The Influence of Collaboration on Enterprises Internationalization Process

Abstract

At present, competitive globalized environments force enterprises to make more effort to both set up collaborative processes among networked partners and open their borders to the internationalization process. With this participation in internationalization processes, a set of barriers emerges that enterprises must overcome, particularly SMEs. The internationalization barriers are classified in four main dimensions, namely, strategy, technology, partners and product, which are considered to establish relationships between the internationalization and the collaborative processes. Accordingly, the research objective is to analyse the extent to which collaboration with international partners facilitates the internationalization process. A research survey was held with Spanish manufacturing SMEs to assess the internationalization of operations by establishing collaborative processes in global networks. Two surveys were conducted to analyse collaboration and internationalization concepts, and the influences among them: (i) a first survey, designed to validate the posed hypothesis about the relation between internationalization and setting up collaborative processes; (ii) a second survey, devised to perform a descriptive analysis that identifies less-applied collaborative processes in SMEs by establishing internationalization activities. The study results reveal that collaboration positively influences the internationalization process, and identifies the collaborative processes that are less performed among the partners that internationalize their operations.

1. Introduction

The way by which small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) operate is by changing partnerships with other companies that belong to complex-value, globally extended networks. Companies’ competitiveness has undergone several changes in recent years by stimulating their participation in collaborative networks [1]. According to Camarinha-Matos and Afsarmanesh [2], a collaborative network (CN) comprises a set of heterogeneous and autonomous geographically dispersed enterprises that collaborate to achieve goals that would never be reached, or would have higher costs, if enterprises worked separately. Participation in CNs requires greater information exchange and the commitment of all companies, without them losing their decision-making authority [3]. Collaboration establishment can positively impact enterprises and network performance by increasing competitiveness and cutting costs.

However, SMEs face challenges in setting up collaborative processes, given their nature and their reluctance in making the necessary cultural change for competition towards collaboration. To deal with this, specific solutions (guidelines, tools and models) are needed to support SMEs to participate in collaborative networks [4].

Today’s global competitive environments have also brought about a change in how SMEs operate in networks through the internationalization of operations [5]. Globalization forces network operations to expand over widespread regions, and forces them to cope with greater complexity [6]. The internationalization of operations involves the development of new international distribution systems, global suppliers, and multisite and/or fragmented manufacturing networks to benefit from subsidies, tariff preferences, lower labour and logistics costs, more short-term competitiveness, better reliable deliveries and a reduced learning curve for networked members [7,8]. Despite the benefits, the internationalization start-up process is difficult because it incurs risks, particularly for SMEs. By way of example, many SMEs fail in foreign markets because the production management of global internationalized networks needs more collaboration to accomplish optimal degrees of quality, costs and flexibility [9]. This means that setting up collaborative processes is considered a relevant condition to perform the internationalization process. This work contemplates the symbiosis between both concepts’ collaboration-internationalization to more beneficial effects. From a collaborative perspective, the internationalization of operations not only reduces costs, but also helps to achieve a global production and distribution network that comes closer to the potential markets, as well as easy access to customers, workers or suppliers with specific skills [10,11]. Moreover, it provides a perspective as to how sustainability challenges are proposed by the integration and the establishment of collaborative relationships by improving, amongst others, intelligent transport systems, sustainable and safe mobility, the integration of services, complex (integrated) service-packs, and the effective management of natural resources [12].

The purposes of this paper are twofold: (i) to verify whether internationalization is (positively) influenced by setting up collaborative processes; (ii) to determine the less-applied collaborative processes in SMEs to promote them and increase internationalization success. Aiming to fulfil these objectives, the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the background of the studied theme, and provides a background for the two studied concepts: collaborative processes, internationalization and their influence on achieving sustainability challenges. Section 3 presents the survey design and data-collection process. Section 4 indicates the inferential and descriptive analysis that is carried out with the data acquired from a survey held in the Spanish manufacturing sector. The results are also provided. Section 5 discusses the research results. Finally, Section 6 ends by presenting the conclusions and the future research lines that derive from the empirical study outcomes.

