conceptually, there is a need to relate better the
issue of export information to the overall exporting
discipline, and try to improve its theoretical back-
ground, using ideas developed from the more
advanced field of domestic marketing/business
research; (b) Methodologically, it is important to
improve the fieldwork (e.g., emphasis on longitudinal,
 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36 31

cross-cultural, and collaborative studies), sampling
and data collection (e.g., more representative samples
and more qualitative research), construct operationa-
lization (e.g., more comprehensive operationaliza-
tion/measurement of antecedent, information, and
performance constructs), and analysis (e.g., using
more robust statistical methods) of future research;4
and (c) Empirically, the concurrent interactive effect
of all four dimensions of information behavior on
export performance should be tested, while at the
same time taking into account the moderating role of
additional antecedent factors (e.g., management
traits, organizational characteristics, internationali-
zation stage).
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the European
Editor and the reviewers of the Journal for their
valuable insights and constructive comments on pre-
vious versions of the article.

Appendix A. List of journals and studies incorporated in the review

Journal Studies
Developments of Marketing Science Naor and Cavusgil (1981)
European Journal of Marketing Bodur and Cavusgil (1985); McAuley (1993);
Walters (1983); Wood and Goolsby (1987)
International Business Review Diamantopoulos and Horncastle (1997); Robertson
and Wood (2001)
International Journal of Information Management Benito et al. (1993); Walters (1996)
International Marketing Review Czinkota and Ursic (1983); Hart et al. (1994)
Journal of Business Research Cavusgil (1984); Reid (1984); Samiee and Walters (1990)
Journal of International Marketing Yeoh (2000)
Journal of Global Marketing Koh et al. (1993)
Journal of Marketing Management Kaynak and Erol (1989); Souchon and
Diamantopoulos (1997)
Journal of Small Business Kleischmidt and Ross (1984)
Journal of Small Business Management Howard and Herremans (1988)
Journal of Strategic Marketing Leonidou and Katsikeas (1997)
Long Range Planning Leonidou (1997)
Management International Review Kaynak (1992); Seringhaus (1993)
Marketing Intelligence & Planning Chaudhry and Crick (1998); Evirgen et al. (1993)
Note. Studies by Brooks and Rosson (1982) and Tesar and Tarleton (1982) were published in (Czinkota, M. R., &
Tesar, G. (Eds.)), Export management: An international context. New York Publishers.

4
Researchers from Austria, Germany, New Zealand, the United
Kingdom, and the United States have recently formed such a
collaborative team in order to investigate methodological aspects of
export information use along the lines of the work of Souchon and
Diamantopoulos (1999). Interestingly, this group has already made
a substantial contribution in this area by providing valuable input
on the cross-cultural validation of scales measuring the instru-
mental, conceptual, and symbolic dimensions of information usage
(Salzberger et al., 2002).
 32
Appendix B. Methodological profile of export information studies

Research Naor and Brooks and Tesar and Tesar and Czinkota Walters Cavusgil Kleischmidt Reid Bodur and Wood and Howard and Kaynak and Samiee and
study Cavusgil Rosson Tarleton Tarleton and Ursic (1983) (1984) and Ross (1984) Cavusgil Goolsby Herremans Erol (1989) Walters
(1981) (1982) (1982) (1982) (1983) (1984) (1985) (1987) (1988) (1990)

Fieldwork 1979 1979 1974 1981 1981 1981 1981 1982 1979 1983 1985 1986 1985 1988
yeara
Focus US—Maine Canada— USA— USA— USA USA— USA— Canada— Canada— Turkey USA— USA Turkey USA

L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36

country Ontario/Nova Wisconsin Virginia Georgia Wisconsin/ Ontario Ontario Oregon
Scotia/New Illinois
Brunswick
Firm size Small/ Small/ Small/ Small/ Small/ Small/ Small/ Small Small Small/ NA Small NA Small/
medium medium medium medium medium medium medium/ medium/ large
large large
Industrial NA Multiple NA NA Material- Forest NA High-tech Material Food/textile Multiple Multiple Multiple Multiple
group handling products products fabrication/ products
equipment/ furniture/
avionics and machinery
aviation support/
industrial
equipment
Units of Exporters/ Exporters/ Exporters/ Exporters/ Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters
analysis non-exporters non-exporters non-exporters non-exporters
Sampling Probability/ Probability/ NA NA Whole Whole NA NA Probability Nonprobability/ Nonprobability/ Nonprobability Nonprobability/ Probability/
design systematic random population population judgment judgment judgment stratified
Sample size 310 253 57 þ (417) 167 þ (23) 182 33 70 85 89 88 137 101 50 145
Effective 39 44 NA NA 20 70 NA 75 51 71 53 34 29 30
response
rate (%)
Nonresponse Nontested Nontested Nontested Nontested Tested Nontested Nontested Nontested Nontested Nontested Nontested Nontested Nontested Nontested
bias
Data Mail survey Mail survey Mail survey Mail survey Mail survey Personal Personal Personal Mail Personal Mail survey Mail survey Mail survey/ Mail survey
collection interviews interviews interviews survey interviews personal
interviews
Key NA President/ NA NA NA Export officer International Multiple NA Export and CEO/ Export Owner/ NA
informant general business marketing president/ officer president
manager officer manager upper level
manager
Information – – 15 15 – – – – – 18 23 – – 11
types items
Information 8 8 – – 7 11 5 16 6 8 – 23 6 –
source items
Information – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
use items
Measurement Dichotomous/ Dichotomous/ Dichotomous/ Dichotomous/ Dichotomous/ Dichotomous/ Dichotomous/ 5-point/usage 5-point/ Dichotomous/ 5-point/ 4-point/ Dichotomous/ 5-point/
scale/ usage usefulness usefulness usefulness usage usage and importance and constant- importance usage and importance helpfulness usage acquisition
dimensions 5-point/utility sum/importance 4-point/
importance
Statistical Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage Mean score Percentage Percentage Factor Mean score Percentage Mean
analysis frequency frequency frequency frequency frequency frequency/ frequency frequency/ frequency/ analysis/ frequency/ score/t-test
mean score correlation/ mean score/ MANOVA t-test Chi-square
regression t-test
Appendix B. (Continued )
Kaynak Koh et al. Evirgen et al. Benito et al. Seringhaus McAuley Hart et al. Walters Diamanto- Souchon and Leonidou Chaudhry Yeoh Robertson
(1992) (1993) (1993) (1993) (1993) (1993) (1994) (1996) poulos and Diamanto- (1997)/ and Crick (2000) and Wood
Horncastle poulos (1997) Leonidou and (1998) (2001)
(1997) Katsikeas (1997)

Fieldwork 1990 1991 1991 1991 1991 1990 1992 1994 1995 1995 1996 1995 1998 1996
yeara
Focus Canada— Thailand— Turkey Norway Canada/Austria UK UK Norway UK UK Cyprus UK USA USA
country Atlantic Bangkok
region/
Prairie

L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36

region
Firm size NA NA Large Small/ Small/ NA Small/ NA Small/ NA Small Small/ Small/ NA
medium/large medium medium medium medium medium/large
Industrial Multiple Canned Multiple Multiple High- Multiple Facilitating Multiple Industrial NA Textiles & NA Multiple Multiple
group foods/ technology goods/original goods wearing
electronics, products equipment/ apparel/food
electrical capital goods & beverages
appliances,
parts
Unit of Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters Exporters/ Exporters Exporters
analysis non-exporters
Sampling Probability/ Probability/ Nonprobability/ Nonprobability/ Probability/ Nonprobability NA NA Probability/ Probability/ Probability/ NA Probability/ Nonprobability/
design systematic random judgment judgment random random random random systematic judgment
Sample size 196 33 18 221 123 77 50 32 71 39 80 1248 180 137
Effective 49 52 82 25 25 75 30 NA 25 26 25 24 32 52
response
rate (%)
Nonresponse Nontested Nontested Nontested Nontested Nontested Nontested Nontested Nontested Tested Nontested Tested Nontested Tested Tested
bias
Data Mail survey Mail survey Personal Personal Mail survey Mail survey Mail survey Personal Mail Mail survey Personal Mail survey Mail survey Mail survey
collection interviews/ interviews interviews survey interviews
mail survey
Key Owner/ Export/ Senior General NA NA NA Multiple CEO/export Export officer CEO/export NA CEO/ Multiple
informant president officer manager/ export, and officer/ officer/ president/
export marketing marketing marketing export manager
marketing manager manager/ director
manager sales
manager
Information – 15 18 12 – 12 16 10 – – 23 17 – 60
type items
Information 15 – – 15 11 17 10 14 – – 26 14 11 –
source
items
Information – – – – – – 4 – Composite 4 – – – –
use items (7)
Measurement 10-point/ 4-point/ 5-point/ 5-point/ 4-point/ Dichotomous/ 5-point/ Dichotomous/ NA 5-point/ 5-point/ 5-point/ 5-point/ 5-point/
scale/ usefulness usefulness importance importance importance frequency of importance usage frequency frequency of importance frequency of importance
dimension use and and 5-point use and 5-point/ and 5-point/ use and
5-point/ usage importance utility 5-point/
usefulness usefulness
Statistical Mean score/ Percentage Mean score/ Mean Mean score/ Percentages/ Mean score/ Percentage Regression Friedman’s Percentage Factor Factor Mean score
analysis t-test frequency/ ANOVA/ score/t-test discriminant mean score factor analysis/ frequency/ two-way frequency/ analysis/ analysis/
mean score/ Scheffe test analysis/ correlation/ regression/t-test ANOVA/ mean score/t-test discrimianant correlation/
t-test correlation Mann- Spearman analysis/ regression/
Whitnney correlation mean score ANOVA/t-test
a

