Two Faces of Early Corporate Venture Capital Funding: Promoting Innovation and Inhibiting IPOs

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2017.0032

References

  • Aggarwal VA, Hsu DH (2014) Entrepreneurial exits and innovation. Management Sci. 60(4):867–887.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Aghion P, Tirole J (1994) The management of innovation. Quart. J. Econom. 109(4):1185–1209.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Ahuja G (2000) Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(3):425–455.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Alvarez-Garrido E, Dushnitsky G (2016) Are entrepreneurial venture’s innovation rates sensitive to investor complementary assets? Comparing biotech ventures backed by corporate and independent VCs. Strategic Management J. 37(5):819–834.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Baron RA, Ensley MD (2006) Opportunity recognition as the detection of meaningful patterns: Evidence from comparisons of novice and experienced entrepreneurs. Management Sci. 52(9):1331–1344.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Baum JAC, Silverman BS (2004) Picking winners or building them? Alliance, intellectual, and human capital as selection criteria in venture financing and performance of biotech startups. J. Bus. Venturing 19(3):411–436.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Beckman CM (2006) The influence of founding team prior company affiliations on firm behavior. Acad. Management J. 49(4):741–758.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Beckman CM, Burton MD (2008) Founding the future: Path dependence in the evolution of top management teams from founding to IPO. Organ. Sci. 19(1):3–24.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Benson D, Ziedonis RH (2009) Corporate venture capital as a window on new technologies: Implications for the performance of corporate investors when acquiring startups. Organ. Sci. 20(2):329–351.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Bernstein S (2015) Does going public affect innovation? J. Finance 70(4):1365–1403.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Boeker W (1989) The development and institutionalization of subunit power in organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 34(3):388–410.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Brüderl J, Preisendörfer P, Ziegler R (1992) Survival chances of newly founded business organizations. Amer. Soc. Rev. 57(2):227–242.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Cameron AC, Trivedi PK (2009) Microeconometrics Using Stata (Stata Press, College Station, TX).Google Scholar
  • CB Insight (2016) The 2016 global CVC report. Accessed April 25, 2017, https://www.cbinsights.com/research-corporate-venture-capital-report-2016.Google Scholar
  • Chemmanur TJ, Loutskina E, Tian X (2014) Corporate venture capital, value creation, and innovation. Rev. Financial Stud. 27(8):2434–2473.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Chesbrough HW (2002). Making sense of corporate venture capital. Harvard Bus. Rev. 80(3):90–99.Google Scholar
  • Cohen WM, Nelson RR, Walsh JP (2000) Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (Or Not) (National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA).CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Cyert RM, March JG (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm (Wiley-Blackwell, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
  • Dobrev SD, Gotsopoulos A (2010) Legitimacy vacuum, structural imprinting, and the first mover disadvantage. Acad. Management J. 53(5):1153–1174.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Dushnitsky G (2006) Corporate venture capital: Past evidence and future directions. Basu A, Casson M, Wadeson N, Yeung B, eds. Oxford Handbook of Entrepreneurship (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 387–431.Google Scholar
  • Dushnitsky G, Lenox M (2005a) When do firms undertake R&D by investing in new ventures? Strategic Management J. 26(10):947–965.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Dushnitsky G, Lenox MJ (2005b) When do incumbents learn from entrepreneurial ventures?: Corporate venture capital and investing firm innovation rates. Res. Policy 34(5):615–639.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Dushnitsky G, Lenox MJ (2006) When does corporate venture capital investment create firm value? J. Bus. Venturing 21(6):753–772.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Dushnitsky G, Shaver M (2009) Limitations to interorganizational knowledge acquisition: The paradox of corporate venture capital. Strategic Management J. 30(10):1045–1064.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fine JP, Gray RJ (1999) A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 94(446):496–509.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fleming L (2001) Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Sci. 47(1):117–132.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Gaba V, Meyer AD (2008) Crossing the organizational species barrier: How venture capital practices infiltrated the information technology sector. Acad. Management J. 51(5):976–998.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gans JS, Stern S (2003) The product market and the market for “ideas”: Commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs. Res. Policy 32(2):333–350.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Geroski PA, Mata J, Portugal P (2010) Founding conditions and the survival of new firms. Strategic Management J. 31(5):510–529.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gersick CJG (1991) Revolutionary change theories: A multilevel exploration of the punctuated equilibrium paradigm. Acad. Management Rev. 16(1):10–36.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gompers PA, Lerner J (2004) The Venture Capital Cycle (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
  • Graebner M, Eisenhardt KM (2004) The seller’s side of the story: Acquisition as courtship and governance as syndicate in entrepreneurial firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 49(3):366–403.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Greene WH (2003) Econometric Analysis (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ).Google Scholar
