Digital Entrepreneurship
Handbook topic · Digital Entrepreneurship — wrap-up and exploring technology entrepreneurship in the digital age
Digital entrepreneurship means starting new ventures, or transforming existing ones, by building new digital technologies or using existing ones in new ways. This week covers the skills it needs, the main digital business models (including platforms), their benefits and downsides, and how going online changes internationalisation. The final section pulls all twelve weeks together into a revision map for the Learning Diary and the Individual Report.
The big question
How do digital technologies change the way entrepreneurs create value, capture it and take it abroad, and what stays the same?
By the end of this week you can
- Define digital entrepreneurship and explain why it has become popular.
- Describe the four key digital skills for entrepreneurs and the advantages of running a business digitally.
- Explain the main digital business models, including platform business models, and weigh their benefits against their downsides.
- Explain digital internationalisation and how digital technologies change the Uppsala logic of gradual, knowledge-based expansion.
- Match every Learning Diary and Individual Report question to the week whose theory answers it.
What digital entrepreneurship is and why it matters
Digital entrepreneurship is not a separate subject. It is the opportunity-seeking you have studied since Week 1, carried out with digital technologies.
Creating new ventures and transforming existing businesses by developing novel digital technologies and/or making novel use of such technologies. It involves using digital platforms and technologies to create innovative business models and opportunities.
The definition covers two routes. A founder can start a new venture that exists because of a digital technology, or an established firm can use digital technology to change how it works. Either way the entrepreneurial logic is the same: spot an opportunity, then create and capture value from it.
The editors of the module’s case collection put it the same way. For them, digital entrepreneurship means using digital technologies or digital business models to explore and exploit entrepreneurial opportunities (Soltanifar, Hughes and Göcke, 2021).
Two routes into digital entrepreneurship
- The business is built around a digital product, platform or channel from day one.
- Examples from the case collection: Anyyogi, kawaloo and LogCorp (German platform start-ups), and LebMall and WIB (Lebanese online shops).
- The typical challenge is proving that customers exist before money runs out.
- An established firm uses digital technology to change its processes, services or business model.
- Examples: Domino’s digital ordering, Tesco’s HomePlus virtual stores in South Korea, Rolls-Royce’s pay-per-flying-hour TotalCare.
- When this happens inside a company it overlaps with digital intrapreneurship: intrapreneurship that uses digital means as a critical part of its innovation (Pinchot and Soltanifar, 2021).
Why digital entrepreneurship has become popular
- It uses the internet as the launch pad. Entrepreneurs can start and grow a business through the internet and other digital platforms, without first building physical infrastructure.
- It suits younger founders. The lecture notes that young people are often more comfortable with technology than older generations, which makes this route especially attractive to them.
- It can cost less. A digital business can be cheaper than a brick-and-mortar one, so more people can afford to try. WIB’s founder found an online shop much cheaper to open than a physical store because she avoided rent and electricity bills; most of her costs were her own time and effort.
The diary asks you to classify your Ashoka venture as social entrepreneurship, intrapreneurship, ecopreneurship or international entrepreneurship. A venture that runs on an app is still classified by its purpose and setting. Treat the digital technology as the *innovative element* (process, service, product or business model innovation), not as the type of entrepreneurship.
Key skills and the advantages of going digital
The lecture names four skills a digital entrepreneur needs and four advantages that make the effort worthwhile. The cases show what each looks like in practice.
Four skills that work together: knowing the tools, having ideas, testing those ideas honestly, and getting the message across to customers, partners and investors.
Being comfortable choosing and using digital tools such as websites, apps, online payments, data and social media. In the Lebanon chapter, an expert interviewee lists search engine marketing, content marketing, social media marketing and social selling as the skills employees need, and says that without them “you may not be the right person to go into digital entrepreneurship”.
Example — LebMall’s founder built his own websites: “I know how to develop Web sites through my personal education and curiosity.”
Turning new and imaginative ideas into reality. Digital technologies widen the options: a shop can become a poster, and a product launch can become a community event.
Example — Tesco put “virtual stores” (displays of scannable product codes) in South Korean subway stations and bus stops.
Questioning your own assumptions instead of trusting them. The case collection warns that founders fall into confirmation bias, overconfidence and escalation of commitment, and recommends testing the riskiest assumptions before scaling up (Göcke and Weninger, 2021).
Example — Before building anything, kawaloo surveyed both landlords and tenants and invited them to test mock-ups of the platform.
