The technological novelty of inventions signals economic potential while simultaneously indicating considerable technological and market risks. We speculate that unlike early-stage venture capital (VC) investors, late-stage public investors will interpret technological novelty as a signal of high risks. Consequently, they will hesitate to promptly invest in high-tech start-ups with such inventions, thereby slowing the initial public offering speed of the start-ups. Based on a sample of 408 VC-backed healthcare start-ups founded between 1990 and 2010, we find support for our hypothesis. We also find that the negative effect of technological novelty of inventions can be relieved when the technology is characterised by conventionality, when the founder is also the inventor, or when the start-up is backed by premium VC investors.
AghamollaCThakorRT (2022) IPO peer effects. Journal of Financial Economics144(1): 206–226.
2.
AhujaGLampertC (2001) Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: a longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management Journal22: 521–543.
3.
AndersonPTushmanML (1990) Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: a cyclical model of technological change. Administrative Science Quarterly35: 604–633.
4.
BakhshiHDaviesJFreemanA, et al. (2015) The Geography of the UK’s Creative and High-Tech Economies. United Kingdom: Nesta.
5.
BatniniFHammamiM (2015) IPO Waves: how market performances influence the market timing of IPO?Journal of Applied Business Research31(5): 1679–1692.
6.
BaumJASilvermanBS (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 Venturing19(3): 411–436.
7.
BranderJAAmitRAntweilerW (2002) Venture-capital syndication: improved venture selection vs. the value-added hypothesis. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy11(3): 423–452.
8.
ByunSFullerKLinZ (2021) The costs and benefits associated with inventor CEOs. Journal of Corporate Finance71: 102094.
9.
CallanderSMatouschekN (2022) The novelty of innovation: competition, disruption, and antitrust policy. Management Science68(1): 37–51.
10.
CarlinoGKerrWR (2015) Agglomeration and innovation. Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics5: 349–404.
11.
CeccagnoliMHigginsMJKangHD (2018) Corporate venture capital as a real option in the markets for technology. Strategic Management Journal39(13): 3355–3381.
12.
ChangSJ (2004) Venture capital financing, strategic alliances, and the initial public offerings of Internet start-ups. Journal of Business Venturing19(5): 721–741.
13.
ChemmanurTJHeJ (2011) IPO waves, product market competition, and the going public decision: Theory and evidence. Journal of Financial Economics101(2): 382–412.
14.
ChemmanurTJGuptaMSimonyanK (2020) Top management team quality and innovation in venture-backed private firms and IPO market rewards to innovative activity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice46: 920–951. DOI: 10.1177/1042258720918827.
15.
ChenJHengCSTanBC, et al. (2018) The distinct signaling effects of R&D subsidy and non-R&D subsidy on IPO performance of IT entrepreneurial firms in China. Research Policy47(1): 108–120.
16.
ChristensenCM (2013) The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
17.
CohenWMNelsonRRWalshJP (2000) Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not) (Working Paper No. 7552). National Bureau of Economic Research.
18.
ContiAGrahamSJ (2020) Valuable choices: prominent venture capitalists’ influence on start-up ceo replacements. Management Science66(3): 1325–1350.
19.
CowlingMLiuWZhangN (2021) In the post-crisis world, did debt and equity markets respond differently to high-tech industries and innovative firms?International Small Business Journal39(3): 247–288.
20.
CozzolinoARothaermelFT (2018) Discontinuities, competition, and cooperation: coopetitive dynamics between incumbents and entrants. Strategic Management Journal39(12): 3053–3085.
21.
CummingDJohanS (2016) Venture’s economic impact in Australia. The Journal of Technology Transfer41(1): 25–59.
DimovD (2010) Nascent entrepreneurs and venture emergence: opportunity confidence, human capital, and early planning. Journal of Management Studies47(6): 1123–1153.
24.
EttredgeMLLiCWangQ, et al. (2021) Executive board member financial expertise and IPO performance. Accounting Horizons35(1): 47–64.
25.
EwensMRhodes-KropfM (2015) Is a VC partnership greater than the sum of its partners?The Journal of Finance70(3): 1081–1113.
26.
FischerTRinglerP (2014) What patents are used as collaterals? An empirical analysis of patent reassignment data. Journal of Business Venturing29(5): 633–650.
27.
FlemingL (2001) Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Science47(1): 117–132.
28.
FullerAWRothaermelFT (2012) When stars shine: the effects of faculty founders on new technology ventures. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal6(3): 220–235.
29.
GompersPALernerJ (2004) The Venture Venture Capital Capital Ccycle. MIT press.
30.
GriffinA (1997) The effect of project and process characteristics on product development cycle time. Journal of Marketing Research34(1): 24–35.
31.
GulerI (2007) Throwing good money after bad? Political and institutional influences on sequential decision making in the venture capital industry. Administrative Science Quarterly52(2): 248–285.
32.
HeZHirshleiferD (2019) The exploratory mindset and corporate innovation. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis57: 1–43.
33.
HeeleyMBMatusikSFJainN (2007) Innovation, appropriability, and the underpricing of initial public offerings. Academy of Management Journal50(1): 209–225.
34.
