Model for the effective implementation of technological venture capital strategy (Case Study; Future Bank)

Subject Areas : Financial engineering

AbdolMajid SaadatNezhad ¹ , Tahmoures Sohrabi ² , Abbas Toloie Eshlaghy ³ , Nosratollah ShadNoush ⁴

1 - Department of Industrial Management, Central tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 - Department of Industrial Management, Central tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3 - Department of Industrial Management, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
4 - Department of Industrial Management, Central tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Received: 2020-02-01 Accepted : 2020-07-14 Published : 2020-12-21

Keywords: Strategy Implementation, Technology Venture Capital, Technology Financing,

Abstract :

Unlike strategy formulation and monitoring models, which are often general applicable to different industries, strategy implementation models are always a function of the specific characteristics of each firm, so in this study, the researcher seeks to design a native model for one of the bank's functional strategies in the area of financing technological venture capital strategy. The present study is a descriptive study using qualitative-quantitative mixed methods.Using exploratory factor analysis(EFA), the identified factors were prioritized in previous research and then the final relationships were identified using structural equation modeling(SEM) and confirmatory factor analysis(CFA).In order to investigate the changes of factors and their impact on the effectiveness of the research model, a system dynamics approach was used. Then, by setting up an interview protocol with 12 experts, the effectiveness of the strategy's implementation as a dependent variable was evaluated and analyzed in the synergy sessions by the effect of changes in factors and sub-components in different scenarios.Factors Evaluating venture capital Plans, Business and Operational Characteristics of Investment Plans, Entrepreneurial Factors, and venture capital Subcomponents are important factors and sub-components of the model.

References:

 

1. ایمانی پور، نرگس و کنعانی، مهدی (1389). شناسایی عوامل مؤثر بر تصمیم به خروج سرمایه‌گذاران مخاطره پذیر. مجله. توسعه کارآفرینی، 1(4)، 83- 67.


2. آذر، عادل؛ غلامزاده، رامین و و قنواتی، مریم (1391). مد لسازی مسیری - ساختاری در مدیریت کابرد نرم افزار Smart PLS. تهران: انتشارات نگاه دانش.


3. باقری، سیدکامران و محبوبی، جواد (1393). سرمایه‌گذاری خطرپذیر، انتشارات باران و بنیاد توسعه فردا، تهران. چاپ اول.


4. خلیلی عراقی، منصور و سلیمی شندی، رقیه (1393). رابطه بین سرمایه‌گذاری مستقیم خارجی، توسعه مالی و رشد اقتصادی: مطالعه موردی کشورهای منتخب آسیایی. فصلنامه پژوهش ها و سیاست های اقتصادی، 22(71)، 156- 143.


5. عسکری، محمدمهدی و امید میرچولی (1390)، بررسی تطبیقی ابزار سرمایه‌گذاری ریسک‌پذیر با دیگر ابزارهای مشابه در بازارهای اسلامی و غیر اسلامی، پژوهش‌های اقتصادی ایران، شماره 48، صص163-135.


6. کشاورز، عین الله و منتظری، محسن (1393). سرمایه‌گذاری مخاطره پذیر و ارتباط آن با مراکز رشد. چهارمین همایش ملی صنعت سرمایه‌گذاری مخاطره آمیز.


7. کوشافر، مصطفی؛ نوروش، ایرج و مشایخی، بیتا (1396). سنجش کارآیی و توانایی مدیریت بر اساس معیارهای مالی. فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی دانش حسابداری و حسابرسی مدیریت، 6(23)، 202- 187.


8. محمدی، علیرضا (1395). بررسی تکنیک ها و نرم افزارهای آماری جهت سنجش چندگانه پرسش نامه های محقق ساخته. پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد مهندسی کامپیوتر، دانشگاه آزاد همدان. چاپ نشده.


9. مختاری، مرضیه و فلاحی، نعمت الله (1395). بررسی کارآفرینی فردی و ویژگی‌های شخصیتی کارآفرینان. اولین کنفرانس بین المللی کارآفرینی، خلاقیت و نوآوری.


10. مدل­سازی معادلات ساختاری با نرم افزار PLS، نوشته علی داوری و آرش رضازاده، انتشارات جهاد دانشگاهی، چاپ اول، 1392.


