Frontiers in Business, Economics and Management ISSN: 2766-824X | Vol. 15, No. 1, 2024 187 Enterprise Internationalization and Enterprise Innovation Performance: The Regulating Effect of Equity Incentive Zijie Yu School of Management, Chongqing University of Technology, Chongqing, 400054, China Abstract: Against the backdrop of globalization in today's era, Chinese enterprises are experiencing a flourishing trend of internationalization. With the rise of the Chinese economy and the continuous advancement of reform and opening up, an increasing number of Chinese enterprises are actively integrating into the global market, seeking the resources needed for their own development on a global scale, enhancing innovation capabilities, and striving to improve their position and influence in the global value chain. This article takes 647 manufacturing enterprises as the research objects, subdivides the measurement of internationalization into depth and breadth, quantitatively explores the impact of the depth and breadth of enterprise internationalization on innovation performance, and investigates the moderating effect of equity incentives. The results show that: the depth of internationalization significantly promotes innovation performance of enterprises, and equity incentives positively moderate the relationship between them; the breadth of internationalization significantly promotes innovation performance of enterprises, and equity incentives positively moderate the relationship between them. Keywords: Internationalization depth; internationalization breadth; innovation performance; equity incentives. 1. Introduction In the context of globalization, the internationalization of Chinese enterprises shows a momentum of vigorous development. With the rise of China's economy and the continuous promotion of reform and opening up, more and more Chinese enterprises actively integrate into the global market, trying to find the resources needed for their own development on a global scale, strengthen their innovation capacity, and strive to enhance their position and influence in the global value chain. In 2022, China's OFDI flow exceeded US $160 billion, ranking second in the world and the top three in the world for 11 consecutive years. By the end of 2022, China's OFDI stock reached US $2.75 trillion, ranking the top three in the world for six consecutive years. Chinese enterprises have set up 47,000 overseas enterprises in 190 countries and regions. Thus it can be seen that China's outbound investment capacity is at the forefront of the world. In the context of economic globalization, Chinese enterprises actively enter the international market. Does it improve the innovation ability of enterprises? For Chinese enterprises participating in international markets, is the higher their participation, the better their innovation performance? At present, the research has analyzed the relationship between enterprise internationalization and enterprise innovation performance, but it has not reached a unified conclusion. Some scholars believe that promoting the internationalization strategy plays a role in promoting the innovation performance of enterprises. Mario et al. (2008) concluded from empirical research on enterprises that when the enterprise internationalization reaches a certain degree, it can penetrate into many overseas markets, successfully obtain more innovation output and improve business performance [1]. Filippetti et al. (2017) conducted empirical research on the country as an individual, and found that when the national absorption capacity of innovation resources is strong enough, internationalization promoted the improvement of national innovation performance through the efficient flow of innovation resources [2]. Based on Zhao Chuanwen (2020) and organizational learning theory, the data of listed companies in China's high-tech industry confirmed that the degree of internationalization has a significant positive impact on enterprise innovation performance [3]. Zhai Xiaorong et al. (2023) show that the new energy vehicle enterprises above the scale mainly focus on the expansion strategy of overseas subsidiaries, and improve their innovation performance by integrating the government or various market resources [4]. There are also some scholars believe that internationalization will inhibit effect on enterprise innovation performance, Yao pengpeng (2018) based on organizational learning theory of enterprise internationalization and innovation performance relationship, think enterprise internationalization will test enterprise absorption ability, bring challenges to enterprise innovation performance, and through empirical research verified the