33
In some studies the fieldwork year was not indicated, and therefore, this had to be inferred from the article’s year of publication.
34 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
References
Alexandrides, G. (1983). Effectiveness of government export
assistance for US smaller-sized manufacturers: Some further
evidence. International Marketing Review, 1(1): 68–75.
Athanassiou, N., & Nigh, D. (2000). Internationalization, tacit
knowledge and the top management teams of MNCs. Journal of
International Business Studies, 31(3): 471–487.
Axinn, C. N. (1994). Introduction: International perspectives of
export marketing. In C. N. Axinn (Ed.), Advances in interna-
tional marketing (Vol. 6, pp. xi–vi). Greenwich, CT: JM Press.
Belich, T. J., & Dubinsky, A. J. (1995). Factors related to
information acquisition in exporting organizations. Journal of
Business Research, 33: 1–11.
Benito, G. R. G., Solberg, C. A., & Welch, L. S. (1993). An
exploration of the information behavior of Norwegian exporters.
International Journal of Information Management, 13: 274–286.
Bodur, M., & Cavusgil, S. T. (1985). Export market research
orientations of Turkish firms. European Journal of Marketing,
19(2): 5–17.
Brooks, M. R., & Rosson, P. J. (1982). A study of export behaviour
of small and medium-sized manufacturing firms in three
Canadian provinces. In M. R. Czinkota & G. Tesar (Eds.),
Export management: An international context (pp. 39–54).
New York: Praeger Publishers.
Cavusgil, S. T. (1984). Differences among exporting firms based on
their degree of internationalization. Journal of Business
Research, 12: 195–208.
Cavusgil, S. T. (1985). Guidelines for export market research.
Business Horizons, 28(5): 27–33.
Chaudhry, S., & Crick, D. (1998). Export information providers:
Are they meeting the needs of SMEs? Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, 16(3): 141–149.
Christensen, C. H., Rocha, A. D., & Gerner, R. G. (1987). An
empirical investigation of the factors influencing the export
success of Brazilian firms. Journal of International Business
Studies, Fall: 61–78.
Churchill, G. A. (2001). Basic marketing research. U.S.A.:
Harcourt College Publishers.
Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1985). The impact of export
strategy on export sales performance. Journal of International
Business Studies, 16(1): 37–55.
Coyne, K. P. (1986). Sustainable competitive advantage—what it is,
what it isn’t. Business Horizons, 29(January/February): 54–61.
Cravens, D. W. (2000). Strategic marketing. USA: McGraw-Hill.
Culpan, R. (1989). Export behavior of firms: Relevance of firm
size. Journal of Business Research, 18: 207–218.
Cunningham, M. T., & Spiegel, R. I. (1971). A study of successful
exporting. British Journal of Marketing, 5: 2–12.
Czinkota, M. R., & Ronkainen I. A. (2001). International
marketing. USA: The Dryden Press.
Czinkota, M. R., & Ursic, M. L. (1983). Impact of export growth
expectations on smaller firms. International Marketing Review,
1(2): 26–32.
Darling, J. R., & Posttnikoff, J. F. (1985). Strategic export
information for small business. Journal of Small Business
Management, 23: 28–38.
Day, G. S. (1994). The capabilities of market-driven organizations.
Journal of Marketing, 58(October): 37–52.
Deshpandé, R., & Zaltman, G. (1982). Factors affecting the use of
market research information: A path analysis. Journal of
Marketing Research, 19(February): 32–38.
Diamantopoulos, A., & Souchon, A. L. (1999). Measuring export
information use: Scale development and validation. Journal of
Business Research, 46: 1–14.
Diamantopoulos, A., & Horncastle, S. (1997). Use of export
marketing research by industrial firms: An application and
extension of Deshpande and Zaltman’s model. International
Business Review, 6(3): 245–270.
Dichtl, E., Koglmayr, H.-G., & Muller, S. (1990). International
orientation as a precondition for export success. Journal of
International Business Studies, 21(1): 23–40.
Dienes, Z., & Perner, Z. (1999). A theory of implicit and explicit
knowledge. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(5): 735–808.
Douglas, S. P., & Craig, S. C. (1983). International marketing
research. U.S.A.: Prentice-Hall.
Evirgen, C., Bodur, M., & Cavusgil, S. T. (1993). Information
needs of exporters: An empirical study of Turkish exporters.
Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 11(2): 28–36.
Glazer, R. (1991). Marketing in an information-intensive environ-
ment: Strategic implications of knowledge as an asset. Journal
of Marketing, 55(October): 1–19.
Glazer, R., & Weiss, A. M. (1993). Marketing in turbulent
environments: Decision processes and the time-sensitivity of
information. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(11): 509–521.
Hart, S., & Tzokas, N. (1999). The impact of marketing research
activity on SME export performance: Evidence from the UK.
Journal of Small Business Management, 37(2): 63–75.
Hart, S. J., Webb, I. R., & Jones, M. V. (1994). Export marketing
research and the effect of export experience in industrial SMEs.
