Search results

Considering the unique characteristics of equity crowdfunding platforms including the removal of stringent structural barriers (e.g. lack of co-location), high visibility and traceability of investor characteristics, large pool of available investors and simplified transaction process, the authors aim to examine how the two most prevalent mechanisms (i.e. homophily and repeated ties) unfold in this context by incorporating the contextual characteristics. The authors theorize an inverted U-shaped relationship between leader-backer similarity and the likelihood of co-investment in a syndicate on equity crowdfunding platforms. In addition, a leader–backer dyad is more likely to form new syndicates if the students have more prior co-investment ties.

The empirical study is based on data from the AngelList syndicate platform and a linear probability model (LPM) with fixed effects is adopted to estimate the syndicate formation.

The authors find that the similarity between a leader and a backer has an inverted U-shaped relationship with the leader and backer's likelihood of co-investment in a syndicate, which is different from the dominant homophily-based tie formation in venture capital (VC) syndicates and other digital platform contexts. Although equity crowdfunding platforms encourage the possibility of exploring new partners, investors are more likely to co-invest with others who have stronger prior ties.

This research theoretically contributes to the scant literature of equity crowdfunding syndicates by contextualizing two most prevalent mechanisms (i.e. homophily and repeated ties) driving tie formation in VC syndicates and digital platforms.

This study empirically aims to examine the collaboration between social enterprises (SEs) and impact investors (IIs), which are organisations with similar interests but with distinct logics, and in high demand in emerging economies with complex problems. Despite the significant economic contributions of these organisations, there have been limited studies examining how they collaborate in different contexts, including theoretical insights explaining how they gain partner fit from resource synergy.

Mainstream businesses use the compatibility and complementarity concepts to examine buyer–supplier strategic alliances. Using similar concepts in the context of hybrid organisations, the authors interviewed six pairs of SEs and IIs with dyadic relations in Nigeria, aiming to deeply understand how they align dissimilar logics in pursuing common goals in emerging economies.

The authors’ findings revealed how compatibility criteria from the institutional logics perspective and complementarity from social exchange theory guide collaboration between SEs and IIs in an emerging economy. Using these theories provides new insights that distinguish SEs and IIs collaboration from conventional theories on the internationalisation of businesses, which remained insufficient for understanding the cross-border operations of SEs.

The study holds practical implications for organisations, regardless of their size, international investors, governments, organisations and individuals desiring to pursue sustainable business agendas in emerging economies with huge impact opportunities and the process involved.

The outcomes of this study extend knowledge of the theoretical lens examining collaborative entrepreneurship from the perspective of hybrid organisations. It also challenged existing knowledge on collaboration between SEs and IIs, often characterised by potential tensions due to the dissimilarity of institutional logics of actors.

The aim of this study is to understand the levels (i.e. mild vs intense) of task conflict (TC) expressions between angel investors and entrepreneurs at the post-investment stage and how it affect angel investors’ follow-on investment intentions with the same entrepreneur.

Survey data was gathered from 71 angel investors in China. Mplus was used to test the proposed research model.

This study found that angels perceive affective conflict (AC) when engaged in intense TC, unlike the case for mild TC expressions. Furthermore, the analysis shows that, unlike mild TC expressions, intense TC expressions impede angels’ reinvestment intentions when they perceive ACs. Other results indicate that when angels perceive that entrepreneurs are not open to coaching, the prominence of mild TC expression is sharply mitigated and becomes as detrimental as intense TC expressions.

This study only focused on one specific aspect of the angel–entrepreneur post-investment relationship: The effect of their TC expressions on angels’ reinvestment intentions. By no means do the authors imply that TC expression in the angel–entrepreneur post-investment relationship is the only factor that matters to angel investors in their follow-on investment intentions with the same entrepreneur.

The findings suggest that entrepreneurs should pay careful attention to TC that may arise between them and their financiers. TCs are not entirely detrimental, but their negative effect might depend on how they are expressed. An appropriate level of TC may also improve enterprise performance and collaboration. Thus, angels and entrepreneurs should set clear goals and performance standards, where task interactions mainly focus on the goals and expected outcomes.

