Advertisement

Asia Pacific Journal of Management

, Volume 35, Issue 4, pp 965–991 | Cite as

Beyond institutional voids and the middle-income trap: The emerging business angel market in Malaysia

  • Richard Harrison
  • William Scheela
  • P. C. Lai
  • Sivapalan Vivekarajah
Article
  • 420 Downloads

Abstract

Emerging economies are characterized by the presence of institutional voids which challenge and constrain the behavior of economic agents. In this paper we report on one set of agents, angel investors, in Malaysia, which investors fear is experiencing a middle-income trap whereby economic growth and new venture formation stalls due to persistent institutional voids. This research addresses this question through interviews with 19 Malaysian business angel investors in 2015, utilizing a mixed-methods approach. Results indicate that business angels in our sample generated strong returns, though they did find it a challenge to invest in and monitor new ventures in a highly uncertain and competitive environment where there is high political uncertainty, weak legal and financial support for investors and SMEs. In order to overcome weak institutional support, business angel investors develop informal institutions by co-investing and networking with family members and government officials. They also conduct careful due diligence before investing and closely monitor their investee companies after investing. This research provides several theory and practice contributions with respect to business-angel investing in emerging economies with weak formal institutional regimes.

Keywords

Business angels Institutional theory Emerging economies Malaysia Entrepreneurial ecosystems Institutional voids Middle-income trap 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

Research for this paper was sponsored by the Malaysian Business Angels Network (MBAN) and Technopreneurs Association of Malaysia (TeAM) and funded by the Cradle Fund Sdn Bhd, all located in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