2. Background

2.1. Collaborative Processes and Associated Barriers

SMEs’ evolution towards collaboration is both a reality and a crucial mechanism that deals with the global solutions demanded by customers in their own countries, as well as in foreign markets. Non-participation in collaborative processes leads to consequential inefficiencies in enterprises’ readiness to deal with globally expanded dynamic markets [13], which raises enterprises’ awareness of the need to be prepared to collaborate with network partners. Given the importance of this new trend, setting up collaborative process has been studied well in recent years [1]. The benefits deriving from each process been studied, as well as the designed solutions, such as technologies, methodologies and approaches, to properly carry follow each process. The literature review of Andres and Poler [4] reinforces knowledge-processing in relation to the present research on collaborative processes set up by network partners. The literature analysis found a set of collaborative processes. Each one was identified after considering several processes and approaches that were developed in the literature to overcome the possible barriers that may emerge when SMEs follow a specific process from the collaborative perspective. To obtain a better understanding of this, processes were arranged from the decision-making level perspective as follows: strategical, tactical, operational (

Table 1. Summary of the collaborative processes [4].

Decision Level	Strategical	Tactical	Operational
Collaborative Processes	Network Design	Forecast Demand	Scheduling
	Decision System Design	Operational Planning	Order-Promising Process
	Partners Selection	Replenishment	Lot-sizing Negotiation
	Strategies Alignment	Performance Management	Inventory Management
	Partners Coordination and Integration	Knowledge Management	Information Exchange Management
	Product Design	Uncertainty Management	Process Connection
	Performance Management System Design	Negotiation Contracts among Partners	Interoperability
	Coordination Mechanisms Design	Share Costs/Profits
		Coordination Mechanisms Management

).

As previously indicated, setting up collaborative processes implies an associated number of barriers that may emerge when SMEs decide to collaborate. Table 1 includes the most relevant collaborative processes and some authors who have put forward solutions to deal with any barrier that may emerge during each process. One example is offered for each decision-making level in each of the identified processes to gain insight into the associated barriers when processes are collaboratively followed. At the strategical decision level, barriers in the Strategies Alignment [14] process appear because distinct partners belong to one or more network. Therefore, for each network, objectives may differ and, accordingly, the strategies to fulfil them might be misaligned. Thus, contradictions among the strategies defined by one partner may arise, which could negatively influence other network enterprises. Alignment is also emphasized by the authors of [15], who state that aligning product quality attributes in internationalized supply chains is a key element in understanding the internationalization process. At the tactical decision level, the Forecast Demand process is characterized by an evolution from independent to dependent demand [16]. To achieve this transformation, coordination mechanisms and contracts are necessary to share credible forecasts. Barriers emerge when enterprises lack collaborative mechanisms and technologies, and when exchanging information about demand, which bring about divergences in forecasts. Finally, one example of barriers at the operational decision-making level can be found in the Interoperability of processes, as enterprises have to acquire systems that exchange services and information in heterogeneous organizational and technological environments [17].

Overall, although participation in collaborative processes implies relevant advantages, properly establishing them is not easy task given the necessary information requirements and communication technology resources and abilities, which act as barriers. The business environment, specific industry features and endogenous firm characteristics all impact the ability to set up a collaboration [18].

2.2. Internationalization Barriers

Internationalization involves the creation of relationships with networked partners in other countries [19]. This means that the internationalization of operations in collaborative contexts makes decision-making more difficult because global networks consist of wide-ranging international firms. As well as contemplating collaborative processes, internationalization is also an important research area that emerges with a number of academics, which requires the further integration of the internationalization literature to reduce or eliminate trade barriers, lower transport and communication costs [20], and raise the product-related value level [21]. The internationalization of operations, therefore, implies the need to contemplate relevant requirements and barriers (

Table 2. Internalization barriers.

Author	Internationalization Barriers
[20]	Limited access to low-cost finance. Standardization of products and product quality.
[22]	Cost-operating factors; managerial experience (lack of international experience, commitment, partner difficulties); market barriers (lack of market knowledge and experience); government incentives; specific barriers in firms (resources, size).
[20]	Skills, competences, experience; budget and credit flexibility; language skills; employee/owner’s reluctance to change; staff training levels and qualifications.
[23]	Resource constraints; knowledge barriers; corruption; lack of export aid; poor infrastructure.
[24]	(i) Operational barriers: discriminatory taxation, prohibition against employment of foreign nationals, government procurements discrimination, refusing entry to national trade associations, international data transmission, government subsidies to domestic firms, government competition. (ii) Entry barriers: monopolistic markets, license requirements, local ownership requirements, service limitations, labour restrictions, excessive financial requirements,
[25]	(i) Internal barriers ▪ Functional (lack of new technology or abilities), financial (lack of financial resources). ▪ Marketing product (new products, quality, technical, export,), price (not competitive), distribution (complexity access), logistics (facilities, transportation costs) ▪ Informational (difficult access to information). (ii) External barriers ▪ Governmental (lack of incentives, inadequate regulations). ▪ Procedural (documentation, communication). ▪ Environmental—economic (economic situation, currencies), political/legal (regulations, instability), socio-cultural (language and cultural differences). ▪ Task (competition in export markets).
[26,27]	Cultural commitment and Cultural diversity
[28]	International asset dispersion in the supply-chain risk-management performance effect
[29]	Competition from countries that are able to offer more competitive prices; scarce information; low pricing; political/economic factors; distribution products; cultural differences; distance; language; exchange; fierce competition; bureaucracy; customs fees;

).

