准备入住还是待修?风险投资专业化与创业创新

IF 2.9 Q2 MANAGEMENT Strategy Science Pub Date : 2022-10-26 DOI:10.1287/stsc.2022.0176
Elisa Alvarez-Garrido
{"title":"准备入住还是待修?风险投资专业化与创业创新","authors":"Elisa Alvarez-Garrido","doi":"10.1287/stsc.2022.0176","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Extant scholarship typically assumes that VC firms prefer to pick winners. I offer an alternative perspective: that specialist VC firms can select less attractive start-ups—with innovative potential but in need of help—and then contribute to the start-ups’ innovative processes so they can achieve their potential. The analogy is buying a fixer-upper house, which, with the right help, can be brought to the level of one that is move-in ready. I argue that specialist (versus generalist) VC firms in the syndicate have superior commercialization knowledge and specialized resource networks, and they can choose to follow a move-in-ready strategy (select winners) or a fixer-upper strategy (build winners). This choice is contingent on the research environment and how unique the help from the specialist VC firm is: in well-developed research environments, a specialist adds less value and may follow a move-in-ready strategy; in less-developed research environments, a specialist adds more value and may follow a fixer-upper strategy. I leverage an ideal empirical context, global biotechnology VC-backed start-ups, over the period 1996–2006, when the biotech industry was established in the United States and developing in 25 other countries, and highlight qualitative insights from 20 interviews with investors in seven countries.","PeriodicalId":45295,"journal":{"name":"Strategy Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Move-in Ready or Fixer-Upper? VC Specialization and Start-up Innovation\",\"authors\":\"Elisa Alvarez-Garrido\",\"doi\":\"10.1287/stsc.2022.0176\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Extant scholarship typically assumes that VC firms prefer to pick winners. I offer an alternative perspective: that specialist VC firms can select less attractive start-ups—with innovative potential but in need of help—and then contribute to the start-ups’ innovative processes so they can achieve their potential. The analogy is buying a fixer-upper house, which, with the right help, can be brought to the level of one that is move-in ready. I argue that specialist (versus generalist) VC firms in the syndicate have superior commercialization knowledge and specialized resource networks, and they can choose to follow a move-in-ready strategy (select winners) or a fixer-upper strategy (build winners). This choice is contingent on the research environment and how unique the help from the specialist VC firm is: in well-developed research environments, a specialist adds less value and may follow a move-in-ready strategy; in less-developed research environments, a specialist adds more value and may follow a fixer-upper strategy. I leverage an ideal empirical context, global biotechnology VC-backed start-ups, over the period 1996–2006, when the biotech industry was established in the United States and developing in 25 other countries, and highlight qualitative insights from 20 interviews with investors in seven countries.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45295,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Strategy Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Strategy Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2022.0176\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Strategy Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2022.0176","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

Extent奖学金通常假设风险投资公司更喜欢挑选赢家。我提供了另一种视角:专业的风险投资公司可以选择吸引力较小的初创企业——具有创新潜力但需要帮助——然后为初创企业的创新过程做出贡献,使其能够发挥潜力。这个比喻是买一栋装修好的上层住宅,在正确的帮助下,它可以达到准备入住的水平。我认为,辛迪加中的专业(相对于多面手)风险投资公司拥有卓越的商业化知识和专业的资源网络,他们可以选择采用现成的战略(选择赢家)或固定的上层战略(建立赢家)。这一选择取决于研究环境以及专业风险投资公司的帮助有多独特:在发达的研究环境中,专家增加的价值较少,可能会遵循现成的策略;在不太发达的研究环境中,专家会增加更多的价值,并可能遵循更高的策略。我利用了一个理想的经验背景,即1996-2006年期间全球生物技术风险投资支持的初创企业,当时生物技术行业在美国成立,并在其他25个国家发展,并强调了对7个国家投资者的20次采访中的质量见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Move-in Ready or Fixer-Upper? VC Specialization and Start-up Innovation
Extant scholarship typically assumes that VC firms prefer to pick winners. I offer an alternative perspective: that specialist VC firms can select less attractive start-ups—with innovative potential but in need of help—and then contribute to the start-ups’ innovative processes so they can achieve their potential. The analogy is buying a fixer-upper house, which, with the right help, can be brought to the level of one that is move-in ready. I argue that specialist (versus generalist) VC firms in the syndicate have superior commercialization knowledge and specialized resource networks, and they can choose to follow a move-in-ready strategy (select winners) or a fixer-upper strategy (build winners). This choice is contingent on the research environment and how unique the help from the specialist VC firm is: in well-developed research environments, a specialist adds less value and may follow a move-in-ready strategy; in less-developed research environments, a specialist adds more value and may follow a fixer-upper strategy. I leverage an ideal empirical context, global biotechnology VC-backed start-ups, over the period 1996–2006, when the biotech industry was established in the United States and developing in 25 other countries, and highlight qualitative insights from 20 interviews with investors in seven countries.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Strategy Science
Strategy Science MANAGEMENT-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
5.10%
发文量
31
期刊最新文献
Airline Responses to the COVID-19 Collapse: Applying Learning to an Unprecedented Crisis Innovation Disclosures and the Design of Technology Acquisition Contracts: Evidence from the American Inventors Protection Act How Demand Shocks “Jumpstart” Technological Ecosystems and Commercialization: Evidence from the Global Electric Vehicle Industry How Firms Cultivate Collaboration During Postmerger Integration of Technology Acquisitions Who Captures the Value from Organizational Ratings?: Evidence from Public Schools
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1