  • Grossman SJ, Hart OD (1986) The costs and benefits of ownership: A theory of vertical and lateral integration. J. Pol. Econom. 94(4):691–719.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Guo B, Lou Y, Perez-Castrillo D (2015) Investment, duration, and exit strategies for corporate and independent venture capital-backed startups. J. Econom. Management Strategy 24(2):415–455.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hall BH, Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M (2001) The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools (National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA).CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hart O, Moore J (1990) Property rights and the nature of the firm. J. Political Econom. 98(6):1119–1158.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hsu DH (2006) Venture capitalists and cooperative start-up commercialization strategy. Management Sci. 52(2):204–219.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Hyytinen A, Pajarinen M, Rouvinen P (2015) Does innovativeness reduce startup survival rates? J. Bus. Venturing 30(4):564–581.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M (2002) Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kaplan SN, Strömberg P (2003) Financial contracting theory meets the real world: An empirical analysis of venture capital contracts. Rev. Econom. Stud. 70(2):281–315.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Katila R, Rosenberger JD, Eisenhardt KM (2008) Swimming with sharks: Technology ventures, defense mechanisms and corporate relationships. Admin. Sci. Quart. 53(2):295–332.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • King G, Tomz M, Wittenberg J (2000) Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. Amer. J. Political Sci. 44(2):347–361.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kortum S, Lerner J (2000) Assessing the contribution of venture capital to innovation. RAND J. Econom. 31(4):674–692.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Lerner J, Merges RP (1998) The control of technology alliances: An empirical analysis of the biotechnology industry. J. Indust. Econom. 46(2):125–156.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Lerner J, Stern S (2012) The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity Revisited (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Levinthal D, Myatt J (1994) Co-evolution of capabilities and industry: The evolution of mutual fund processing. Strategic Management J. 15(S1):45–62.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Maula MVJ, Keil T, Zahra SA (2013) Top management’s attention to discontinuous technological change: Corporate venture capital as an alert mechanism. Organ. Sci. 24(3):926–947.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • McEvily B, Jaffee J, Tortoriello M (2012) Not all bridging ties are equal: Network imprinting and firm growth in the Nashville legal industry, 1933–1978. Organ. Sci. 23(2):547–563.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Nelson RR (1962) The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
  • Pahnke EC, Katila R, Eisenhardt KM (2015a) Who takes you to the dance? How partners’ institutional logics influence innovation in young firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 60(4):596–633.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Pahnke EC, McDonald R, Wang D, Hallen B (2015b) Exposed: Venture capital, competitor ties, and entrepreneurial innovation. Acad. Management J. 58(5):1334–1360.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Park HD, Steensma HK (2012) When does corporate venture capital add value for new ventures? Strategic Management J. 33(1):1–22.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Park HD, Steensma HK (2013) The selection and nurturing effects of corporate investors on new venture innovativeness. Strategic Entrepreneurship J. 7(4):311–330.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Pennings JM, Lee K, Van Witteloostuijn A (1998) Human capital, social capital, and firm dissolution. Acad. Management J. 41(4):425–440.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Schumpeter JA (1934) The Theory of Economic Development (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
  • Shane S, Stuart T (2002) Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Sci. 48(1):154–170.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Simsek Z, Fox BC, Heavey C (2015) “What’s past is prologue”: A framework, review, and future directions for organizational research on imprinting. J. Management 41(1):288–317.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Spulber DF (2011) How entrepreneurs affect the rate and direction of inventive activity. Lerner J, Stern S, eds. The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity Revisited (University of Chicago Press, Chicago), 277–315.Google Scholar
  • Stinchcombe F (1965) Social structure and organizations. March J, ed. Handbook of Organizations (Rand McNally, Chicago), 142–193.Google Scholar
  • Stuart TE, Hoang H, Hybels RC (1999) Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2):315–349.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Swaminathan A (1996) Environmental conditions at founding and organizational mortality: A trial-by-fire model. Acad. Management J. 39(5):1350–1377.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Teece DJ (1986) Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res. Policy 15(6):285–305.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Terza JV (1998) Estimating count data models with endogenous switching: Sample selection and endogenous treatment effects. J. Econometrics 84(1):129–154.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Tong TW, Li Y (2011) Real options and investment mode: Evidence from corporate venture capital and acquisition. Organ. Sci. 22(3):659–674.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Trajtenberg M (1990) A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. Rand J. Econom. 21(1):172–187.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Wadhwa A, Kotha S (2006) Knowledge creation though external venturing: Evidence from the telecommunications equipment manufacturing industry. Acad. Management J. 49(4):819–835.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Waguespack DM, Fleming L (2009) Scanning the commons? Evidence on the benefits to startups participating in open standards development. Management Sci. 55(2):210–223.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Winston-Smith SW, Shah SK (2013) Do innovative users generate more useful insights? An analysis of corporate venture capital investments in the medical device industry. Strategic Entrepreneurship J. 7(2):151–167.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Winters TE, Murfin DE (1988) Venture capital investing for corporate development objectives. J. Bus. Venturing 3(3):207–222.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Wooldridge JM (2002) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
  • Zelner BA (2009) Using simulation to interpret results from logit, probit, and other nonlinear models. Strategic Management J. 30(12):1335–1348.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.