One work [14] grouped internationalization barriers together by defining four dimensions (

Table 3. Internationalization Barriers: four dimensions.

Dimension	Description Based on Emerging Internationalization Barriers	Authors
Strategy	Entry barriers considered to create the network and to locate foreign partners. Market features, labor restrictions, cultural differences, political regulations, partner requirements. Global partners strategies aligned to properly work in the internationalization process.	[24,25,28,29,30]
Technology	SMEs’ information and knowledge exchange capabilities are crucial for dealing with connecting interoperability and processes to internationalized partners, and to obtain a proper technological infrastructure that is able to overcome barriers associated with transmitting data among global partners.	[22,23,24,25]
Partners	Partners’ capabilities, specificities, language skills, experience and cultural collaboration. Willingness to share information considering profits deriving from performed activities and inter-network node agreements.	[20,22,23,25,28,31,32]
Product	Product design and production operations must be analyzed. It is necessary to indicate the way to produce and exchange data about the product to be manufactured in the global network. A product’s importance for the global manufacturing network.	[20,25,26,29]

): (i) strategy; (ii) technology; (iii) partners; (iv) product.

The characteristics that impact a firm’s capacity to internationalize operations is related to the close collaborative relationships being developed with its partners [33]. This means that the enterprises willing to participate in internationalized scenarios can set up collaborative processes.

Having defined both internationalization barriers and collaborative processes, we, the authors, connected these two concepts. The four identified dimensions that group internationalization barriers were characterized by defining the possible constraints that SMEs might encounter during the internationalization process. Then, a set of the previously defined processes [4] was associated with each dimension as a mechanism to help to overcome the associated barriers (Figure 1) Accordingly, internationalization and collaboration became two connected variables.

2.3. The Influence of Collaboration in Sustainable Value Chains

The sharing economy and stakeholders’ collaboration, in both national and international environments, is a growing business model that results in sustainable value chains, boosting sustainable production, consumption and development [34]. In this paper, collaboration considers the current, globally dispersed market, where both national and international partners are part of the same supply chain or collaborative network. According to Hileman et al. [35], the establishment of collaborative relationships between networked partners is considered a key factor to achieve the sustainability challenges in the industry. Finally, we can state that, according to Camarinha-Matos et al. [12], the role of collaborative networks in achieving sustainability challenges is evident, as sustainability exceeds the capabilities of individual actors, requiring the establishment of collaborative relationships.

3. Research Methodology

The survey is the research methodology used in this paper, which can provide answers to problems both in descriptive terms and in relation to variables, after collecting systematic information according to a previously established design that ensures the rigor of the information. In this way, the survey can be used to describe the objects of study, note patterns and relationships between the described characteristics, and establish relationships between internationalization and collaborative processes.

3.1. Survey Design

To obtain a complete, up-to-date perspective of how internationalization is affected by the collaborative processes established with foreign partners, an empirical study was conducted with a survey held with SMEs from the Spanish manufacturing sector. The survey was used to assess the current SMEs’ preparedness to address the internationalization of operations when establishing collaborative processes in global networks.

Two surveys were conducted to analyse the collaboration and internationalization concepts and their influences. The purposes of the two implemented surveys were as follows:

• Survey A: designed to validate the posed hypothesis about the relation between internationalization and establishing collaborative processes (Section 4.1)
• Survey B: devised to develop a descriptive analysis to identify the less-applied collaborative processes in SMEs. The identification and improvement of processes will have a positive impact when following the internationalization process (Section 4.2)

Survey A was designed to perform a correlation analysis between internationalization and establishing collaborative processes. In this case, a 24-question survey was designed and arranged into three main groups (

Table 4. Structures of Survey A and Survey B.

