Alliances Between Academic Entrepreneurs & Large Firms-A Theory Elaboration Approach to Effectuation

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (1) ◽  
pp. 15457
Author(s):  
Somayeh Taghvaee ◽  
Rene Mauer
Author(s):  
Darwin Ugarte Ontiveros

Recent evidence suggests that formality improves micro-firms profits in Bolivia. This gain is only for firms with 2 to 5 workers, while smaller and larger firms would lose out by formalizing (McKenzie and Sakho, 2010). However, as much of the empirical literature on this topic, the estimations are based on strong assumptions about unobservables. If the returns to formality vary among firms and these variations influence selection into formality, traditional estimators are biased (Heckman and Vytlacil, 2007). In this paper we considerthese elements to estimate the heterogeneous effects of formality on firm profits in Bolivia. We find remarkable heterogeneity in the returns to formality, from -3% to 6%. The group of firms with positive marginal effects from formality corresponds to those which are most likely to register. We also characterize the firms that likely benefit from having a formal status. These would correspond to large firms which work at big scales.


2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zulkarnain Muhamad Sori ◽  
Shamsher Mohamad ◽  
Siti Shaharatulfazzah Mohd Saad
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Wen Li ◽  
Yurong Zhang

Drawing on the entrepreneurial event model, we examined the role of perceived desirability and perceived feasibility and their interaction in university scholars' entrepreneurial intentions, with data from 252 Chinese academic entrepreneurs. Results showed that perceived feasibility only had a significant effect on scholars' entrepreneurial intentions formation. Further, the moderating effect of external environmental support brought about an interactive mechanism between perceived desirability and perceived feasibility: When perceived desirability was low, perceived feasibility played a more significant role in entrepreneurial intentions formation, and vice versa. Theoretical contributions and practical implications are discussed.


Author(s):  
Ashwini Deshpande

This chapter argues the normative case for greater diversity in the workforce of private corporations in the specific context of caste disparities in India. It offers evidence from the literature which indicates a positive association between profits and more diverse workforce teams as well as management boards for large firms. This suggests that ensuring greater diversity, in addition to enabling social inclusion especially of marginalized groups, would make good business sense. However, the discussion on diversity might be more relevant to large corporations. Small and micro-enterprises that are owned and populated by members of marginalized groups might face discrimination on account of their identity, adversely affecting their performance. This indicates that discrimination based on social identity manifests itself in different ways in different segments of the market depending on the size of the firm.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 334
Author(s):  
Ye Cai ◽  
Hersh Shefrin

We estimate how an acquiring firm’s risk changes depending on whether the market initially judges the acquisition to be neutral, strongly negative, or strongly positive for the shareholders of the acquiring firm. We found that for an average neutral acquisition, the annualized standard deviation of an acquiring firm’s total return declines by 5%. In contrast, acquisitions judged negatively by the market result in a 5% increase in total risk, while acquisitions judged positively by the market feature a 30-basis-point increase in total risk. We found the median acquisition to be value creating, not value destructive. Value destruction tends to be concentrated among large firms and to be associated with extreme negative outliers. Acquiring firms with longholder CEOs are more prone to undertake acquisitions and more prone to take on risk, but are less prone to engage in value-destructive acquisitions than acquiring firms with non-longholder CEOs. In this respect, acquiring firms with non-longholder CEOs are more apt to undertake risky bad acquisitions, especially when their prior returns lie above the industry average. In addition, acquiring firms with non-longholder CEOs are less prone to take on good acquisitions that are high in risk. As a general matter, firms with longholder CEOs are less risk sensitive to changes in prior returns than firms with non-longholder CEOs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document