مدل سطح بندی عوامل موثر بر به کارگیری راهبرد سرمایه گذاری مخاطره آمیز شرکتی با رویکرد مدل سازی ساختاری تفسیری (ISM)
محورهای موضوعی : دانش سرمایه‌گذاری
حسین غضنفری
1
(دانشجوی دکترای مدیریت بازاریابی بین الملل دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران)
سید حمید خداداد حسینی
2
(استاد و عضو هیئت علمی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول))
اسدالله کرد نائیج
3
(دانشیار و عضو هیئت علمی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران)
عادل آذر
4
(استاد و عضو هیئت علمی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران)
کلید واژه: سرمایه‌گذاری مخاطره‌آمیز شرکتی, مدلسازی ساختاری تفسیری, تلاطم محیطی, فشار رقابتی, مخاطری پذیری برون سازمانی,
چکیده مقاله :
روشهای تحقیق و توسعه درون سازمانی در بسیاری از مواقع نمی‌تواند با سرعت کافی روند تغییرات محیطی در بازار متلاطم کنونی را دنبال کند. لذا شرکتهای حاضر در این بازارها ناگزیرند علاوه بر تحقیق و توسعه داخل سازمانی از راهبردهای توسعه ی خارج از سازمان نیز بهره بگیرند. استفاده از سرمایه گذاری مخاطره آمیز شرکتی به عنوان یک راهبرد توسعه خارج از سازمان در میان شرکت های بزرگ کشور رو به افزایش است. در این مقاله بر آن شدیم تا مدلی برای سطح بندی عوامل موثر بر بکارگیری راهبرد سرمایه‌گذاری مخاطره‌آمیز شرکتی در شرکتهای ایرانی ارائه دهیم. جمع آوری داده ها از طریق مصاحبه با نخبگان و مرور ادبیات تحقیق، شناسایی مقوله های مرتبط با سرمایه گذاری مخاطره آمیز شرکتی با تحلیل محتوی و ارائه مدل با رویکرد مدلسازی ساختاری تفسیری و تحلیل MICMAC انجام شده است.
In many cases, Internal R&D cannot follow the changes in the organization’s turbulent environment with the sufficient pace. So the companies in such markets have to complete their internal R&D activities with external development strategies. Use of corporate venture capital as an external development strategy is growing among large Iranian companies. In this research, we are going to propose a classification model of factors affect the application of corporate venture capital strategy in Iranian companies. Data has been gathered through interview to experts and Literature review. Then factors have been Identified based on a content analysis. The built model in an ISM approach has been analyzed in a MICMAC.
* آذر، عادل؛ تیزرو، علی؛ مقبل با عرض، عباس؛ انواری رستمی، علی اصغر (1389). طراحی مدل چابکی زنجیره تأمین؛ رویکرد مدلسازی تفسیری- ساختاری. پژوهشهای مدیریت در ایران. دوره 14 (4):1-25.
* Alter, M. & Buchsbaum, l., 2000. Corporate venturing: goals, compensation and taxes. In: D. Barr, ed. The Corporate Venturing Directory and Yearbook. Wellesley,MA:
* Attri, R., Dev, N. & Sharma, V., 2013. Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) approach: An overview. Research Journal of Management Sciences , 2(2), pp. 3-8.
* Bannock Consulting Ltd, 1999. Corporate venturing in Europe, s.l.: Study for the European Commission DGXIII EIMS 98/176.
* Basu, S., Phelps, C. & Kotha, S., 2011. Towards understanding who makes corporate venture capital investments and why. Journal of Business venturing, pp. 153-171.
* Benson, D. & Ziedonis, R., 2004. Try before they buy: corporate venture capital and the acquisition of technology start-ups, MI: University of Michigan.
* Birkinshaw, J., Murray, G. & Basten-Bastenberg, R. v., 2002. Corporate venturing: The state for the art and the prospects for the future, London: London Business School.
* Birkinshaw, J., Murray, G. & Basten-Batenburg, R. V., 2002. Corporate venturing: The state of the art and the prospects for the future, London: London Business School.
* Bottazzi, L., Rin, M. D. & Hellmann, T., 2004. The changing face of the European venture capital industry: facts and analysis. Journal of Private Equity, 7(2), pp. 26-53.
* Bottazzi, L., Rin, M. D. & Hellmann, T., 2008. Who are the active investors? Evidence from venture capital. Journal of financial Economics, 89(3), pp. 488-512.
* Charan, P., Shankar, R. & Baisya, R. K., 2008. Analysis of interactions among the variables of suly chain performance measurement system implementation. Business Process Management Journal, 14(4), pp. 512-529.
* Chesbrough , H. W. & Tucci, C., 2004. Corporate venture capital in the context of corporate innovation. s.l., DRUID Conference 2004.
* Chesbrough, H., 2000. Designing corporate ventures in the shadow of private venture capital. California Management Review, 42(3), pp. 31-49.
