A Start-Up’s R&D Stages and the Evolution of Financing Sources: Evidence from the Biotechnology Industry
-
Hyunsung D Kang
Abstract
The 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.
Appendix
A Variable descriptions
| Variable | Description | Data source |
|---|---|---|
| Financing source ( | A discrete variable that equals one if a start-up finances through angels ( | Deloitte Recap |
| Number of products | The number of products within a start-up’s R&D pipeline. This variable is divided into five stages, including preclinical, phase I, phase II, phase III, and launched stages. For example, number of products (preclinical) is the number of products in the preclinical stage, and the other categories are as follows. Each stage is used as an independent variable in the following analyses. | PharmaProject |
| Ratio of products | The ratio of product in each stage to the total number of products plus one within a start-up’s R&D pipeline. Similar with number of products, this variable is divided into five stages, including preclinical, phase I, phase II, phase III, and launched stages. For example, number of products (preclinical) is calculated as number of products (preclinical) divided by the total number of products within a start-up’s R&D pipeline (i. e., all the five stages) plus one. The other categories are as follows. Each stage is used as an independent variable in the following analyses. | PharmaProject |
| Age | Number of days from a start-up’s founding to financing, divided by 365 | Deloitte Recap |
| Patents | Number of patents applied by a start-up in a year | U.S. Patent Office |
| Forward citations | Number of forward citations (i. e., number of patents citing a start-up’s patents) in a year | U.S. Patent Office |
| Backward citations | Number of backward citations (i. e., number of patents cited by a start-up’s patents) in a year | U.S. Patent Office |
| External R&D | Stock of technological alliances, including collaborative research alliances, licensing contracts, and other types of research agreements, in a year | Deloitte Recap |
| Funding amount | The log of amount of financing in million U.S. dollars | Deloitte Recap |
| Cumulative funding amount | The log of cumulative amount of financing in million U.S. dollars | Deloitte Recap |
| Financing experience | Number of prior fundraising activities | Deloitte Recap |
| Prior IVC | An indicator variable that equals one if a start-up has previously financed through IVCs, and zero otherwise | Deloitte Recap |
| Prior CVC | An indicator variable that equals one if a start-up has previously financed through CVCs, and zero otherwise | Deloitte Recap |
B Major CVCs and IVCs included in the Deloitte Recap database
| CVC | Number of investments | Amount of investments | IVC | Number of investments | Amount of investments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eli Lilly | 36 | 387.24 | Domain | 44 | 477.82 |
| Genetech | 26 | 173.27 | NEA | 33 | 512.63 |
| Elan | 26 | 157.12 | H&Q | 32 | 174.89 |
| Pfizer | 25 | 184.66 | KPCB | 32 | 170.73 |
| SmithKline | 24 | 155.41 | Venture Investors | 29 | 337.10 |
| Warner-Lambert | 19 | 66.09 | UKN | 26 | 87.92 |
| Abbott | 17 | 491.55 | Alta | 25 | 255.11 |
| Ciba-Geigy | 17 | 102.75 | IVP | 25 | 186.22 |
| Genzyme | 16 | 129.10 | Mayfield | 25 | 150.09 |
| Novartis | 15 | 306.42 | HCV | 22 | 93.20 |
| Total | 221 | 2153.61 | Total | 293 | 2445.71 |
| (Mean) | (22.1) | (215.36) | (Mean) | (29.30) | (244.57) |
Note: These figures use all the observations from the Deloitte Recap database. The amount of investments is in million U.S. dollars.
C Sample distribution over time
Note: This figure illustrates the yearly information of angels, IVCs, CVCs, and syndicated between IVC and CVC investments included in the database. This figure is important because it allows me to investigate whether or not IVC and CVC financing sources have been available to a start-up over time. If either IVCs or CVCs were extremely scarce during a particular period and not readily available, a start-up’s financing choice would be heavily impacted by the availability of each financing source rather than the stages of R&D pipelines I study. If this concern is not the case, I should see a notable pattern in which the sample distributions of financing sources move together over time. This figure indicates that the number of samples in financing sources gradually increased together in the 1990s, peaked in the early 2000s, and gradually decreased afterward.