internationalization negative influence enterprise innovation performance conclusion [5]. Luo Xinyi (2021) proposed that the improvement of internationalization depth will lead to resource mismatch, and cause operational risks to hit the enterprise innovation ability of the [6]. Scholars have not reached a unified conclusion on the research of the relationship between two and others. Existing studies mostly analyze the adjustment factors between internationalization and innovation performance from the perspectives of external environment and enterprise nature , and few studies mention the regulating role of equity incentive on the relationship between the two on the road of enterprise internationalization [7][8][9]. China belongs to a developing country, and the manufacturing industry is an important factor to distinguish developing countries from developed countries. Focusing on the study of China's manufacturing industry can better explore their own internationalization path for Chinese enterprises. 188 2. Theoretical Analysis and Research Hypothesis 2.1. Depth of enterprise internationalization and enterprise innovation performance This paper subdivides the internationalization of enterprises into the depth and breadth of internationalization. The depth of internationalization refers to the intensity of enterprises' participation in international operation and their dependence on overseas markets. On the one hand, the internationalization depth of higher enterprise and overseas market higher degree of integration, the local cultural differences, market demand, competitive environment and human resources will have a deeper understanding, which enables them to get more complementary resources in different countries, still have the opportunity from relatively backward countries for cheaper raw materials and labor, reduce production costs, for product international cooperation research and development to provide more sufficient financial support [10]. Further internationalization can continuously expand the channels for enterprises to acquire overseas knowledge, provide enterprises with richer and more valuable knowledge resources, and create more opportunities for interaction and communication, which will help stimulate the innovation ability of enterprises and promote the improvement of innovation performance of [11]. On the other hand, enterprises with higher international depth can have access to more cutting-edge scientific and technological knowledge, and improve their innovation performance through technology transfer and knowledge sharing [12]. With the internationalization of enterprises, they have a wider range of learning opportunities and stronger innovation motivation, thus promoting the improvement of research and development efficiency, promoting the output of scientific and technological achievements, and improving the innovation performance [13]. Therefore, this paper proposes the hypothesis that: H1: The depth of enterprise internationalization can promote the innovation performance of enterprises 2.2. Breadth of enterprise internationalization and enterprise innovation performance Internationalization breadth is the size of the scope of international business. The larger the scope of participation, the more international market it will be involved in, and the more resources and learning opportunities it will be exposed. On the one hand, in the process of internationalization of enterprises, the increase of the breadth of internationalization not only expands the way for enterprises to obtain resources, but also injects the diversity and complementary resources into the enterprise. These resources include technology, talent, market information and so on. They realize the horizontal flow within the enterprise, and promote the exchange and complementary of resources between different regions and countries [14]. By setting up overseas subsidiaries, enterprises can cooperate with local suppliers, R & D institutions, and allocate R & D resources and carry out R & D layout globally, so as to further improve the innovation performance of enterprises [15]. On the other hand, internationalization breadth provides enterprises with learning opportunities across regional and cultural boundaries. Through communication with innovation subjects in different regions, enterprises can enrich their knowledge reserve and improve their ability of exploratory learning, so as to promote the improvement of innovation performance. Internationalization breadth increase will also stimulate enterprise internal innovation power, different countries market diversity and the difference of business environment will force enterprises to constantly adjust the products, services