* Chesbrough, H. W., 2002. Making sense of corporate venture capital. Harvard Business Review, 80(3), pp. 90-99.
* Colombo, M., Grilli, L. & Piva, E., 2006. In research for complementary assets: The determinants of aaliance formation of high tech startups. Research policy, Volume 35, pp. 1166-119.
* Cumming, D. & Johan, S., 2008. Preplanned exit strategies in venture capital. European Economic Review, Volume 52, pp. 1209-1241.
* Dushnitsky, G., 2012. Corporate venture capital in the twenty first century: An integral part of firm's innovation toolkit. In: D. Cumming, ed. The Oxford handbook of venture capital. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 156-210.
* Dushnitsky, G., 2012. Corporate venture capital in the twenty first century: An integral part of firm's innovation toolkit. In: D. Cumming, ed. The Oxford handbook of venture capital. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 156-210.
* Dushnitsky, G. & Lenox, M. J., 2003. When do firms undertake R&D by investing in new ventures?. s.l., Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings.
* Dushnitsky, G. & Lenox, M. J., 2005a. When do firms undertake R&D by investing in new ventures?. Strategic Management Journal, Volume 26, pp. 947-965.
* Dushnitsky, G. & Lenox, M. J., 2005b. When do incumbents learn from entrepreneurial ventures?Corporate venture capital and investing firm innovation rates. Research Policy, 34(5), pp. 615-639.
* Dushnitsky, G. & Shapira, Z. B., 2010. Entrepreneurial financemeets corporate reality: Comparing investment practices and performing of corporate and independent venture capitalists. Strategic Management Journal, 30(10), pp. 1025-1132.
* Dushnitsky, G. & Shaver, J. M., 2009. Limitations to inter-organizational knowledge acquisitions: The paradox of corporate venture capital. Strategic Management Journal, 30(10), pp. 1045-1064.
* Ernst & young, 2009. Global venture capital report, s.l.: Ernst & Young.
* Gaba , V. & Dokko , G., 2016. Learning to let go: Social influence, learning, and the abandonment of corporate venture. Strategic Management Journal, 37(8), pp. 1558-1577.
* Gaba, V. & Dokko, G., 2012. Venturing into new territory: Career experiences of corporate venture capital managers s and practice variation.. Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), pp. 563-583.
* Gaba, V. & Meyer, A. D., 2008. Crossing the organizational species barrier: How venture capital practices infiltrated the information technology sector. Academy of Management Journal, Volume 51, pp. 976-998.
* Gawer, A. & Cusumano, M. A., 2002. Platform Leadership: How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco Drive Industry Innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
* Gompers, P. A. & Lernere, J., 1998. What Drives Venture Capital Fundraising. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, pp. 149-204.
* Hill, S. A. & Birkinshaw, J., 2014. Ambidexterity and Survival in Corporate Venture Units. Journal of Management, Volume 40, pp. 1899-1931.
* Hill, S. & Birkinshaw, J., 2008. Strategy-organization configurations in corporate venture units: Impact on performance and survival. journal of business venturing, Volume 23, pp. 423-444.
* Hill, S., Maula, M., Birkinshaw, j. & Murray, G., 2009. transferability of the venture capital model to the corporate context: Implications of corporate venture units. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(1), pp. 3-270.
* Kann, A., 2000. Strategic venture capital investing by corporations: A framework for structuring and Valuing Corporate venture capital programs, s.l.: unpublished Doctoral Dissertaion.
* Katila, R., Rosenberger, J. & Eisenhardt, K., 2008. Swiming with sharks: Technology ventures, defense mechanisms, and corporate relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(2), pp. 295-332.
* Katila, R., Rosenberger, J. & Eisenhardt, K., 2008. Swimming with sharks: Technology ventures, defense mechanisms, and corporate relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(2), pp. 295-332.
* Keil, T., 2000. External coorporate venturing: cognition, speed, and capability development. , Espoo: Helsinki University of Technology.
* Keil, T., 2002. External Corporate Venturing: Strategic Renewal in Rapidly Changing Industries. s.l.:Greenwood Publishing Group.
* Keil, T., Autio, E. & George, G., 2008. Corporate venture capital, disembodied experimentation and capability development. Journal of Management Studies, Volume 45, pp. 1475-1505.
* Keil, T., Maula, M. V. & Zahra, S. A., 2004. Explorative and exploitative learning from corporate venture capital: model of program level factors. New Orleans LA USA, Academy of Management.
* Keil, T., Maula, M. & Wilson, C., 2010. Unique resources of corporate venture capitalists as a key to enter rigid venture capital syndication networks. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(1), pp. 83-103.
* Lavis, J. N. et al., 2006. Working within and beyond the Cochrane Collaboration to make systematic reviews more useful to healthcare managers and policy makers.. Healthcare Policy, 1(2), pp. 21-33.
* Masulis, R. & Nahata, R., 2010. Venture capital conflicts of interest: Evidence from acquisition of venture backed firms. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 46(2), pp. 395-430.