Reaching and persuading customers, partners and investors, online and face to face. Digital channels make this cheaper, but trust still has to be earned.
Example — Jolla asked its community which extra features they wanted and turned the answers into crowdfunding stretch goals. WIB combined social media with selling in person at events.
| Advantage | What it means | Evidence in the case collection |
|---|---|---|
| Scalability | Digital marketing and software let a business serve many more customers without growing premises or staff at the same rate. | LebMall’s twelve employees can support up to 1,000 orders a day. Domino’s runs 14,000 stores on one common platform. |
| Flexibility and independence | Entrepreneurs can work from anywhere at any time, organise their own calendars and keep a good work–life balance. | WIB’s founder: an online business “can be run from anywhere around the world”; when travelling she can simply change the target market or language. |
| Access to the world market | A business set up digitally can reach clients anywhere and meet their needs through effective marketing. | Jolla’s crowdfunding campaign was open in all EU countries, Norway, Switzerland, the USA, India, China, Hong Kong and Russia at once. |
| Unique business models | Digital technology lets owners build more sophisticated business models than were possible before. | Rolls-Royce charges airlines per engine flying hour instead of selling the engine. Anyyogi lets yoga teachers keep a larger share of their revenue than a studio would allow. |
The lecture lists these four advantages; the evidence column comes from the Week 12 case collection.
The report asks what resource challenges you face and how you will overcome them. A digital channel is a strong answer to scarce capital, because WIB started with modest savings. But pair every advantage with the matching risk from the next section. Markers reward balanced reasoning, not a list of benefits.
Digital business models: types, benefits and downsides
A digital business model is still a business model: a logic for creating, delivering and capturing value. What changes is that software carries much of the work.
A business model that lets a business create value and generate revenue online. It uses software to deliver products, services and experiences to customers without the need for a physical presence.
The lecture notes that the shift to digital has created new opportunities and new threats for traditional business models, so a broad variety of digital models has emerged. Two distinctions from the case collection help you analyse any of them.
First, a business model is not the same as a revenue model. The business model is the whole set-up: value proposition, value creation and value capture. The revenue model is only the part that says how money comes in (Göcke and Weninger, 2021). This matches the Business Model Canvas from Week 2, where Revenue Streams is one block of nine.
Second, pure digital models (a search engine, an online broker like Airbnb) create value with digital artefacts only, while digital-enabled models need physical assets as well (Remane et al., 2017, cited in Göcke and Weninger, 2021). Tesco’s virtual store and Rolls-Royce’s engine monitoring are digital-enabled; kawaloo’s storage marketplace is close to pure digital.
| Model | How it creates and captures value | Where you meet it in the module |
|---|---|---|
| E-commerce | Selling goods online, usually with online payment and delivery. | WIB, an online beauty and health shop in Lebanon. |
| Subscription services | Customers pay a recurring fee for continued access to a product or service. | Closest case: Rolls-Royce TotalCare, where airlines pay a recurring fee per flying hour instead of buying the engine. |
| Online marketplaces | A platform matches sellers and buyers and earns a fee or commission on each transaction. | LebMall (brands sell on it and it takes a commission), kawaloo, LogCorp, AliExpress and DHgate. |
| Digital products | The product itself is software, data or content delivered online. | Jolla’s Sailfish mobile operating system, which it first planned to license to phone makers. |
| Ad-based models | Users get the service free or cheaply; advertisers pay for their attention. | Facebook, whose platform has advertisers as one of its sides. |
| Affiliate marketing | A business earns a commission for sending customers to another firm’s offer. | Not illustrated in the module cases; use it only if your own venture genuinely works this way. |
Benefits and downsides of a digital business model
- Wider reach and accessibility. Customers can buy at any time from anywhere with a connection.
- Cost-effective operations. Less spent on premises and physical infrastructure.
- Data-driven decision making. Every click and order is information; Domino’s used purchase data to predict customer behaviour.
- Enhanced customer experience. Faster, more convenient buying, such as ordering groceries from a subway station or bus stop.
- Flexibility and scalability. Software can be changed and copied easily, so the business can grow or pivot quickly.
- Enhanced security. Good digital systems can protect data; the case collection shows blockchain being used to protect sensitive health consultations.
- Cybersecurity risks. In Lebanon, LebMall’s founder notes there is no e-commerce law to fall back on: “if I lose my password, there is no backup.”
- Increased competition. Low entry costs mean rivals can appear fast; LebMall’s biggest problem is copycat stores selling knock-offs and copying its photos.
- Dependence on technology. LebMall pays $2,000 a month for Wi-Fi and another $2,000 a month for Cloudflare servers because customers will not wait more than twenty seconds for a page to load.
- Skill gaps and training needs. The Lebanon chapter reports a shortage of digitally skilled, experienced staff.
- Lack of personal interaction. WIB’s customers “want to see, smell, and touch the product”, so it adds face-to-face selling.
- Ongoing challenges of digital transformation. Going digital is not a one-off change; the case collection describes organisations having to keep adapting to ongoing digital change.
Ask what the technology changes. If it changes how customers pay or how the firm earns money, argue business model innovation. If it changes how the work is done behind the scenes, argue process innovation. If it changes what the customer experiences when being served, argue service innovation. If the offering itself is new, argue product innovation. Then say why it is not the other three. For example: Rolls-Royce’s engine is unchanged, so it is not product innovation.
Platforms: the business model behind many digital ventures
Online marketplaces such as Airbnb, Uber and eBay are platform businesses. They do not make the product; they connect the people who supply it with the people who want it, and that brings its own challenges.
A traditional “pipeline” firm makes something and sells it down a supply chain. A platform instead provides the infrastructure where different groups of users exchange value such as goods, services, money or information. Using a common classification from the platform literature, Göcke and Meier (2021) distinguish transaction platforms (marketplaces such as eBay or Deliveroo that match supply and demand and cut transaction costs), innovation platforms (such as operating systems on which others build apps), and hybrid platforms that combine both, as Apple does with iOS and the App Store.
Four features that set platforms apart from pipeline businesses and explain why they are hard to start but powerful once they work.
The platform must create value for at least two groups at once, such as guests and hosts on Airbnb. Each side has to be won and kept separately.
Example — Anyyogi connects yoga teachers, students and the spaces where classes take place.
The platform becomes more valuable as more people use it. Same-side effects: more users attract more users of the same kind, as in a social network. Cross-side effects: more users on one side attract the other side, as when more sellers on eBay attract more buyers.
Example — kawaloo judged that storage supply was the side that would start the network effect.
At launch, neither side wants to join an empty platform. The founder must reach a critical mass on both sides before the network effects start working in the platform’s favour.
Example — LogCorp kept drivers available through professional driver agencies so that business customers always found a courier.
Strong network effects can lock users in, so one or a few platforms dominate. This is most likely when users single-home (use only one platform, as with Google search) rather than multi-home (use several, as in fashion e-commerce).
Example — Whether users single- or multi-home affects how much capital a platform needs, its market entry strategy and its competitive position.
Three ways to launch a “minimum viable platform”
- The founder acts as a market participant herself: in mid-2019 Natalie Pompe was still managing many classes herself.
- This gives deep, first-hand understanding of both sides before automating anything.
- Risk: the founder’s own experience biases the insights.
- The platform supplies one side itself, keeping drivers available through professional driver agencies even before demand arrives.
- This lets the start-up test and build demand, which then attracts independent suppliers.
- Risk: the authors call it high-risk if customer demand has not been tested first.
- The start-up borrows reach from existing platforms: the founders contact users of competing sites and convert them into early evangelists.
- PayPal did the same on eBay, persuading buyers and sellers to pay through its service.
- Limitation to consider (not stated in the case): it depends on another platform’s audience.
Göcke and Meier (2021) advise testing international scalability only after the business model fits at home. Competition, law, politics and culture differ between countries, and a platform must satisfy every side in each one. Their example is Uber: riders in Germany behave much like riders in San Francisco, but the supply side is far more regulated, and algorithms tuned for San Francisco can cause problems in Berlin. This helps explain the local operations teams you met in the Week 6 Uber resource.
Digital internationalisation
The internet offers a cheaper way to reach foreign customers. It changes the Uppsala story of slow, experience-based expansion, but it does not remove the need to understand the target country.
Taking advantage of international opportunities by making a firm’s products or services available to customers in foreign markets through websites, i.e. through virtual presence instead of physical-presence entry modes. The rapid growth of the internet has made this a less cost-intensive way to reach foreign customers.
Recall the Uppsala model from Week 1: firms internationalise step by step, building experiential knowledge and moving first into markets with low psychic distance (Vahlne and Johanson, 2017). Song and Wu (2021) ask what digital technologies do to that logic and give two answers.
Two views of what digital technologies do to internationalisation
- The Uppsala logic still holds: firms need knowledge to go abroad.
