The extent and nature of heterogeneity of venture capital selection behaviour in new technology-based firms

R and D Management

Volumn 40, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 357-371

  Knockaert, Mirjam ^a,b   Clarysse, Bart ^a,c   Wright, Mike ^a,d  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^c IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d NOTTINGHAM UNIVERSITY BUSINESS SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955963803     PISSN: 00336807     EISSN: 14679310     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9310.2010.00607.x     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Addelman S. Orthogonal main-effect plans for asymmetrical factorial experiments. Technometrics 1962, 4(1):21-46.
2. Baeyens K, Vanacker T, Manigart S. 'Venture capitalists' selection process: the case of biotechnology proposals. International Journal of Technology Management 2006, 34:28-46.
3. Baum JAC, Silverman BS. Picking winners or building them? Alliance, intellectual and human capital as selection criteria in venture financing and performance of biotechnology. Journal of Business Venturing 2004, 19(3):411-425.
4. Chiesa V, Piccaluga A. Exploitation and diffusion of public research: the case of academic spin-offs in Italy. R&D Management 2000, 30(4):329-340.
5. Clarysse B, Wright M, Bruneel J. 2009, Structuring the resource portfolio in technology gazelles. Working paper Imperial College, London
6. Dimov PD, Shepherd DA. Human capital theory and venture capital firms: exploring "home runs" and "strike outs" Journal of Business Venturing 2005, 20:1-22.
7. Druilhe C, Garnsey E. Do academic spin-outs differ and does it matter? Journal of Technology Transfer 2004, 29:269-285.
8. Elango B, Fried VH, Hisrich RD, Poloncjek A. How venture capital firms differ. Journal of Business Venturing 1995, 10:157-179.
9. Engel D. The performance of venture-backed firms: the effect of venture capital company characteristics. Industry and Innovation 2004, 11(3):249-263.
10. Fischhoff B, Kaharman D, Slovic P, Tversky A. For those condemned to study the past: heuristics and biases. Hindsight, Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases 1982, Kaharman D, Slovic P, Tversky A, (eds), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
11. Freeman C. The Economics of Industrial Innovation 1983, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press
12. Gompers P. Optimal investment, monitoring, and the staging of venture capital. Journal of Finance 1995, 50(5):1461-1489.
13. Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tathum RL, Black WC. Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings 1998, New York, Macmillan
14. Hambrick DC. An empirical typology of mature industrial-product environments. Academy of Management Journal 1983, 26(2):213-220.
15. Heirman A, Clarysse B. How and why do research-based start-ups differ at founding? A resource-based configurational perspective. Journal of Technology Transfer 2004, 29(3):247-268.
16. Heirman A, Clarysse B. 2005, A1-A6. The imprinting effect of initial resources and market strategy on the early growth path of start-ups. Academy of Management Proceedings, pp
17. Hellman T, Puri M. The interaction between product market and financing strategy: the role of venture capital. The Review of Financial Studies 2000, 13(4):959-984.
18. Hisrich RD, Jankowitz AD. Intuition in venture capital decisions: an exploratory study using a new technique. Journal of Business Venturing 1990, 5:49-62.
19. Hood N. Public venture capital and economic development: the Scottish experience. Venture Capital 2000, 2(4):313-341.
20. Hutt RW, Thomas B. Venture capital in Arizona. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research 1985, 155-169.
21. Kahn AM. Assessing venture capital investments with noncompensatory behavioural decision models. Journal of Business Venturing 1987, 2:193-205.
22. Keeley RH, Roure JB. Determinants of new venture success before 1982 and after a preliminary look at two eras. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research 1989, 274-287.
23. Ketchen DJ, Shook CL. The application of cluster analysis in strategic management research: an analysis and critique. Strategic Management Journal 1996, 17(6):441-458.
24. Knockaert M, Lockett A, Clarysse B, Wright M. Do human capital and fund characteristics drive follow-up behaviour of early stage high-tech VCs? International Journal of Technology Management 2006, 34(1):7-27.