and even organization structure, to meet the needs of the local market, the challenging environment forced enterprise continuous innovation, constantly explore, improve the flexibility and adaptability of enterprise [16]. Therefore, this paper proposes the hypothesis that: H2: The breadth of enterprise internationalization promotes the innovation performance of enterprises 2.3. Adjustment effect of equity incentive Compared with local enterprises, international enterprises bear more agency costs, and the uncertainty brought by international operation is more prominent. Enterprises operating in different countries are affected by the economy, culture and policies of the host country, which increases the uncertainty of operation. To alleviate the principal-agent problem, shareholders usually take steps to provide management with incentives closely related to the long-term development of the company, such as stocks or options, to strengthen the management incentives and supervision of [17]. Through equity incentive, from the role of shareholders, realize the identity conversion, makes the managers and the interests of the owner of the bundled, so that managers will consider the future long-term development of the enterprise to make decisions, this practice helps to improve enterprise innovation ability and increase innovation output [18]. Senior managers tend to pay more attention to the short-term interest goals in the tenure cycle, and tend to choose in the investment areas with low risk and high certainty [19]. Equity incentive improves managers' willingness to take risks, and can share the high returns of innovation success. At the same time, considering personal interests and reputation demands, managers are more willing to provide more resources to innovative projects that can increase the competitive advantage of the company, and promote the performance level of technological innovation to improve [20]. Therefore, this paper proposes the hypothesis that: H3: Equity incentive has a positive regulating effect on the relationship between the enterprise internationalization depth and enterprise innovation performance H4: Equity incentive has a positive regulating effect on the relationship between enterprise internationalization breadth and enterprise innovation performance 3. Research Design 3.1. Sample Selection This paper mainly explores the influence of the internationalization degree on the innovation performance of enterprises. Manufacturing is usually an important part of a country's economy, especially for developing countries and emerging economies, manufacturing is often an important pillar of supporting the national economy, manufacturing is usually an important part of a national economy, China and the global industrial chain and supply chain is inseparable, in the internationalization strategy of Chinese enterprises is manufacturing, manufacturing is also an important field of technology innovation and competition [21]. At the same time, with the decline of China's demographic dividend, the 189 increase of labor costs, the cost of land and capital has also increased significantly, the domestic development of manufacturing enterprises is limited, and it is urgent for enterprises to go out [22]. Therefore, the manufacturing industry is selected as a sample to study the basic situation of the internationalization and innovation of Chinese enterprises. In this paper, the data of A-share listed companies from 2015 of Chinese manufacturing industry to 2022 are selected as observation samples, and the data are processed in the following way; (1) excluding enterprise samples without overseas business; (2) excluding listed companies with transaction status of ST and * ST; (3) excluding observation samples with missing data and abnormal observed values. The international data and financial data used in this paper are from the CSMAR database and Wind database, and the enterprise patent data are from the CNRDS database. In the end, this paper obtained 5,176 observations from 647 listed manufacturing companies. 