Skip to main content

Framework: Matching Signals with Complexities of High-Tech Startups

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Financing High-Tech Startups
  • 1634 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter identifies and examines the most important complexity factors from Study II, i.e., the ones that affect early stage high-tech startups and their investors the most. It also describes matching signals that startups can send to counter the adverse effects of complexity and newness. This makes it possible to validate key dimensions of investor uncertainties and classes of appropriate signals, which ultimately enables the development of a comprehensive ‘complexity signal framework’ that is specific to early stage high-tech startups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Literature

  • Abbot, K., Pendlebury, N., & Wardman, K. (2007). Business law (8th ed.). London: Thomson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrawal, A., Catalini, C., & Goldfarb, A. (2015). Crowdfunding: Geography, social networks, and the timing of investment decisions. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 24(2), 253–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahlers, G. K., Cumming, D., Günther, C., & Schweizer, D. (2015). Signaling in equity crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(4), 955–980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amit, R., Liechtenstein, H., Prats, I., Millay, T., & Pendleton, L. (2008). Single family offices: Private wealth management in the family context. Working paper from Wharton Global Family Alliance. Retrieved from http://wgfa.wharton.upenn.edu/documents/WhartonGFA_SFO_Study.pdf

  • Arthurs, J. D., & Busenitz, L. W. (2003). The boundaries and limitations of agency theory and stewardship theory in the venture capitalist/entrepreneur relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(2), 145–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baltussen, G., & Post, G. T. (2011). Irrational diversification: An examination of individual portfolio choice. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 46(05), 1463–1491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barberis, N., & Thaler, R. (2003). A survey of behavioral finance. In G. M. Constantinides, M. Harris, & R. Stulz (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of finance, 1B (pp. 1053–1128). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J. A., Calabrese, T., & Silverman, B. S. (2000). Don’t go it alone: Alliance network composition and startups’ performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 267–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benson, D., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2009). Corporate venture capital as a window on new technologies: Implications for the performance of corporate investors when acquiring startups. Organization Science, 20(2), 329–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouthers, K. D., & Brouthers, L. E. (2003). Why service and manufacturing entry mode choices differ: The influence of transaction cost factors, risk and trust. Journal of Management Studies, 40(5), 1179–1204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busenitz, L. W., Fiet, J. O., & Moesel, D. D. (2005). Signaling in venture capitalist—New venture team funding decisions: Does it indicate long-term venture outcomes? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, R. E., & Petersen, B. C. (2002). Capital market imperfections, high-tech investment, and new equity financing. The Economic Journal, 112(February), F54–F72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CB Insights. (2015). Venture capitalists are bullish on news. Retrieved May 28, 2015, from https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/venture-capital-media-news/

  • Chesbrough, H. W. (2002). Making sense of corporate venture capital. Harvard Business Review, 80(3), 90–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, E., Wuebker, R., & Wustenhagen, R. (2009). Of acting principals and principal agents: Goal incongruence in the venture capitalist-entrepreneur relationship. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 7(3), 367–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., Kellermanns, F., & Wu, Z. (2011). Family involvement and new venture debt financing. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(4), 472–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collewaert, V. (2012). Angel investors’ and entrepreneurs’ intentions to exit their ventures: A conflict perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(4), 753–779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conti, A., Thursby, M., & Rothaermel, F. T. (2013a). Show me the right stuff: Signals for high-tech startups. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 22(2), 341–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conti, A., Thursby, J., & Thursby, M. (2013b). Patents as signals for startup financing. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 61(3), 592–622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David, P. A., Hall, B. H., & Toole, A. A. (2000). Is public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence. Research Policy, 29(4), 497–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davila, A., Foster, G., & Gupta, M. (2003). Venture capital financing and the growth of startup firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(6), 689–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Bettignies, J. E., & Brander, J. A. (2007). Financing entrepreneurship: Bank finance versus venture capital. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(6), 808–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duhautois, R., Redor, D., & Desiage, L. (2015). Long term effect of public subsidies on start-up survival and economic performance: An empirical study with French data. Revue d’économie industrielle, 1, 11–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebben, J., & Johnson, A. (2006). Bootstrapping in small firms: An empirical analysis of change over time. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(6), 851–865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, W. (1968). Conservatism in human information processing. In B. Kleinmutz (Ed.), Formal representation of human judgment (pp. 17–52). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elitzur, R., & Gavious, A. (2003). Contracting, signaling, and moral hazard: A model of entrepreneurs, ‘angels’, and venture capitalists. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(6), 709–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, J. L. (2004). Wealthy investor attitudes, expectations, and behaviors toward risk and return. The Journal of Wealth Management, 7(1), 12–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EY. (2015). Liquidity meets perspective—Venture capital and start-ups in Germany 2015. Berlin: Ernst & Young.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairchild, R. (2011). An entrepreneur’s choice of venture capitalist or angel-financing: A behavioral game-theoretic approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(3), 359–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florida, R. (2016, February 23). A closer look at the geography of venture capital in the US. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.citylab.com/tech/2016/02/the-spiky-geography-of-venture-capital-in-the-us/470208/