11. مرکز پژوهش های مجلس شورای اسلامی (1394)، بررسی چالش ها و ظرفیت های قانونی توسعه صنعت سرمایه‌گذاری خطرپذیر (با تمرکز بر صندوق های پژوهش و فناوری غیردولتی)، تهران، معاونت پژوهش های اقتصادی، دفتر مطالعات اقتصادی، کد موضوعی 280، شماره مسلسل 14406.


12. معصومی‌نیا، غلامعلی و مصطفی شهیدی نسب (1388)، بررسی فقهی و اقتصادی ابزار تأمین مالی مشارکت کاهنده، اقتصاد اسلامی، شماره 35، صص128-99.


13. منطقی، منوچهر؛ حاجی‌غلام سریزدی، علی و زارع مهرجردی. یحیی، (1392)، سیستم داینامیک. تهران: انتشارات الماس البرز.


14. موسوی حقیقی، محمد هاشم و تاجیک، مهدی (1393). شبیه سازی فرآیند اشاعه محصولات نوین با رویکرد پویایی های سیستم. نشریه علمی - پژوهشی مدیریت نوآوری، 3(3)، 99- 77.


15. موغلی، علیرضا (1386). پذیرش بانکداری الکترونیک در بین بانکهای شهر شیراز. فصلنامه علوم مدیریت ایران، 2(7)، 98- 81.


16. مؤمنی، منصور و مروتی شریف آبادی، علی (1385). مدلسازی پویایی های سیستم صف با استفاده از رویکرد پویایی سیستم. ماهنامه علمی- پژوهشی دانشگاه شاهد، 13(17)، 15- 1.


17. همتی، بهنام؛ فروزانی، معصومه؛ یزدان پناه، مسعود و خسروی پور، بهمن (1394). مقایسه کاربرد فرایند تحلیل شبکه (ANP) و تحلیل سلسله مراتبی (AHP) در تحلیل شاخص فقر آبی کشاورزی شهرستان دزفول. مجله علوم ترویج و آموزش کشاورزی ایران، 14(54)، 220- 203.


18. Abdull, M., & Ahmad, L. (2011). Islamic private equity and venture capital. International journal of economic, 26(39): 564-582.


19. Adeli, A. (2013). Evaluation and interpretation of policies of five-year developmental plans and Iran fisheries outlook. Fisheries Science and Technology, 2(3): 57–74.


20. Agarwal, R., & Shah, S. (2014). Knowledge sources of entrepreneurship: Firm formation by academic, user and employee innovators. Research Policy, 43(9): 1109–1133.


21. Akinyemi, P. (2014). System dynamics modelling of waste management system, Conference Proceedings. The 14th Asia-Pacific System Dynamics Conference.


22. Alessi, S. (2013). Designing educational support in systemdynamics- based interactive learning environments, Simulation & Gaming, 31(2): 178-196.


23. Analoui, F., Moghimi, S. M., and Khanifar, H. (2009). Public sector managers and entrepreneurship in Islamic Republic of Iran. Journal of Management Development, 28(6): 522– 532.


24. Berends, P., & Romme. A. G. (2016). Simulation as a research tool in management studies. European Management Journal, 24(17): 576-583.


25. Boocock, G. & Woods, M. (2012). The Evaluation Criteria Used By Venture Capitalists: Evidence from A UK Venture Fund. International Small Business Journal,16(36): 36-57.


26. Burton, A., & Hubona, G. (2006). The mediation of external variables in the technology acceptance model. Information and Management, 6(43): 706–717.


27. Fischer, D., Norvell, J., Sonka, S., & Nelson, M. (2010). Understanding technology adoption through system dynamics modeling: implications for agribusiness management. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 3(19): 269-281.


28. Gladstone, D., & Gladstone, L. (2014). Venture Capital Investing: The Complete Handbook for Investing in Private Businesses for Outstanding Profits, Revised edition. Financial Times Prentice Hall;


29. Gompers, P., & Lerner, L. (2016). The Venture Capital Cycle, The MIT press, Cambridge, London 2nd edition, 350-375.


30. Hellmann T., Lindsey, L. A., & Puri, M. (2015). Building Relationships Early: Banks in Venture Capital, NBER Working Paper: 10535.


31. Mckechnie, S., Winklhofer, H., & Ennew, H., (2006). Applying the technology acceptance model to the online retailing of financial services, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 34(5): 388-410.


32. Nian, Z., & Guiwu, W. (2013). Extension of VIKOR method for decision making problem based on hesitant fuzzy set. Journal of applied mathematical modelling, 37(56): 4938–4947.