References

  1. Accountant Today. 2014. Angel tax incentive to boost innovative and domestic investments. Mar/Apr.Google Scholar
  2. Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. 2012. Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. New York: Crown Business.Google Scholar
  3. Agénor, P.-R. 2017. Caught in the middle? The economics of middle-income traps. Journal of Economic Surveys, 31(3): 771–791.Google Scholar
  4. Agénor, P.-R., & Canuto, O. 2014. Access to finance, product innovation and middle-income traps. Policy Research working paper No. 6767, The World Bank, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  5. Ahlstrom, D. 2010. Innovation and growth: How business contributes to society. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3): 11–24.Google Scholar
  6. Ahlstrom, D., & Bruton, G. D. 2006. Venture capital in emerging economies: Networks and institutional change. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 30(2): 299–320.Google Scholar
  7. Ahlstrom, D., & Bruton, G. D. 2010. Rapid institutional shifts and the co-evolution of entrepreneurial firms in transition economies. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 34(3): 531–554.Google Scholar
  8. Ahlstrom, D., Bruton, G. D., & Yeh, K. S. 2007. Venture capital in China: Past, present and future. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24(3): 247–268.Google Scholar
  9. Ahlstrom, D., & Ding, Z. 2014. Entrepreneurship in China: An overview. International Small Business Journal, 32(6): 610–618.Google Scholar
  10. Ahlstrom, D., Levitas, E., Hitt, M. A., Dacin, M. T., & Zhu, H. 2014. The three faces of China: Strategic alliance partner selection in three ethnic Chinese economies. Journal of World Business, 49(4): 572–585.Google Scholar
  11. Ahlstrom, D., Young, M. N., Nair, A., & Law, P. 2003. Managing the institutional environment: Challenges for foreign firms in post WTO China. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 68(2): 41–49.Google Scholar
  12. Aiyar, S., Duval, R., Puy, D., Wu, Y., & Zhang, L. 2013. Growth slowdowns and the middle-income trap. IMF working paper no. 13/71, International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  13. Amaeshi, K., Adegbite, E., & Rajwani, T. 2016. Corporate social responsibility in challenging and non-enabling institutional contexts: Do institutional voids matter?. Journal of Business Ethics, 134: 135–153.Google Scholar
  14. Amatucci, F. M., & Sohl, J. E. 2006. Business angels: Investment, processes, outcomes, and current trends. In A. Zacharakis, & S. Spinelli (Eds.). Entrepreneurship: The engine of growth, Vol. 2: 87–107. Wesport: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  15. Anheier, H. K. 2014. Institutional voids and the role of civil society: The case of global finance. Global Policy, 5: 23–36.Google Scholar
  16. Asian Development Bank. 2011. Asia 2050: Realizing the Asian century. Manila: Asian Development Bank.Google Scholar
  17. Asian Development Bank. 2014. Asian development outlook 2014: Fiscal policy for inclusive growth. Manila: Asian Development BankGoogle Scholar
  18. Asian Development Bank. 2016. Asian development outlook 2016: Asia’s potential growth. Manila: Asian Development Bank.Google Scholar
  19. Avdeitchikova, S. 2008. On the structure of the informal venture capital market in Sweden: Developing investment roles. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 10: 55–85.Google Scholar
  20. Avdeitchikova, S., Landstrom, H., & Mansson, N. 2008. What do we mean when we talk about business angels? Some reflections on definitions and sampling. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 10: 371–394.Google Scholar
  21. Bettis, R. A., Gambardella, A., Helfat, C., & Mitchell, W. 2014. Theory in strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 35: 1411–1413.Google Scholar
  22. Bruton, G. D., & Ahlstrom, D. 2003. An institutional view of China’s venture capital industry: Explaining the differences between China and the West. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2): 233–259.Google Scholar
  23. Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Obloj, K. 2008. Entrepreneurship in emerging economies: Where are we today and where should the research go in the future. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 32(1): 1–14.Google Scholar
  24. Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Puky, T. 2009. Institutional differences and the development of entrepreneurial ventures: A comparison of the venture capital industries in Latin America and Asia. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(5): 762–778.Google Scholar
  25. Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Singh, K. 2002. The impact of the institutional environment on the venture capital industry in Singapore. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 4(3): 197–218.Google Scholar
  26. Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Yeh, K. S. 2004. Understanding venture capital in East Asia: The impact of institutions on the industry today and tomorrow. Journal of World Business, 39(1): 72–88.Google Scholar
