IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/sbusec/v62y2024i1d10.1007_s11187-023-00824-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Core business prospects and the management of internal corporate ventures

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey G. Covin

    (University of Wyoming)

  • Robert P. Garrett

    (University of Memphis)

  • Ricarda B. Bouncken

    (University of Bayreuth)

  • Martin Ratzmann

    (University of Bayreuth)

  • Malcolm Muhammad

    (Russell Innovation Center for Entrepreneurs)

Abstract

Corporations with attractive core business prospects focus their attention on those core businesses and away from ICVs they may be pursuing, thus influencing how those ICVs are treated from a corporate parenting perspective and, in turn, how well they perform. Using data collected from 145 ICVs operating in 72 corporate parents, this research reveals that corporations with more attractive core businesses grant greater planning autonomy to their ICVs’ managers, and planning autonomy contributes to ICV performance. Additional results reveal the moderating effects within our structural model of venture manager experience and the similarity of the ICV’s product to those of other businesses within the corporation. Considered collectively, this research demonstrates why corporations that “need” their ICVs to be successful – because of poor prospects in their core businesses – are most likely to mismanage them. Unattractive core business prospects can be viewed as justifying corporate managers’ involvement in the direct management of their firms’ ICVs. However, venture planning autonomy is needed to avoid placing undue expectations on ICVs as the “saviors” of corporate performance. By extension, this need for autonomy is also anticipated to apply to other entrepreneurial contexts where experimentation and learning are significant concerns (e.g., business incubators, corporate venture capital investments, new venture divisions). Plain English Summary This research demonstrates how and why corporations that have attractive core business operations are most likely to be good corporate parents to their internal corporate ventures (ICVs), and vice versa. In a sense, when it comes to internal corporate venturing, “the rich corporations get richer, and the poor corporations get poorer.” Parent corporations with more attractive core business prospects were found to grant greater planning autonomy to the managers of their ICVs, and autonomy is needed to give ICV managers the discretion and flexibility they need when navigating their ventures though unchartered business territory. Overall, this research demonstrates the importance of corporate managers (1) granting ICV managers autonomy in planning their venture operations, (2) being willing to consider engaging in internal corporate venturing even though their firms’ existing, core business operations may be attractive (i.e., before these ICVs “need” to be successful), and (3) not putting too much pressure on ICVs to “perform,” and avoiding meddling in the management of those ventures, when prospects in the corporation’s core business are unattractive. We argue that autonomy is likely efficacious in most entrepreneurial contexts where experimentation and learning are significant concerns (e.g., business incubators, corporate venture capital investments, new venture divisions).

