This article investigates how prior corporate venture capital (CVC) relationships between two firms affect the likelihood of their subsequently entering a strategic alliance. Creating a portfolio of CVC investments provides the investing firm with a set of opportunities that can be pursued once the technological and market uncertainty have been reduced. If the technology appears to be promising, a follow–on investment, such as a strategic alliance, is made to ensure the transfer of the technological knowledge. This article shows that prior CVC investments can play a role in the formation of strategic alliances and investigates the conditions under which they are most likely to do so.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgarwalR. & GortM. (2001). First mover advantage and the speed of competitive entry. Journal of Law and Economics, 44, 161–177.
2.
AhujaG. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 425–455.
3.
AhujaG. & KatilaR. (2001). Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: A longitudinal study. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 197–220.
4.
AllenS.A. & HevertK.T. (2007). Venture capital investing by information technology companies: Did it pay?Journal of Business Venturing, 22, 262–282.
5.
BalakrishnanS. & KozaM.P. (1993). Information asymmetry, adverse selection and joint ventures: Theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 20, 99–117.
6.
BamfordJ., Gomes–CasseresB., & RobinsonM. (2003). Mastering alliance strategy: A comprehensive guide to design, management, and organization. San Francisco, CA: Jossey–Bass.
7.
BasuS., PhelpsC., & KothaS. (2011). Towards understanding who makes corporate venture capital investments and why. Journal of Business Venturing, 26, 153–171.
8.
BensonD. & ZiedonisR.H. (2009). Corporate venture capital as a window on new technologies: Implications for corporate investors when acquiring startups. Organization Science, 20, 352–376.
9.
BowmanE.H. & HurryD. (1993). Strategy through the option lens: An integrated view of resource investments and the incremental choice process. Academy of Management Review, 18, 760–782.
10.
ChesbroughH.W. (2000). Designing corporate ventures in the shadow of private venture capital. California Management Review, 42(3), 31–49.
11.
ChesbroughH.W. (2002). Making sense of corporate venture capital. Harvard Business Review, 80(3), 4–11.
12.
ChesbroughH.W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
13.
ChesbroughH.W. (2006). Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
14.
CohenM. & LevinthalD.A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152.
15.
DimovD. & MurrayG. (2008). Determinants of the incidence and scale of seed capital investments by venture capital firms. Small Business Economics, 30, 127–152.
16.
DixitA.K. & PindyckR.S. (1994). Investment under uncertainty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
17.
DushnitskyG. (2004). Limitations to inter–organizational knowledge acquisitions. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Stern School of Business, New York University.
18.
DushnitskyG. & LavieD. (2010). How alliance formation shapes corporate venture capital investment in the software industry: A resource–based perspective. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 4, 22–48.
19.
DushnitskyG. & LenoxM.J. (2005a). When do incumbents learn from entrepreneurial ventures? Corporate venture capital and investing firm innovation rates. Research Policy, 34, 615–639.
20.
DushnitskyG. & LenoxM.J. (2005b). When do firms undertake R&D by investing in new ventures?Strategic Management Journal, 26(10), 947–965.
21.
DushnitskyG. & LenoxM.J. (2006). When does corporate venture capital investment create firm value?Journal of Business Venturing, 21, 753–772.
DyerJ.H., KaleP., & SinghH. (2001). How to make strategic alliances work. Sloan Management Review, 42(4), 37–43.
24.
FoltaT.B. (1998). Governance and uncertainty: The trade–off between administrative control and commitment. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 1007–1028.
25.
FoltaT.B. & MillerK.D. (2002). Real options in equity partnerships. Strategic Management Journal, 23, 77–88.
26.
GompersP.A. & LernerJ. (2000). The determinants of corporate venture capital success: Organizational structure, incentives, and complementarities. In MorckR. (Ed.), concentrated corporate ownership (pp. 17–50). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
27.
GompersP.A. & LernerJ. (2001). The venture capital revolution. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15, 145–168.
28.
GrönlundJ., Rönnberg SjödinD., & FrishammarJ. (2010). Open innovation and the stage–gate process: A revised model for new product development. California Management Review, 52(3), 106–131.
29.
GulatiR. (1995). Social structure and alliance formation patterns: A longitudinal analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 619–652.
30.
GulatiR. (1998). Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 293–317.
31.
GulatiR. (1999). Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 397–420.
32.
GulatiR. & GargiuloM. (1999). Where do interorganizational networks come from?American Journal of Sociology, 104, 1439–1493.
33.
GulerI. (2007). Throwing good money after bad? Political and institutional influences on sequential decision making in the venture capital industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(2), 248–285.
34.
HagedoornJ. (2002). Inter–firm R&D partnerships: An overview of major trends and patterns since 1960. Research Policy, 31, 477–492.
