Organization and Financing of Innovation, and the Choice between Corporate and Independent Venture Capital

2009 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 1291-1321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Fulghieri ◽  
Merih Sevilir
Keyword(s):  
Venture Capital ◽  
Strategic Alliances ◽  
Internal Resources ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Corporate Venture ◽  
External Organization ◽  
Rival Firms ◽  
Established Firms ◽  
Start Ups ◽  
The Impact

AbstractThis paper examines the impact of competition on the optimal organization and financing structures in innovation-intensive industries. We show that as an optimal response to competition, firms may choose external organization structures established in collaboration with specialized start-ups where they provide start-up financing from their own resources. As the intensity of the competition to innovate increases, firms move from internal to external organization of projects to increase the speed of product innovation and to obtain a competitive advantage with respect to rival firms in their industry. We also show that as the level of competition increases, firms provide a higher level of financing for externally organized projects in the form of corporate venture capital (CVC). Our results help explain the emergence of organization and financing arrangements such as CVC and strategic alliances, where large established firms organize their projects in collaboration with external specialized firms and provide financing for externally organized projects from their own internal resources.

scholarly journals Collaborative production networks among unequal actors

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Manuel Muñoz-Herrera ◽  
Jacob Dijkstra ◽  
Andreas Flache ◽  
Rafael Wittek
Keyword(s):  
Network Formation ◽  
Increasing Returns ◽  
Production Networks ◽  
Resource Heterogeneity ◽  
Dominant Group ◽  
Collaborative Project ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Established Firms ◽  
Start Ups ◽  
The Impact

Abstract We develop a model of strategic network formation of collaborations to analyze the consequences of an understudied but consequential form of heterogeneity: differences between actors in the form of their production functions. We also address how this interacts with resource heterogeneity, as a way to measure the impact actors have as potential partners on a collaborative project. Some actors (e.g., start-up firms) may exhibit increasing returns to their investment into collaboration projects, while others (e.g., established firms) may face decreasing returns. Our model provides insights into how actor heterogeneity can help explain well-observed collaboration patterns. We show that if there is a direct relation between increasing returns and resources, start-ups exclude mature firms and networks become segregated by types of production function, portraying dominant group architectures. On the other hand, if there is an inverse relation between increasing returns and resources, networks portray core-periphery architectures, where the mature firms form a core and start-ups with low-resources link to them.

scholarly journals Corporate venture capital: global trends and evaluation of russia’s prospects

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 114-128
Author(s):  
О. A. Yeremchenko
Keyword(s):  
Venture Capital ◽  
Mobile Communications ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Corporate Venture Capital ◽  
Global Trends ◽  
Second Stage ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Corporate Venture ◽  
Total Investment ◽  
Start Ups

The article analyzes the global trends of corporate venture financing (CFE) as a whole and for individual sectors of the economy. It is shown that the industries in which KFW is most actively and dynamically used are the Internet, mobile communications and healthcare. The maximum attention of corporate venture funds is attracted by start-ups in the early stages of raising capital, more than half of all venture capital deals are made at the Seed / Angel (seed stage) and Early Stage stages (the second stage of attracting start-up capital). The most common exit from venture capital deals during 2014–2018. For most industries, the redemption share of the FAC is a management startup (Management Buyout). It was concluded that Russia is poorly included in the use of corporate venture capital as a tool for building technological capacity: the country’s share in the number of corporate venture capital transactions in 2018 is 1.9% of the global total, and the total investment of Russian enterprises estimated at only 0.45% of the global total. It was suggested that it would be expedient to increase the activity of Russian corporations in the field of creating and using the capabilities of the FSC.

A Start-Up’s R&D Stages and the Evolution of Financing Sources: Evidence from the Biotechnology Industry

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyunsung D Kang
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Venture Capital ◽  
Biotechnology Industry ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Corporate Venture Capital ◽  
Entrepreneurial Finance ◽  
Life Cycle Theory ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Corporate Venture ◽  
Start Ups

AbstractThe co-existence of angel, independent venture capital (IVC), and corporate venture capital (CVC) in the entrepreneurial finance market raises a natural question of why a start-up finances its projects from one source over another. This question becomes more complicated to address because a start-up grows or declines dynamically. Using a life cycle theory of entrepreneurial finance, which suggests that a start-up uses several financing sources as it reaches certain thresholds in its life cycle accordingly, I explore this selection issue with my dataset on 113 biopharmaceutical start-ups. I find that these start-ups tend to finance their projects mostly from solely IVCs or CVCs rather than angels and syndicated investors combining IVCs and CVCs when they have more preclinical and phase I products in their R&D pipelines; and from CVCs or syndicated investors rather than angels and IVCs when they do more phase II and phase III products.

scholarly journals Measuring the Spillovers of Venture Capital

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-48
Author(s):  
Monika Schnitzer ◽  
Martin Watzinger
Keyword(s):  
Venture Capital ◽  
Capital Investment ◽  
Private Equity ◽  
Knowledge Spillovers ◽  
Fund Raising ◽  
Tax Credits ◽  
Venture Capital Investment ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Established Firms ◽  
Start Ups

This paper shows that venture capital investment in start-ups increases innovation of established companies in technologically related fields due to knowledge spillovers. To address endogeneity issues, we instrument R&D expenditures of established companies with statelevel R&D tax credits (Bloom, Schankerman, and Van Reenen, 2013), and venture capital investment with past fund-raising of private equity buy-out funds (Nanda and Rhodes-Kropf, 2013). Exploring the mechanism, we show that the patents of VC-financed start-ups are on average of higher quality, more novel and less protected by intellectual property rights than those of established firms, leading to significantly larger spillovers. This knowledge transfer between companies is enhanced by mobile start-up inventors.