* Maula, M., 2001. Corporate Venture Capital and the Value-Added for Technology-Based New Firms, Helsinki: Institute of Strategy and Internationa Business, Helsinki University of Technology.
* Maula, M., Autio, E. & Murray, G., 2009. Corporate venture capital and the balance of risks and rewards for portfolio companies. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(3), pp. 274-286.
* Maula, M. V., Autio, E. & Murray, G. C., 2003. Prerequisite for the creation of social capitaland subsequent knowledge acquisition in corporate venture capital. Venture Capital, 5(2), pp. 117-134.
* Maula, M. V., Autio, E. & Murray, G. C., 2006. How corporate venture capitalists add value to entrepreneurial young firms. In: D. D. A. K. a. D. A. S. J. Wiklund, ed. Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and growth. Oxford: JAI, pp. 267-309.
* Maula, M. V. J., 2006. Corporate venture capital as a strategic tool for corporations. In: Handbook of research on venture capital. s.l.:s.n., pp. 371-392.
* Maula, M. V. J., Keil, T. & Zahra, S. A., 2013. Top Management’s Attention to Discontinuous Technological Change: Corporate Venture Capital as an Alert Mechanism. Organization Science, Volume 24, pp. 926-947.
* Maula, M. V., Keil, T. & Salmenkaita, J. -P., 2006b. Open innovation in systemic innovation contexts. In: H. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke & J. West, eds. Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 241-257.
* Maula, M. V. & Murray, G., 2000. Corporate venture cpital and the exercise of the options to acquire. Manchester,UK, Proceedings of the R&D Management Conference.
* Mckinsey & Co, 1998. US venture capital-industry overview and economics , New York: McKinsey and Company.
* McNally, K., 1997. Corporate venture capital:Bridging the equity gap in the small business sector. London: Routledge.
* Narayanan, V. K., Yang, Y. & Zahra, S. A., 2009. Corporate venturing and value creation: A review and proposed framework. Research policy, pp. 58-76.
* Park, H. D. & Steensma, K. H., 2012. When does corporate venture capital add value for new ventures?. Strategic Management Journal, 33(1), pp. 1-22.
* Sahaym, A., Steensma, H. K. & Barden, J. Q., 2010. The influence of R&D investment on the use of corporate venture capital: An industry-level analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(4), pp. 376-388.
* Schildt, H. A., Maula, M. V. & Keil, T., 2005. Explorative and exploitative learning from external corporate ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), pp. 493-515.
* Siegel, R., Siegel, E. & Macmillan, I. C., 1988. Corporate venture capitalists: autonomy, obstacles, and performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 3(3), pp. 233-247.
* Silver, D. A., 1993. Strategic Planning. New York: NY:McGraw-Hill.
* Souitaris, V. & Zerbinati, S., 2014. How do corporate venture capitalists do deals? An explorartion of corporate investment practices. Strategic Entrepreneurship journal , Volume 8, pp. 321-348.
* Souitaris, V., Zerbinati, S. & Liu, G., 2012. Which Iron Cage? Endo- and exoisomorphism in Corporate Venture Capital Programs. Academy of Management Jounal, 55(2), pp. 477-505.
* Sykes, H. B., 1986. Anatomy of a corporate venturing program: Factors influencing success. Journal of Business Venturing, 1(3), pp. 275-294.
* Sykes, H. B., 1990. Corporate venture capital: Strategies for success. Journal of Business Venturing, 5(1), pp. 37-47.
* Titus Jr., V. K. & Anderson, B. S., 2016. Firm structure and environment as contingencies to the corporate venture capital–parent firm value relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory & practice, 40(6), pp. 1-25.
* Van de Vrande, V., Vanhaverbeke, W. & Duijsters, G., 2009. External technology sourcing: The effect of uncertainty on governance mode choice. Journal of business Venturing , Volume 24, pp. 62-80.
* Wadhwa , A., Phelps, C. & Kotha, S., 2016. Corporate venture capital portfolios and firm innovation. Journal of Business Venturing, Volume 31, pp. 95-112.
* Wadhwa, A. & Kotha, S. B., 2006. Knowledge creation through external venturing: Evidence from telecommunication equipment manufacturing industry. Academy of Management Journal, Volume 49, pp. 819-835.
* Wadhwa, A. & Phelps, C., 2009. An option to partner: A dyadic analysis of CVC relationships. s.l., Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings.
* Warfield, J. N., 2005. Developing interconnection metrics in structural modeling. IEEE transactions on systems. Man and Cybermetrics, 4(1), pp. 67-81.
* Winters, T. E. & Murfin, D. L., 1988. Venture capital investments for corporate develoment objectives. Journal of Business Venturing, Volume 3, pp. 207-222.
* Yang, Y., Narayanan, V. K. & De Carolis, D. M., 2014. The relationship between portfolio diversification and firm value: The evidence from corporate venture capital activity. Strategic Management Journal, Volume 35, p. 1993–2011.
_||_