35.
HagedoornJ. & SadowskiB. (1999). The transition from strategic technology alliances to mergers and acquisitions: An exploratory study. Journal of Management Studies, 36, 87–107.
36.
HaspeslaghG. & JemisonD.B. (1991). Managing acquisitions: Creating value through corporate acquisition activity. New York: Free Press.
37.
HeimeriksK.H., VanhaverbekeW., & DuystersG. (2007). An exploratory study of learning mechanisms and differential performance in alliance portfolios. Strategic Organization, 5(4), 373–408.
38.
HillS.A., MaulaM.V.J., BirkinshawJ.M., & MurrayG.C. (2009). Transferability of the venture capital model to the corporate context: Implications for the performance of corporate venture units. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(1), 3–27.
39.
HoskissonR.E. & BusenitzL.W. (2002). Market uncertainty and learning distance in corporate entrepreneurship entry mode choice. In HittM.A., IrelandR.D., CampS.M., & SextonD.L. (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset (pp. 151–172). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
40.
JanneyJ.J. & DessG.G. (2004). Can real–options analysis improve decision–making? Promises and pitfalls. Academy of Management Executive, 18, 60–75.
41.
JenkinsS. (1995). Easy estimation methods for discrete–time duration models. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 57, 120–138.
42.
KaleP., DyerJ.H., & SinghH. (2002). Alliance capability, stock market response, and long–term alliance success: The role of the alliance function. Strategic Management Journal, 23, 747–767.
43.
KatilaR., RosenbergerJ., & EisenhardtK. (2008). Swimming with sharks: Technology ventures, defense mechanisms and corporate relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53, 295–332.
KeilT., MaulaM., SchildtH., & ZahraS. (2008). The effect of governance modes and relatedness of external business development activities on innovative performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 895–907.
46.
KelleyD. & SpinelliS. (2001). The role of corporate investor relationships in the formation of alliances for corporate venture capital funded startups. Working paper. Babson Park, MA: Babson College.
KogutB. (1991). Joint ventures and the option to expand and acquire. Management Science, 37, 19–33.
49.
KumarM.V. (2005). The value of acquiring and divesting a joint venture: A real options approach. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 321–331.
50.
LaneP.J., KokaB.R., & PathakS. (2006). The reification of absorptive capacity: A critical review and rejuvenation of the construct. Academy of Management Review, 31, 833–863.
LavieD. (2004). The evolution and strategy of interconnected firms: A study of the Unisys alliance network. Best Paper Proceedings of the Academy of Management Conference, New Orleans, LA.
53.
LiY. & MahoneyJ.T. (2006). A real options view of corporate venture capital investment decisions: An empirical examination. Working paper, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign.
LindseyL. (2008). Blurring firm boundaries: The role of venture capital in strategic alliances. Journal of Finance, 63(3), 1137–1168.
56.
MacMillanI., RobertsE., LivadaV., & WangA. (2008). Corporate venture capital (CVC): Seeking innovation and strategic growth. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Science and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce.
57.
MajdS. & PindyckR. (1987). Time to build, option value, and investment decisions. Journal of Financial Economics, 18, 7–27.
58.
MarchJ.G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2, 71–87.
59.
MaulaM.V.J., AutioE., & MurrayG.C. (2005). Corporate venture capitalists and independent venture capitalists: What do they know, who do they know, and should entrepreneurs care?Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 7, 3–19.
60.
MaulaM.V.J., KeilT., & ZahraS.A. (2003). Corporate venture capital and recognition of technological discontinuities. Working paper, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
61.
McGrathR.G. (1997). A real options logic for initiating technology positioning investments. Academy of Management Review, 22, 974–996.
62.
McNallyK. (1997). Corporate venture capital: Bridging the equity gap in the small business sector. London, U.K.: Routledge.
63.
MitsuhashiH. & GreveH.R. (2009). A matching theory of alliance formation and organizational success: Complementarity and compatibility. Academy of Management Journal, 52(5), 975–995.
64.
MoweryD., OxleyJ., & SilvermanB. (1998). Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: Implications for the resource–based view of the firm. Research Policy, 27, 507–523.
65.
NarulaR. & SantangeloG. (2009). Location, collocation and R&D alliances in the European ICT industry. Research Policy, 38, 393–403.
66.
NooteboomB. (2000). Learning and innovation in organizations and economies. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
67.
NooteboomB., VanhaverbekeW., DuystersG., GilsingV., & Van den OordA. (2007). Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 36, 1016–1034.
68.
OzmelU., JeffreyJ.R., & GulatiR. (2011). Network interdependencies: Signals from venture capital and alliance networks in determining future alliance formation. To appear in Academy of Management Journal.
