IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbvent/v28y2013i1p117-133.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contextualizing the categorical imperative: Category linkages, technology focus, and resource acquisition in nanotechnology entrepreneurship

Author

Listed:
  • Wry, Tyler
  • Lounsbury, Michael

Abstract

This paper examines the role of category affiliations in entrepreneurial resource acquisition. Pace existing studies, we suggest category spanning will cause firms to be overlooked or discounted because evaluators assume that they have less expertise than their category-focused competitors; a phenomenon known as the ‘categorical imperative’. We suggest, however, that categories can be related both vertically and horizontally, and that this has important implications for understanding how the actors that span between them are evaluated. Studying startup ventures in nanotube technology, we show that venture capital investments were affected by a firm's position across patent classes that were related at both of these levels of analysis and that the interaction between them had implications for which firms received the largest investments.

Suggested Citation

  • Wry, Tyler & Lounsbury, Michael, 2013. "Contextualizing the categorical imperative: Category linkages, technology focus, and resource acquisition in nanotechnology entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 117-133.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbvent:v:28:y:2013:i:1:p:117-133
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.03.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883902612000390
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giacomo Negro & Michael T. Hannan & Hayagreeva Rao, 2010. "Categorical contrast and audience appeal: niche width and critical success in winemaking," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(5), pages 1397-1425, October.
    2. Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R., 1997. "Present at the biotechnological revolution: transformation of technological identity for a large incumbent pharmaceutical firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 429-446, December.
    3. Gilsing, Victor & Nooteboom, Bart & Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & van den Oord, Ad, 2008. "Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: Technological distance, betweenness centrality and density," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1717-1731, December.
    4. Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2003. "Why Focus? A Study Of Intra‐Industry Focus Effects," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 121-150, June.
    5. Hicks, Diana, 1995. "Published Papers, Tacit Competencies and Corporate Management of the Public/Private Character of Knowledge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 401-424.
    6. Nelson, Richard R, 1986. "Institutions Supporting Technical Advance in Industry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 186-189, May.
    7. Nelson, Richard R., 1989. "Technology and global industry: Companies and nations in the world economy : Bruce R. Guile and Harvey Brooks (Eds.), (National Academy Press, Washington, D.C, 1987)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 114-115, April.
    8. Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson & Adam Jaffe, 1997. "University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window On The Basicness Of Invention," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 19-50.
    9. Partha, Dasgupta & David, Paul A., 1994. "Toward a new economics of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 487-521, September.
    10. Manuel Trajtenberg & Adam B. Jaffe & Michael S. Fogarty, 2000. "Knowledge Spillovers and Patent Citations: Evidence from a Survey of Inventors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 215-218, May.
    11. Francis Narin & Kimberly S Hamilton & Dominic Olivastro, 1995. "Linkage between agency-supported research and patented industrial technology," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 183-187, December.
    12. Gupta, Anil K. & Sapienza, Harry J., 1992. "Determinants of venture capital firms' preferences regarding the industry diversity and geographic scope of their investments," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 7(5), pages 347-362, September.
    13. Zucker, Lynne G & Darby, Michael R & Brewer, Marilynn B, 1998. "Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 290-306, March.
    14. Vance H. Fried & Robert D. Hisrich, 1994. "Toward a Model of Venture Capital Investment Decision Making," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 23(3), Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rodolphe Durand & Robert M. Grant & Tammy L. Madsen & Gino Cattani & Joseph F. Porac & Howard Thomas, 2017. "Categories and competition," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 64-92, January.
    2. Michael Lounsbury & Christine M. Beckman, 2015. "Celebrating Organization Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 288-308, March.
    3. Gianluca Carnabuci & Elisa Operti & Balázs Kovács, 2015. "The Categorical Imperative and Structural Reproduction: Dynamics of Technological Entry in the Semiconductor Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 1734-1751, December.
    4. J.-P. Vergne & Tyler Wry, 2014. "Categorizing Categorization Research: Review, Integration, and Future Directions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 56-94, January.
    5. Rodolphe Durand & Jean-Philippe Vergne, 2015. "Asset divestment as a response to media attacks in stigmatized industries," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(8), pages 1205-1223, August.
    6. Younger, Shannon & Fisher, Greg, 2020. "The exemplar enigma: New venture image formation in an emergent organizational category," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(1).
    7. Tang, Yi & Wezel, Filippo Carlo, 2015. "Up to standard?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 452-466.
    8. McCarthy, Killian J. & Aalbers, Hendrik Leendert, 2016. "Technological acquisitions: The impact of geography on post-acquisition innovative performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1818-1832.
    9. Peter Younkin & Keyvan Kashkooli, 2020. "Stay True to Your Roots? Category Distance, Hierarchy, and the Performance of New Entrants in the Music Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 604-627, May.
    10. Goldenstein, Jan & Hunoldt, Michael & Oertel, Simon, 2019. "How optimal distinctiveness affects new ventures' failure risk: A contingency perspective," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 477-495.
    11. Jade Yu-Chieh Lo & Mark Thomas Kennedy, 2015. "Approval in Nanotechnology Patents: Micro and Macro Factors That Affect Reactions to Category Blending," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 119-139, February.
    12. Zhao, Hongxin & Lu, Jiangyong, 2016. "Contingent value of political capital in bank loan acquisition: Evidence from founder-controlled private enterprises in China," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 153-174.
    13. Gras, David & Mendoza-Abarca, Karla I., 2014. "Risky business? The survival implications of exploiting commercial opportunities by nonprofits," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 392-404.
    14. Poonam Khanna & Lemaro Thompson & Michael Mcdonald, 2015. "Research On Venture Capital Firms’ ‘Investment Behavior A Review’," Working Papers 0197mgt, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbvent:v:28:y:2013:i:1:p:117-133. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Haili He). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusvent .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.