International Marketing Review, 11(6): 4–22.
Howard, D. G., & Herremans, I. M. (1988). Sources of assistance
for small business exporters: Advice from successful firms.
Journal of Small Business Management, 26(3): 48–54.
Johanson, J., & Vahlne, I. E. (1977). The internationalization
process of the firm: A model of knowledge development and
increasing foreign commitment. Journal of International
Business Studies, Spring/Summer: 23–32.
Kamath, S., Rosson, P. J., Patton, D., & Brooks, M. (1987).
Research on success in exporting: Past, present and future. In
P. J. Rosson & S. D. Reid (Eds.), Managing export entry and
expansion (pp. 398–421). New York: Praeger Publishers.
Katsikeas, C. S., & Piercy, N. F. (1993). Long-term export stimuli
and firm characteristics in a European LDC. Journal of
International Marketing, 1(3): 23–47.
Kaynak, E. (1992). A cross regional comparison of export
performance of firms in two Canadian regions. Management
International Review, 32(2): 163–180.
Kaynak, E., & Erol, C. (1989). Export propensity of Turkish
manufacturing and trading house firms. Journal of Marketing
Management, 5(2): 211–229.
Kleischmidt, E. J., & Ross, R. E. (1984). Export performance and
foreign market information: Relationships for small high-
technology firms. Journal of Small Business, 2: 8–23.
 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
Koh, A. C. (1991). Relationships among organizational character-
istics, marketing strategy, and export performance. Interna-
tional Marketing Review, 8(3): 46–60.
Koh, A. C., Chow, J., & Smittivate, S. (1993). The practice of
international marketing research by Thai exporters. Journal of
Global Marketing, 7(2): 7–26.
Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1990). Market orientation: The
construct, research propositions, and managerial implications.
Journal of Marketing, 54(April): 1–18.
Koontz, H., & Weihrich, H. (1990). Essentials of management.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kothari, V. (1983). Researching for export marketing. In M. R.
Czinkota (Ed.), Export promotion: The public and private
sector interaction (pp. 154–76). New York: Praeger Publishers.
Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2001). Principles of marketing.
U.S.A.: Prentice-Hall.
Laudon, K. C., & Laudon, J. P. (2000). Management Information
Systems. U.S.A: Prentice-Hall.
Leonidou, L. C. (1995). Empirical research on export barriers:
Review, assessment, and synthesis. Journal of International
Marketing (USA), 3(1): 29–43.
Leonidou, L. C. (1997). Finding the right information mix for the
export manager. Long Range Planning, 30: 572–584.
Leonidou, L. C. (2000). Barriers to export management: An
organizational and internationalization analysis. Journal of
International Management, 6(2): 1–28.
Leonidou, L. C., & Katsikeas, C. S. (1996). The export
development process: An integrative review of empirical
models. Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 517–
551.
Leonidou, L. C., & Katsikeas, C. S. (1997). Export information
sources: The role of organizational and internationalization
influences. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 5: 65–87.
Leonidou, L. C., Katsikeas, C. S., & Samiee, S. (2002). Marketing
strategy determinants of export performance: A mets-analysis.
Journal of Business Research, 55: 51–67.
McAuley, A. (1993). The perceived usefulness of export informa-
tion services. European Journal of Marketing, 27(10): 52–64.
Menon, A., & Varadarajan, P. R. (1992). A model of marketing
knowledge use within firms. Journal of Marketing, 56(Octo-
ber): 53–71.
Moorman, C. (1995). Organizational market information processes:
Cultural antecedents and new product outcomes. Journal of
Marketing Research, 32(August): 318–335.
Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpandé, R. (1992). Relationships
between providers and users of market research: The dynamics
of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing
Research, 29(August): 314–328.
Naor, J., & Cavusgil, T. (1981). Information use behavior of small
nonexporting firms: An empirical study. Developments of
Marketing Science, 4: 91–96.
Nijssen, E. I., Douglas, S. P., & Calis, G. (1999). Gathering and
using information for the selection of trading partners.
International Marketing Review, 33(1/2): 143–162.
Pavord, W. C., & Bogard, R. G. (1975). The dynamics of the
decision to export. Akron Business and Economic Review,
Spring: 6–11.
35
Pike, R. H., & Ross, D. G. (1997). Trade credit information for
export sales: The Canadian experience. Management Interna-
tional Review, 37(3): 243–258.
Porter, M., & Millar, V. E. (1985). How information gives you
competitive advantage. Harvard Business Review, 85(July/
August): 149–160.
Prasad, V. K., Ramamurthy, K., & Naidu, G. M. (2001). The
influence of internet-marketing integration on marketing
competencies and export performance. Journal of International
Marketing, 9(4): 82–110.
Reid, S. (1981). The decision maker and export entry and
