IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/kue/epaper/e-23-001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

At the Right Time:Eliminating Mismatch between Cash Flow and Credit Flow in Microcredit

Author

Listed:
  • Sachiko HATA
  • Yasuo SUGIYAMA

Abstract

This research explores how entrepreneurs deploy defense mechanisms when facing the potential misappropriation of their own resources by established corporate partner “sharks.” The prior literature has examined legal and timing defenses, along with social defenses that utilize the network structure of investment relationships with power imbalances between young firms and large firms. By conducting qualitative analysis based on 41 semi-structured interviews with entrepreneurs' firms, broader and more detailed defense strategies were identified, including seven (invisible) defense mechanisms, such as “balanced coopetition,” “eliminate information asymmetry,” “agile implementation of ideas,” which were not immediately identifiable as defense mechanisms."

Suggested Citation

  • Sachiko HATA & Yasuo SUGIYAMA, 2023. "At the Right Time:Eliminating Mismatch between Cash Flow and Credit Flow in Microcredit," Discussion papers e-23-001, Graduate School of Economics , Kyoto University.
    • Handle: RePEc:kue:epaper:e-23-001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dp/papers/e-23-001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric L. Chen & Riitta Katila & Rory McDonald & Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 2010. "Life in the fast lane: Origins of competitive interaction in new vs. established markets," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(13), pages 1527-1547, December.
    2. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Marco Ceccagnoli, 2009. "Appropriability, preemption, and firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 81-98, January.
    4. Richard A. Bettis & Constance E. Helfat & J. Myles Shaver & Massimo G. Colombo & Kourosh Shafi, 2016. "Swimming with sharks in Europe: When are they dangerous and what can new ventures do to defend themselves?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(11), pages 2307-2322, November.
    5. Konstantinos Grigoriou & Frank T. Rothaermel, 2017. "Organizing for knowledge generation: internal knowledge networks and the contingent effect of external knowledge sourcing," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 395-414, February.
    6. Winter, Sidney G., 2006. "The logic of appropriability: From Schumpeter to Arrow to Teece," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1100-1106, October.
    7. Jeffrey J. Reuer & Tony W. Tong, 2010. "Discovering Valuable Growth Opportunities: An Analysis of Equity Alliances with IPO Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 202-215, February.
    8. Srikanth Paruchuri & Snehal Awate, 2017. "Organizational knowledge networks and local search: The role of intra‐organizational inventor networks," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 657-675, March.
    9. David Benson & Rosemarie H. Ziedonis, 2009. "Corporate Venture Capital as a Window on New Technologies: Implications for the Performance of Corporate Investors When Acquiring Startups," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 329-351, April.
    10. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Brent Goldfarb & Scott Shane & Marie Thursby, 2008. "Appropriability and Commercialization: Evidence from MIT Inventions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 893-906, May.
    11. Siegel, Robin & Siegel, Eric & MacMillan, Ian C., 1988. "Corporate venture capitalists: Autonomy, obstacles, and performance," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 233-247.
    12. Peng Huang & Marco Ceccagnoli & Chris Forman & D. J. Wu, 2013. "Appropriability Mechanisms and the Platform Partnership Decision: Evidence from Enterprise Software," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 102-121, July.
    13. Miozzo, Marcela & Desyllas, Panos & Lee, Hsing-fen & Miles, Ian, 2016. "Innovation collaboration and appropriability by knowledge-intensive business services firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1337-1351.
    14. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    15. Haemin Dennis Park & H. Kevin Steensma, 2012. "When does corporate venture capital add value for new ventures?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 1-22, January.
    16. Jonatan Pinkse & Koen Groot, 2015. "Sustainable Entrepreneurship and Corporate Political Activity: Overcoming Market Barriers in the Clean Energy Sector," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 39(3), pages 633-654, May.
    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. Yaowu Sun & Yi Zhai, 2018. "Mapping the knowledge domain and the theme evolution of appropriability research between 1986 and 2016: a scientometric review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 203-230, July.
    2. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia & Yang, Jialei, 2022. "Distinguishing between appropriability and appropriation: A systematic review and a renewed conceptual framing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    3. Yang, Jialei & Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia, 2022. "Evolving appropriability – Variation in the relevance of appropriability mechanisms across industries," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    4. Anokhin, Sergey & Morgan, Todd & Schulze, William & Wuebker, Robert, 2022. "Is a reputation for misconduct harmful? Evidence from corporate venture capital," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 65-76.
    5. Zhong, Qi & Sun, Yaowu, 2020. "The more the better? Relational governance in platforms and the role of appropriability mechanisms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 62-73.
    6. 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).
    7. Jeon, Euiju & Maula, Markku, 2022. "Progress toward understanding tensions in corporate venture capital: A systematic review," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 37(4).
    8. Kenny Ching & Joshua Gans & Scott Stern, 2019. "Control versus execution: endogenous appropriability and entrepreneurial strategy," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(2), pages 389-408.
    9. Fábio De Oliveira Paula & Jorge Ferreira Da Silva, 2019. "The Role Of The Appropriability Mechanisms For The Innovative Success Of Portuguese Small And Medium Enterprises," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(04), pages 1-23, May.
    10. Morricone, Serena & Munari, Federico & Oriani, Raffaele & de Rassenfosse, Gaetan, 2017. "Commercialization Strategy and IPO Underpricing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1133-1141.
    11. Graciela Corral de Zubielqui & Janice Jones & David Audretsch, 2019. "The influence of trust and collaboration with external partners on appropriability in open service firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 540-558, April.
    12. Massimo Colombo & Kourosh Shafi, 2016. "The impact of patenting on the size of high-tech firms: the role of venture capital and product market regulation," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 43(1), pages 85-103, March.
    13. Patrick Haslanger & Erik E. Lehmann & Nikolaus Seitz, 2023. "The performance effects of corporate venture capital: a meta-analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 2132-2160, December.
    14. Torres de Oliveira, Rui & Verreynne, Martie-Louise & Steen, John & Indulska, Marta, 2021. "Creating value by giving away: A typology of different innovation revealing strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 137-150.
    15. Ji Youn (Rose) Kim & Haemin Dennis Park, 2017. "Two Faces of Early Corporate Venture Capital Funding: Promoting Innovation and Inhibiting IPOs," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 161-175, September.
    16. Langlois, Jonathan & BenMahmoud-Jouini, Sihem & Servajean-Hilst, Romaric, 2023. "Practicing secrecy in open innovation – The case of a military firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    17. Massimo G. Colombo & Kourosh Shafi, 2016. "The impact of patenting on the size of high-tech firms: the role of venture capital and product market regulation," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 43(1), pages 85-103, March.
    18. Patrick Röhm, 2018. "Exploring the landscape of corporate venture capital: a systematic review of the entrepreneurial and finance literature," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 279-319, August.
    19. Foege, J. Nils & Lauritzen, Ghita Dragsdahl & Tietze, Frank & Salge, Torsten Oliver, 2019. "Reconceptualizing the paradox of openness: How solvers navigate sharing-protecting tensions in crowdsourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1323-1339.
    20. Stefanie Weniger & Svenja Jarchow, 2023. "Between benefit and risk: how entrepreneurs evaluate corporate investors," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(5), pages 783-816, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Microcredit; Open Innovation; Startup; Entrepreneurs; Qualitative research; Defense mechanism;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M10 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - General
    • M13 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - New Firms; Startups
    • M21 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics - - - Business Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:kue:epaper:e-23-001. 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: Graduate School of Economics Project Center (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fekyojp.html .

    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.