Heterogeneity in organizational search behaviors: The case of corporate venture capital units

IF 5.4 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Raj Krishnan Shankar, M. Schückes, T. Gutmann
{"title":"Heterogeneity in organizational search behaviors: The case of corporate venture capital units","authors":"Raj Krishnan Shankar, M. Schückes, T. Gutmann","doi":"10.1002/sej.1508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our qualitative study of five corporate venture capital (CVC) units reveals that CVC is organized along one of two distinct pathways—order‐taker or free‐bird. Our two‐pathway model deconstructs the heterogeneity within CVC designs and provides detailed insights into the processual nature of CVC search mechanisms. We find evidence that the locus of problem formulation influences the chosen search behavior. While order‐takers respond to predefined corporate‐led problem formulation, free‐birds allow the venture market to guide search behavior. Differences in search processes can thus be attributed to the pursuit of distinct problem‐solution pairs. Implications for CVC and organizational search literature are discussed.Organizations search for new knowledge and technologies using corporate venture capital (CVC) units. Despite growing evidence of heterogeneity in CVC designs, managers continue to have limited insights for designing and running such CVC units. In contrast to previous recommendations to use structural attributes and/or institutional logics to design and manage CVCs, we provide managers an organizational search lens which reveals significant variations in how corporations search for new ventures. We identified two extreme CVC designs driven by the locus of problem formulation (internal vs. external): order‐takers—who respond to a predefined and corporate‐led problem formulation approach, and free‐birds—who shape the problem formulation guided by venture market dynamics. We point to design differences across popular CVC subprocesses which can be handy for managers.","PeriodicalId":51417,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1508","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our qualitative study of five corporate venture capital (CVC) units reveals that CVC is organized along one of two distinct pathways—order‐taker or free‐bird. Our two‐pathway model deconstructs the heterogeneity within CVC designs and provides detailed insights into the processual nature of CVC search mechanisms. We find evidence that the locus of problem formulation influences the chosen search behavior. While order‐takers respond to predefined corporate‐led problem formulation, free‐birds allow the venture market to guide search behavior. Differences in search processes can thus be attributed to the pursuit of distinct problem‐solution pairs. Implications for CVC and organizational search literature are discussed.Organizations search for new knowledge and technologies using corporate venture capital (CVC) units. Despite growing evidence of heterogeneity in CVC designs, managers continue to have limited insights for designing and running such CVC units. In contrast to previous recommendations to use structural attributes and/or institutional logics to design and manage CVCs, we provide managers an organizational search lens which reveals significant variations in how corporations search for new ventures. We identified two extreme CVC designs driven by the locus of problem formulation (internal vs. external): order‐takers—who respond to a predefined and corporate‐led problem formulation approach, and free‐birds—who shape the problem formulation guided by venture market dynamics. We point to design differences across popular CVC subprocesses which can be handy for managers.
组织搜索行为的异质性:企业风险投资单位的案例
我们对五家企业风险投资(CVC)机构进行的定性研究显示,CVC是按照两种不同的途径之一组织起来的--订单接受者或自由鸟。我们的双通道模型解构了 CVC 设计中的异质性,并对 CVC 搜索机制的过程性提供了详细的见解。我们发现有证据表明,问题提出的地点会影响所选择的搜索行为。订单接受者会对预先确定的由企业主导的问题制定做出反应,而自由鸟则会让风险投资市场来引导搜索行为。因此,搜索过程的差异可归因于对不同问题-解决方案的追求。本文讨论了企业风险投资和组织搜索文献的意义。尽管有越来越多的证据表明企业风险投资设计存在异质性,但管理者对设计和运营此类企业风险投资机构的见解仍然有限。与以往利用结构属性和/或制度逻辑来设计和管理 CVC 的建议不同,我们为管理者提供了一个组织搜索视角,揭示了企业如何搜索新企业的显著差异。我们发现了两种极端的 CVC 设计,其驱动因素是问题的提出地点(内部与外部):"订单接受者 "和 "自由鸟"。"订单接受者 "对预先确定的、由企业主导的问题提出方法做出回应,而 "自由鸟 "则在风险投资市场动态的引导下提出问题。我们指出了流行的 CVC 子流程在设计上的差异,这对管理者很有帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.10
自引率
1.60%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal is a research journal that publishes original work recommended by a developmental, double-blind review process conducted by peer scholars. Strategic entrepreneurship involves innovation and subsequent changes which add value to society and which change societal life in ways which have significant, sustainable, and durable consequences. The SEJ is international in scope and acknowledges theory- and evidence-based research conducted and/or applied in all regions of the world. It is devoted to content and quality standards based on scientific method, relevant theory, tested or testable propositions, and appropriate data and evidence, all replicable by others, and all representing original contributions. The SEJ values contributions which lead to improved practice of managing organizations as they deal with the entrepreneurial process involving imagination, insight, invention, and innovation and the inevitable changes and transformations that result and benefit society.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信