Student entrepreneurship ecosystems at Australian higher education institutions

2022 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Maritz ◽  
Quan Nguyen ◽  
Sergey Ivanov
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Higher Education Institutions ◽  
Entrepreneurship Education ◽  
University Student ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Student Entrepreneurship ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Entrepreneurship Ecosystems ◽  
Start Ups ◽  
The Impact

PurposeDespite the significance, university student start-ups and student entrepreneurship ecosystems (SEEs) have been subject to little research. This study aims to apply a qualitative emergent enquiry approach to explore best practice SEEs in Australia, complimented by narratives from leading scholars in higher education institutions with the aim of delineating the integrative components of SEEs.Design/methodology/approachAdopting the entrepreneurial ecosystem framework and aligned to the social cognitive theory, this paper explores the components and dynamics of SEEs, contributing to an understanding of how such components can better support the growth, sustainability and success of student start-ups. The authors extend entrepreneurship research on social construction using narrative research.FindingsThe findings provide guidelines for researchers, entrepreneurship scholars and educators, entrepreneurship students, policymakers and practitioners to enhance the impact and success of university student start-ups by adopting a student ecosystem approach.Research limitations/implicationsThe narratives represent a limited number of universities with an opportunity for further research to empirically measure the impact and outcomes of SEEs. The research is exploratory, inherently conceptual and emergent, providing an opportunity for validation of narrative frameworks in future studies.Practical implicationsThe findings may assist university managers to be more aware of their own subconscious preferences to student entrepreneurship and start-up initiatives, which may be useful in refining their impact and offerings regarding a quest toward the entrepreneurial university.Social implicationsFrom social perspectives, the alignment of the components of SEE has the ability to enhance and shift the entrepreneurial mindset of entrepreneurship students, notwithstanding enhancement of intentionality and self-efficacy.Originality/valueThis is the first study of SEEs in Australia, highlighting the importance of the integration of entrepreneurship education programs, entrepreneurship education ecosystems, the entrepreneurial university and specific start-up initiatives such as university accelerators. Furthermore, students may enhance their entrepreneurial mindset by actively engaging in such ecosystems.

scholarly journals Innovative start-ups and young entrepreneurs: Definition of venture capital and findings from Switzerland

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-81
Author(s):  
Simon Zaby
Keyword(s):  
Venture Capital ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Total Sample ◽  
Venture Capitalists ◽  
Flow Of Funds ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Capital Financing ◽  
Proper Definition ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Start Ups

This paper aims to investigate success factors of innovative start-up firms from the perspective of young start-up managers. Which key factors did they experience before and since the foundation of their company? The experience from the quite young Swiss start-up scene pro-vides important insights to entrepreneurs and policy-makers in emerging countries that cur-rently face the necessity of building up a start-up environment. One part of the data has been collected by the author, the other part originates from the Swiss Venture Capital Database (total sample size: 306). The results show a significant role of venture capital financing for the success of innovative start-ups. Interestingly, this is to some extent because the start-ups see various additional benefits from venture capitalists involved in their firm. Thus, the findings shed new light on a proper definition of venture capital that should not solely focus on the flow of funds.

Start-Ups Are Everywhere! (but the Growth Statistics)

2021 ◽  
pp. 43-50
Author(s):  
Dan Breznitz
Keyword(s):  
Venture Capital ◽  
San Diego ◽  
Gilded Age ◽  
Silicon Valley ◽  
Successful Solution ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Ways Of Thinking ◽  
Finance Innovation ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Start Ups

“But,” some readers might say, “look at Israel, look at San Diego—it is still feasible to become a Silicon-Hyphen.” To which this chapter answers: “And would it be a good idea if it is?” The chapter opens the mind of the reader to new ways of thinking about innovation and growth. Providing a frontal attack on the start-up religion and its most important commandment: using venture capital (VC) as a basis for growth. VCs have attained the paradigmatic status of a “must-have,” institution, when in fact they are just one, not very successful, solution to solving the question of how to finance innovation. The chapter does it by explaining how VCs really work and make money (and for whom), where and when they are successful (rarely and only in ICT and biotech), what does that means to the companies they finance, who is allowed to be part of this party, and what are the impacts on communities in places where the VCs are successful (inequality levels last seen in the Gilded Age). It utilizes research on Israel and Silicon Valley to drive those points home. At the end of the chapter the reader should realize that, YES, they want innovation-based growth, but NO, even if they could make it happen, the last thing they want for their community is to become a Silicon-Valley/Israel look-alike.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document