Corporate Venture Capital and R&D Investment: An Empirical Analysis Based on the Organizational Learning

DOI: https://doi.org/10.62517/jbm.202409519

Author(s)

Yin Yang*

Affiliation(s)

Business School, Southwest University of Political Science and Law, Chongqing, China *Corresponding Author.

Abstract

This paper investigates the effect of corporate venture capital (CVC) on the initiator company’s R&D investment. Using data from A-share listed companies from 2009 to 2016 in China, we find that CVC promotes R&D investment. Besides, the effect of CVC on R&D investment is influenced by industry-related factors; specifically, it is more pronounced in companies that conduct a major business-oriented venture capital. Further tests show that the association between CVC and R&D investment is stronger when the company operates in a high-tech industry, is located in a more developed region and is non-state-owned. Furthermore, the unique characteristics of CVC indicate that both a longer CVC duration and a greater number of CVC capitalists facilitate the association between CVC and R&D investment. Our study suggests that the organizational learning mechanism among CVC participants impacts the initiator company’s R&D investment. The findings have meaningful implications for listed companies in promoting R&D investment through organizational learning from CVC activities.

Keywords

Corporate Venture Capital; R&D Investment; Organizational Learning; High-Tech Industry

References

[1] Allen S A, Hevert K T. Venture capital investing by information technology companies: Did it pay? Journal of Business Venturing, 2007, 22(2): 262-282. [2] Dushnitsky G, Lenox M J. When does corporate venture capital investment create firm value? Journal of Business Venturing, 2006, 21(6): 753-772. [3] Chemmanur T J, Loutskina E, Tian X. Corporate venture capital, value creation, and innovation. The Review of Financial Studies, 2014, 27(8): 2434-2473. [4] Cooper A, Gadson J, Nielsen K, et al. Corporate Venturing-Gold Mining or Fool's Gold. Kellog TechVenture Anthology, 2001. [5] March J G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, 1991, 2(1): 71-87. [6] Miner A S, Bassof P, Moorman C. Organizational improvisation and learning: A field study. Administrative science quarterly, 2001, 46(2): 304-337. [7] Keil T. Building external corporate venturing capability. Journal of Management Studies, 2004, 41(5): 799-825. [8] Schildt H A, Maula M V J, Keil T. Explorative and exploitative learning from external corporate ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 2005, 29(4): 493-515. [9] Alter M, Buchsbaum L. Corporate venturing: Goals, compensation, and taxes. The Corporate Venturing Directory and Yearbook, 2000: 25-29. [10] Maula M, Autio E, Murray G. Prerequisites for the creation of social capital and subsequent knowledge acquisition in corporate venture capital. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 2003, 5(2): 117-134. [11] Keil T, Autio E, George G. Corporate venture capital, disembodied experimentation and capability development. Journal of Management Studies, 2008, 45(8): 1475-1505. [12] Dushnitsky G, Lenox M J. When do incumbents learn from entrepreneurial ventures? Corporate venture capital and investing firm innovation rates. Research Policy, 2005, 34(5): 615-639. [13] Hall B H. The financing of research and development. Oxford review of economic policy, 2002, 18(1): 35-51 [14] Uzzi B. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative science quarterly, 1997: 35-67. [15] Huikkola T, Ylimäki J, Kohtamäki M. Joint learning in R&D collaborations and the facilitating relational practices. Industrial Marketing Management, 2013, 42(7): 1167-1180. [16] Weerawardena J, O'Cass A, Julian C. Does industry matter? Examining the role of industry structure and organizational learning in innovation and brand performance. Journal of business research, 2006, 59(1): 37-45. [17] Tan C L, Chang Y P. Does Organizational Learning Affect R&D Engineers’ Creativity? Asian Social Science, 2015, 11(16): 137. [18] Uzzi B. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative science quarterly, 1997: 35-67. [19] Yost, M., & Devlin, K. The state of corporate venturing. Venture Capital Journal,1993, 33:37-40. [20] Maula M V J, Autio E, Murray G C. Corporate venture capital and the balance of risks and rewards for portfolio companies. Journal of Business Venturing, 2009, 24(3): 274-286. [21] Weber C, Weber B. Exploring the antecedents of social liabilities in CVC triads—A dynamic social network perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 2011, 26(2): 255-272. [22] Weber C. Corporate Venture Capitalists with a ‘Bird’s-Eye View’. Schmalenbach Business Review, 2009, 61(2): 195-224. [23] Cohen W M, Levinthal D A. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Strategic Learning in a Knowledge economy. 2000: 39-67 [24] Petersen M A. Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. The Review of Financial Studies, 2009, 22(1): 435-480. [25] Gilsing V, Nooteboom B, Vanhaverbeke W, et al. Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: Technological distance, betweenness centrality and density. Research policy, 2008, 37(10): 1717-1731. [26] Hsu P H, Tian X, Xu Y. Financial development and innovation: Cross-country evidence. Journal of Financial Economics, 2014, 112(1): 116-135. [27] Burt R S. Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Harvard university press, 2009.