25. Kortum S, Lerner J. Assessing the contribution of venture capital to innovation. The Rand Journal of Economics 2000, 31(4):674-693.
26. Lockett A, Murray G, Wright M. Do UK venture capitalists still have a bias against investment in new technology firms. Research Policy 2002, 31:1009-1030.
27. MacMillan IC, Siegel R, Subbanarashima PN. Criteria used by venture capitalists to evaluate new venture proposals. Journal of Business Venturing 1985, 1:119-128.
28. MacMillan IC, Zemann L, Subbanarashima PN. Criteria distinguishing successful from unsuccessful ventures in the venture screening process. Journal of Business Venturing 1987, 2:123-137.
29. Manigart S, Baeyens K, Van Hyfte W. The survival of venture capital backed companies. Venture Capital 2002, 4(2):103-124.
30. March JG, Feldman MS. Information in organisations as signal and symbol. Administrative Science Quarterly 1981, 26:171-186.
31. Meyer GD, Zacharakis AL, De Castro J. A post-mortem of new venture failure: an attribution theory perspective. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research 1993, 256-269.
32. Minola T, Giorgino M. Who's going to provide the funding for high tech start-ups? A model for the analysis of determinants with a fuzzy approach. R&D Management 2008, 38(3):335-351.
33. Moray N, Clarysse B. Institutional change and resource endowments to science-based entrepreneurial firms. Research Policy 2005, 34(7):1010-1027.
34. Murray G. A policy response to regional disparities in the supply of risk capital to new technology-based firms in the European Union: the European seed capital fund scheme. Regional Studies 1998, 32(5):405-420.
35. Murray G. Early stage venture capital funds, scale economies and public support. Venture Capital 1999, 1(4):351-384.
36. Murray G, Lott J. Have UK venture capitalists a bias against investment in new technology-based firms? Research Policy 1995, 24:283-300.
37. Mustar P. Spin-off enterprises. How French academics create hi-tech companies: the conditions for success and failure. Science and Public Policy 1997, 24:37-43.
38. Mustar P, Renault M, Colombo M, Piva E, Fontes M, Lockett A, Wright M, Clarysse B, Moray N. Conceptualising the heterogeneity of research-based spin-offs: a multi-dimensional taxonomy. Research Policy 2006, 35(2):289-308.
39. Muzyka D, Birley S, Leleux B. Trade-offs in the investment decisions of European Venture capitalists. Journal of Business Venturing 1996, 11:273-287.
40. Oakey R. High Technology New Firms: Variable Barriers to Growth 1995, London, Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
41. Riquelme H, Rickards T. Hybrid conjoint analysis: an estimation probe in new venture decisions. Journal of Business Venturing 1992, 7:505-518.
42. Rothwell R, Zegveld W. Industrial Innovation and Small and Medium Sized Firms 1982, London, Francis Pinter
43. Sapienza HJ, Amason AC, Manigart S. The level and nature of venture capitalist involvement in their portfolio companies: a study of three European countries. Managerial Finance 1994, 20(1):3-17.
44. Sapienza HJ, Gupta AK. The impact of agency risks and task uncertainty on venture capitalist-CEO interaction. Academy of Management Journal 1994, 37(5):1618-1632.
45. Shepherd DA, Ettenson R, Crouch A. New venture strategy and profitability: a venture capitalist's assessment. Journal of Business Venturing. 2000, 15:449-467.
46. Shepherd DA, Zacharakis A. Conjoint analysis: a new methodological approach for researching the decision policies of venture capitalists. Venture Capital 1999, 1(3):197-217.
47. Shepherd DA, Zacharakis A, Robert AJ. 'VCs' decision processes: evidence suggesting more experience may not always be better. Journal of Business Venturing 2003, 18:381-401.
48. Storey DJ, Tether BS. Public policy measures to support new technology-based firms in the European Union. Research Policy. 1998, 26:1037-1057.
49. Tyebjee TT, Bruno AV. A model of VC investment activity. Management Science 1984, 30:1051-1066.
50. Weber C, Dierkes M. Strukturmerkmale klassischer Venture-Capital-Gesellschaften und Corporate-Venture-Capital-Gesellschaften in Deutschland im Vergleich. Finanzbetrief 2002, 4:545-553.
51. Wood R, Bandura A. Social cognitive theory of organizational management. Academy of Management Review 1989, 14(3):361-384.
52. Wright M, Lockett A, Clarysse B, Binks M. University spin-out companies and venture capital. Research Policy 2006, 35(4):481-501.