De-internationalization

While internationalization appeals to many—entrepreneurs, CEOs, investors, and policy makers—as a successful and/or desired endeavor, leading to and/or stimulating growth, de-internationalization, on the other hand, is perceived as a failure, an undesired enterprise. These stakeholders commit to the internationalization of diverse types of resources, e.g., physical, financial, social, and human capital; time; and reputation. Just acknowledging, never mind acting on, the need to de-commit these and other resources that were assembled and deployed to support internationalization to de-internationalize is seen as accepting and succumbing to failure. It is in human nature to suppress the admission of failure, hence the perpetual (need to) focus and emphasis on “positive” international growth and persistent disregard of the importance of de-internationalization to the overall cross-border activity of the firm. Focusing only on positive or successful factors, as perceived by key stakeholders, and prescribing them as normative is akin to advising or prescribing that winning in gambling, say on horse racing, is both good and desirable—an advice solely based on people who won money on that gambling (received net gain). By adopting this approach to decision and policy making, key stakeholders risk accepting such behaviors and factors as indicators of success, when, in fact, they may be the very factors that increase the risk of failure.