3.2. Definition and measurement of variables (1) Dependent Variable: The number of patents is directly correlated with a company's level of technological innovation, serving as an indicator of its innovation capability. With increasing awareness of intellectual property rights, patent applications have become a crucial means for companies to safeguard their intellectual property. Moreover, considering that there is typically a time lag in patent grants, we adopt the approach of Peng Songlin (2017) and Li Xuesong (2022) by utilizing the number of patent applications to gauge a company's innovation capability, we logarithmically transform the number of patent applications and add one for calculation [23][24]. (2) Independent Variables:Concerning internationalization depth, we follow established research methodologies while taking into account data accessibility. We opt for the ratio of overseas business revenue to total operating revenue to assess this dimension [25][26]. An escalation in this ratio signifies a deepening level of internationalization, with a higher proportion of overseas business revenue indicating greater internationalization depth. Regarding internationalization breadth, we similarly rely on previous research methodologies and data availability. We employ the number of overseas subsidiaries to measure this dimension [27][28]. An increase in the value of this indicator denotes an expansion of internationalization, with a larger number of overseas subsidiaries signifying greater internationalization breadth. (3) Moderator Variable:With equity ownership, as stock prices ascend, managers also stand to gain higher returns. This mechanism can mitigate managerial myopia and incentivize long-term investments such as research and development (R&D) innovation. Consequently, we utilize the ratio of total executive shareholdings to total shares outstanding as a metric for the level of executive equity incentives [29]. (4) Control Variables:We incorporate company size, financial leverage, return on total assets, growth rate, and years since establishment as control variables [30][31]. The primary variables are delineated in Table 1. Table 1. Primary variable definitions Variable Type Variable Name Measurement Method Variable Symbol Measurement Method Dependent Variable Innovation Performance Patent Ln(Number of patents applied for in the current year + 1) Independent Variables Enterprise Internationalization Depth Doic1 Overseas business revenue/Total operating revenue Enterprise Internationalization Breadth Doic2 Ln(Number of overseas subsidiaries + 1) Moderator Variable Equity Incentives MSH Number of shares held by management/Total number of shares Control Variables Company Size Size Ln(Total assets) Financial Leverage Lev Total liabilities/Total assets Return on Total Assets ROA Net profit/Total assets at the end of the period Growth Growth (Current year's operating revenue - Previous year's operating revenue)/Previous year's operating revenue Years Since Establishment Age Ln(Current year - Year of establishment) 3.3. Model Specification In order to test the influence effect of enterprise internationalization on enterprise innovation performance, referring to the model design of Zhang Jie (2017) and Yu Yihua (2018) [32][33], the total regression model of this study is as follows: π‘ƒπ‘Žπ‘‘π‘’π‘›π‘‘ 𝛼 𝛼 π·π‘œπ‘–π‘1 𝛼 𝑆𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝛼 𝐿𝑒𝑣 𝛼 𝑅𝑂𝐴 𝛼 πΊπ‘Ÿπ‘œπ‘€π‘‘β„Ž 𝛼 𝐴𝑔𝑒 π‘¦π‘’π‘Žπ‘Ÿ 𝑖𝑛𝑑 πœ€ (1) π‘ƒπ‘Žπ‘‘π‘’π‘›π‘‘ 𝛼 𝛼 π·π‘œπ‘–π‘2 𝛼 𝑆𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝛼 𝐿𝑒𝑣 𝛼 𝑅𝑂𝐴 𝛼 πΊπ‘Ÿπ‘œπ‘€π‘‘β„Ž 𝛼 𝐴𝑔𝑒 π‘¦π‘’π‘Žπ‘Ÿ 𝑖𝑛𝑑 πœ€ (2) To examine the moderating effect of equity incentives on the relationship between enterprise internationalization and innovation performance, an interaction term is added to the regression model: 190 π‘ƒπ‘Žπ‘‘π‘’π‘›π‘‘ 𝛽 𝛽 π·π‘œπ‘–π‘1 𝛽 𝑀𝑆𝐻 𝛽 Doic 𝑀𝑆𝐻 𝛽 𝑆𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝛽 𝐿𝑒𝑣 𝛽 𝑅𝑂𝐴 𝛽 πΊπ‘Ÿπ‘œπ‘€π‘‘β„Ž 𝛽 𝐴𝑔𝑒 π‘¦π‘’π‘Žπ‘Ÿ 𝑖𝑛𝑑 πœ€ (3) π‘ƒπ‘Žπ‘‘π‘’π‘›π‘‘ 𝛽 𝛽 π·π‘œπ‘–π‘2 𝛽 𝑀𝑆𝐻 𝛽 Doic 𝑀𝑆𝐻 𝛽 𝑆𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝛽 𝐿𝑒𝑣 𝛽 𝑅𝑂𝐴 𝛽 πΊπ‘Ÿπ‘œπ‘€π‘‘β„Ž 𝛽 𝐴𝑔𝑒 π‘¦π‘’π‘Žπ‘Ÿ 𝑖𝑛𝑑 πœ€ (4) Patent represent the innovation performance of company i in year t, Doic1 represents the internationalization depth of company i in year t, Doic2 represents the internationalization breadth of company i in year t, MSH represents the equity incentives of company i in year t, Doic1 MSH is the interaction term between internationalization depth and equity incentives of company i in year t, used to measure the moderating effect, Doic2 MSH is the interaction term between internationalization breadth and equity incentives of company i in year t, used to measure the moderating effect, Size is company size, Lev is financial leverage, ROA is return on total assets, Growth is growth, Age is years since establishment, year and ind respectively represent year and industry fixed effects, Ξ΅ is the error term. To ensure the accuracy of the regression results, decentralization is performed before constructing the interaction terms between enterprise internationalization and equity incentives, to avoid potential multicollinearity. 