Advertisement

Analyzing VC Influence on Startup Success: A People-Centric Network Theory Approach

  • Beth Hadley
  • Peter A. Gloor
  • Stephanie L. Woerner
  • Yuhong Zhou
Chapter
Part of the Studies on Entrepreneurship, Structural Change and Industrial Dynamics book series (ESID)

Abstract

We study the impact of venture capitalists on startup success using social network analysis. Using multiple sources, we compile a unique dataset of 3199 US-based technology startups and their board members, from which we generate and analyze the interlocking directorates network (formal network) and the Twitter activity network (informal network). We define three metrics of success: startup funding (collected from Crunchbase), annual sales (collected from OneSource), and return-on-investment (annual sales/funding). We find that startups with more VCs on their board are more centrally located in the formal network, tend to receive greater funding, have greater annual sales, yet a smaller return-on-investment. We also find that VCs are significantly more central in the Twitter network than non-VCs, and they have greater Twitter popularity (number of followers/number of people they follow). Interestingly, VCs tweet significantly less than non-VCs. Our results indicate that VCs carry a significant amount of capital, both financially as well as socially, which they transmit to the startups they become involved with, yet they tend to invest disproportionately to startup revenue (hence lower ROI).

References

  1. Amit, R., Brander, J., & Zott, C. (1998). Why do venture capital firms exist? Theory and Canadian evidence. Journal of Business Venturing, 13, 441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernstein, S., Giroud, X., & Townsend, R. R. (2015). The impact of venture capital monitoring. The Journal of Finance, 71, 1591–1622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chan, Y. S. (1983). On the positive role of financial intermediation in allocation of venture capital in market with imperfect information. Journal of Finance, 35(5), 1543–1568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chemmanur, Thomas J., Krishnan, K., & Nandy, Debarshi K. (2008). How does venture capital financing improve efficiency in private firms? A look beneath the surface. US Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies Paper No. CES-WP-08-16.Google Scholar
  5. Franklin, B., & Haque, M. (2016, March). National Venture Capital Association yearbook. New York: Thomson Reuters.Google Scholar
  6. Gloor, P. A. (2005). Swarm creativity: Competitive advantage through collaborative innovation networks. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hellmann, T. (2000). Venture capitalists: The coaches of Silicon Valley. In W. Miller, C. M. Lee, M. G. Hanock, & H. Rowen (Eds.), The Silicon Valley edge: A habitat for innovation and entrepreneurship (pp. 267–294). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hellmann, T., & Puri, M. (2002). Venture capital and the professionalization of start-up firms: Empirical evidence. The Journal of Finance, 57, 169–197.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6261.00419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Higashide, H., & Birley, S. (2002). The consequences of conflict between the venture capitalist and the entrepreneurial team in the United Kingdom from the perspective of the venture capitalist. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(1), 59–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jee, C. (2016, July 25). Why you should avoid venture capitalists. Techworld (Web).Google Scholar
  12. Kaplan, S. N., & Strömberg, P. (2003). Financial contracting theory meets the real world: An empirical analysis of venture capital contracts. Review of Economic Studies, 70(2), 281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Khanin, D., & Turel, O. (2013). Conflicts between venture capitalists and CEOs of their Portfolio companies. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 23(1), 31–54.Google Scholar
  14. Lahr, H., & Mina, A. (2016). Venture capital investments and the technological performance of portfolio firms. Research Policy, 45, 303–318.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lerner, J. (1995). Venture capitalists and the oversight of private firms. Journal of Finance, 50, 301–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mizruchi, M. S. (1996). What do interlocks do? An analysis, critique, and assessment of research on interlocking directories. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 271–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mullins, J. (2014, November 05). VC funding can be bad for your start-up. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2014/08/vc-funding-can-be-bad-for-your-start-up
  18. Pommet, S. (2017). The impact of the quality of VC financing and monitoring on the survival of IPO firms. Managerial Finance, 43(4), 440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Reve, T., & Stern, L. W. (1989). The relationship between interorganizational form, transaction climate, and economic performance in vertical interfirm dyads. In L. Pellegrini & S. K. Reddy (Eds.), Marketing channels: Relationship and performance. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  20. Wang, C. K., et al. (2003). Effects of venture capitalists’ participation in listed companies. Journal of Banking and Finance, 27, 2015–2034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wright, M., & Robbie, K. (1998). Venture capital and private equity: A review and synthesis. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 25(5–6), 521–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wu, A., Jin, F., & Hitt L. (2015, July). Social is the new financial: How startups’ social media activities influence funding outcomes (Working Paper).Google Scholar
  23. Xi, Y., & Su-Sheng, W. (2016). Do venture capital firms play as supportive mentors or free-riders? Evidence from China. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 22(4), 3–18.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Beth Hadley
    • 1
  • Peter A. Gloor
    • 2
  • Stephanie L. Woerner
    • 3
  • Yuhong Zhou
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.MIT Department of Computer ScienceCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.MIT Center for Collective IntelligenceCambridgeUSA
  3. 3.MIT Sloan School of ManagementCambridgeUSA
  4. 4.South China University of TechnologyGuangzhouChina
  5. 5.MITCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations