Skip to main content

The export intensity of venture capital backed companies

Abstract

In this study we examine how venture capital (VC) firms influence the export behavior of their investee companies. VC firms perform an important governance function for investee companies by providing monitoring and value-added activities. Drawing on agency theory, the resource-based view of the firm and governance life-cycle theory we hypothesize that the relationship between VC governance resources and investee exporting behavior is moderated by investment stage. Employing a sample of 340 VC-backed firms, our results confirm this hypothesis. Monitoring resources are most effective in promoting export behavior for late-stage ventures and value-added resources in promoting export behavior in early-stage ventures.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. 1.

    Respondents are incentivized to supply data through receipt of a free copy of a review of the buy-out market.

  2. 2.

    In the UK, for example, the Companies Act 1967 required directors to include a statement of the value of goods exported as long as turnover was above a certain level, with subsequent legislation allowing an exemption where this would seriously be prejudicial to the company’s interests. In contrast, in the Netherlands, for example, private companies are not obliged to disclose exports.

  3. 3.

    We have constructed this variable so that the 61.7% of the sample who have responded that they have invested abroad = 1 and all other = 0. An alternative would be to specify those for whom we do not have information as being zero. Doing this, however, results in a significant loss of observations, but leaves our key results unchanged. As a robustness check we also defined internationalization as the VC having branch offices abroad; the results were unchanged.

  4. 4.

    Following the suggestion of an anonymous referee, we also experimented with the inclusion of other control variables in the model, namely including GDP in the exporting equation and several alternative variables to controls for EU integration (including adoption of the Euro). Without exception these variables had little explanatory power and had only a marginal effect on the coefficients of the key variables in our model. These results are not reported here but are available on request.

  5. 5.

    There is statistical support for this hypothesis in that, when we included GDP in the main regression equation it attracts an insignificant coefficient. Reassuringly, our key results are robust to the exclusion of different sub-sets of control variables from the selection and main regression equations.

  6. 6.

    VCMVCVA and VCVA VCM are included as these variables may play a role in removing or imposing constraints that affect the decision over whether or not to export. We exclude EARLY from the selection model on the grounds that the decision over whether or not to export (as opposed to how much to export) is affected primarily by the nature of the firm and industry rather than by the stage of the firm. Again there is empirical support for this proposition in that these variables attract insignificant coefficients when included in the selection equation without materially changing the other results.

  7. 7.

    The marginal effects are reported here using 0.1 as the degree of change as this is a more realistic figure than a full unit. If a 1 unit change was to occur, e.g., if the venture capitalists’ value-added contribution (VCVA) was to increase in absolute terms by 1 unit then the marginal effect and standard error would need to be multiplied by 10 as reported here. In this instance a 1 unit change in the VCVA would result in an increase in export intensity of 3.463 (standard error 1.217) of a percentage point.

  8. 8.

    As highlighted on footnote 3, the marginal effects are reported here using 0.1 as the degree of change as this is a more realistic figure than a full unit. Hence, in order to calculate the marginal effect of a full unit change in VCM or VCVA the marginal effects and standard errors reported here would need to be multiplied by 10.