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey G. Covin & Robert P. Garrett & Ricarda B. Bouncken & Martin Ratzmann & Malcolm Muhammad, 2024. "Core business prospects and the management of internal corporate ventures," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 435-459, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:sbusec:v:62:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s11187-023-00824-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11187-023-00824-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11187-023-00824-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11187-023-00824-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Andrew J. Hoffman & William Ocasio, 2001. "Not All Events Are Attended Equally: Toward a Middle-Range Theory of Industry Attention to External Events," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 414-434, August.
    2. James Robins & Margarethe F. Wiersema, 1995. "A resource‐based approach to the multibusiness firm: Empirical analysis of portfolio interrelationships and corporate financial performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 277-299.
    3. Morgan P. Miles & Jeffrey G. Covin, 2002. "Exploring the Practice of Corporate Venturing: Some Common Forms and Their Organizational Implications," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 26(3), pages 21-40, April.
    4. Henri A. Schildt & Markku V.J. Maula & Thomas Keil, 2005. "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 493-515, July.
    5. McGrath, Rita Gunther, 1995. "Advantage from adversity: Learning from disappointment in internal corporate ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 121-142, March.
    6. Lee Cronbach, 1951. "Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 16(3), pages 297-334, September.
    7. Jeffrey G. Covin & Morgan P. Miles, 2007. "Strategic Use of Corporate Venturing," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 31(2), pages 183-207, March.
    8. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    9. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    10. Covin, Jeffrey G. & Garrett, Robert P. & Kuratko, Donald F. & Shepherd, Dean A., 2020. "Short leash or long leash? Parenting style, initial strategic clarity, and the development of venture learning proficiency," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(4).
    11. Jeffrey G. Covin & Robert P. Garrett Jr. & Jyoti P. Gupta & Donald F. Kuratko & Dean A. Shepherd, 2018. "The Interdependence of Planning and Learning among Internal Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 42(4), pages 537-570, July.
    12. Covin, Jeffrey G. & Garrett, Robert P. & Kuratko, Donald F. & Shepherd, Dean A., 2015. "Value proposition evolution and the performance of internal corporate ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 749-774.
    13. Sykes, Hollister B., 1992. "Incentive compensation for corporate venture personnel," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 253-265, July.
    14. Charles Williams & Will Mitchell, 2004. "Focusing Firm Evolution: The Impact of Information Infrastructure on Market Entry by U.S. Telecommunications Companies, 1984--1998," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1561-1575, November.
    15. Mark Kroll & Bruce A. Walters & Peter Wright, 2008. "Board vigilance, director experience, and corporate outcomes," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 363-382, April.
    16. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    17. William Ocasio, 1997. "Towards An Attention‐Based View Of The Firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(S1), pages 187-206, July.
    18. Thomas Keil & Rita Gunther McGrath & Taina Tukiainen, 2009. "Gems from the Ashes: Capability Creation and Transformation in Internal Corporate Venturing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 601-620, June.
    19. Lysander Weiss & Dominik Kanbach, 2022. "Toward an integrated framework of corporate venturing for organizational ambidexterity as a dynamic capability," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 1129-1170, December.
    20. Hüseyin Tanriverdi & N. Venkatraman, 2005. "Knowledge relatedness and the performance of multibusiness firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 97-119, February.
    21. Veer, Theresa & Yang, Philip & Riepe, Jan, 2022. "Ventures' conscious knowledge transfer to close partners, and beyond: A framework of performance, complementarity, knowledge disclosure, and knowledge broadcasting," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 37(3).
    22. Theresa S. Cho & Donald C. Hambrick, 2006. "Attention as the Mediator Between Top Management Team Characteristics and Strategic Change: The Case of Airline Deregulation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 453-469, August.
    23. Caron H. St. John & Jeffrey S. Harrison, 1999. "Manufacturing‐based relatedness, synergy, and coordination," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 129-145, February.
    24. Covin, Jeffrey G. & Slevin, Dennis P. & Heeley, Michael B., 2000. "Pioneers and followers: Competitive tactics, environment, and firm growth," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 175-210, March.
    25. Kanter, Rosabeth, 1985. "Supporting innovation and venture development in established companies," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 47-60.
    26. G.T. Lumpkin & Claudia C. Cogliser & Dawn R. Schneider, 2009. "Understanding and Measuring Autonomy: An Entrepreneurial Orientation Perspective," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(1), pages 47-69, January.
    27. Jeffrey G. Covin & Robert P. Garrett & Donald F. Kuratko & Mark Bolinger, 2021. "Internal corporate venture planning autonomy, strategic evolution, and venture performance," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 293-310, January.
    28. Teece, David J., 1980. "Economies of scope and the scope of the enterprise," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 223-247, September.