D Correlation tables
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.00 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | 0.09 | 1.00 | |||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | 0.08 | 0.54 | 1.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | 0.08 | 0.58 | 0.48 | 1.00 | |||||||||||||||||
| 5 | 0.08 | 0.42 | 0.51 | 0.36 | 1.00 | ||||||||||||||||
| 6 | 0.05 | 0.17 | 0.25 | 0.13 | 0.21 | 1.00 | |||||||||||||||
| 7 | 0.12 | 0.78 | 0.39 | 0.39 | 0.32 | 0.09 | 1.00 | ||||||||||||||
| 8 | 0.08 | 0.26 | 0.68 | 0.30 | 0.31 | 0.09 | 0.25 | 1.00 | |||||||||||||
| 9 | 0.09 | 0.23 | 0.26 | 0.71 | 0.18 | 0.05 | 0.21 | 0.24 | 1.00 | ||||||||||||
| 10 | 0.07 | 0.13 | 0.19 | 0.13 | 0.68 | 0.04 | 0.14 | 0.17 | 0.10 | 1.00 | |||||||||||
| 11 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.79 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 1.00 | ||||||||||
| 12 | −0.06 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 1.00 | |||||||||
| 13 | 0.04 | 0.15 | 0.10 | 0.16 | 0.12 | 0.02 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.24 | 1.00 | ||||||||
| 14 | −0.02 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.22 | 0.68 | 1.00 | |||||||
| 15 | −0.04 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.12 | 0.00 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.22 | 0.61 | 0.69 | 1.00 | ||||||
| 16 | −0.02 | 0.21 | 0.19 | 0.17 | 0.14 | 0.11 | 0.16 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.52 | 0.25 | 0.16 | 0.15 | 1.00 | |||||
| 17 | −0.04 | 0.08 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.33 | 0.17 | 0.14 | 0.15 | 0.31 | 1.00 | ||||
| 18 | 0.06 | 0.13 | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.09 | 0.04 | 0.13 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.66 | 0.25 | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.52 | 0.73 | 1.00 | |||
| 19 | −0.01 | 0.13 | 0.13 | 0.13 | 0.11 | 0.05 | 0.11 | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.76 | 0.26 | 0.27 | 0.28 | 0.57 | 0.42 | 0.78 | 1.00 | ||
| 20 | 0.26 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.03 | −0.01 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.02 | −0.01 | 0.02 | 0.11 | 0.13 | 0.14 | 0.12 | 0.12 | 0.30 | 0.42 | 0.30 | 1.00 | |
| 21 | 0.30 | 0.10 | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.04 | 0.11 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.41 | 0.15 | 0.13 | 0.09 | 0.32 | 0.32 | 0.55 | 0.53 | 0.18 | 1.00 |
Note: Variables include 1. Financing source (
References
Adamati, A.R., and P. Pfleiderer. 1994. “Robust Financial Contracting and the Role of Venture Capitalists.” Journal of Finance 49 (2):371–402.10.1111/j.1540-6261.1994.tb05146.xSuche in Google Scholar
Alvarez-Garrido, E., and G. Dushnitsky. 2015. “Are Entrepreneurial Venture’s Innovation Rates Sensitive to Investor Complementary Assets? Comparing Biotech Ventures Backed by Corporate and Independent VCs.” Strategic Management Journal 37 (5):819–834.10.1002/smj.2359Suche in Google Scholar
Amit, R., J.A. Brander, and C. Zott. 1998. “Why Do Venture Capital Firms Exist? Theory and Canadian Evidence.” Journal of Business Venturing 13:441–466.10.1016/S0883-9026(97)00061-XSuche in Google Scholar
Basu, S., C. Phelps, and S. Kotha. 2011. “Towards Understanding Who Makes Corporate Venture Capital Investments and Why.” Journal of Business Venturing 26 (2):153–171.10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.07.001Suche in Google Scholar
Baum, J.A., and B.S. Silverman. 2004. “Picking Winners or Building Them? Alliance, Intellectual, and Human Capital as Selection Criteria in Venture Financing and Performance of Biotechnology Start-Ups.” Journal of Business Venturing 19:411–436.10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00038-7Suche in Google Scholar