- Digital tools speed up the learning, both about a specific market (customers, suppliers, competitors, rules) and about how to run international operations in general.
- Example cited by the authors: Indian IT firms found psychic distance shrinking because they learned from online communities.
- Digital tools reduce how much experiential knowledge matters.
- Customers help spread the product across borders through network effects, and firms can work with foreign partners instead of owning assets abroad.
- Example: on DHgate, foreign buyers with little knowledge of China rely on other buyers’ reviews, translated pages and the platform’s payment system to deal safely with Chinese suppliers.
| PESTEL factor | Barrier reported by Lebanese digital entrepreneurs | What it means for your plan |
|---|---|---|
| Political | Weak institutions and corruption; one founder gives gifts to people who help him get things done, an extra cost. | Build extra cost and time into the plan; local partners matter more. |
| Economic | No bank loans for entrepreneurs; PayPal blocked by the banks; the only local payment system charges 3% per transaction; Wi-Fi costs $2,000 a month against about $50 in developed countries. | Online payment cannot be assumed; WIB relies on cash on delivery. |
| Social | Customers prefer physical shopping and want to touch products; young and female founders face scepticism. | Mix online selling with personal contact and trusted referrals. |
| Technological | Slow and expensive internet; LebMall imported Cloudflare servers so pages load fast enough. | Budget for infrastructure that you would take for granted elsewhere. |
| Legal | No e-commerce or consumer-protection law; e-signatures not recognised, so contracts go by courier and take two weeks; photos copied despite copyright registration. | Check IP protection and contract rules in the target country (Week 11). |
Source: Samara and Terzian (2021). The cases report no environmental barriers. The authors frame these problems as the entrepreneur’s embeddedness in a developing-country context, the same concept the Individual Report brief asks you to use.
In the Learning Diary’s cross-border section and the Individual Report’s entry strategy, an online (virtual presence) entry is a legitimate option alongside the Week 7 modes. Justify it with the target country’s conditions (PESTEL: internet access, payments, law, shopping habits) and name the partners you need there (Week 8), such as delivery firms, payment providers or local distributors. If the conditions look like Lebanon’s, say how you will work around them.
Pulling the module together
Week 12 closes the module. This section links the twelve weeks into one storyline and shows which week answers each question in the two assessments.
The module as one storyline
- Week 1Foundations
Main IB theories (including Uppsala, born global and network theory), types of entrepreneurship, innovation types and levels, and PESTEL.
- Week 2Opportunity and competition
Discovered vs created opportunities, causation vs effectuation, competition and SWOT, and the Business Model Canvas.
- Weeks 3–4Special kinds of venture
Family firms and how they internationalise; social entrepreneurship.
- Week 5Is the idea viable?
Feasibility analysis and writing a business plan.
- Week 6Building the international firm
Competitive advantage, founding teams, alternative governance and funding for international new ventures.
- Weeks 7–8Going abroad
Market selection and entry modes; networks and social capital.
- Weeks 9–11Sustaining growth
Finance, entrepreneurial marketing (with the Gibbs Reflective Cycle), and intellectual property rights.
- Week 12Digital
Digital business models, platforms and digital internationalisation, which cut across everything above.