4. Empirical Results and Analysis 4.1. Descriptive analysis First, descriptive statistics were made on the main variables of the sample of 647 listed manufacturing companies involved in the institute. Descriptive statistics of this paper include the total sample, mean, median, standard deviation, maximum and minimum. To avoid the effect of extreme values on the empirical results, the continuous variables involved were treated at 1% Winsorize. Table 2 is the descriptive statistical results, in which the mean value of the innovation performance of the explained variable enterprise Patent is 3.533, the minimum value is 0, the maximum value is 6.518, and the standard deviation is 1.243, indicating that the innovation performance of the sample enterprises is quite different, and the sample enterprises have some diversity. The average value of the enterprise internationalization depth of Doic 1 is 0.196, the minimum value is 0.002, and the maximum value is 0.763, indicating that the proportion of overseas income of the sample enterprises is different, and the depth of internationalization is different. Interpretive variable internationalization breadth Doic 2 average of 0.74, the median of 0.693, the minimum of 0, the maximum of 3.367, the standard deviation of 0.856, that the sample enterprise overseas subsidiaries of large difference, from the mean and median, about 50% of enterprises overseas only a subsidiary, that the country of manufacturing enterprise internationalization breadth is in the primary stage. The average value of the adjustment variable equity incentive MSH is 0.132, the minimum value is 0, the maximum value is 0.634, and the standard deviation is 0.172, indicating that the total shareholding ratio of senior executives of the sample enterprises is not high, and the equity incentive level of different enterprises varies greatly. In addition to the main variables mentioned above, the mean ROGA ROA in the control variables in the selected sample was 0.04, which varied between-0.187 and 0.189, indicating a large difference in yield among enterprises. The mean value of growth Growth was 0.156, varying between-0.398 and 1.571, showing significant variability. The mean value of enterprise size Size is 22.33, which varies between 20.21 and 25.39, indicating that there are some differences between enterprise sizes. The mean value of financial leverage Lev is 0.400, varying between 0.069 and 0.77, indicating that there are still differences in the asset-liability ratio between enterprises. The mean enterprise age of Age was 2.991, varying between 2.197 and 3.526, indicating some differences in the year of enterprise establishment. Considering the above, it shows that the sample companies selected in this survey are differentiated and diversified, which can reflect the operating conditions of Chinese manufacturing companies. Table 2. Descriptive statistics Variables N Mean Median Std. Dev Minimum Maximum Patent 5176 3.533 3.638 1.243 0 6.518 Doic1 5176 0.196 0.140 0.181 0.002 0.763 Doic2 5176 0.740 0.693 0.856 0 3.367 MSH 5176 0.132 0.028 0.172 0 0.634 ROA 5176 0.040 0.038 0.056 -0.187 0.189 Growth 5176 0.156 0.114 0.292 -0.398 1.571 Size 5176 22.33 22.22 1.048 20.21 25.39 Lev 5176 0.400 0.399 0.168 0.069 0.770 Age 5176 2.991 2.996 0.264 2.197 3.526 4.2. Correlation analysis In Table 3, which reports the correlation coefficient among the variables in this study, we found that the coefficient between internationalization depth and innovation performance is 0.118 and significantly positive correlation at 1%; the correlation coefficient between internationalization breadth and innovation performance is 0.431 and significantly positive correlation at 1%, preliminarily indicating that enterprise internationalization improves enterprise innovation performance. The correlation coefficient between return on total assets and innovation performance was 0.043 and 191 significantly positive at 1%; growth and innovation performance was 0.067 and 1%; enterprise size and innovation performance was 0.427 and 1%; financial leverage and innovation performance was 0.244 and at 1%. Therefore, the selection of control variables in this paper is more reasonable. Moreover, the correlation coefficient between the variables is not greater than 0.5, and the maximum VIF value is 1.83, indicating that there is no multicollinearity effect. Table 3. Correlation analysis Patent Doic1 Doic2 MSH Size Lev ROA Growth Age Patent 1 Doic1 0.118*** 1 Doic2 0.431*** 0.331*** 1 MSH 0.005 0.120*** 0.011 1 ROA 0.043*** 0.019 0.012 0.096*** 1 Growth 0.067*** 0.026* 0.053*** 0.086*** 0.304*** 1 Size 0.427*** -0.001 0.463*** -0.265*** 0.098*** 0.081*** 1 Lev 0.244*** 0.046*** 0.277*** -0.213*** -0.365*** 0.034** 0.455*** 1 Age -0.0110 -0.048*** 0.025* -0.239*** -0.033** -0.108*** 0.194*** 0.099*** 1 4.3. Multiple