69.
PatelP. & PavittK. (1997). The technological competencies of the world's largest firms: Complex and path–dependent, but not much variety. Research Policy, 26, 141–156.
70.
PuranamP., SinghH., & ChaudhuriS. (2009). Integrating acquired capabilities: When structural integration is (un)necessary. Organization Science, 20, 313–328.
71.
ReuerJ.J. & KozaM.P. (2000). Asymmetric information and joint venture performance: Theory and evidence for domestic and international joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 81–88.
72.
RobertsE.B. & BerryC.A. (1985). Entering new businesses: Selecting strategies for success. Sloan Management Review, 26, 3–17.
73.
RobertsE.B. & LiuW.K. (2001). Ally or acquire? How technology leaders decide. MIT Sloan Management Review, 43(1), 26–34.
74.
RobertsK. & WeitzmanM. (1981). Funding criteria for research, development, and exploration projects. Econometrica, 49, 1261–1288.
75.
RoijakkersN., HagedoornJ., & Van KranenburgH. (2005). Dual market structures and the likelihood of repeated ties—Evidence from pharmaceutical biotechnology. Research Policy, 34, 235–245.
76.
RosenbergerJ. & EisenhardtK. (2003). What are real options? A review of empirical research. AOM 2003 Conference Proceedings.
77.
SahlmanW. (1990). The structure and governance of venture capital organizations. Journal of Financial Economics, 27, 473–521.
78.
SantoroM.D. & McGillJ.P. (2005). The effect of uncertainty and asset co–specialization on governance in biotechnology alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 1261–1269.
79.
SchildtH.A., MaulaM.V.J., & KeilT. (2005). Explorative and exploitative learning from external corporate ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29, 493–515.
80.
SiegelR., SiegelE., & MacMillanI. (1988). Corporate venture capitalists: Autonomy, obstacles and performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 3, 233–247.
81.
SorensonO. & StuartT.E. (2001). Syndication networks and the spatial distribution of venture capital investments. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 1546–1588.
82.
SorensonO. & StuartT.E. (2008). Bringing the context back in: Settings and the search for syndicate partners in venture capital investment networks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(2), 266–294.
83.
StuartT.E. (1998). Network positions and propensities to collaborate: An investigation of strategic alliance formation in a high–technology industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 668–698.
84.
SykesH. (1990). Corporate venture capital: Strategies for success. Journal of Business Venturing, 5, 37–47.
85.
TongT.W. & LiY. (2011). Real options and investment mode: Evidence from corporate venture capital and acquisition. Organization Science, 22(3), 659–674.
86.
TongT.W., ReuerJ.J., & PengM.W. (2008). International joint ventures and the value of growth options. Academy of Management Journal, 51(5), 1014–1029.
87.
TrigeorgisL. (1996). Real options: Managerial flexibility and strategy in resource allocation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
88.
Van de VrandeV., LemmensC., & VanhaverbekeW. (2006). Choosing governance modes for external technology sourcing. R&D Management, 36, 347–363.
89.
Van de VrandeV., VanhaverbekeW., & DuystersG. (2009). External technology sourcing: The effect of uncertainty on governance mode choice. Journal of Business Venturing, 24, 62–80.
90.
VanhaverbekeW., DuystersG., & NoorderhavenN. (2002). External technology sourcing through alliances or acquisitions: An analysis of the application–specific integrated circuits industry. Organization Science, 13, 714–733.
91.
VanhaverbekeW., GilsingV., BeerkensB., & DuystersG. (2009). The role of alliance network redundancy in the creation of core and non–core technologies. Journal of Management Studies, 46, 215–244.
92.
VillalongaB. & McGahanA.M. (2005). The choice among acquisitions, alliances and divestures. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 1183–1208.
93.
WadhwaA. & KothaS. (2006). Knowledge creation through external venturing: Evidence from the telecommunications equipment manufacturing industry. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 819–835.
94.
WadhwaA. & PhelpsC. (2011). Take a chance on me: An examination of the interdependence of start–up tie formation across venture capital and alliance networks. Paper presented at the DRUID 2011 conference at Copenhagen Business School, Denmark, June 15–17, 2011.
95.
WilliamsonO.E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York: Free Press.
96.
YangY., NarayananV.K., & ZahraS. (2009). Developing the selection and valuation capabilities through learning: The case of corporate venture capital. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(3), 261–273.
97.
ZahraS.A. (1996). Governance, ownership, and corporate entrepreneurship: The moderating impact of industry technological opportunities. Academy of Management Journal, 39(6), 1713–1735.
98.
ZahraS.A. & CovinJ. (1995). Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship–performance relationship: A longitudinal analysis. Journal Business Venturing, 10(1), 43–59.