  • Ghosh, S., & Nanda, R. (2010). Venture capital investment in the clean energy sector. Harvard Business School Entrepreneurial Management Working Paper, 11-020.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh, M., Dutta, S., & Stremersch, S. (2006). Customizing complex products: When should the vendor take control? Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), 664–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilovich, T., Vallone, R., & Tversky, A. (1985). The hot hand in basketball: On the misperception of random sequences. Cognitive Psychology, 17(3), 295–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomes, J. F., de Weerd-Nederhof, P. C., Pearson, A. W., & Cunha, M. P. (2003). Is more always better? An exploration of the differential effects of functional integration on performance in new product development. Technovation, 23(3), 185–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gompers, P. (1995). Optimal investment, monitoring, and the staging of venture capital. Journal of Finance, 50(4), 1461–1489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gompers, P. A., & Lerner, J. (2004). The venture capital cycle (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • González, X., & Pazó, C. (2008). Do public subsidies stimulate private R&D spending? Research Policy, 37(3), 371–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodhart, C. A. E. (1998). Financial regulation: Why, how, and where now? New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grover, V., & Saeed, K. A. (2007). The impact of product, market, and relationship characteristics on interorganizational system integration in manufacturer-supplier dyads. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(4), 185–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R., & Higgins, M. C. (2003). Which ties matter when? The contingent effects of interorganizational partnerships on IPO success. Strategic Management Journal, 24(2), 127–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. H. (2008). The financing of innovation. In S. Shane (Ed.), The handbook of technology and innovation management (pp. 409–430). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häussler, C., Harhoff, D., & Müller, E. (2009). To be financed or not…—The role of patents for venture capital-financing. ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper, (09-003).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellmann, T. (1998). The allocation of control rights in venture capital contracts. The Rand Journal of Economics, 29(1), 57–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herold, F. (2010). Contractual incompleteness as a signal of trust. Games and Economic Behavior, 68(1), 180–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobday, M. (1998). Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation. Research Policy, 26(6), 689–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horstmann, I., MacDonald, G. M., & Slivinski, A. (1985). Patents as information transfer mechanisms: To patent or (maybe) not to patent. Journal of Political Economy, 93(5), 837–858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hottenrott, H., Hall, B. H., & Czarnitzki, D. (2015). Patents as quality signals? The implications for financing constraints on R&D. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 25(3), 197–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, D. H., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2008). Patents as quality signals for entrepreneurial ventures. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2008(1), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeng, L. A., & Wells, P. C. (2000). The determinants of venture capital funding: Evidence across countries. Journal of Corporate Finance, 6(3), 241–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. (2005). Agency costs of overvalued equity. Financial Management, 34(1), 5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakemond, N., Berggren, C., & Weele, A. (2006). Coordinating supplier involvement in product development projects: A differentiated coordination typology. R&D Management, 36(1), 55–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay, N. J. (2004). Do business angels have an entrepreneurial orientation? Venture Capital, 6(2-3), 197–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, C., & Stark, M. (2004). What do investors look for in a business plan? A comparison of the investment criteria of bankers, venture capitalists and business angels. International Small Business Journal, 22(3), 227–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, A. L., & Lévesque, M. (2014). Trustworthiness: A critical ingredient for entrepreneurs seeking investors. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(5), 1057–1080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, A. L., Jeffrey, S. A., & Lévesque, M. (2011). Business angel early stage decision making. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(2), 212–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meuleman, M., & De Maeseneire, W. (2012). Do R&D subsidies affect SMEs’ access to external financing? Research Policy, 41(3), 580–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R. E., & Cote, M. (1987). Growing the next Silicon Valley: A guide for successful regional planning. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, S., & Eppinger, S. D. (2001). Sourcing by design: Product complexity and the supply chain. Management Science, 47(1), 189–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ollier, S., & Thomas, L. (2013). Ex post participation constraint in a principal–agent model with adverse selection and moral hazard. Journal of Economic Theory, 148(6), 2383–2403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parhankangas, A., & Ehrlich, M. (2014). How entrepreneurs seduce business angels: An impression management approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(4), 543–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, H. D., & Steensma, H. K. (2012). When does corporate venture capital add value for new ventures? Strategic Management Journal, 33(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prencipe, A. (2000). Breadth and depth of technological capabilities in CoPS: The case of the aircraft engine control system. Research Policy, 29(7), 895–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. A. (1977). The determination of financial structure: The incentive-signalling approach. The Bell Journal of Economics, 8(1), 23–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shenhar, A. (1994). Systems engineering management: A framework for the development of a multidisciplinary discipline. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 24(2), 327–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sixt, E. (2014). Schwarmökonomie und Crowdfunding. Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sommer, S. C., Loch, C. H., & Dong, J. (2009). Managing complexity and unforeseeable uncertainty in startup companies: An empirical study. Organization Science, 20(1), 118–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, T. E., Hoang, H., & Hybels, R. C. (1999). Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 315–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, T. E. (2000). Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates in a high-technology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 21(8), 791–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sudek, R. (2006). Angel investment criteria. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 17(2), 89–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tu, Q., Vonderembse, M. A., Ragu-Nathan, T. S., & Ragu-Nathan, B. (2004). Measuring modularity-based manufacturing practices and their impact on mass customization capability: A customer-driven perspective. Decision Sciences, 35(2), 147–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. In D. Wendt & C. Vlek (Eds.), Utility, probability, and human decision making (pp. 141–162). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van Osnabrugge, M., & Robinson, R. J. (2000). Angel investing: Matching startup funds with startup companies. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Tech, R.P.G. (2018). Framework: Matching Signals with Complexities of High-Tech Startups. In: Financing High-Tech Startups. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66155-1_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics