واکاوی چالش‌های نهادی تبادلات سرمایه‌گذاران خطرپذیر با شرکت‌های فناوری‌محور

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استاد دانشکده اقتصاد، دانشگاه تهران

2 دانشجوی دکترای دانشکده مدیریت کارآفرینی، دانشگاه تهران

3 دانشیار دانشکده مدیریت کارآفرینی، دانشگاه تهران

4 استادیار دانشکده مدیریت کارآفرینی، دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

نقش شرکتهای کوچک فناوریمحور در توسعه کشورها بر کسی پوشیده نیست اما عدم دسترسی به سرمایه یکی از بزرگترین موانع رشد این شرکتهاست سرمایهگذاران خطرپذیر در تمین سرمایه این شرکتها بیشترین نقش را دارند حال آنکه صنعت سرمایهگذاری خطرپذیر در ایران توسعهیافته نیست از آنجا که یکی از مهمترین دلایل این مسئله چالشهایی است که سرمایهگذاران و شرکتهای فناوریمحور در تعامل با یکدیگر دارند این مطالعه تلاش داشته این چالشها را در مراحل مختلف فرآیند سرمایهگذاری خطرپذیر واکاوی نماید در این مطالعه مصاحبه عمیق از خبرگان اخذ و دادههای به دست آمده با روش نظریه برخاسته از دادهها تجزیه و تحلیل شد در انجام این کار رویکرد نهادی مدنظر بوده چون این نهادها هستند که انگیزهها و چگونگی ارتباط میان بازیگران از جمله سرمایهگذاران خطرپذیر و بنگاههای کوچک فناوریمحور را تعیین میکنند نتایج که با استفاده از مدل نهادی ویلیامسون جمعبندی شدند نشان میدهد که نهادهایی همچون استانداردهای افشا اطلاعات مالیات مالکیت فکری و حقوق صاحبان سهام اجرای قراردادها جهتگیریهای حمایتی حاکمیت در تمین مالی فناوری نهادهای مالی و برخی نهادهای فرهنگیاجتماعی همچون ضعف فرهنگ کار تیمی در ایجاد مسئله مورد پژوهش نقش اساسی دارد لذا توصیه میشود سیاستگذاران به جای مداخله مستقیم برای توسعه صنعت سرمایهگذاری خطرپذیر موانع نهادی را اصلاح نمایند

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

). Exploring the Institutional Challenges of Transactions between Venture Capitals – Technological Firms.

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mahmood Motavasseli 1
  • saeed shojaeei 2
  • Ghanbar Mohammadi Eliasi 3
  • Hasti Chitsazan 4
1 Professor, Faculty of Economics, University of Tehran, Iran
2 Ph.D. of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran, Iran
3 Associate Professor, Faculty of Entrepreneurship Management, University of Tehran, Iran
4 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Entrepreneurship Management, University of Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

The prominent role of technology-based small firms (TBSFs) in economic growth is prevalent in the literature. However, access to appropriate financial resources is a critical success factor for TBSFs. Venture capital (VC) funds are the key player in financing TBSFs. But, in developing countries, such as Iran, VC industry is inmature and underdeveloped. One of the main obstacle ahead of this industry is the challenges that exist in transactions between two parties (i.e. venture capitalists and TBSFs). So, the current study has executed to explore such challenges during the various stages of VC process. To do this, 29 in-depth interviews were conducted and the datas were analized applying grounded theory method. Also, the institutional theory was adapted in this study, because the institutions provide the frameworks in which the incentives and relation among all actors, including VC fund and TBSFs, are determined. The research finding (that was concluded using the Williamson institutional model) suggest that institutions such as information disclosure standards, tax regulations, intellectual property rights, protection of shareholders rights, law enforcement, government supportive policies, financial market institutions and several other socio-cultural such as collective action culture are critically important in setting up the relationship between the venture capitalists and TBSFs. So, it is recommended that policy makers reform institutions instead of direct intervention to develop the VC industry.
 
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Venture capital
  • Technology-Based Small Firms
  • Transaction
  • Corporate Finance
  • Institutional Theory
  • Grounded Theory Method
[1] Bozkaya, A., Van Pottelsberghe Dela Potterie, B. (2008). Who fund technology-based small firms? Evidence from belgium. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 17(1&2), 97-122.
[2] Carpenter, R. E., & Petersen, B. C. (2002). Capital market imperfections, high-tech investment, and new equity financing. The Economic Journal, 112, 54-72.
[3] Hall, B. (2010). The financing of innovative firms. Review of Economics and Institutions, 1(1), 1-30.
[4] Metrick, A., & Yasuda, A. (2010). Venture Capital and the Finance of Innovation. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
[5] Berger, A., & Udell, G. (1998). The economics of small business finance: The roles of private equity and debt markets in the financial growth cycle. Journal of Banking & Finance, 22, 613-673.
[6] Vanacker, T., Heughebaert, A., & Manigart, S. (2014). Institutional Frameworks, Venture Capital and the Financing of European New Technology-based Firms. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 22(3), 199-215.
[7] Jebel Aameli, M., & Azadegan Mehr, M. (2010). Supportive pattern for the formation of university spin-off companies through venture capital mechanism: The Case of Iran University of Science and Technology. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 3(1), 15-28. {In Persian}.
[8] Scheela, W., & Jittrapanun, T. (2012). Do institutions matter for business angel investing in emerging Asian markets? Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 14(4), 289-308.
[9] Hain, D., Johan, S., & Wang, D. (2016). Determinants of Cross-Border Venture Capital Investments in Emerging and Developed Economies: The Effects of Relational and Institutional Trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 138, 743-764.
[10] Ernst & Young. (2016). Back to reality. EY global venture capital trends 2015.
[11] Revest, V., & Sapio, A. (2012). Financing technology-based small firms in Europe: what do we know? Small Business Economics, 39, 179-205.
[12] Bruton, G., & 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, 233-259.
[13] MENA Private Equity Association (MENAPEA). (2016). 10th Annual MENA Private Equity and Venture Capital Report, 2015. Dubai: Author.
[14] UNCTAD. (2016). Science, technology and innovation policy review-Iran. United Nations publication, Printed in Switzerland.
[15] World Economic Forum (WEF), Klaus Schwab. (2016). The Global Competitiveness Report 2015-2016. Printed and bound in Switzerland.
[16] Peneder, M. (2008). The problem of private under-investment in innovation: A policy mind map. Technovation, 28, 518-530.
[17] Shepherd, D., & Zacharakis, A. (2001). The venture capitalist-entrepreneur relationship: Control, trust and confidence in cooperative behavior. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 3(2), 129-149.
[18] Dossani, R., & Kenney, M. (2002). Creating an Environment for Venture Capital in India. World Development, 30(2), 227-253.
[19] Milana, C., & Wu, H. (2012). Growth, Institutions, and Entrepreneurial Finance in China: A Survey. Strategic Change, 21, 83-106.
[20] Modigliani, F., & Miller, M. (1958). The cost of capital, corporation finance and the theory of investment. American Economics Review, 48(3), 261-297.
[21] North, D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge Univercity Press, Cambridge.
[22] Motavaseli, M. (2016). A prelude to the Creation Process of novelty in Economic Development and Entrepreneurship. Journal of entrepreneurship development, 9(1), 177-195. {In Persian}.
[23] Klonowski, D. (2007). Venture capitalists’ perspective on corporate governance in transitioneconomies. Problems of Economic Transition, 49(8), 44-64.
[24] Williamson, O. (1988). Corporate Finance and Corporate Governance. The Journal ofFinance, 43(3), 567-591.
[25] Heidari, M., & Mohammadi, P. (2016). Main Characteristic of Entrepreneurial Venture-backed Firms in Different Stages of Growth. Journal of entrepreneurship development, 9(1), 59-78. {In Persian}.
[26] Imanipour, N., & Azizi, H. (2011), Venture capital process analysis in Iran. Journal of entrepreneurship development, 4(12), 85-103. {In Persian}.
[27] Heidari, M., & Mohammadi, P. (2015). Information Asymmetry in Venture Capital:Study on Shirkah and Mudhaarabah. Journal of Islamic Economy, 15(58), 153-177. {In Persian}.
[28] Commons, J. (1934). Institutional Economics: It’s Place in Political Economy. New York: Macmillan.
[29] Williamson, O. (2000). The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead. Journal of Economic Literature, 38, 595-613.
[30] Lerner, J., & Tag, J. (2013). Institutions and Venture Capital. Industrial and Corporate Change, 22(1), 153-182.
[31] Motavaseli, M. (2015). The process of creation of novelty in economic development and entrepreneurship. Journal of entrepreneurship development, 8(3), 413-431. {In Persian}.
[32] Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Aldine de Gruyter, New York.
[33] Heath, H., & Cowley, S. (2004). Developing Grounded Theory approach: a comparison of Glaser and Strauss. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 41, 141-50.
[34] Glaser, B. (1978). Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory: Theoretical Sensitivity. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.
[35] Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theory from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532-550.
[36] Hooman, H. A. (2000). A Practical Guide to Qualitative Research. SAMT publication, Tehran, Iran. {In Persian}.
[37] Ferasatkhah, M. (2015). We Iranians: A historical and social contextualizing of Iranian ethos. Ney Publication, Tehran, Iran. {In Persian}.
[38] Fan, J., Titman, S., & Twite, G. (2012). An international comparison of capital structure anddebt maturity choices. Journal of financial and quantitative analysis, 47(1), 23-56.
[39] Cumming, D., & MacIntosh, J. (2003). A cross country comparison of full and partial venture capital exits. Journal of Banking & Finance, 27(3), 511-548.
[40] Myrdal, G. (1978). Institutional Economics. Journal of economic issues, 12(4), 771-783.