regression analysis We further conducted an empirical test on the relationship between enterprise internationalization and enterprise innovation performance and the adjustment effect of equity incentive. The empirical results are shown in Table 4: Table 4. The regression results (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Patent Patent Patent Patent Patent Doic1 0.417*** 0.324*** (0.080) (0.081) Doic2 0.264*** 0.257*** (0.019) (0.019) MSH 0.470*** 0.418*** (0.088) (0.086) Doic1Γ—MSH 1.294*** (0.415) Doic2Γ—MSH 0.577*** (0.094) ROA 1.182*** 1.091*** 1.150*** 0.970*** 1.065*** (0.297) (0.297) (0.292) (0.296) (0.291) Growth -0.064 -0.063 -0.063 -0.080 -0.083 (0.052) (0.052) (0.051) (0.052) (0.051) Size 0.610*** 0.608*** 0.501*** 0.621*** 0.520*** (0.017) (0.017) (0.018) (0.017) (0.018) Lev 0.193* 0.161 0.132 0.210* 0.143 (0.108) (0.108) (0.106) (0.108) (0.106) Age -0.241*** -0.230*** -0.182*** -0.188*** -0.156*** (0.060) (0.060) (0.060) (0.061) (0.060) Constant -10.256*** -10.271*** -8.152*** -10.732*** -8.666*** (0.396) (0.395) (0.416) (0.405) (0.428) Year Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Ind Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes N 5176 5176 5176 5176 5176 ADJ-R2 0.374 0.377 0.397 0.382 0.404 Model (1) Only the control variables of this study are added, showing that most of the control variables selected in this paper are significantly related to the explained variables, and have a certain control effect on the model. Model (2) The depth of internationalization is added on the basis of model (1). The regression results show that the adjusted R2 of the model is increased from 0.374 to 0.377, indicating that the model has stronger explanatory power after adding the depth of internationalization. The correlation coefficient between the depth of enterprise internationalization and enterprise innovation performance is 0.417, which is significant at the level of 1%, indicating that the improvement of enterprise internationalization depth will significantly promote the improvement of enterprise innovation performance, which is in line with the H1 proposed in this paper. Model (3) adds the internationalization breadth of explanatory variables on the basis of model (1). The regression results show that the adjusted R2 of the model has increased from 0.374 to 0.397, indicating that the model has stronger explanatory power after adding the internationalization breadth. The correlation coefficient of enterprise internationalization breadth and enterprise innovation performance is 0.264, and it is significant at the level of 1% respectively, indicating that the improvement of enterprise internationalization breadth will significantly 192 promote the improvement of enterprise innovation performance, which is in line with the H2 proposed in this paper. In the model (4), on the basis of the model (2), the interaction term of the adjustment variable equity incentive and equity incentive and enterprise internationalization depth is added. After the adjustment of the model, the R2 is increased from 0.377 to 0.382, indicating that the model is stronger. From the perspective of the regression results, the regression coefficient of the interaction between equity incentive and the depth of enterprise internationalization is 1.150, which is significant at the level of 1%, indicating that equity incentive enhances the relationship between the depth of enterprise internationalization and enterprise innovation performance, and equity incentive is a positive adjustment between the two, which is in line with the H3 proposed in this paper. Model (5) On the basis of model (3), the interaction term of adjusting variable equity incentive and equity incentive and the breadth of enterprise internationalization was added. The adjusted R2 of the model increased from 0.397 to 0.404, indicating that the model was stronger. From the perspective of the regression results, the regression coefficient of the interaction between equity incentive and the breadth of enterprise internationalization is 0.577, and it is significant at the level of 1%, indicating that equity incentive enhances the relationship between the breadth of enterprise internationalization and enterprise innovation performance, and equity incentive is a positive adjustment between the two, which is in line with the H4 proposed in this paper. 4.4. Robustness test In order to ensure the robustness of the above regression analysis, we further use the patents obtained by the enterprise in the current year as the surrogate variable for the explained variables. From the regression results, the results after replacing the explanatory variables were basically consistent with those of the benchmark regression, and the results of the original model were verified, indicating that the results of this study are robust. 