Venture capital internationalization : synthesis and future research directions

Research on venture capital internationalization (VC) has expanded rapidly over the last decade. This paper reviews the extant literature on VC internationalization and highlights gaps in our knowledge. We identify three major research streams within this literature, which revolve around the following questions: (1) which VC firms invest across borders and what countries do they target, with a macro-economic or a micro-economic focus; (2) how do VC firms address the liabilities of non-domestic investing; and (3) what are the real effects of international VC investments? We provide an overview of the contributions in these research streams, discuss the role of public policy, and suggest avenues for future research. Specifically, we call for a deeper understanding of: (1) the functioning and impact of VC firms’ modes of internationalization; (2) micro level processes such as the functioning and decision making of international investment committees, the interaction between headquarters and local offices, or the development of international human and social capital; (3) the role of country institutions in VC internationalization and its real effects; and (4) the interplay of international VC with alternative financing sources

Microfoundations for learning within international joint ventures

IJV research highlights the importance of learning in international joint ventures (IJVs) but has not indicated how to achieve it. We combine organizational learning and internationalization process research within a microfoundations framework to understand learning in IJVs. We study a Samsung-Tesco IJV that successfully learned retail practice from one partner and applied it in a South Korean context known by the other. The managers used many learning processes, not just experiential learning emphasized in international business research, and used many more knowledge sources than assumed in prior research, including the IJV partners’ other subsidiaries. To build absorptive capacity, IJVs need appropriate microfoundations at individual, process and structural levels, and coherent interlinkages between them, especially by having IJV managers’ with extensive experience and orientation to learn who are given structural and process autonomy to invest in learning

Relocation to get venture capital : a resource dependence perspective

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from SAGE via the DOI in this record.Using a resource dependence perspective, we theorize and show that non-venture-capital-backed ventures founded in U.S. states with a lower availability of venture capital (VC) are more likely to relocate to California (CA) or Massachusetts (MA)—the two VC richest states—compared to ventures founded in states with a greater availability of VC. Moreover, controlling for self-selection, ventures that relocate to CA or MA subsequently have a greater probability of attracting initial VC compared to ventures that stay in their home state. We discuss the implications for theory, future research, and practice

Failure processes and causes of company bankruptcy: a typology

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to show that previous research about financial and non-financial causes of bankruptcy has neglected the time dimension of failure. The paper seeks to gain deeper insight into the failure process of a company, giving it a more grounded understanding of the relationship between the characteristics of a company, the underlying causes of failure and the financial effects. Design/methodollogy/approach - The findings are based on a literature overview and in-depth case study research. Findings - Four types of failure processes were observed: the failure process of unsuccessful startups, the failure process of ambitious growth companies, the failure process of dazzled growth companies, and the failure process of apathetic established companies. Between these four failure processes, there exist major distinctions in terms of the presence and the importance of specific causes of bankruptcy, i.e. errors made by management, errors in the corporate policy and the importance of external factors. Research limitations/implications - The results of the study are based on qualitative, case study research. No attempt is made to quantify the existence and the importance of the findings. The major constructs that emerged as important in the research are well-known concepts in the management literature. As a consequence, they should be further developed in order to quantify their effect in large-scale studies. Practical implications - Based on the findings, stakeholders of a company can have a clearer view of both the time dimension inherent in corporate failure and the impact of their own actions on bankruptcy. Originality/value - The paper lays the ground for understanding the process of company failure. Company failure does not happen overnight and therefore a longitudinal and holistic perspective is needed

Failure processes and causes of company bankruptcy: a typology

This paper describes a typology of failure processes within companies. Based on case studies and considering companies' ages and management characteristics, we discovered four types of failure processes. The first failure process describes the deterioration of unsuccessful start-up companies leaded by a management with a serious deficiency in managerial and industry- related experience. The second process reveals the failure process of ambitious growth companies. Those companies have, after a failed investment, insufficient financial means to adjust their way of doing business to the changes in the environment in order to prevent bankruptcy. Third, we describe the failure process of dazzled growth companies, leaded by an overconfident management without a realistic view on the company's financial situation. Lastly, the failure process of apathetic established companies, describes the gradual deterioration of established companies where management had lost touch with the changing environment. We also found that there is a great difference in the presence and importance of specific causes of bankruptcy between the distinctive failure processes . Errors made by management, errors in corporate policy and changes in the general and immediate environments differ considerably between each of the four failure processes