  27. Bruton, G. D., Dattani, M., Fung, M., Chow, C., & Ahlstrom, D. 1999. Private equity in China: Differences and similarities with the Western model. Journal of Private Equity, 2(2): 7–13.Google Scholar
  28. Bruton, G. D., Fried, V. H., & Manigart, S. 2005. Institutional influences on the worldwide expansion of venture capital. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29: 737–760.Google Scholar
  29. Cai, F. 2012. Is there a “middle-income trap”? Theories, experiences and relevance to China. China & World Economy, 20: 49–61.Google Scholar
  30. Chen, J., Chang, A. Y., & Bruton, G. D. 2017. Microfinance: Where are we today and where should the research go in the future?. International Small Business Journal, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  31. Cherif, R. & Hasanov, F. 2015. The leap of the tiger: How Malaysia can escape the middle-income trap. IMF working paper no. 15/131, International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  32. Coviello, N. I., & Jones, M. V. 2004. Methodological issues in international entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Venturing, 19: 485–508.Google Scholar
  33. Creswell, J. W. 2014. A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. 2007. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  35. Denrell, J., Fang, C., & Winter, S. G. 2003. The economics of strategic opportunity. Strategic Management Journal, 24: 977–990.Google Scholar
  36. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. 1991. Introduction. In W. W. Powell, & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis: 1–38. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. Ding, Z., Sun, S. L., & Au, K. 2014. Angel investors’ selection criteria: A comparative institutional perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 31(3): 705–731.Google Scholar
  38. Eichengreen, B., Park, D., & Shin, K. 2013. Growth slowdowns redux: new evidence on the middle-income trap. NBER working paper no. 18673, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  39. Farrell, E., Howorth, C., & Wright, M. 2008. A review of sampling and definitional issues in informal venture capital research. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 10: 331–353.Google Scholar
  40. Felipe, J., Abdon, A., & Kumar, U. 2012. Tracking the middle-income trap: What is it, who is in it, and why?. Working paper no. 715, Levy Economics Institute, Annandale-on-Hudson.Google Scholar
  41. Gao, C., Zuzul, T., Jones, G., & Khanna, T. 2017. Overcoming institutional voids: A reputation-based view of long run survival. Working paper no. 17–060, Harvard Business School, Boston.Google Scholar
  42. Gill, I. S., Kharas, H., & Bhattasali, D. 2007. An East Asian renaissance: Ideas for economic growth. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  43. Gomez, E. T. 2013. The new economic policy in Malaysia: Affirmative action, ethnic inequalities and social justice. Singapore: NUS Press.Google Scholar
  44. Gompers, P. A., & Lerner, J. 2001. The money of invention: How venture capital creates new wealth. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  45. Gorman, M., & Sahlman, W. A. 1989. What do venture capitalists do?. Journal of Business Venturing, 4: 231–248.Google Scholar
  46. Griffith, B. 2011. Middle-income trap. In R. Nallari, S. Yusuf, B. Griffith & R. Battacharya (Eds.). Frontiers in development policy: A primer on emerging issues. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  47. Groh, A., Liechtenstein, H., & Lieser, K. 2013. The venture capital and private equity country attractiveness index 2013 annual. Barcelona: IESE Business School, University of Navarra.Google Scholar
  48. Groh, A., Liechtenstein, H., Lieser, K., & Biesinger, M. 2015. The venture capital and private equity country attractiveness index 2015 annual. Barcelona: IESE Business School, University of Navarra.Google Scholar
  49. Harrison, R. T. 2016. Afterword. In J. Y. Lo (Ed.). Angel financing in Asia Pacific: A guidebook for investors and entrepreneurs: 489–491. Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
  50. Harrison, R. T. 2017. The internationalization of business angel investment activity: A review and research agenda. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 19: 119–127.Google Scholar
  51. Harrison, R. T., & Mason, C. M. 2000. The role of the public sector in the development of a regional venture capital industry. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 2(4): 243–253.Google Scholar
  52. Harrison, R. T., & Mason, C. M. 2008. Sampling and data collection in business angel research. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 10: 305–308.Google Scholar
  53. Henisz, W. J., Dorobantu, S., & Nartey, L. J. 2014. Spinning gold: The financial returns to stakeholder engagement. Strategic Management Journal, 35: 1727–1748.Google Scholar
  54. Hindle, K., & Lee, L. 2002. An exploratory investigation of informal venture capitalists in Singapore. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 4: 169–181.Google Scholar
  55. Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L., Chung, M. L., & Wright, M. 2000. Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 249–267.Google Scholar
  56. Hurmerinta-Peltomaki, L., & Nummela, N. 2006. Mixed methods in international business research: A value-added perspective. Management International Review, 46: 1–21.Google Scholar
  57. Ingram, P. L., & Silverman, B. S. 2002. The new insitiutionalism in strategic management. Kidlington: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  58. Jack, G., Zhu, Y., Barney, J., Brannen, M. Y., Prichard, C., Singh, K., & Whetton, D. 2013. Refining, reinforcing and reimagining universal and indigenous theory development in international management. Journal of Management Inquiry, 22(2): 148–164.Google Scholar
  59. Jankowska, A., Nagengast, A., & Perea, J. R. 2012. The product space and the middle income trap: Comparing Asian and Latin American experiences. Development Centre working paper no. 311, OECD, Paris.Google Scholar
  60. Kelly, P. 2007. Business angel research: The road traveled and the journey ahead. In H. Landstrom (Ed.). Handbook of research on venture capital: 315–331. Northampton: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  61. Khanna, T. 2014. Contextual intelligence. Harvard Business review, 75(4): 58–68.Google Scholar
  62. Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. 2010. Winning in emerging markets: A road map for strategy and execution. Boston: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  63. Khanna, T., & Rivkin, J. 2001. Estimating the performance effects of business groups in emerging markets. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 45–74.Google Scholar
  64. Kharas, H., & Kohli, H. 2011. What is the middle income trap, why do countries fall into it, and how can it be avoided?. Global Journal of Emerging Market Economies, 3(3): 281–289.Google Scholar
  65. Kutsuna, K., & Harada, N. 2004. Small business owner-managers as latent informal investors in Japan: Evidence from a country with a bank-based financial system. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 6: 283–311.Google Scholar
  66. Landstrom, H., & Mason, C. 2016. Handbook of research on business angels. Northampton: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  67. Law, S. H., & Singh, N. 2014. Does too much finance harm economic growth?. Journal of Banking and Finance, 41: 36–44.Google Scholar
  68. Lee, K. 2013. Schumpeterian analysis of economic catch-up: knowledge, path-creation and the middle-income trap. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Lerner, J. 2009. Boulevard of broken dreams. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Liu, M. M., Wang, J., & Chen, S. 2016. Angel investing in China. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.Google Scholar
  71. Liu, X., Serger, S. S., Tagscherer, U., & Chang, A. Y. 2017. Beyond catch-up—Can a new innovation policy help China overcome the middle income trap?. Science and Public Policy.  https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scw092.Google Scholar
  72. Liu, Y., Chen, Y. J., & Wang, L. C. 2017. Family business, innovation and organizational slack in Taiwan. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 34(1): 193–213.Google Scholar
  73. Lo, J. Y. 2016a. Angel financing in Asia Pacific: A guidebook for investors and entrepreneurs. Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
  74. Lo, J. Y. 2016b. China. In J. Y. Lo (Ed.). Angel financing in Asia Pacific: A guidebook for investors and entrepreneurs: 45–80. Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
  75. Luo, X. R., & Chung, C. N. 2013. Filling or abusing the institutional void? Ownership and control of public family businesses in an emerging market. Organization Science, 24: 591–613.Google Scholar
  76. Mair, J., & Marti, I. 2009. Entrepreneurship in and around institutional voids: A case study from Bangladesh. Journal of Business Venturing, 24: 419–435.Google Scholar
  77. Mair, J., Marti, I., & Ventresca, M. J. 2012. Building inclusive markets in rural Bangladesh: How intermediaries work institutional voids. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 819–850.Google Scholar
  78. Malaysian Economy in Figures. 2017. Developing Malaysia into a knowledge-based economy. Kuala Lumpur: Economic Planning Unit.Google Scholar
  79. Mani, S. 2004. Financing of innovation: A survey of various institutional mechanisms in Malaysia and Singapore. Journal of Technology Innovation, 12(2): 185–208.Google Scholar
  80. Manikandan, K. S., & Ramachandran, J. 2015. Beyond institutional voids: Business groups, incomplete markets, and organizational form. Strategic Management Journal, 36: 598–617.Google Scholar
  81. Marquis, C., & Raynard, M. 2015. Institutional strategies in emerging markets. Academy of Management Annals, 9: 291–335.Google Scholar
  82. Mason, C. M., & Harrison, R. T. 1997. Business angel networks and the development of the informal venture capital market in the UK: Is there still a role for the public sector?. Small Business Economics, 9: 111–123.Google Scholar
  83. Mason, C. M., & Harrison, R. T. 2002. Is it worth it? The rates of return from informal venture capital investments. Journal of Business Venturing, 4: 211–236.Google Scholar
  84. Mason, C. M., & Harrison, R. T. 2008. Measuring business angel investment activity in the United Kingdom: A review of potential data sources. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 10: 309–330.Google Scholar
  85. May, J., & Lui, M. 2016. Angels without borders: Trends and policies shaping angel investment worldwide. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
  86. McCloskey, D. M. 2013. Tunzelmann, Schumpeter, and the hockey stick. Research Policy, 42: 1706–1715.Google Scholar
  87. Meyer, K. E. 2001. Institutions, transaction costs and entry mode choice in Eastern Europe. Journal of International Business Studies, 32: 357–367.Google Scholar
  88. Meyer, K. E., Estrin, S., Bhaumik, S. K., & Peng, M. W. 2009. Institutions, resources, and entry strategies in emerging economies. Strategic Management Journal, 30: 61–80.Google Scholar
  89. Meyer, K. E., & Peng, M. W. 2016. Theoretical foundations of emerging economy business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 47: 2–8.Google Scholar
  90. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. 1984. Qualitative data analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  91. Morrissette, S. G. 2007. A profile of angel investors. Journal of Private Equity, Summer: 52–66.Google Scholar
  92. North, D. C. 1990. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  93. Paul, S., Whittam, G., & Wyper, J. 2007. Towards a model of the business angel investment process. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 9: 117–125.Google Scholar
  94. Peng, M. W. 2003. Institutional transitions and strategic choices. Academy of Management Review, 28: 275–296.Google Scholar
  95. Peng, M. W., & Heath, P. 1996. The growth of the firm in planned economies in transition: Institutions, organizations, and strategic choice. Academy of Management Review, 21: 492–528.Google Scholar
  96. Peng, M. W., Sun, S. L., Pinkham, B., & Chen, H. 2009. The institution-based view as a third leg for a strategy tripod. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23: 63–81.Google Scholar
  97. Peng, M. W., Ahlstrom, D., Carraher, S. M., & Shi, W. 2017. An institution-based view of global IPR History. Journal of International Business Studies.  https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-016-0061-9.Google Scholar
  98. Preqin. 2011. Preqin special report: Asia-Pacific private equity—September 2011. New York: Preqin.Google Scholar
  99. Puffer, S. M., McCarthy, D. J., & Boisot, M. 2010. Entrepreneurship in Russia and China: The impact of formal institutional voids. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 34: 441–467.Google Scholar
  100. Ramamurti, R. 2000. A multilevel model of privatization in emerging economies. Academy of Management Review, 25: 525–550.Google Scholar
  101. Scheela, W. 2006. Knowledge transfer: The development of venture capital in South East Asia. In J. Butler, A. Lockett, & D. Ucbasaran (Eds.). Venture capital and the changing world of entrepreneurship: 75–90. Greenwich: Information Age.Google Scholar
  102. Scheela, W. 2014. Venture capital in Asia: Investing in emerging countries. New York: Business Expert.Google Scholar
  103. Scheela, W., & Isidro, E. S. 2008. Private equity investing in the Philippines: Business angels vs. venture capitalists. Journal of Private Equity, 11: 90–99.Google Scholar
  104. Scheela, W. J., & Isidro, E. S. 2009. Business angel investing in an emerging Asian economy. Journal of Private Equity, 12: 44–56.Google Scholar
  105. Scheela, W., Isidro, E. S., Jittrapanun, T., & Nguyen, T. T. 2015. Formal and informal venture capital investing in emerging economies in Southeast Asia. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(3): 597–617.Google Scholar
  106. Scheela, W., & Jittrapanun, T. 2008. The impact of the lack of institutional development on the venture capital industry in Thailand. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 16: 189–204.Google Scholar
  107. Scheela, W., & Jittrapanun, T. 2012. Do institutions matter for business angel investors in emerging Asian markets?. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 14: 289–308.Google Scholar
  108. Scheela, W., & Nguyen, V. D. 2004. Venture capital in a transition economy: The case of Vietnam. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 6: 333–350.Google Scholar
  109. Science and Technology Information Center. 2017. Malaysian science and technology indicators report 2017. Putrajaya: Science and Technology Information Center.Google Scholar
  110. Scott, W. R. 2013. Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  111. Silvestre, B. S. 2015. Sustainable supply chain management in emerging economies: Environmental turbulence, institutional voids and sustainability trajectories. International Journal of Production Economics, 167: 156–169.Google Scholar
  112. Smangs, M. 2006. The nature of the business group: A social network perspective. Organization, 13: 889–909.Google Scholar
  113. Sohl, J. 2003. The US angel and venture capital market: Recent trends and developments. Journal of Private Equity, 6: 7–17.Google Scholar
  114. Spigel, B. 2015. The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice.  https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12167.Google Scholar
  115. Spigel, B., & Harrison, R. T. 2016. Towards a theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1268.Google Scholar
  116. Stam, E. 2015. Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: A sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23: 759–769.Google Scholar
  117. Stephan, U., Uhlaner, L. M., & Stride, C. 2015. Institutions and social entrepreneurship: The role of institutional voids, institutional support, and institutional configurations. Journal of International Business Studies, 46: 208–331.Google Scholar
  118. Su, Z., Ahlstrom, D., & Cheng, D. 2013. Knowledge creation capability, absorptive capacity, and product innovativeness. R&D Management, 43(5): 473–485.Google Scholar
  119. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. 1998. Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  120. Tashiro, Y. 1999. Business angels in Japan. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 1: 259–273.Google Scholar
  121. Tendulkar, S. D., & Bhavani, T. A. 1997. Policy on modern small scale industries: A case of government failure. Indian Economic Review, 32: 39–64.Google Scholar
  122. Wang, J., & Chen, S. 2016. China. In J. May, & M. M. Liu (Eds.). Angels without borders: Trends and policies shaping angel investment worldwide: 139–150. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
  123. Wang, J., Tan, Y., & Liu, M. 2016. Business angels in China: Characteristics, policies and international comparison. In H. Landstrom, & C. Mason (Eds.). Handbook of research on business angels: 201–232. Northampton: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  124. Wang, L. C., Ahlstrom, D., Nair, A., & Hang, R. Z. 2008. Creating globally competitive and innovative products: China’s next Olympic challenge. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 73(3): 4–15.Google Scholar
  125. Wetzel, W. E. 1983. Angels and informal risk capital. Sloan Management Review, summer: 23–34.Google Scholar
  126. Wong, C. Y., & Enoch, C. 2011. An evolutionary perspective on development of venture capital industries. Malaysian Journal of Science and Technology Studies, 7: 1–19.Google Scholar
  127. Wong, P. K., & Ho, Y. P. 2007. Characteristics and determinants of informal investment in Singapore. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 9: 43–70.Google Scholar
  128. Woo, W. T. 2009. Getting Malaysia out of the middle-income trap. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1534454. Accessed June 28, 2017.
  129. World Bank. 2014. Global financial development report: Financial inclusion. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  130. World Development Report. 2002. Building institutions for markets. Washington, DC: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  131. Wright, M., Pruthi, S., & Lockett, A. 2005. International venture capital research: From cross-country comparisons to crossing borders. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7: 135–165.Google Scholar
  132. Xiao, L., & North, D. 2012. Institutional transition and the financing of high-tech SMEs in China: A longitudinal perspective. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 14: 269–287.Google Scholar
  133. Xiao, L., & Ritchie, B. 2011. Informal investor investing and network in China: An exploratory study. Journal of Private Equity, 14: 72–85.Google Scholar
  134. Yin, R. K. 2013. Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  135. Young, M. N., Peng, M. W., Ahlstrom, D., & Bruton, G. D. 2003. Principal-principal agency. Web Journal of Chinese Management Review, 6(1): 18–45.Google Scholar
  136. Young, M. N., Peng, M. W., Ahlstrom, D., Bruton, G. D., & Jiang, Y. 2008. Corporate governance in emerging economies: A review of the principal-principal perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1): 196–220.Google Scholar
  137. Yusuf, S., & Nabeshima, K. 2009. Can Malaysia escape the middle-income trap? A strategy for Penang. Policy Research working paper no. 4971, The World Bank, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  138. Zoogah, D., Peng, M. W., & Woldu, H. 2015. Institutions, resources, and organizational effectiveness in Africa. Academy of Management Perspectives, 29(1): 7–31.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Business School and University of EdinburghEdinburghUK
  2. 2.College of BusinessBemidji State UniversityBemidjiUSA
  3. 3.Innovation & Business Development and University of MalayaKuala LumpurMalaysia
  4. 4.Malaysian Business Angel NetworkKuala LumpurMalaysia

Personalised recommendations