Market Entry Strategy: What the FIFA World Cup 2026 Teaches Business Leaders

Over the last month, highly motivated competitors from all over the world arrived in North America to compete for arguably the most coveted sports prize of all, the FIFA World Cup.

It is not hard to see the metaphor between competing at the top level in a global sport and other types of organisation seeking to "win" by creating long-term growth and exploiting new global markets.

This last month, 48 hopeful nations from around the globe pre-qualified for the opportunity to compete in the United States, Canada and Mexico for the ultimate prize in team sport.

Two hundred and six teams entered the tournament. Forty-eight qualified for the finals. Only one will win.

Sport is structured >> business is not

Unlike in business, the ranking system of sport allows leadership to assess their rivals one at a time along a predefined and linear pathway. Strict rules are both agreed by the governing body and enforced.

Business, by contrast, has to deal constantly with a range of intense competition from all over the world, and that competition is dynamic. Rules can be, and are, changed frequently by government, at will.

For sport, and specifically the FIFA World Cup, the competitive landscape is laid out for all to see. It is simply structured, with named teams, named rivals, and timelines and dates of contested engagement all pre-agreed.

Business has no such luxury. Competitors can and do change. Acquisitions and mergers happen. New players can appear from unrelated market sectors. Competitors can enter a home market from geographies around the globe that have not been monitored closely. Surprises happen. New innovations appear. Rivals can quickly erode your position of dominance and your market share. Business models and value propositions can be eroded in a heartbeat.

One interesting insight is to compare and contrast the mixed fortunes of the primary sponsors and leading brands supporting the FIFA World Cup over the last 50 years. Which global brands have reduced in stature, or even disappeared from existence? Which brands have prospered, or even been created, since the beginning of the 21st century? In sport, the same exercise can be carried out with the leading teams of yesteryear, Brazil, Germany and others, recently humbled by emerging smaller countries.

Business leadership has to thrive on constant change

Leaders must not only assess threats but also explore new and emerging opportunities and decide how best to execute. They have to assess what intelligence they already have, as well as identify the inevitable gaps in their knowledge.

Questions arise. What size is the addressable market? Why did we miss that competitor move? Why are we not tracking the emerging rivals from the BRIC countries? How did we miss that valuable acquisition? Who won that important bid, and why?

Sport learns from its errors within an accepted process of deep and regular post-mortems. Top-level sport is recorded by the media for transparent, detailed analysis and insight. Business does not have such a luxury, but how often does business engage in a deep post-mortem with truly independent win-loss analysis and insight?

The FIFA World Cup may be the catalyst that provokes business leaders to review, or create, an international market expansion strategy. For business and industry:

• Entering new geographical markets is risky and expensive.

• Market expansion requires a special form of commercial due diligence.

• Assessment of the intensity of the competitive landscape is mission critical.

• Assessment of the comparative advantage of the various incumbent players is important.

Entering new markets can be a mission-critical growth strategy, yet it presents a complex, high-stakes decision for any organisation, irrespective of size.

The chosen approach determines not only the speed of entry and the potential for winning new clients and increased top-line growth. It is also important to assess the level of risk and the need for organisational support, as well as funding, in a sophisticated and complex market.

Companies seeking to enter new markets need to navigate the trade-off between their vision, their depth of experience, the need for control, the levels of investment and their depth of commitment. They also need to research the market and assess the likely intensity of the competitive environment.

Typically, organisations need to consider strategies that range from low-risk, low-control methods to high-risk, high-control investments.

Low complexity: exporting and licensing

For many firms, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, exporting is the most straightforward method.

Selling direct, or indirect, involves minimal changes to the product in order to adapt to local market conditions and requires negligible or low up-front investment. This option also provides an easy exit, making it a low-risk, low-complexity entry mode. The downside is that it offers limited control over marketing, branding and distribution.

There can be significant costs of sale with long, competitive sales cycles. The principal will incur risks and face higher associated costs such as travel, recruitment, talent management, training, taxes and tariffs.

Licensing and franchising represent a slightly more complex, yet relatively low-risk, step. Licensing allows a partner based within the target territory to use, licence or sell the product or intellectual property, such as technology or brand, in exchange for a margin or royalties. This avoids regulatory barriers but risks potential loss of brand control if the partner underperforms or subsequently becomes a competitor. Of course, the performance of the principal is critical too, in terms of product development, training and support. Franchising is similar but typically involves higher, ongoing control over operational standards.

Moderate complexity: joint ventures and strategic alliances

Joint ventures (JVs) involve partnering with a local entity to create a new, shared legal entity. This approach provides essential local market expertise, established relationships and distribution networks, with shared financial risk. It is particularly effective for navigating complex regulatory landscapes in new emerging markets, and also for sophisticated markets with established players already in place, where those players combine to create an intensely competitive landscape.

The risk, however, shifts to potential conflicts of management style, cultural differences, prejudice, unconscious bias, unequal involvement, or intellectual property leakage. Strategic alliances are less formal than JVs and, as they do not require creating a new entity, offer higher flexibility. This makes them a popular, lower-complexity alternative to a full, more formal merger of entity.

High complexity: foreign direct investment

The most complex and highest-risk option is foreign direct investment (FDI), typically through wholly owned subsidiaries or greenfield investments. A greenfield investment involves building new operations from the ground up, allowing maximum control over every facet of the business.

While this promises the highest profit potential and brand protection in the long term, it carries the highest financial risk, as all capital and operational burdens reside with the originating principal, that is, the parent company.

An alternative to greenfield when entering new geographical markets is acquisition, which allows for faster market entry and instant scale but involves high upfront costs and the complex challenge of understanding and embracing a variety of new demands, such as new employment laws within the new jurisdiction and the integration of different corporate cultures.

Risk assessment and strategic choice

The selection of an entry mode is never a one-size-fits-all decision. Commercial due diligence with proper risk assessment must weigh the political, economic and operational volatility of the target market against the firm's vision, internal appetite, capabilities and, most importantly, financial resources.

For instance, a volatile, high-growth market might warrant a joint venture to share risk, while a stable, mature market might justify the greater investment of creating a subsidiary.

Ultimately, the best strategy aligns with the firm's long-term vision and objectives. Capital availability is important, and tolerance for operational, legal and reputational risk must be considered.

Commercial due diligence is critical, as is having trusted business partners, accountants and lawyers, all with international and cross-border experience.

Successful firms often start with low-risk, low-control methods, progressively increasing their investment and control as they gain local market knowledge, create goodwill and build an ever-expanding client base.

Global sport compared to global business

Arguably, global sport is more straightforward than global business. Whichever team is successful this month in the FIFA World Cup, it will be a team operating with substantial back-office support, world-class insights, and truly aligned scenario-planning strategies combined with inspirational tactics. These tactics will be executed by leaders who are at the zenith of their fitness, ready to both adapt and overcome the challenges on the field of play in real time.

On Sunday 19 July 2026, 47 squads of players, along with their back-office staff and nearly 6 billion of the planet's population, will witness only one team hold the ultimate sports prize aloft. For business leadership, what lessons can be learned from this pinnacle of achievement?

For an informal, no-obligation discussion on how Fletcher's range of MI and CI services can support your global go-to-market ambitions with bespoke market insights, please connect with your local Fletcher office.