33. SaadatNezhad, A., & ets. (2019). Analysis and Identification of Factors Affecting Effective Implementation of Technological Venture Capital (VC) Strategies at Ayandeh Bank


34. Zacharakis, A. L. & Meyer, G. D. (2010). The Potential of Actruarial Decision Models: Can They Improve the Venture Capital Investment Decision? Journal of Business Venturing, Volume 15(75): 323–346.


35. Zacharakis, Andrew & Meyer, Dale. (2000). The Potential of Actuarial Decision Models: Can They Improve the Venture Capital Investment Decisions? Journal of Business Venturing, 15(71): 323-346.


36. Zacharakis, Andrew & Meyer, Dale. (2015). A Lack of Insight:Do Venture Capitalists Really Understand Their Own Decision Process? Journal of Business Venturing, 13(39): 57-76.


37. Zahra, S. (2013). Environment, corporate entrepreneurship and financial performance: a taxonomic approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(4): 319-40.


38. Zhoa, W., & Rena, H. (2011). A system dynamics model for evaluating the alternative of type in construction and demolition waste recycling center. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 19(38): 933-944.


39. Zutshi, R. . K., tan, w. l., Allampalli, D. G. & Gibbons, P. G. (2017). Singapore Venture Capitalists (VCs) Investment Evaluation Criteria: A Re-Examination. Small Business Economics, 13(1): 9-26.

 

 

1. Abdull, M., & Ahmad, L. (2011). Islamic private equity and venture capital. International journal of economic, 26(39): 564-582.


2. Adeli, A. (2013). Evaluation and interpretation of policies of five-year developmental plans and Iran fisheries outlook. Fisheries Science and Technology, 2(3): 57–74.


3. Agarwal, R., & Shah, S. (2014). Knowledge sources of entrepreneurship: Firm formation by academic, user and employee innovators. Research Policy, 43(9): 1109–1133.


4. Akinyemi, P. (2014). System dynamics modelling of waste management system, Conference Proceedings. The 14th Asia-Pacific System Dynamics Conference.


5. Alessi, S. (2013). Designing educational support in systemdynamics- based interactive learning environments, Simulation & Gaming, 31(2): 178-196.


6. Analoui, F., Moghimi, S. M., and Khanifar, H. (2009). Public sector managers and entrepreneurship in Islamic Republic of Iran. Journal of Management Development, 28(6): 522– 532.


7. Berends, P., & Romme. A. G. (2016). Simulation as a research tool in management studies. European Management Journal, 24(17): 576-583.


8. Boocock, G. & Woods, M. (2012). The Evaluation Criteria Used By Venture Capitalists: Evidence from A UK Venture Fund. International Small Business Journal,16(36): 36-57.


9. Burton, A., & Hubona, G. (2006). The mediation of external variables in the technology acceptance model. Information and Management, 6(43): 706–717.


10. Fischer, D., Norvell, J., Sonka, S., & Nelson, M. (2010). Understanding technology adoption through system dynamics modeling: implications for agribusiness management. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 3(19): 269-281.


11. Gladstone, D., & Gladstone, L. (2014). Venture Capital Investing: The Complete Handbook for Investing in Private Businesses for Outstanding Profits, Revised edition. Financial Times Prentice Hall;


12. Gompers, P., & Lerner, L. (2016). The Venture Capital Cycle, The MIT press, Cambridge, London 2nd edition, 350-375.


13. Hellmann T., Lindsey, L. A., & Puri, M. (2015). Building Relationships Early: Banks in Venture Capital, NBER Working Paper: 10535.


14. Mckechnie, S., Winklhofer, H., & Ennew, H., (2006). Applying the technology acceptance model to the online retailing of financial services, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 34(5): 388-410.


15. Nian, Z., & Guiwu, W. (2013). Extension of VIKOR method for decision making problem based on hesitant fuzzy set. Journal of applied mathematical modelling, 37(56): 4938–4947.


16. SaadatNezhad, A., & ets. (2019). Analysis and Identification of Factors Affecting Effective Implementation of Technological Venture Capital (VC) Strategies at Ayandeh Bank


17. Zacharakis, A. L. & Meyer, G. D. (2010). The Potential of Actruarial Decision Models: Can They Improve the Venture Capital Investment Decision? Journal of Business Venturing, Volume 15(75): 323–346.