| Diary question | Week(s) | Theories and tools to use |
|---|---|---|
| Classify the venture as social entrepreneurship, intrapreneurship, ecopreneurship or international entrepreneurship, and say why it is not the other types | 1, 4 | Types of entrepreneurship (Week 1); social entrepreneurship (Week 4). |
| Identify one innovative element and classify it as process, business model, service or product innovation (and why not the others) | 1, 2, 12 | Innovation types; business model elements and the Business Model Canvas; this week’s guide to classifying digital innovations. |
| Identify the level of innovation | 1 | Incremental–radical; new to the firm or region vs new to the world; sustaining–disruptive. |
| Reflect on how your tutorial group identified innovations in the mini-cases | 1–5 | Your own tutorial notes on the Weeks 1–5 mini-cases, linked to the innovation theory above. |
| Explain how the venture could be internationalised as an SME, and what type of SME | 1, 3, 6 | Uppsala, born global and network theory; family-firm pathways; building the international new venture. |
| Choose the most appropriate entry mode | 7, 12 | Exporting, licensing, franchising, joint venture, wholly owned subsidiary; virtual presence. |
| Explain the adaptations needed (e.g. TOE-I framework) | 1, 7 | The TOE-I framework is named in the brief but not explained in the slides (see the assessment page); organise the adaptations with PESTEL and market selection for the new country. |
| Name key partners and supporters in the new market | 8 | Network theory of internationalisation, social capital, strong and weak ties. |
| Report question | Week(s) | Theories and tools to use |
|---|---|---|
| Country context and type of firm (small, medium or family business) | 1, 3 | PESTEL for the country; family firms if relevant. |
| Operational or resource challenges and how you will overcome them | 6, 12 | Alternative ways of mobilising resources; the low-cost advantages and skill needs of digital business. |
| Why the business is interesting; how you found the need; feasibility | 2, 5 | Discovered vs created opportunities; feasibility analysis; business plan. |
| Which market you will enter and why | 1, 7 | PESTEL-based market selection. |
| Entry strategy, innovation types and a new product for the target market | 1, 2, 7, 12 | Entry modes; all innovation types and levels; digital business models and platforms. |
| Managing and expanding through networks; competitors | 2, 6, 8 | Competition and competitive advantage; network theory and social capital; Porter’s Five Forces (named in the brief and applied in the Week 6 Airbnb resource). |
| Marketing: target segment and innovative promotion | 10, 12 | Entrepreneurial marketing, segmentation, targeting and positioning, branding, the marketing mix; digital channels. |
| Funding the expansion, with estimated amounts | 6, 9 | Short- and long-term finance, business angels, venture capital, crowdfunding types and platforms. |
| Protecting intellectual property in the new market | 11 | Copyright, trade marks, designs, patents, trade secrets and geographical indications; territoriality and enforcement. |
| Benefit to local communities | 4 | Social entrepreneurship and social value. |
| Theories such as Porter’s Five Forces, PESTEL and embeddedness | 1, 5, 6, 8, 12 | PESTEL (Week 1); Porter’s Five Forces (Week 5 industry analysis, applied in the Week 6 Airbnb resource); over-embeddedness in social networks (Week 8); embeddedness in a developing-country context (Week 12). |
| Gibbs Reflective Cycle reflection on the module | 10, 11 | Gibbs’ six stages (introduced in Week 10, practised in the Week 11 briefing), applied to the tutorial cases from across the module that helped you most. |
Both briefs forbid concepts from outside the module’s teaching resources. If a theory is not in this table or on a week page, check before using it.
The Gibbs reflection is worth 30% of the Individual Report. As you revise each week, note one tutorial case that changed how you think (for example, how the Lebanon case made embeddedness concrete) and one difficulty you had. Those notes become your Description, Feelings, Evaluation and Analysis stages, and the gaps you notice become your Action plan.
Tutorial activities
Which launch approach would you use for a platform?
Week 12 has no tutorial deck, so this self-study task uses the platform start-ups from the case collection. Compare how Anyyogi, kawaloo and LogCorp solved the chicken-and-egg problem, then apply the lesson to a platform idea of your own.
- 1.For each start-up, name the two (or more) sides of the platform and the core transaction between them.
- 2.Which side did each founder tackle first, and why?
- 3.Which launch approach (immersion, anticipation or piggybacking) carries the most risk, and under what conditions?
- 4.If you took one of these platforms to a new country, which of the four platform characteristics would cause the most trouble?
Taking an online shop into a developing market
Compare two very different digital entries: Tesco adapting its offer to South Korea, and two small Lebanese online shops working around weak infrastructure. Use them to rehearse the cross-border section of the Learning Diary.
- 1.Sort the barriers LebMall and WIB face into PESTEL factors. Which one would you tackle first?
- 2.How did personal connections and family support substitute for missing institutions?
- 3.What did Tesco learn about South Korean customers before designing HomePlus, and which PESTEL factors does that correspond to?
- 4.Would a virtual-presence entry work for your Ashoka venture’s target country? What partners would it need?
Build your module revision map
Use the two assessment tables in “Pulling the module together” to check that you have a theory, an example and a tutorial memory for every question you must answer.
- 1.For each diary and report question, which theory will you use and which case or tutorial example supports it?
- 2.Which week’s material do you feel least confident about, and why?
- 3.Which tutorial case most changed your thinking during the module?
- 4.What will you do differently when you next plan a similar assignment?
Cases
Key terms
- Digital entrepreneurship
- Creating new ventures and transforming existing businesses by developing novel digital technologies and/or making novel use of them (Week 12 lecture).
- Digital business model
- A business model that creates value and generates revenue online, using software to deliver products, services and experiences without a physical presence.