Prior to this study, little was known about whether all TCs potentially lead to ACs. By distinguishing between levels (i.e. mild vs intense) of TC expressions between angels and entrepreneurs, this study adds a novel aspect to it by showing that TC, in and of itself, does not necessarily lead to AC but can lead to AC once its intensity grows.

Consumer product firms renowned for marketing appear to be complementing brand creation, extension and acquisition with minority equity investments in entrepreneurial brand ventures (EBVs) for strategic purposes. Similarly, EBVs are looking for growth and resources that can be accessed via inter-organizational partnerships. This flourishing industry practice and the paucity of empirical research indicates the potential for new studies. The research objective was to examine why and how large incumbents were implementing strategic brand venturing (SBV), and with this understanding to develop a framework useful for descriptive and normative purposes.

This qualitative research study comprised in-depth interviews and multiple data sources across seven case studies drawn from US subsidiaries of global firms within the consumer products industry. Grounded in resource theory, the dimensions of strategic brand equity investments are abductively derived.

The findings delineate 16 process capabilities within four aggregate clusters entailing, the designing of the SBV program, opportunity identification, brand entrepreneur partnerships and venture portfolio management. Prefaced by endogenous and exogenous antecedents, these process capabilities help to contribute strategic and financial value when implemented.

This qualitative research study yielded analytical rather than statistical generalizations. A range of market and economic factors exist in the United States contributing towards a favorable entrepreneurial and brand incubation climate. This may render the SBV concept as contingent and contextual. Furthermore, the view of brand entrepreneurs' regarding the design of the process model were not explicitly sought but inferred from the discourses of the venturing units interviewed.

The article outlines several important implementation imperatives for corporations endeavoring to competitively advantage their brand portfolios via adoption of a minority equity investing strategy in EBVs. Practitioners are cautioned against myopically adopting this process alone as a success heuristic given other factors may impact success such as changes in corporate strategy or upper echelon sponsorship.

Mission preservation for social brand ventures being tethered to a large incumbent may need to be taken into account prior to and during SBV relationships.

The research contributes to the call for greater insights into the investment processes used in venturing relationships as well as coverage of new industry sectors beyond technology industries that often characterize corporate venture capital studies. Several novel findings emerged related to the importance of—the industry ecosystem; symbiosis between the founding brand entrepreneur and brand culture; synchronization of investment strategies with an emerging brand life-cycle model and serendipitous corporate entrepreneurial opportunities.

This paper examines the governance function that incubators perform for entrepreneurial firms. The authors demonstrate that this governance function has both a consultative and a control dimension and illustrate how these are enacted in the interactions between incubators and entrepreneurs. The authors also show how these interactions come into being and how entrepreneurs assess the value of the governance role played by incubators.

The paper is based on a cross-sectional interview study with entrepreneurs of 21 start-ups that were hosted by three different incubators. The start-ups are all early-stage technology firms. The analysis in the paper follows an inductive approach.

The authors find that the governance role of incubators is about both consultation and control. Consultative forms of governance include providing input and advice as well as questioning ideas and assumptions. Controlling forms of governance comprise setting targets and tracking progress as well as enforcing structures and documentation. The authors furthermore show that governance episodes are triggered either by the entrepreneurs themselves or by the incubator. In the former case, such episodes are mainly about consultation, while in the latter one, they often have a pronounced control element, which materializes particularly through regularly enforced meetings. Most entrepreneurs seem to appreciate this control element, acknowledging that, in its absence, they would lack the self-discipline of doing some things that need to be done.

This study’s findings extend prior research on inter-organizational relationships and the types of governance mechanisms observed therein. The authors show that a strict separation between actors who offer consultation and those who exercise control is too simplistic. Incubators influence entrepreneurial firms both through consultative and controlling forms of governance. In terms of limitations, this study’s analysis focuses on the perspectives of entrepreneurs, and the authors did not include the perspectives of incubators nor did the authors directly observe meetings between these two parties.

This paper provides examples for how entrepreneurial firms can benefit from being part of an incubator.

This study contributes to the discussion of the governance of inter-organizational relationships by focusing on incubators. In so doing, the authors also complement extant literature on management control in entrepreneurial settings by showing how the incubator fulfills a control function for entrepreneurs before these implement control mechanisms themselves.