5. Research Conclusions and Implications This paper studies China's listed manufacturing enterprises from 2015 to 2022, and verifies the positive correlation between the depth and breadth of internationalization and enterprise innovation performance, and the adjustment relationship between equity incentive. The main conclusions are: the depth of internationalization will significantly promote the innovation performance, equity incentive will positively regulate the relationship between the two; internationalization breadth will significantly promote the innovation performance, and equity incentive will positively regulate the relationship between the two. Enterprises should unswervingly implement the internationalization strategy and seize the innovation resources of overseas markets to enhance their innovation ability. In the face of the limited domestic market, enterprises should put their long-term goals, dare to acquire overseas high-quality technology and knowledge through internationalization, strengthen industry-university-research cooperation, deepen the internationalization strategy, so as to ensure the steady improvement of the innovation ability of Chinese enterprises. At the same time, we should also strengthen the protection of intellectual property rights, and establish a sound intellectual property management system, to ensure that our own innovation achievements are not subject to infringement and theft. Enterprises to their own present situation and future planning and situation has a clear judgment, reasonable planning enterprise internationalization strategy, fully understand the advantages and disadvantages of enterprise, the internationalization strategy in combination with their own conditions, to optimize overseas resources reasonable screening, in the further internationalization strategy, can consider adjusting the internationalization layout, expanding enterprise overseas business scope. Equity incentive in regulating the relationship between enterprise internationalization and innovation performance play a good effect, so enterprises should actively implement equity incentive, appropriate promotion executives holdings, makes the management and enterprise interests integration, promote the internationalization of enterprise innovation performance, boost enterprise innovation performance. Acknowledgment Supported by the Graduate Innovation Project of Chongqing University of Technology (gzlcx20233436). References [1] Mario I. Kafouros, Peter J. Buckley, et al. The role of internationalization in explaining innovation performance[J]. Technovation, 2008, 28(1–2): 63-74. [2] Filippetti A, Frenz M, Ietto-gillies G. The Impact of Internationalization on Innovation at Countriesβ€² Level: the Role of Ab-sorptive Capacity[J]. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2017, 41(2): 413-439. [3] Zhao Chuanwen, Zhu Chaofan, Song Haze. Research on the relationship between enterprise internationalization degree and innovation performance β€”β€” Empirical test based on the panel data of multinational high-tech enterprises [J]. Price Theory and Practice, 2020 (01): 147-150. [4] Zhai Xiaorong, Liu Yun. Internationalization strategy, resource base and innovation performance of new energy vehicle enterprises β€”β€” qualitative comparative analysis based on fuzzy set [J]. China Science and Technology Forum, 2023, (10): 95-104. [5] Yao Pengpeng. Research on the influence of start-up internationalization on innovation performance [D]. Zhejiang University. 2018. [6] Luo Xinyi. Research on the influence of enterprise internationalization degree on innovation performance [D]. Zhejiang University, 2021. [7] Cao Xin, Liu Dege. The dynamic relationship between enterprise internationalization and innovation performance and the regulation effect of the industry [J]. Reference for economic research, 2016 (70): 64-67. [8] Xiao Peng, Wen Lei. The regulatory effect of market environment on the relationship between enterprise internationalization and innovation performance [J]. Journal of Heihe College, 2020,11 (01): 70-74. [9] Wang Xiaoyan, Yu Feng, Zhong Changbiao. The impact of R & D internationalization on the innovation performance of Chinese enterprises β€”β€” is based on the perspective of "political correlation" [J]. Research on the World Economy, 2017 (03): 78-86 + 135. 