HendersonRMClarkKB (1990) Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly35: 9–30.
35.
HirshleiferDAShengJ (2021) Macro news and micro news: complements or substitutes?Journal of Financial Economics. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.09.012, In Press.
36.
HoenigDHenkelJ (2015) Quality signals? The role of patents, alliances, and team experience in venture capital financing. Research Policy44(5): 1049–1064.
37.
HuangL (2018) The role of investor gut feel in managing complexity and extreme risk. Academy of Management Journal61(5): 1821–1847.
38.
HuangLPearceJL (2015) Managing the unknowable: the effectiveness of early-stage investor gut feel in entrepreneurial investment decisions. Administrative Science Quarterly60(4): 634–670.
39.
IslamEZeinJ (2020) Inventor CEOs. Journal of Financial Economics135(2): 505–527.
40.
KahnemanDFrederickS (2002) Representativeness revisited: attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment49.
41.
KahnemanDSlovicPTverskyA (eds) (1982) Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press.
42.
KleinbaumDG (1988) Selecting the best regression equation. Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariate Methods, 314–340.
43.
KortewegASorensenM (2017) Skill and luck in private equity performance. Journal of Financial Economics124(3): 535–562.
44.
LeaheyEBeckmanCMStankoTL (2017) Prominent but less productive: the impact of interdisciplinarity on scientists’ research. Administrative Science Quarterly62(1): 105–139.
45.
LiDAzoulayPSampatBN (2017) The applied value of public investments in biomedical research. Science356(6333): 78–81.
46.
MeyerJWRowanB (1977) Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology83(2): 340–363.
47.
NahataR (2008) Venture capital reputation and investment performance. Journal of Financial Economics90(2): 127–151.
48.
NandaRRhodes-KropfM (2013) Investment cycles and start-up innovation. Journal of Financial Economics110(2): 403–418.
49.
NandaRSamilaSSorensonO (2020) The persistent effect of initial success: evidence from venture capital. Journal of Financial Economics137(1): 231–248.
50.
NelsonRWinterS (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51.
NerkarAShaneS (2007) Determinants of invention commercialization: an empirical examination of academically sourced inventions. Strategic Management Journal28(11): 1155–1166.
52.
OzmelURobinsonDTStuartTE (2013) Strategic alliances, venture capital, and exit decisions in early-stage high-tech firms. Journal of Financial Economics107(3): 655–670.
53.
ParsonsCASulaemanJTitmanS (2018) The geography of financial misconduct. The Journal of Finance73(5): 2087–2137.
54.
PlotnickiMSzyszkaA (2014) IPO market timing. The evidence of the disposition effect among corporate managers. Global Finance Journal25(1): 48–55.
55.
PolidoroFJrYangW (2021) Corporate investment relationships and the search for innovations: an examination of start-ups’ search shift toward incumbents. Organization Science32(4): 909–939.
56.
PollockTGGulatiR (2007) Standing out from the crowd: the visibility-enhancing effects of IPO-related signals on alliance formation by entrepreneurial firms. Strategic Organization5(4): 339–372.
57.
PollockTGChenGJacksonEM, et al. (2010) How much prestige is enough? Assessing the value of multiple types of high-status affiliates for young firms. Journal of Business Venturing25(1): 6–23.
58.
RagozzinoRBlevinsDP (2016) Venture–backed firms: How does venture capital involvement affect their likelihood of going public or being acquired?Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice40(5): 991–1016.
59.
RagozzinoRBlevinsDP (2021) An investigation of the attention effects of venture capitalist backing on entrepreneurial firms. Long Range Planning54(3): 101995.
60.
ShenXLiHTolbertPS (2021) Converging tides lift all boats: consensus in evaluation criteria boosts investments in firms in nascent technology sectors. Organization Science. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2021.1493. In Press.
61.
ShepherdDAZacharakisA (2001) Speed to initial public offering of VC-backed companies. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice25(3): 59–70.
62.
StuartTEHoangHHybelsRC (1999) Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly44(2): 315–349.
63.
SuárezFFUtterbackJM (1995) Dominant designs and the survival of firms. Strategic Management Journal16(6): 415–430.
64.
TalaulicarT (2020) How do CEO values influence IPO speed? A conceptual analysis from the upper echelons perspective. Journal of New Business Ventures1(1–2): 69–91.
65.
TchetgenEJWalterSVansteelandtS, et al. (2015) Instrumental variable estimation in a survival context. Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)26(3): 402–410.
66.
TianX (2011) The causes and consequences of venture capital stage financing. Journal of Financial Economics101(1): 132–159.
67.
UzziBMukherjeeSStringerM, et al. (2013) Atypical combinations and scientific impact. Science342(6157): 468–472.
68.
VerhoevenDBakkerJVeugelersR (2016) Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators. Research Policy45(3): 707–723.
69.
WangJVeugelersRStephanP (2017) Bias against novelty in science: a cautionary tale for users of bibliometric indicators. Research Policy46(8): 1416–1436.
70.
YangQZimmermanMJiangC (2011) An empirical study of the impact of CEO characteristics on new firms’ time to IPO. Journal of Small Business Management49(2): 163–184.