- Business model vs revenue model
- The business model is the whole logic of creating, delivering and capturing value; the revenue model is only the part that says how money comes in (Göcke and Weninger, 2021).
- Pure digital vs digital-enabled
- Pure digital models create value with digital artefacts only (e.g. an online broker); digital-enabled models also need physical assets (e.g. engine monitoring).
- Online marketplace
- A digital business model that matches sellers and buyers and earns a fee or commission on transactions.
- Platform business model
- A business that provides the infrastructure where two or more user groups exchange value, rather than making the product itself (Göcke and Meier, 2021).
- Multi-sidedness
- A platform must create value for at least two groups at once, such as guests and hosts.
- Network effects
- A platform becomes more valuable as more people use it: same-side (users attract similar users) or cross-side (users on one side attract the other side).
- Chicken-and-egg problem
- At launch, no side wants to join an empty platform, so the founder must build a critical mass on both sides.
- Winner-takes-all (or most)
- Strong network effects let one or a few platforms dominate a market, especially when users single-home.
- Minimum viable platform
- The simplest version of a platform that delivers its core transaction, used to test assumptions; launched by immersion, anticipation or piggybacking.
- Digital (online) internationalisation
- Serving foreign customers through websites, i.e. virtual presence instead of physical-presence entry modes (Week 12 lecture).
- Digital intrapreneurship
- Intrapreneurship that uses digital means as a critical part of its innovation (Pinchot and Soltanifar, 2021).
Check your understanding
Which statement matches the Week 12 lecture’s definition of digital entrepreneurship?
Flashcards
References and sources
As cited in the module materials. Check each against the original before using it in an assignment.
- Ghosh, S., Hughes, M., Hughes, P. and Hodgkinson, I. (2021) ‘Corporate digital entrepreneurship: leveraging industrial Internet of Things and emerging technologies’, in Soltanifar, M., Hughes, M. and Göcke, L. (eds) Digital Entrepreneurship: Impact on Business and Society. Cham: Springer, pp. 183–207.
- Göcke, L. and Meier, P. (2021) ‘Development and validation of platform businesses in digital entrepreneurship’, in Soltanifar, M., Hughes, M. and Göcke, L. (eds) Digital Entrepreneurship: Impact on Business and Society. Cham: Springer, pp. 87–102.
- Göcke, L. and Weninger, R. (2021) ‘Business model development and validation in digital entrepreneurship’, in Soltanifar, M., Hughes, M. and Göcke, L. (eds) Digital Entrepreneurship: Impact on Business and Society. Cham: Springer, pp. 71–85.
- Lynn, T. and Rosati, P. (2021) ‘New sources of entrepreneurial finance’, in Soltanifar, M., Hughes, M. and Göcke, L. (eds) Digital Entrepreneurship: Impact on Business and Society. Cham: Springer, pp. 209–231.
- Pinchot III, G. and Soltanifar, M. (2021) ‘Digital intrapreneurship: the corporate solution to a rapid digitalisation’, in Soltanifar, M., Hughes, M. and Göcke, L. (eds) Digital Entrepreneurship: Impact on Business and Society. Cham: Springer, pp. 233–262.
- Samara, G. and Terzian, J. (2021) ‘Challenges and opportunities for digital entrepreneurship in developing countries’, in Soltanifar, M., Hughes, M. and Göcke, L. (eds) Digital Entrepreneurship: Impact on Business and Society. Cham: Springer, pp. 283–302.
- Soltanifar, M., Hughes, M. and Göcke, L. (eds) (2021) Digital Entrepreneurship: Impact on Business and Society. Cham: Springer. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53914-6.
- Soltanifar, M. and Smailhodžić, E. (2021) ‘Developing a digital entrepreneurial mindset for data-driven, cloud-enabled, and platform-centric business activities: practical implications and the impact on society’, in Soltanifar, M., Hughes, M. and Göcke, L. (eds) Digital Entrepreneurship: Impact on Business and Society. Cham: Springer, pp. 3–21.
- Song, D. and Wu, A. (2021) ‘Pursuing international opportunities in a digitally enabled world’, in Soltanifar, M., Hughes, M. and Göcke, L. (eds) Digital Entrepreneurship: Impact on Business and Society. Cham: Springer, pp. 265–281.
- Vahlne, J.E. and Johanson, J. (2017) ‘From internationalization to evolution: the Uppsala model at 40 years’, Journal of International Business Studies, 48(9), pp. 1087–1102.
Written from these course files
External pages used