    29. Kevin L. Johnson, 2012. "The Role of Structural and Planning Autonomy in the Performance of Internal Corporate Ventures," Journal of Small Business Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(3), pages 469-497, July.
    30. Sorrentino, Mario & Williams, Mary L., 1995. "Relatedness and corporate venturing: Does it really matter?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 59-73, January.
    31. Marvel, Matthew R. & Wolfe, Marcus T. & Kuratko, Donald F., 2020. "Escaping the knowledge corridor: How founder human capital and founder coachability impacts product innovation in new ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(6).
    32. Robert A. Burgelman, 1983. "Corporate Entrepreneurship and Strategic Management: Insights from a Process Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(12), pages 1349-1364, December.
    33. Brian S. Silverman, 1999. "Technological Resources and the Direction of Corporate Diversification: Toward an Integration of the Resource-Based View and Transaction Cost Economics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(8), pages 1109-1124, August.
    34. Thornhill, Stewart & Amit, Raphael, 2001. "A dynamic perspective of internal fit in corporate venturing," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 25-50, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Waldkirch, Matthias & Kammerlander, Nadine & Wiedeler, Conrad, 2021. "Configurations for corporate venture innovation: Investigating the role of the dominant coalition," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(5).
    2. Covin, Jeffrey G. & Garrett, Robert P. & Kuratko, Donald F. & Shepherd, Dean A., 2015. "Value proposition evolution and the performance of internal corporate ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 749-774.
    3. Robert P. Garrett Jr. & Jeffrey G. Covin, 2015. "Internal Corporate Venture Operations Independence and Performance: A Knowledge–Based Perspective," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 39(4), pages 763-790, July.
    4. Jeffrey G. Covin & Robert P. Garrett Jr. & Jyoti P. Gupta & Donald F. Kuratko & Dean A. Shepherd, 2018. "The Interdependence of Planning and Learning among Internal Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 42(4), pages 537-570, July.
    5. Maria Glinyanova & Ricarda B. Bouncken & Victor Tiberius & Antonio C. Cuenca Ballester, 2021. "Five decades of corporate entrepreneurship research: measuring and mapping the field," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 1731-1757, December.
    6. Covin, Jeffrey G. & Garrett, Robert P. & Kuratko, Donald F. & Shepherd, Dean A., 2020. "Short leash or long leash? Parenting style, initial strategic clarity, and the development of venture learning proficiency," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(4).
    7. Jeffrey G. Covin & Robert P. Garrett & Donald F. Kuratko & Mark Bolinger, 2021. "Internal corporate venture planning autonomy, strategic evolution, and venture performance," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 293-310, January.
    8. Tobias Gutmann, 2019. "Harmonizing corporate venturing modes: an integrative review and research agenda," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 69(2), pages 121-157, June.
    9. Lee, Hyunmin, 2023. "Converging technology to improve firm innovation competencies and business performance: Evidence from smart manufacturing technologies," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    10. Simone A. Schweiger & Tatiana R. Stettler & Artur Baldauf & César Zamudio, 2019. "The complementarity of strategic orientations: A meta‐analytic synthesis and theory extension," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(11), pages 1822-1851, November.
    11. Hicheon Kim & Johngseok Bae & Garry Bruton, 2012. "Business groups and institutional upheaval in emerging economies: Corporate venturing in Korea," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 729-752, September.
    12. Henri A. Schildt & Markku V.J. Maula & Thomas Keil, 2005. "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 493-515, July.
    13. Daniel Reimsbach & Bastian Hauschild, 2012. "Corporate venturing: an extended typology," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 71-80, September.
    14. Bhandari, Krishna Raj & Rana, Sudhir & Paul, Justin & Salo, Jari, 2020. "Relative exploration and firm performance: Why resource-theory alone is not sufficient?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 363-377.
    15. Lee, Hyunmin, 2023. "Strategic similarity in the co-evolution of technological and business diversification for firm growth: Evidence from smart-manufacturing related firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    16. Shin, Jongtae & Shin, Hyun, 2013. "Institutional ownership and technological relatedness: A test of endogeneity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(11), pages 2279-2286.
    17. Elisabeth Nocker & Harry P. Bowen & Christian Stadler, 2012. "Value Chain Relatedness: Strategic Complementarities and Firm Performance," Discussion Paper Series 2012-03, McColl School of Business, Queens University of Charlotte.
    18. Choi, Jaeho & Rhee, Mooweon & Kim, Young-Choon, 2019. "Performance feedback and problemistic search: The moderating effects of managerial and board outsiderness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 21-33.
    19. Hoskins, Jake D. & Carson, Stephen J., 2022. "Industry conditions, market share, and the firm’s ability to derive business-line profitability from diverse technological portfolios," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 178-192.
    20. Adrian Lüthge, 2020. "The concept of relatedness in diversification research: review and synthesis," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 1-35, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Corporate venturing; Business prospects; Planning autonomy; Venture performance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L26 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Entrepreneurship

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:kap:sbusec:v:62:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s11187-023-00824-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.