Purpose: This study aims to explore and understand the adaptive strategies employed by Iranian businesses operating under the dual pressures of international sanctions and the broader global trend of deglobalization. In recent years, the world has witnessed a significant reversal of globalization characterized by the rise of protectionist policies, geopolitical fragmentation, and the weaponization of economic interdependence. For Iran, this shift compounds decades of multilayered economic, financial, and trade sanctions that severely restrict access to global markets, advanced technologies, and international financial systems such as SWIFT. Traditional internationalization theories, such as the Uppsala Model or the born-global framework, assume a relatively open, predictable, and institutionally supported global environment, rendering them inadequate for explaining how firms operate in contexts of extreme institutional voids and geopolitical isolation. Against this backdrop, this research investigates how Iranian firms navigate, resist, and creatively adapt to these constraints, ultimately redefining what it means to “go global” from the margins of the world economy.
Design/Methodology/Approach: Adopting a qualitative research design grounded in interpretive phenomenology, this study draws on in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 18 senior managers and founders of Iranian businesses actively engaged in industrial, technology, and international services sectors between 2020 and 2024. Participants were selected through purposeful sampling to ensure diversity in firm size (from startups to medium enterprises), sectoral focus, and international engagement experience under sanctions. Data collection continued until theoretical saturation was reached—i.e., when no new thematic insights emerged from additional interviews. The interviews, lasting between 45 and 75 minutes, were audio-recorded (with informed consent), transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis as outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006/2008). This approach was chosen for its theoretical flexibility and capacity to uncover latent patterns without being constrained by pre-existing frameworks. Coding was conducted in NVivo 14, progressing from initial open coding (68 codes) to organizing themes (18 themes) and finally to six overarching (superordinate) themes. Rigor was ensured through peer debriefing, participant validation, reflexive journaling to mitigate researcher bias, and transparent documentation of the analytical process.
Findings: The thematic analysis revealed six superordinate themes that collectively describe a novel model of “resilient internationalization”: Redefining Internationalization: Iranian firms have abandoned linear, formal models of international expansion in favor of indirect, digital, and regionally focused strategies. This includes exporting through third countries (e.g., UAE, Turkey, Malaysia), rebranding products under foreign labels, leveraging global digital platforms despite banking restrictions, and shifting focus from Western to regional markets (Central Asia, Iraq, Afghanistan, West Africa). Informal Networks as Substitutes for Formal Institutions: In the absence of reliable legal, financial, and logistical infrastructures, businesses rely heavily on informal social and commercial networks, family ties, diaspora connections, religious affiliations, and digital communication tools (e.g., Telegram, WhatsApp) to establish trust, facilitate transactions, and access foreign markets. Creativity and Innovation in Response to Constraints: Sanctions have acted as a catalyst for necessity-driven innovation. Firms develop indigenous technologies, reverse-engineer imported components, adopt 3D printing, redesign products for cultural compatibility, and create alternative revenue models (e.g., prepayments, luxury repositioning of domestic goods). Risk and Uncertainty Management: Given extreme volatility in political and economic conditions, successful firms employ diversification (across markets, payment channels, intermediaries), build informal trust mechanisms (e.g., third-party quality verification, free samples), and develop contingency plans for sanctions escalation or logistical breakdowns. Transformation of Organizational Identity: Companies cultivate a dual identity embracing “Iranian-ness” as a competitive advantage (e.g., resilience, craftsmanship under duress) while adhering to global quality standards. They reframe sanctions not as a weakness but as a narrative of resistance, leveraging it in branding and investor storytelling. Managerial mindsets have also shifted from export dependency to strategic agility, and from state reliance to self-reliance. Dependence on Institutional and Political Factors: Despite grassroots adaptability, firms remain deeply entangled with domestic political and institutional dynamics. They navigate bureaucratic hurdles, depend on state export facilitation schemes, adjust strategies in response to diplomatic shifts (e.g., BRICS engagement), and are constrained by internal structural weaknesses (e.g., foreign exchange shortages, inefficient logistics).
Discussion and Conclusion: The findings challenge classical international business paradigms by demonstrating that internationalization in sanctioned, deglobalizing contexts is neither linear nor institutionally mediated but rather nonlinear, networked, and resilience-driven. The emergent concept of “resilient internationalization” captures a strategic logic where survival depends on informal trust, creative improvisation, and contextual redefinition of global engagement. This aligns with—but also extends—recent literature on internationalization under constraints (Ciravegna & Maielli, 2021) and informal economies in sanctioned settings (Vaez-Barzani & Farashahi, 2020). Moreover, the study enriches the dynamic capabilities framework (Teece, 2023) by showing how sensing, seizing, and reconfiguring capabilities are embedded within transnational informal networks rather than internal organizational processes alone. However, these adaptive strategies are not without risks. Overreliance on informal channels exposes firms to fraud, contractual insecurity, and scalability limitations. Regional pivoting may offer short-term relief but risks deeper long-term economic isolation from high-value Western markets. Thus, a tension persists between short-term adaptation and long-term competitiveness. From a policy perspective, the study urges Iranian authorities to formalize and scale successful informal practices by developing alternative payment mechanisms, strengthening export credit insurance, reducing bureaucratic barriers, and supporting digital infrastructure. For scholars, it underscores the need to decouple internationalization theory from Western-centric, institution-rich assumptions and develop context-sensitive models for “peripheral” economies. In conclusion, this research reveals that even under the shadow of deglobalization and sanctions, Iranian businesses demonstrate remarkable agency. They do not merely endure isolation; they actively reconstruct pathways to global relevance through ingenuity, networks, and reimagined identities. In a world where globalization is no longer guaranteed, understanding how firms “internationalize in the shadows” is not just an academic exercise but a strategic imperative for businesses and policymakers alike, navigating the fragmented economic order of the 21st century.