18. Zacharakis, Andrew & Meyer, Dale. (2000). The Potential of Actuarial Decision Models: Can They Improve the Venture Capital Investment Decisions? Journal of Business Venturing, 15(71): 323-346.


19. Zacharakis, Andrew & Meyer, Dale. (2015). A Lack of Insight:Do Venture Capitalists Really Understand Their Own Decision Process? Journal of Business Venturing, 13(39): 57-76.


20. Zahra, S. (2013). Environment, corporate entrepreneurship and financial performance: a taxonomic approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(4): 319-40.


21. Zhoa, W., & Rena, H. (2011). A system dynamics model for evaluating the alternative of type in construction and demolition waste recycling center. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 19(38): 933-944.


22. Zutshi, R. . K., tan, w. l., Allampalli, D. G. & Gibbons, P. G. (2017). Singapore Venture Capitalists (VCs) Investment Evaluation Criteria: A Re-Examination. Small Business Economics, 13(1): 9-26.


23.  


24. 1. Imanipour, Narges and Kanani, Mahdi (2009). Identifying factors affecting the decision to exit risky investors. Magazine. Entrepreneurial Development, 1(4), 67-83.


25. Azar, Adel; Gholamzadeh, Ramin and Kanavati, Maryam (2011). Path-structural modeling in the application management of Smart PLS software. Tehran: Negah Danesh Publications.


26. Bagheri, Seyed Kamran and Mahboubi, Javad (2014). Venture Capital, Baran Publications and Farda Development Foundation, Tehran. First Edition.


27. Khalili Iraqi, Mansour and Salimi Shandi, Ruqiya (2013). The relationship between foreign direct investment, financial development and economic growth: A case study of selected Asian countries. Economic Research and Policy Quarterly, 22(71), 156-143.


28. Askari, Mohammad Mahdi and Omid Mircholi (2017), comparative study of risky investment tools with other similar tools in Islamic and non-Islamic markets, Iran Economic Research, No. 48, pp. 135-163.


29. Keshavarz, Ainullah and Montazeri, Mohsen (2013). Risky investment and its relationship with growth centers. The fourth national conference of venture capital industry.


30. Koshafer, Mustafa; Norush, Iraj and Meshaikhi, Bita (2016). Measuring the efficiency and ability of management based on financial criteria. Quarterly Journal of Accounting and Management Auditing Knowledge, 6(23), 187-202.


31. Mohammadi, Alireza (2016). Examining statistical techniques and software for multiple measurement of researcher-made questionnaires. Master's thesis in computer engineering, Hamadan Azad University. not printed


32. Mokhtari, Marzieh and Fallahi, Nematullah (2015). Investigating individual entrepreneurship and personality traits of entrepreneurs. The first international conference on entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation.


33. Structural equation modeling with PLS software, written by Ali Davari and Arash Rezazadeh, Jihad Academic Publications, first edition, 2012.


34. The Research Center of the Islamic Council (2014), examining the challenges and legal capacities of the development of the venture capital industry (with a focus on non-governmental research and technology funds), Tehran, Deputy Economic Research Department, Economic Studies Office, subject code 280. Machine gun number 14406.


35. Masouminia, Gholam Ali and Mustafa Shahidi Nasab (2008), jurisprudential and economic review of the means of financing reducing participation, Islamic Economy, No. 35, pp. 128-99.


36. logical, manouchehr; Hajigholam Serizdi, Ali and Zare Mehrjardi. Yahya, (2012), Dynamic system. Tehran: Almas Alborz Publications.


37. Mousavi Haghighi, Mohammad Hashem and Tajik, Mehdi (2013). Simulating the diffusion process of new products with the approach of system dynamics. Scientific-Research Journal of Innovation Management, 3(3), 77-99.


38. Mowgli, Alireza (2016). Acceptance of electronic banking among the banks of Shiraz. Iranian Management Sciences Quarterly, 2(7), 81-98.


39. Momeni, Mansour and Maruti Sharifabadi, Ali (2006). Modeling the dynamics of the queue system using the system dynamics approach. Scientific-Research Monthly of Shahid University, 13(17), 1-15.


40. Hemti, Behnam; Farozani, Masoumeh; Yazdanpanah, Masoud and Khosravipour, Bahman (2014). Comparison of the application of network analysis process (ANP) and hierarchical analysis (AHP) in the analysis of agricultural water poverty index of Dezful city. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension Sciences, 14(54), 203-220.


41.