Benson, D., and R.H. Ziedonis. 2010. “Corporate Venture Capital and the Returns to Acquiring Portfolio Companies.” Journal of Financial Economics 98 (3):478–499.10.1016/j.jfineco.2010.07.003Suche in Google Scholar
Bertoni, F., M. Colombo, and L. Grilli. 2013. “Venture Capital Investor Type and the Growth Mode of New Technology-Based Firms.” Small Business Economics 40 (3):527–552.10.1007/s11187-011-9385-9Suche in Google Scholar
Bhak, B.H., and M. Gort. 1993. “Decomposing Learning by Doing in New Plants.” Journal of Political Economy 101:561–583.10.1086/261888Suche in Google Scholar
Burt, R.S. 1983. Corporate Profits and Cooptation: Networks of Market Constraints and Directorate Ties in the American Economy. New York: Academic Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Bygrave, W.D. 1987. “Syndicated Investments by Venture Capital Firms: A Networking Perspective.” Journal Business Venturing 2 (2):139–154.10.1016/0883-9026(87)90004-8Suche in Google Scholar
Casciaro, T., and M.J. Piskorski. 2005. “Power Imbalance, Mutual Dependence, and Constraint Absorption: A Closer Look at Resource Dependence Theory.” Administrative Science Quarterly 50:167–199.10.2189/asqu.2005.50.2.167Suche in Google Scholar
Ceccagnoli, M., M.J. Higgins, and H.D. Kang. 2014. Corporate venture capital as a real option in the markets for technology. Working paper, Georgia Institute of Technology10.3386/w21424Suche in Google Scholar
Chemmanur, T.J., and Z. Chen. 2014. “Venture Capitalists versus Angels: The Dynamics of Private Firm Financing Contracts.” Reviews of Corporate Finance Studies 3 (1–2):39–86.10.1093/rcfs/cfu009Suche in Google Scholar
Cohen, W.M., R. Nelson, and J. Walsh. 2000. Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not). NBER Working Paper #7522.10.3386/w7552Suche in Google Scholar
Cooley, T.F., and B.D. Smith. 1998. “Financial Markets, Specialization, and Learning by Doing.” Research in Economics 52 (4):333–361.10.1006/reec.1998.0170Suche in Google Scholar
Denis, D.J. 2004. “Entrepreneurial Finance: An Overview of the Issues and Evidence.” Journal of Corporate Finance 10:301–326.10.1016/S0929-1199(03)00059-2Suche in Google Scholar
Dushnitsky, G., and M.J. Lenox. 2005. “When Do Incumbents Learn from Entrepreneurial Ventures? Corporate Venture Capital and Investing Firm Innovation Rates.” Researcher Policy 34 (5):615–639.10.1016/j.respol.2005.01.017Suche in Google Scholar
Dushnitsky, G., and M.J. Lenox. 2006. “When Does Corporate Venture Capital Investment Create Firm Value?” Journal of Business Venturing 21:753–772.10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.04.012Suche in Google Scholar
Dushnitsky, G., and Z. Shapira. 2010. “Entrepreneurial Finance Meets Organizational Reality: Comparing Investment Practices and Performance of Corporate and Independent Venture Capitalists.” Strategic Management Journal 31 (9):990–1017.10.1002/smj.851Suche in Google Scholar
Dushnitsky, G., and J.M. Shaver. 2009. “Limitations to Interorganizational Knowledge Acquisition: The Paradox of Corporate Venture Capital.” Strategic Management Journal 30 (10):1045–1064.10.1002/smj.781Suche in Google Scholar
Dutta, S., and T. Folta. 2016. “A Comparison of Angel and Venture Capitalists on Innovation and Value Creation.” Journal of Business Venturing 31 (1):39–58.10.1016/j.jbusvent.2015.08.003Suche in Google Scholar
Dyer, J.H., and H. Singh. 1998. “The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage.” Academy of Management Review 23:660–679.10.5465/amr.1998.1255632Suche in Google Scholar
Freear, J., J. Sohl, and W.E. Wetzel. 1995. “Angels: Personal Investors in the Venture Capital Market.” Entrepreneurship Regional Development 7:85–94.10.1080/08985629500000005Suche in Google Scholar
Freear, J., J. Sohl, and W.E. Wetzel. 1996. Creating new capital markets for emerging ventures. Working paper, University of New Hampshire.Suche in Google Scholar
Fulghieri, P., and M. Sevilir. 2009. “Organization and Financing of Innovation, and the Choice between Corporate and Independent Venture Capital.” Journal of Financial Quantitative Analysis 44 (6):1291–1321.10.1017/S0022109009990391Suche in Google Scholar
Gans, J.S., D.H. Hsu, and S. Stern. 2002. “When Does Start-Up Innovation Spur the Gale of Creative Destruction?” RAND Journal of Economics 33:571–586.10.2307/3087475Suche in Google Scholar
Gompers, P.A. 1995. “Optimal Investment, Monitoring, and the Staging of Venture Capital.” Journal of Finance 50 (5):1461–1489.10.1111/j.1540-6261.1995.tb05185.xSuche in Google Scholar
Gompers, P.A. 2002. “Corporations and the Financing of Innovation: The Corporate Venturing Experience.” Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Econom Reviews 87 (4):1–18.Suche in Google Scholar
Gompers, P.A., and J. Lerner. 2000a. “The Determinants of Corporate Venture Capital Success: Organizational Structure, Incentives and Complementarities.” In Concentrated Corporate Ownership, ed R. Morck. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Grabowski, H.G., and M. Kyle. 2008. Mergers and Alliances in Pharmaceutical: Effects on Innovation and R&D Productivity. The Economics of Corporate Governance and Mergers, 262–287. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.10.4337/9781848443921.00016Suche in Google Scholar
Greene, W.H. 1993. Econometric Analysis, 5th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Suche in Google Scholar
Griffin, A. 2002. “Product Development Cycle Time for Business-To-Business Products.” Industrial Marketing Management 31:291–304.10.1016/S0019-8501(01)00162-6Suche in Google Scholar
Guo, B., Y. Lou, and D. Perez-Castrillo. 2011. Investment, duration, and exit strategies for corporate and independent venture capital backed startups. Working paper, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid.Suche in Google Scholar
Hall, B., A. Jaffe, and M. Trajtenberg. 2005. “Market Value and Patent Citations.” RAND Journal of Economics 36 (1):16–38.Suche in Google Scholar
Hellmann, T.F. 2002. “A Theory of Strategic Investing.” Journal of Financial Economics 64 (2):285–314.10.1016/S0304-405X(02)00078-8Suche in Google Scholar
Hellmann, T.F., and V. Thiele. 2015. “Friends or Foes? the Interrelationship between Angel and Venture Capital Markets.” Journal of Financial Economics 115 (3):639–653.10.1016/j.jfineco.2014.10.009Suche in Google Scholar
Hsu, D.H. 2004. “What Do Entrepreneurs Pay for Venture Capital Affiliation?” Journal of Finance 59 (4):1805–1844.10.1111/j.1540-6261.2004.00680.xSuche in Google Scholar
Hsu, D.H., and R. Ziedonis. 2013. “Resources as Dual Sources of Advantage: Implications for Valuing Entrepreneurial-Firm Patents.” Strategic Management Journal 34 (7):761–781.10.1002/smj.2037Suche in Google Scholar
Iansiti, M. 1995. “Technology Integration: Managing Technological Evolution in a Complex Environment.” Researcher Policy 24:521–542.10.1016/S0048-7333(94)00781-0Suche in Google Scholar
Jensen, M. 1993. “The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit, and the Failure of Internal Control Systems.” Journal of Finance 48:831–880.10.1111/j.1540-6261.1993.tb04022.xSuche in Google Scholar
Kaplan, S., and P. Strömberg. 2001. “Venture Capitalists as Principals: Contracting, Screening, and Monitoring.” The American Economic Review 91:426–430.10.1257/aer.91.2.426Suche in Google Scholar
Katila, R., J.D. Rosenberger, and K.M. Eisenhardt. 2008. “Swimming with Sharks: Technology Ventures, Defense Mechanisms and Corporate Relationships.” Administrative Science Quarterly 53 (2):295–332.10.2189/asqu.53.2.295Suche in Google Scholar
Kerr, W.R., J. Lerner, and A. Schoar. 2014. “The Consequences of Entrepreneurial Finance: Evidence from Angel Financings.” Review of Financial Studies 27 (1):20–55.10.1093/rfs/hhr098Suche in Google Scholar
Krishnan, V., and S. Bhattacharya. 2002. “Technology Selection and Commitment in New Product Development: The Role of Uncertainty and Design Flexibility.” Management Science 48 (3):313–327.10.1287/mnsc.48.3.313.7728Suche in Google Scholar
Lanjouw, J.O., and M. Schankerman. 2001. “Characteristics of Patent Litigation: A Window on Competition.” RAND Journal of Economics 32 (1):129–151.10.2307/2696401Suche in Google Scholar
Lerner, J. 1994a. “The Syndication of Venture Capital Investments.” Financial Management 23:16–27.10.2307/3665618Suche in Google Scholar
Lerner, J. 1994b. “Venture Capitalists and the Decision to Go Public.” Journal of Financial Economics 35:293–316.10.1016/0304-405X(94)90035-3Suche in Google Scholar
Lerner, J., H. Shane, and A. Tsai. 2003. “Do Equity Financing Cycles Matter? Evidence from Biotechnology Alliances.” Journal of Financial Economics 67 (3):411–446.10.1016/S0304-405X(02)00256-8Suche in Google Scholar
Levinthal, D.A., and J.G. March. 1993. “The Myopia of Learning.” Strategic Management Journal 14:95–112.10.1002/smj.4250141009Suche in Google Scholar
Long, J.S., and J. Freese. 2003. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using STATA. College Station, TX: STATA Press.Suche in Google Scholar
MacMillan, I., E. Roberts, V. Livada, and A. Wang. 2008. Corporate Venture Capital (CVC): Seeking Innovation and Strategic Growth. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce.Suche in Google Scholar
Mann, R.J., and T.W. Sager. 2007. “Patents, Venture Capital, and Software Start-Ups.” Researcher Policy 36:193–208.10.1016/j.respol.2006.10.002Suche in Google Scholar
Manski, C.F., and D.L. McFadden. 1981. Structural Analysis of Discrete Data and Econometric Applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Maula, M.V.J., E. Autio, and G.C. Murray. 2009. “Corporate Venture Capital and the Balance of Risks and Rewards for Portfolio Companies.” Journal Business Venturing 24 (3):274–286.10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.10.012Suche in Google Scholar
Maula, M.V.J., T. Keil, and S.A. Zahra. 2013. “Top Management’s Attention to Discontinuous Technological Change: Corporate Venture Capital as an Alert Mechanism.” Organization Science 24 (3):926–947.10.1287/orsc.1120.0775Suche in Google Scholar
Megginson, W.L., and K.A. Weiss. 1990. “Venture Capitalist Certification in Initial Public Offerings.” Journal of Finance 46 (3):879–903.10.1111/j.1540-6261.1991.tb03770.xSuche in Google Scholar
Miemietz, M. 2013. CFA Institute Industry Guides: The Pharmaceutical Industry. Lexington, KY: CFA Institute.Suche in Google Scholar
National Research Council. 2009. Venture Funding and the NIH SBIR Program. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Suche in Google Scholar
National Venture Capital Association. 2010. VC investments 2010. http://www.nvca.org/.Suche in Google Scholar
Newsweek. 2017. Trump’s Plan for Lowering Big Pharma Drug Prices Comes at a High Cost. www.newsweek.com/trump-drug-prices-big-pharma-552295.Suche in Google Scholar
Pahnke, E.C., R. Katila, and K.M. Eisenhardt. 2015. “Who Takes You to the Dance? How Funding Partners Influence Innovative Activity in Young Firms.” Administrative Science Quarterly 60 (4): 596–633.10.1177/0001839215592913Suche in Google Scholar
Park, H.D., and H.K. Steensma. 2011. “When Does Corporate Venture Capital Add Value for New Ventures?” Strategic Management Journal 33 (1):1–22.10.1002/smj.937Suche in Google Scholar
Paul, S.M., D.S. Mytelka, C.T. Dunwiddie, C.C. Persinger, B.H. Munos, S.R. Lindborg, and A.L. Schacht. 2010. “How to Improve R&D Productivity: The Pharmaceutical Industry’s Grand Challenge.” Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 9:203–213.10.1038/nrd3078Suche in Google Scholar
Perez, R.C. 1986. Inside Venture Capital: Past, Present, and Future. New York: Praege.Suche in Google Scholar
Pharma. 2015. 2015 Profile Biopharmaceutical Research Industry. Washington D.C: Pharma.Suche in Google Scholar
PricewaterhouseCoopers. 2014. PricewaterhouseCoopers/National Venture Capital Association Money Tree Report. Washington, D.C: PricewaterhouseCoopers.Suche in Google Scholar
Prowse, S. 1998. “Angel Investors and the Market for Angel Investments.” Journal of Banking & Finance 22:785–792.10.1016/S0378-4266(98)00044-2Suche in Google Scholar
Puri, M., and R. Zarutskie. 2012. “On the Life Cycle Dynamics of Venture-Capital and Nonventure-Capital Backed Companies.” Journal of Finance 67 (6):2247–2293.10.1111/j.1540-6261.2012.01786.xSuche in Google Scholar
Rothaermel, F.R., and D.L. Deeds. 2004. “Exploration and Exploitation Alliances in Biotechnology: A System of New Product Development.” Strategic Management Journal 25 (3):201–221.10.1002/smj.376Suche in Google Scholar
Sah, R.K., and J.E. Stiglitz. 1986. “The Architecture of Economic Systems: Hierarchies and Polyarchies.” The American Economic Review 76 (4):716–727.10.3386/w1334Suche in Google Scholar
Sahlman, W. 1990. “The Structure and Governance of Venture Capital Organizations.” Journal of Financial Economics 27 (2):473–521.10.1016/0304-405X(90)90065-8Suche in Google Scholar
Santos, F.M., and K.M. Eisenhardt. 2009. “Constructing Markets and Shaping Boundaries: Entrepreneurial Agency in Nascent Fields.” Academy of Management Journal 52 (4):643–671.10.5465/AMJ.2009.43669892Suche in Google Scholar
Schilling, M.A. 2009. “Understanding the Alliance Data.” Strategic Management Journal 30 (3):233–260.10.1002/smj.731Suche in Google Scholar
Schwienbacher, A. 2013. “The Entrepreneur’s Investor Choice: The Impact on Later-Stage Firm Development.” Journal Business Venturing 28 (4):528–545.10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.09.002Suche in Google Scholar
Stuart, T., H. Hoang, and C. Ralph. 1999. “Interorganizational Endorsements and the Performance of Entrepreneurial Ventures.” Administrative Science Quarterly 44 (2):315–349.10.2307/2666998Suche in Google Scholar
Vanacker, T., M. Meuleman, and S. Manigart. 2014. “Path-Dependent Evolution versus Intentional Management of Investment Ties in Science-Based Entrepreneurial Ventures.” Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice 38 (3):671–690.10.1111/etap.12007Suche in Google Scholar
Wong, A., M. Bhatia, and Z. Freeman. 2009. “Angel Finance: The Other Venture Capital.” Strategic Change 18 (7–8):221–230.10.1002/jsc.849Suche in Google Scholar
Ziedonis, A.A. 2007. “Real Options in Technology Licensing.” Management Science 53 (10):1618–1633.10.1287/mnsc.1070.0705Suche in Google Scholar
© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Entrepreneurial Orientation, Control Systems, and New Venture Performance: A Dominant Logic Perspective
- A Start-Up’s R&D Stages and the Evolution of Financing Sources: Evidence from the Biotechnology Industry
- Cohort, Age and Business Cycle Effects in Entrepreneurship in Latin America
- Trust Cognition of Entrepreneurs’ Behavioral Consistency Modulates Investment Decisions of Venture Capitalists in Cooperation
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Entrepreneurial Orientation, Control Systems, and New Venture Performance: A Dominant Logic Perspective
- A Start-Up’s R&D Stages and the Evolution of Financing Sources: Evidence from the Biotechnology Industry
- Cohort, Age and Business Cycle Effects in Entrepreneurship in Latin America
- Trust Cognition of Entrepreneurs’ Behavioral Consistency Modulates Investment Decisions of Venture Capitalists in Cooperation