References

  1. Autio, E., Sapienza, H., & Almeida, J. (2000). Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity and imitability on international growth. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 909–924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17, 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Barney, J. B., Wright, M., & Ketchen, D. (2001). The resource based view of the firm: Ten years after 1991. Journal of Management, 26(4), 625–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Barry, C. (1994). New directions in research on venture capital finance. Financial Management, 23, 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bilkey, W., & Tesar, G. (1977). The export behavior of smaller-sized Wisconsin manufacturing firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(1), 93–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bloodgood, J. M., Sapienza, H. J., & Almeida, J. G. (1996). The internationalization of new high-potential U.S. ventures: Antecedents and outcomes. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 20, 61–76.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bonaccorsi, A. (1992). On the relationship between firm size and export intensity. Journal of International Business Studies, 23, 605–635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bruining, J., & Wright, M. (2002). Entrepreneurial orientation in management buy-outs and the contribution of venture capital. Venture Capital, 4, 147–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Burgel, O., Fier, A., Licht, G., & Murray, G. (2001). The rapid internationalization of high-tech young firms in Germany and the United Kingdom. London: Anglo-German Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bygrave, W., Hay, M., & Peeters, J. (1994). Realizing investment value. London: FT-Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Calof, J. L. (1994). The relationship between firm size and export behavior revisited. Journal of International Business Studies, 25, 367–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Carpenter, M. A., Pollock, T. G., & Leary, M. M. (2003). Testing a model of reasoned risk-taking: Governance, the experience of principals and agents, and global strategy in high technology IPO firms. Strategic Management Journal, 24(9), 803–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cowling, M. (2003). Productivity and governance in smaller firms. Small Business Economics, 20(4), 335–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cumming, D., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2007). Private equity, leveraged buyouts and governance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 13(4), 439–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Elango, B., Freid, V., Hisrich, R., & Polonchek, A. (1995). How venture capital firms differ. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(2), 157–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Filatotchev, I., Dyomina, N., Wright, M., & Buck, T. (2001). Effects of post-privatization governance and strategies on export intensity in the former Soviet Union. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(4), 853–871.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Filatotchev, I., & Wright, M. (2005). The life-cycle of corporate governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  18. George, G., Wiklund, J., & Zahra, S. A. (2005). Ownership and the internationalization of small firms. Journal of Management, 31, 210–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gersick, K. E., Davis, J. A., McCollom Hampton, M., & Lansberg, I. (1997). Generation to generation – Life cycles of the family business. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gorman, M., & Sahlman, W. (1989). What do venture capitalists do? Journal of Business Venturing, 4, 231–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Greene, W. H. (2000). Econometric analysis. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

  22. Howorth, C., Westhead, P., & Wright, M. (2004). Management buy-outs of family owned firms: Asymmetric information and the family-management dyad. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(4), 509–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jensen, M. (1993). The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of internal control systems. Journal of Finance, 48(3), 831–880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Johnson, J. L., Daily, C. M., & Ellstrand, A. E. (1996). Boards of directors: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 22(3), 409–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kaplan, S., & Strömberg, P. (2001). Venture capitalists as principals: Contracting, screening and monitoring. American Economic Review, 91(2), 426–430.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Knight, G. A., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2004). Innovation, organizational capabilities, and the born-global firm. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(2), 124–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kumar, N., Stern, L. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1993). Conducting interorganizational research using key informants. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1633–1651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lerner, J. (1995). Venture capitalists and the oversight of private firms. Journal of Finance, 50, 301–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Liesch, P., & Knight, G. (1999). Information internationalization and hurdle rates in small and medium enterprise internationalization. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(2), 383–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Lockett A., & Thompson S. (2001). The resource-based view and economics. Journal of Management, 27, 723–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lu, J., & Beamish, P. (2001). The internationalization and performance of SMEs. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 565–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lynall, M., Golden, B., Hilllman, A. (2003). Board adoescence to maturity: A multi-theoretic view. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 416–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. MacMillan, I., Kulow, D., & Khoylian, R. (1989). Venture capitalists involvement in their investments: Extent and performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 4(1), 27–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Madhok, A. (1997). Cost, value and foreign market entry mode: The transaction and the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 18(1), 39–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. McDougall, P. P., & Oviatt, B. M. (1996). New venture internationalization, strategic change, and performance: A follow-up study. Journal of Business Venturing, 11, 34–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. McDougall, P. P., Shane, S., & Oviatt, B. M. (1994). Explaining the formation of international new ventures: The limits of theories from international business research. Journal of Business Venturing, 9, 469–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Meyer, K. E. (2006). Asian management research needs more self-confidence. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 2, 119–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Meyer, K. E., & Estrin, S. (2001). Brownfield entry in emerging markets. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(3), 575–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Miesenböck, K. J. (1988). Small businesses and exporting: A literature review. International Small Business Journal, 6, 42–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Mitchell, F., Reid, G., & Terry, N. (1995). Post investment demand for accounting information by venture capitalists. Accounting and Business Research, 25(99), 186–196.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Mitchell, F., Reid, G., & Terry, N. (1997). Venture capital supply and accounting information system development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 21, 45–62.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Oviatt, B. M., & McDougall, P. (1994). Towards a theory of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1), 45–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Peng, M., & Ilinitch, A. (1998). Export intermediary firms: A note on export development research. Journal of International Business Studies, 29(3), 609–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Penrose E. T. (1959). The theory of growth of the firm. Blackwell: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Pruthi, S., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2003). Do foreign and domestic venture capital firms differ in their monitoring of investees? Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 20(2), 175–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Rosenstein, J., Bruno, A. V., Bygrave, W. D., & Taylor, N. T. (1993). The CEO, venture capitalists, and the board. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 99–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Ruhnka, J. C., & Young, J. E. (1991). Some hypotheses about risk in venture capital investing. Journal of Business Venturing, 6(2), 115–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Sanders, W., & Carpenter, M. (1998). Internationalization and firm governance: The roles of CEO compensation, top team composition, and board structure. Academy of Management Journal, 41(2), 158–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Sapienza, H. (1992). When do venture capitalists add value? Journal of Business Venturing, 7, 9–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Sapienza, H., Amason, A., & Manigart, S. (1994). The level and nature of venture capitalist involvement in their portfolio companies: A study of three European countries. Managerial Finance, 20(1), 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Sapienza, H., Manigart, S., & Vermeir, W. (1996). Venture capitalist governance and value added in four countries. Journal of Business Venturing, 11, 439–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Thompson, S., & Wright, M. (1995). Corporate governance: The role of restructuring transactions. Economic Journal, 105, 691–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Vohora, A., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy, 33, 147–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5, 171–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Westhead, P. (1995). Exporting and non-exporting small firms in Great Britain. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 1, 6–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Westhead, P., Wright, M., & Ucbasaran, D. (2001). The internationalization of new and small firms: A resource-based view. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 333–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Westhead, P., Wright, M., & Ucbasaran, D. (2002). International market selection strategies selected by ‘Micro’ and ‘Small’ firms. Omega, 30, 51–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Wright, M. (2007). Venture capital in China: A view from Europe. Asia Pacific Journal of Management (forthcoming).

  59. Wright, M., Hoskisson, R., Busenitz, L., & Dial, J. (2000). Entrepreneurial growth through privatization: The upside of management buy-outs. Academy of Management Review, 25, 591–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Wright, M., Lockett, A., & Pruthi, S. (2002). Internationalization of western venture capitalists into emerging markets: Risk assessment and information in India. Small Business Economics, 19(1), 13–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Wright, M., Pruthi, S., & Lockett, A. (2005). International venture capital research: From cross-country comparisons to crossing borders. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7(3), 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Wright, M., & Robbie, K. (1996). Venture capitalists, unquoted equity investment appraisal and the role of accounting information. Accounting and Business Research, 26(2), 153–168.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Wright, M., & Robbie, K. (1998). Venture capital and private equity: A review and synthesis. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 25(5/6), 521–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Wright, M., Thompson, S., & Robbie, K. (1992). Venture capital and management-led leveraged buy-outs. Journal of Business Venturing, 7, 47–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Wright, M., Westhead, P., & Ucbasaran, D. (2007). Internationalisation by SMEs: A critique and policy implications. Regional Studies, 41(7), 1013–1030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Zahra, S. (1995). Corporate entrepreneurship and financial performance: The case of management leveraged buy-outs. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(3), 225–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Zahra, S., Neubaum, D. O., & Naldi, L. (2007). The effects of ownership and governance on SMEs' international knowledge-based resources. Small Business Economics, 29(3), 309–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Zahra, S. A., & Pearce, J. A. (1989). Board of directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrative model. Journal of Management, 15, 291–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Support for this research from EVCA is acknowledged with thanks as is the financial support for CMBOR from Barclays Private Equity and Deloitte. We also thank the editors of the special issue, anonymous reviewers and participants in the Lally Darden Research Retreat at Humbolt 2006 for their insightful comments.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andy Lockett.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lockett, A., Wright, M., Burrows, A. et al. The export intensity of venture capital backed companies. Small Bus Econ 31, 39–58 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-008-9109-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Venture capital
  • Export
  • International trade

JEL Classifications

  • G24
  • G28
  • G31
  • G32
  • G35
  • L26