Survey A		Survey B
1. SMEs General Data Characteristics of the network to which the SMEs belong to	Sector/Activity Processes in the Supply Chain Company size Location Turnover	1. SMEs General Data Characteristics of the network to which the SMEs belong to	Sector/Activity Processes in the Supply Chain Company size Location Turnover
2. Collaborative Processes in the Company	Degree of collaboration in the company with partners Amount of collaborative processes Frequency of collaborative processes Importance of collaborative processes Type of established collaboration	2. Network characteristics which the SMEs belongs to	Organisation Flexibility within the network Network complexity Internationalisation Degree Network Configuration
3. Internationalisation strategy adopted by the Company	Presence of foreign activity internationalisation Position Number of international partners Degree of internationalisation Degree of collaboration with international partners Importance of establishing collaborative processes to achieve high levels of internationalisation in its operations Factors to explain the internationalisation evolution Internationalisation strategies achievement and motivation Business presence in the internationalisation strategy Degree of internationalisation in the future Level of experience in internationalisation	3. Strategy	Business Location regarding the network Strategies and Objectives Alignment Decision-making system Performance Measurement System
		4. Technology	Exchange of information Interoperability Technological Interests
		5. Partners	Alignment between partners Capacity to establish collaborative relationships Capacity to establish internationalised operations Negotiation Share benefits Use and knowledge of collaboration mechanisms Collaborative Order Promising Process Exchange of information Relevant aspects when establishing relationships Levels of collaboration between partners
		6. Product	Product Importance Exchange of Information Management Systems

, Survey A). The first group characterized the enterprise. The second and third groups contained questions to explore in-depth issues about the collaborative processes that enterprises followed and the internationalization strategy they adopted, respectively. Survey B comes in six parts, grouped into two blocks (Table 4, Survey B). The first block is of a general character and features the SME and the network to which it belongs. The second block considers the four dimensions into which interoperability barriers are grouped: strategy, technology, partners and products. For each dimension, the associated collaborative processes are considered (as shown in Figure 1).

Surveys A and B were both designed with [36], a software platform that enables a wide range of questions and facilitates the sending, receiving and processing of data management. Both surveys were developed in Appendix A to provide readers with an insight into the questions that were employed to perform the statistical analysis.

3.2. Data Collection Process

The population that was estimated to follow the data collection process was set out for SMEs from the Spanish manufacturing industry. To obtain a representative sample, the required sample size was calculated with the finite-population formula [37], by considering a 95% confidence level (95% CI) and a standard error of 15% (Equation (1)) (

Table 5. Values taken for each variable in the sample size calculation.

Variable	Definition	Value
N	Total population size (Spanish SMEs from the Manufacturing Sector)	124,646
z	Confidence level	1.96
p	Probability of success	0.5
q	Probability of failure	0.5
e	Standard error	15%
n	Sample size: minimum number of responses required to conduct a reliable study	42

).

$$n=\frac{z^2·p·q·N}{e^2·\left(N-1\right)+z^2·p·q }$$

(1)

The presented status assessment of SMEs from the manufacturing sector was empirically studied by considering the minimum sample size required to form a representative sample. Surveys were distributed to 1033 companies, aiming for a representative sample size. The information collected with the survey was collected and analyzed with the IBM SPSS software [38], which provides analytical functions for a wide range of research matters.

4. Survey Results

This section presents the results from the two analyses that were carried out. The first, an inferential analysis, aimed to draw conclusions about the interdependence of internationalization and collaboration in networked partners, and is derived from Survey A. The second, a descriptive analysis, sought to characterize the extent to which collaborative processes are carried out when companies decide to internationalize their operations, identifying which collaborative processes should be further studied, that is, those processes that are less used in internationalization processes.

4.1. Inferential Analysis: Interdependence of Internationalization and Collaboration in Networked Partners (Survey A)

As indicated in previous sections, collaboration among SMEs may act as a relevant tool for dealing with the barriers associated with internationalization and gain more benefits from the globalization process. According to the authors of [39], the level at which firms engage with a global partner is directly affected by the level of interdependence between processes and the level of understanding of internationalization. The more interdependent that enterprises are, the more insight they gain into each other’s products, processes, business goals and culture and, thus, the more intensely they engage. Therefore, enterprises that are willing to internationalize their operations obtain added value when processes set up with international partners are characterized as being collaborative [39].

A study is provided about how both internationalization and collaboration interact with one another to facilitate the internationalization of SMEs’ operations. The main objective is to identify if SMEs with internationalized operations establish collaborative relationships with their internationalized partners, and to know how setting up collaborative processes promotes internationalization in global networks. In view of this, the following statements were considered:

• Internationalization success is related to setting up collaborative processes to create mutually beneficial outcomes.
• Collaborative relationships can further impact companies’ resources and knowledge acquisition, as well as their ability to work with powerful international partners in the future.
• Managing international production networks requires high collaboration levels.

According to the above statements, the following hypothesis was posed:

Hypothesis 1 (H1).

The higher the level of internationalization of operations, the higher the established collaboration level.

To verify the above hypothesis, a set of 50 enterprises from the Spanish manufacturing sector was surveyed. As the sample size was n = 42, the number of responses obtained in Survey A met the target (119%). According to the results, two variables were considered and crossed to analyse the SMEs’ situation: degree of collaboration and degree of internationalization of operations. Both degrees were rated according to a qualitative scale, as Null, Weak, Moderate, High, and Very High. To assess the hypothesis, linear scales for the degree of internationalization and collaboration variables, obtained from Survey A’s results, were quantitatively rated to obtain standardized variables: Null = 1, Weak = 2, Moderate = 3, High = 4, Very High = 5. Having standardized and quantified the variables, different correlation tests were carried out on the degree of internationalization and collaboration. To carry out the inferential statistical analysis, the confidence level was set at 95%, which coincides with the 5% convention of statistical significance in hypothesis testing. Six correlation tests were performed with the IBM SPSS statistical software to identify the relation and dependence between both variables: (i) Pearson’s correlation; (ii) Pearson’s chi-squared (χ²); (iii) Pearson’s Phi; (iv) Cramer’s V; (v) contingency coefficient; (vi) t-test.

The scatter diagram shown in Figure 2 acts as both an important tool and a first contact to understand the nature of the relationship between both studied variables. The scatter diagram is depicted according to the obtained results. It is represented by a long point cloud and a straight-up trend, which allowed for Pearson’s linear coefficient to be applied to identify the relation between the two depicted variables. Not all the points are seen in the diagram due to overlapping data. The cloud thickness in the scatter diagram offers us an idea of the correlation magnitude: the narrower the cloud, the narrower the margin of the variation in the values of degree of collaboration and internationalization. This makes forecasts more accurate, which implies a higher correlation.

Starting with the correlation tests, in statistics, Pearson’s correlation coefficient is an index that measures the linear relation between two random quantitative variables. Pearson’s statistical, applied to the Survey A results, indicates a 0.836 positive correlation between the degree of internationalization and degree of collaboration (

Table 6. Summary of Pearson’s correlation coefficient.

		Degree of Internationalization	Degree of Collaboration
Degree of Internationalization	Pearson’s Correlation	1.000	0.836 1
	Sig. (bilateral)		0.000
	N	50	50
Degree of Collaboration	Pearson’s Correlation	0.836 1	1.000
	Sig. (bilateral)	0.000
	N	50	50

¹ Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (bilateral).

). It can, therefore, be stated that the two studied variables were related. In addition, the critical level (Sig. Bilateral) allowed for a decision to be made about linear independence. Therefore, as the critical level was lower than the established significant level (0.01), the dependence hypothesis was accepted. This concluded the existence of a significant linear relation. Accordingly, it can be stated that both variables were significantly correlated (Sig = 0.000).

The contingency procedure tables also include other statistics to analyse possible association patterns between the two studied variables. To determine whether degree of internationalization and degree of collaboration were related, different measures of association were employed, along with a corresponding test of significance. Therefore, on the one hand, Pearson’s chi-squared χ² and, on the other hand, Pearson’s Phi, Cramer’s V and contingency coefficient were studied (

Table 7. Statistics table of Pearson’s chi-squared χ^2..

	Value	Sig.
Pearson’s chi-squared	37.788	0.000	Sig. asymptotic (bilateral)
Pearson’s Phi	0.810	0.000	Sig. approximately
Cramer’s V	0. 810	0.000
Contingency Coefficient	0.629	0.000
N valid cases	50

).

Pearson’s chi-squared (χ²) is a statistic applied to check a hypothesis and prove if the two categorical variables are independent or not. In our study sample, a χ² above zero meant that the relation of the variables was closer. As the Sig. Asymptotic (bilateral) value was less than 0.05, the hypothesis of independence was rejected, and it was concluded that the variables’ degree of collaboration and degree of internationalization were related. Pearson’s chi-squared could verify the hypothesis of independence or dependence in the contingency table. Nevertheless, it did not provide information regarding the strength of the association between these variables. To study the degree of the relation between the two analyzed variables, association measures were used, and the sample size effect was eliminated. To do this, Pearson’s Phi, Cramer’s V and contingency coefficients were used. The Sig. approximately level was 0.000 (Table 7) for the three coefficients. Thus, the marked high dependency between degree of internationalization and degree of collaboration was deduced.

To conclude the inferential study, the test T was carried out on independent samples, which could verify the hypotheses of two population means (

Table 8. Scaled and grouped variables: Degree of Collaboration and Degree of internationalization.

Degree of Collaboration		Degree of Internationalization
Null	1	Null	Nint (no internationalization)
Weak	2	Weak
Moderate	3	Moderate	Yint (internationalization)
High	4	High
Very High	5	Very High

). To do this, the degree of internationalization variable was scaled and grouped into ‘Nint’ = null and weak (for those firms with no internationalization) and ‘Yint’ = moderate, high and very high (for those firms with internationalization). Specifically, the degree of collaboration variable (null, weak, moderate, high, very high) was verified, and contrasted between the two groups defined according to the degree of the internationalization variable (Yint and Nint).

Table 9. Statistics of the t-test procedure for independent samples.

	INT 1	N	Average	Deviation	Standard Error of the Mean
COL 2	Yint	30	3.63	0.928	0.169
	Nint	20	1.60	0.754	0.169

¹ INT: Degree of Internationalization ² COL: Degree of Collaboration.

shows the compared groups (‘Yint’: SMEs with internationalized operations and ‘Nint’: SMEs with no internationalized operations). In our study sample, 30 of the firms that collaborated also internationalized their operations, and 20 SMEs collaborated but were not internationalized.

Continuing with the t-test for equality of means,

Table 10. Summary table of the t-test procedure for independent samples.

		Levene Test for Equality Variances		t-Test for Equality of Means
		F	Sig.	t-Test	Degrees of Freedom	Sig. (Bilateral)	Mean Difference	Standard Error of the Difference	Confidence Interval for the Mean
									Lower	Higher
C O L	Equal variances are assumed	0.445	0.508	8.160	48	0.000	2.033	0.249	1.532	2.543
	Equal variances are not assumed			8.160	46.008	0.000	2.033	0. 249	1. 532	2.514

shows the Levene contrast (F) on the equality of variances. The result of this contrast allowed us to decide whether we should assume that the population of variances was equal. Thus, if the probability associated with the Levene statistic was higher than 0.05, we could assume that population variances were equal. In our study, the probability associated with the Levene statistic (Sig = 0.508) was higher than 0.05. Therefore, “Equal variances were assumed”. In this case, when considering equal variances, statistic‘t’ took the value of 8.160 and had an associated bilateral critical level of 0.000 (Sig.bilateral). As 0.000 is less than 0.05, we were able to reject the hypothesis of equal means and, therefore, we concluded that the degree of internationalization in the SMEs that collaborated was not the same as the degree of internationalization of the companies that did not collaborate. Therefore, firms with higher internationalization levels were found to establish collaborative relationships, and less internationalized firms had lower degrees of collaboration. The t- test verified that the degree of internationalization differed statistically for each group. The CI for the mean (95%CI) allowed us to estimate that the true difference between the degree of internationalization of collaborating companies and the degree of internationalization of non-collaborating companies was between 1.532 and 2.543 degrees. The fact that the obtained interval did not include zero also allowed us to reject the equality of means hypothesis. Moreover, the mean difference value fell within the confidence interval for the mean (1.532 < 2.033 < 2.543).

Six statistical tests were employed to determine the correlation between degree of internationalization and degree of collaboration. Bearing these in mind (Pearson’s Correlation, Pearson’s chi-squared χ², Pearson’s Phi, Cramer’s V, contingency coefficient, t-test), it was concluded that the proposed hypothesis was supported by the correlation analysis that was performed, given the interdependence between the internationalization and establishment of collaborative processes within partners of the same network. Hence, the surveyed SMEs sample enabled us to show that establishing collaborative processes among networked members is an influential condition that facilitates the internationalization of the operations process. The next subsection goes one step further. A descriptive analysis was carried out to identify the less-applied collaborative processes that were followed in all the defined processes, and to further study and design solutions that can mostly facilitate the internationalization process.

4.2. Descriptive Analysis: Collaborative Processes to Be Further Studied (Survey B)

The inferential analysis was performed with the results obtained from the surveyed Spanish SMEs. It proved that the internationalization process was positively influenced by setting up collaborative processes in SMEs that belong to a global network. According to the relevance of establishing collaborative processes to facilitate the internationalization of operations, this section carries out a descriptive statistical analysis with the results obtained from Survey B to identify the extent to which processes are collaboratively performed by the Spanish manufacturing SMEs sample.

The principal objective of Survey B was to collect data from a representative sample of Spanish manufacturing SMEs to identify the less implemented collaborative processes within a network. The descriptive analysis focuses on: (i) relating a firms’ size to the geographical scope and turnover to provide readers with global insight into the SME study sample; (ii) acknowledging the distribution of degree of internationalization and collaboration of the surveyed Spanish SMEs; (iii) identifying the less-applied collaborative processes, which should be further treated to help SMEs to establish international operations.

Figure 3 depicts the link between SMEs’ geographical scope, number of employees and turnover. Turnover is represented by different-sized bubbles and provides readers with a perception of how the geographical scope is related to a firm’s size, and how turnover increases when the geographical scope is more global.

Next, the descriptive analysis focuses on the current status on the degree of internationalization and the degree of collaboration in the Spanish manufacturing sector. After considering that the degree of internationalization is the extent to which enterprises contemplate their internationalized operations, Figure 4 was built to depict the distribution of the study sample’s degree of internationalization, where (i) the term “null” refers to the fact that the company has no foreign presence; (ii) the term “weak” refers to the fact that the company has started external activity. It focuses on the commercial side, with no outside investment or cooperation; (iii) the term “moderate”, refers to the fact that the company complies in average value between weak and high degrees of internationalization; (iv) the term “high” refers to the fact that all the enterprise areas know its internationalization strategy and make efforts to consolidate management towards this purpose. Production processes meet the goals set by the internationalization strategy, and the company starts by measuring international responsiveness and begins an international standardization processes and certification; finally, (v) the term “very high” refers to the fact that the company has found potential international customers and, therefore, has started to assess partners’ financial and commercial capabilities and resources. Moreover, the company regularly and effectively communicates with partners, has clearly defined terms and international negotiation conditions, and knows how to translate them into commercial contracts. The company understands the im-portance of alternative dispute resolution and international arbitration.

From the analysis depicted in Figure 4, and according to the surveyed SMEs, only 38% of the SMEs in the Spanish manufacturing sector apply a high and very high degree of internationalization.

Regarding the degree of collaboration, and as collaborative processes are established with partners within the same network, enterprises’ degree of collaboration is analyzed: (i) generally for all the partners (Figure 5a); (ii) specifically with international partners (Figure 5b). The different degrees of collaboration include: (i) “Null” degree of collaboration, where collaborative relationships are not established during the processes that take place among network members; (ii) “Weak” degree of collaboration, where collaborative processes are rarely established among network partners, (iii) “Moderate” degree of collaboration, where some processes are collaboratively performed and in-formally established between partners; (iv) “High” degree of collaboration, where collaborative relationships are established with a wide range of members and are carried out frequently; and (v) “Very High” degree of collaboration, where: collaborative processes are established with all network members and are carried out very often. Generally, for all the partners, the degree of collaboration is high or very high for 51% of the surveyed SMEs. The degree of collaboration specifically contemplates international partners (Figure 5b), and is high or very high for 31% of SMEs. From this descriptive analysis, it was concluded that degree of collaboration is on rather a small scale in the Spanish manufacturing sector, especially regarding international partners.

It has been stated that SMEs may have to face barriers during their participation in collaborative processes, and overcoming collaborative barriers reduces internationalization barriers. Survey B provides the data used to analyse the current status regarding the degree of internationalization and collaboration in Spanish SMEs. This was conducted to identify the extent of each collaborative process applied in the surveyed SMEs. To continue with this terminology, a scale of five ranges (null, weak, moderate, high, very high) was defined to identify the degree to which each collaborative process was applied (

Table 11. Degree to which collaborative processes are adopted in manufacturing SMEs. Collaborative processes to be further studied.

Dimension	Collaborative Process	Degree of Adoption	To Be Further Studied
STRATEGY	Network Design	High	-
	Strategy /Objectives Alignment	Moderate	√
	Partner Selection	Moderate	√
	Decentralized Decision System Design	Moderate	√
	Performance Management System Design	Weak	√
TECHNOLOGY	Information Exchange	High	-
	Uncertainty Management	Moderate	√
	Interoperability	Moderate	√
PARTNERS	Partners Collaboration	High	-
	Contract’s negotiation	Moderate	√
	Share Profits and Costs	High	√
	Collaboration Mechanisms Design	Moderate	√
	OPP	Weak	√
	Information Exchange	High	-
PRODUCT	Information Management	High	-
	Collaborative Forecasts	Moderate	√
	Replenishment	Moderate	√

). Processes were arranged in four dimensions to group internationalization barriers (strategy, technology, partners, product). Depending on the degree of adaptation, a process was classified as being further studied (√) or not (-). Those classified as √ were further studied and corresponded to the null, weak, and moderate degrees of adoption.