193 [10] Masaaki K, Srini S, Preet S A. Multinationality and Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of RD and Marketing Capabilities[J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 2002, 33(1): 220-245. [11] Tinguely X. Sectoral Distribution of Inventive Activity and Specialization Patternsβ€” Towards an Identification of Switzerland’s Main Inventive Clusters[J]. The New Geography of Innovation,2013, (8), 181-207. [12] Ernst H. Patent applications and subsequent changes of performance: evidence from time-series cross-section analyses on the firm level[J]. Research Policy, 2001, 30(1): 143-157. [13] Tang Yuying, research on the influence of enterprise internationalization on Innovation performance [D]. Ningbo University, 2021. [14] Chen Yantai, Li Jiajia, Fan Yancheng. The internationalization diversity and innovation performance of Chinese enterprises β€” β€” the adjustment effect of the host country system and the state-owned equity [J]. Scientific and technological Progress and Countermeasures, 2019,36 (07): 91-97. [15] Makino S, Delios A. Local Knowledge Transfer and Performance: Implications for Alliance Formation in Asia[J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 1996, 27(5): 905-927. [16] Sha Wenbing. OFDI, reverse technology spillover and domestic innovation capability β€”β€” Empirical study based on inter-provincial panel data in China [J]. Research on the World Economy, 2012, (03): 69-74 + 89. [17] Manso G.Motivating Innovation[]J. The Journal of Finance, 2011,(66): 1823-1860. [18] Zahra S A, Neubaum D O, Huse M. Entrepreneurship in Medium-Size Companies, Exploring the Effects of Ownership and Governance Systems[J]. Journal of Management. 2000, 26(5): 947-970. [19] Huang Yuhong, Huang Lin. Financial knowledge and innovation awareness and innovation vitality of small and micro enterprises β€”β€” Empirical research based on China Small and Micro Enterprises Survey (CMES) [J]. Financial Research, 2019, (04): 149-167. [20] Li Xiaorong, Zhang Ruijun. Equity incentive affects risk bearing: is the agency cost or risk aversion?[J]. Accounting Research, 2014, (01): 57-63 + 95. [21] Zhu Gaofeng, Wang Di. Let innovation truly drive economic development [J]. Research in Higher Engineering Education, 2017, (02): 1-5. [22] Zhu Gaofeng, Wang Di. Analysis and prospect of the Current development situation of China's manufacturing industry: Based on the evaluation index system of manufacturing power [J]. Journal of Management Engineering, 2017,31 (04): 1-7. [23] Peng Songlin, Zhou Chao. Can enterprise internationalization enhance enterprise innovation ability?β€”β€” Based on the panel data test of Chinese listed companies [J]. Science and Technology Management Research, 2017,37 (14): 6-13. [24] Li Xuesong, Dang Lin, Zhao Chenyu. Digital transformation, integration into global innovation networks, and innovation performance [J]. Industrial Economy of China, 2022, (10): 43- 61 [25] Bai Yun, Liu Ziwei. Implement the spirit of the 19th National Congress of the Party and accelerate the construction of an innovative country β€”β€” The role of enterprise internationalization on the innovation performance of enterprises [J]. Business Research, 2018 (01): 10-18. [26] Yang Lili, Sheng Bin, Zhao Jin. International dynamic ability, international expansion strategy and enterprise performance: based on the experience of manufacturing enterprises in Jiangsu province [J]. International Business (Journal of the University of International Business and Economic Affairs), 2015 (03): 151-160. [27] Hitt M A, Hoskisson R E, Kim H. international diversification: effects on innovation and firm performance in product- diversified firms. The Academy of Management Journal, 1997, 40(4). [28] Li Dongyang, Zheng Lei, Yuan Xiuxiu. The influence of internationalization degree on enterprise innovation ability β€” β€” Based on the empirical test of listed Chinese manufacturing companies [J]. Research on Financial Issues, 2019, (04): 122- 128. [29] Li Yang, Huang Guoliang. Senior executive equity incentive, major shareholder control and stock liquidity [J]. Accounting Monthly, 2016 (23): 118-121. [30] Filippetti A, Frenz M, Ietto-gillies G. The Impact of Internationalization on Innovation at Countriesβ€² Level: the Role of Ab-sorptive Capacity[J]. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2017, 41(2): 413-439. [31] Wang Jingyu, Wang Yuanyue. Research on the influence of internationalization behavior on enterprise innovation performance: evidence from China's listed manufacturing industry companies [J]. Research on Technical Economics and Management, 2018 (4): 61-66. [32] Zhang Jie, Zheng Wenping, a new husband. China's banking deregulation, structural competition and corporate innovation [J]. Industrial Economy of China, 2017, (10): 118-136. [33] Yu Yihua, Zhao Qifeng, Ju Xiaosheng. Inventor executives and corporate innovation [J]. Industrial Economy of China, 2018, (03): 136-154.