expansion. Journal of International Business Studies, 12(3):
101–112.
Reid, S. (1984). Information acquisition and export entry decisions
in small firms. Journal of Business Research, 12(2): 141–157.
Richey, R. G., & Myers, M. B. (2001). An investigation of market
information use in export channel decisions. International
Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management,
31: 334–353.
Robertson, K. R., & Wood, V. R. (2001). The relative importance of
types of information in the foreign market selection process.
International Business Review, 10: 363–379.
Salzberger, T., Holzmüller, H. H., Souchon, A. L., Diamantopou-
los, A., Durden, G. R., & Axinn, C. N. (2002). An investigation
of construct validity and cross-national comparability—A five-
country study of export information usage in the UK, Austria,
Germany, the United States, and New Zealand. In Proceedings
of the Thirty-first EMAC Conference, Braga, Portugal.
Samiee, S., & Walters, P. G. P. (1990). Influence of firm size on
export planning and performance. Journal of Business
Research, 20: 235–248.
Samiee, S., & Walters, P. G. P. (1999). Determinants of structured
export knowledge acquisition. International Business Review,
8: 373–397.
Seringhaus, F. H. R. (1986). The role of information assistance in
small firms’ export involvement. International Small Business
Journal, 5(2): 26–36.
Seringhaus, F. H. R. (1993). Comparative marketing behaviour of
Canadian and Austrian high-tech exporters. Management
International Review, 33(3): 247–269.
Seringhaus, F. H. R., & Rosson, P. J. (1990). Government export
promotion: A global perspective. London: Routledge.
Sinkula, J. M. (1994). Market information processing and organiza-
tional learning. Journal of Marketing, 58(January): 35–45.
Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1995). Market orientation and the
learning organization. Journal of Marketing, 59(July): 63–74.
Souchon, A. L., & Diamantopoulos, A. (1996). A conceptual
framework of export marketing information use: Key issues and
research propositions. Journal of International Marketing, 4(3):
49–71.
Souchon, A. L., & Diamantopoulos, A. (1997). Use and non-use of
export information: Some preliminary insights into antecedents
and impact on export performance. Journal of Marketing
Management, 13: 135–151.
Souchon, A. L., & Diamantopoulos, A. (1999). Export information
acquisition modes: Measure development and validation.
International Marketing Review, 16(2): 143–168.
36 L.C. Leonidou, M. Theodosiou / Journal of World Business 39 (2004) 12–36
Sullivan, D., & Bauerschmidt, A. (1990). Incremental internatio-
nalization: A test of Johanson and Vahlne’s thesis. Management
International Review, 30(1): 19–30.
Tesar, G., & Tarleton, J. S. (1982). Comparison of Wisconsin and
Virginian small and medium-sized exporters: Aggressive and
passive exporter. In M. R. Czinkota & G. Tesar (Eds.), Export
management: An international context (pp. 85–112). New
York: Praeger Publishers.
Tull, D. S. & Hawkins D. I. (1993). Marketing research:
Measurement and method. U.S.A.: Macmillan.
Ursic, M. L., & Czinkota, M. R. (1984). An experience curve
explanation of export expansion. Journal of Business Research,
12: 159–168.
Walters, P. G. P. (1983). Export information sources—A study of
their usage and utility. International Marketing Review, Winter:
34–43.
Walters, P. G. P. (1996). International market information infusion:
Data acquisition behaviour in Norwegian exporters. Interna-
tional Journal of information Management, 16: 437–444.
Welch, L. S., & Luostarinen, R. K. (1988). Internationalization: Evo-
lution of a concept. Journal of General Management, 14: 34–55.
Welch, L. S., & Wiedersheim-Paul, F. (1980). Initial exports—A
marketing failure? Journal of Management Studies, October:
333–344.
Wiedersheim-Paul, F., Olson, H. C., & Welch, L. S. (1978). Pre-
export activity: The first step in internationalization. Journal of
international Business Studies, Spring/Summer: 47–58.
Wood, V. R., & Goolsby, J. R. (1987). Foreign market information
preferences of established U.S. exporters. International Mar-
keting Review, 4(4): 43–52.
Wood, V. R., & Robertson, K. R. (2000). Evaluating international
markets. the importance of information by industry, by country
of destination, and by type of export transaction. International
Marketing Review, 17(1): 34–55.
Wortzel, L. H., & Wortzel, H. V. (1981). Export marketing
strategies for MC and LDC-based firms. Columbia Journal of
World Business, 16: 51–60.
Wright, M., & Ashill, N. (1998). A contingency model of
marketing information. European Journal of Marketing,
32(1/2): 125–144.
Yaprak, A. (1985). An empirical study of the differences between
small exporting and non-exporting U.S. firms. International
Marketing Review, 2(2): 72–83.
Yeoh, P. (2000). Information acquisition activities: A study of
global start-up exporting companies. Journal of international
Marketing, 8(3): 36–60.
Zikmund, W. G. (2000). Exploring marketing research. U.S.A.:
Harcourt College Publishers.