5. Discussion

According to the above classification, the collaborative processes that need to be further studied should be examined by researchers to propose future solutions with a view to improve their implementation and to increase their rate of adoption. Generally speaking, experts must support SMEs to apply solutions to collaborative processes to facilitate the internationalization process. As the concepts of internationalization and collaboration are positively related, the study of the less-applied collaborative processes is crucial for further research.

The reasons that further study was contemplated for the collaborative processes, labelled as √, were later summarized for each process as follows:

• Alignment between strategy and objectives, and lack of integration of strategies into international partners, involving a lack of unified objectives.
• Partner selection performed non-collaboratively reduces the possibility of reaching international agreements with appropriate partners.
• Decentralized decision system design: lack of decentralized decision-making implies loss of benefits with international partners because the objectives and decisions of less powerful partners are not contemplated, and only a few dominant partners’ objectives are considered.
• Performance Management System design and measurement: lack of collaborative performance management design does not provide SMEs with feedback on the collaborative and internationalized relationships in global networks.
• Uncertainty management, along with interoperability, are seen as weaknesses if information exchange is inefficient to properly communicate with international partners.
• Contract negotiation: if contracts are not collaboratively reached, confusion and problems may appear, such as trust and information exchange, and make the internationalization of operations difficult to follow.
• Collaboration mechanisms design: a lack of mechanisms for collaboration implies deficient coordination between international partners.
• Order-Promising Process (OPP): this copes with the order proposals placed by customers by coordinating activities with internationalized companies; lack of a collaborative OPP means more difficulty in delivering orders.
• Collaborative forecast and replenishment: if they are not collaboratively applied, network visibility diminishes, benefits also decrease and no improvements are seen in forecast demand. Accordingly, the internationalization process becomes difficult, with fewer derived benefits.

With the empirical study performed with SMEs from the Spanish manufacturing sector, the less-performed processes were identified, so that more importance could be attached. This means that they could be included in further research and their implementation could be promoted, facilitating the internationalization process.

6. Conclusions

Two main concepts are dealt with in this paper: collaboration and internationalization. The set of internationalization barriers is arranged into four dimensions (strategy, technology, partners, product) from the reviewed literature.

Furthermore, an empirical study was performed to provide readers with a current perspective as to how internationalization and establishing collaborative processes are related. On the one hand, an inferential statistical analysis was carried out with the results from Survey A to demonstrate that enterprises with internationalized operations further participate in collaborative processes. On the other hand, given the positive correlation between internationalization and collaborative processes, another survey (Survey B) was distributed to identify the collaborative processes that were less adopted by SMEs with a descriptive analysis. Both surveys were distributed in the Spanish manufacturing sector. The descriptive analysis results concluded that a collection of processes could be addressed and improved by designing solutions and decision-support systems to facilitate the internationalization of operations in global networks. After considering the four defined dimensions, the processes most likely to be addressed were as follows. (i) Strategy Dimension: strategy and objectives alignment, partner selection, decentralized decision making and performance management; (ii) Technology Dimension: uncertainty management and interoperability; (iii) Partners Dimension: share profits and costs, contract negotiations, collaboration mechanisms and OPP; (iv) Product Dimension: collaborative forecast and collaborative replenishment processes.

Despite the contributions derived from the analysis, the study had several drawbacks that should be addressed by future research. In light of this, the collected data can be improved by increasing the number of responses and decreasing the standard error to 5%. According to the equation provided by (Miquel et al., 1997), the number of responses with a 5% standard error must exceed 96 to obtain a proper sample size for the new target. Then, a new round of surveys should be distributed to reach the new sample size and acquire more accurate results. Furthermore, this study was only conducted for the SMEs that operate in the Spanish manufacturing sector, which makes gaining more in-depth insight into other sectors, countries and cultures a difficult task.

The distributed surveys provided a tool to demonstrate that improvements are necessary in our study area, namely, internationalization in collaborative networks. In light of this, the present paper provides researchers with a clear idea about the collaborative processes that should be investigated by enhancing collaborative efforts and making the internationalization process easier. Hence, this paper aimed to consider the following in future research lines: (i) developing new solutions to improve and facilitate the setup of less-applied collaborative processes and, consequently, to overcome barriers associated with the internationalization process, and pursue sustainable solutions in an holistic perspective to increase collaboration among a wide range of stakeholders; (ii) identifying which collaborative processes more strongly impact the internationalization of operations; (iii) identifying the most influential collaborative processes and providing solutions to properly follow them in the SMEs’ context. In a nutshell, forthcoming action research focuses on proposing novel models, tools and guidelines that support collaborative process, and that make the internationalization process more sustainable and achievable, in terms of long-term collaborative relationships.