IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Decision time in Belgium: an experiment as to how business angels evaluate investment opportunities

  • Joël Ludvigsen
Registered author(s):

    To what extent do business angels really understand their own decision process? This paper is the first in business angel research literature to use conjoint analysis to capture decision makers’ actual decision policies and to compare these results with their stated decision policies. Although more than twenty papers discussing the decision criteria of business angels have been published, most of these studies rely on post hoc methodologies (e.g. interviews and surveys) to capture the decision process. Post hoc methods assume that business angels can accurately introspect about their own decision processes, but studies from cognitive psychology suggest that decision makers are poor at introspecting. In addition, experiments in the venture capital industry have shown that venture capitalists are poor at introspecting and do not fully understand their decision processes. Taking cues from cognitive psychology, this paper starts with the hypothesis that, like venture capitalists, business angels do not fully understand their own decision processes. To test this hypothesis, an experiment including twenty-four Belgian business angels and using conjoint analysis is performed. The findings suggest that business angels are not good at introspecting about their own decision processes. Even within the confines of a controlled experiment, which greatly reduces the amount of information considered, business angels lacked strong understanding of how they made decisions.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/54323/1/RePEc_sol_wpaper_09-037.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles in its series Working Papers CEB with number 09-037.RS.

    as
    in new window

    Length: 34 p.
    Date of creation: 2009
    Date of revision:
    Publication status: Published by:
    Handle: RePEc:sol:wpaper:09-037
    Contact details of provider: Postal: CP114/03, 42 avenue F.D. Roosevelt, 1050 Bruxelles
    Phone: +32 (0)2 650.48.64
    Fax: +32 (0)2 650.41.88
    Web page: http://difusion.ulb.ac.be
    Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Macmillan, Ian C. & Zemann, Lauriann & Subbanarasimha, P. N., 1987. "Criteria distinguishing successful from unsuccessful ventures in the venture screening process," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 123-137.
    2. ANT Bozkaya & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe, 2004. "Who Funds Technology-Based Small Firms? Evidence from Belgium," Working Papers CEB 04-027.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Freear, John & Sohl, Jeffrey E. & Wetzel, William Jr., 1994. "Angels and non-angels: Are there differences?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 109-123, March.
    4. Lisa Feeney & George H. Haines & Allan L. Riding, 1999. "Private investors' investment criteria: Insights from qualitative data," Venture Capital, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 121-145, April.
    5. Landstrom, Hans, 1993. "Informal risk capital in Sweden and some international comparisons," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 8(6), pages 525-540, November.
    6. Shepherd, Dean A. & Ettenson, Richard & Crouch, Andrew, 2000. "New venture strategy and profitability: A venture capitalist's assessment," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(5-6), pages 449-467.
    7. Sullivan, Mary Kay & Miller, Alex, 1996. "Segmenting the informal venture capital market: Economic, hedonistic, and altruistic investors," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 25-35, May.
    8. Mason, Colin M. & Harrison, Richard T., 2002. "Is it worth it? The rates of return from informal venture capital investments," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 211-236, May.
    9. Zacharakis, Andrew L. & Meyer, G. Dale, 1998. "A lack of insight: do venture capitalists really understand their own decision process?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 57-76, January.
    10. Fiet, James O., 1995. "Reliance upon informants in the venture capital industry," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 195-223, May.
    11. Dev Prasad & Garry D. Bruton & George Vozikis, 2000. "Signaling value to businessangels: The proportion of the entrepreneur's net worth invested in a new venture as a decision signal," Venture Capital, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(3), pages 167-182, July.
    12. Haar, Nancy E. & Starr, Jennifer & MacMillan, Ian C., 1988. "Informal risk capital investors: Investment patterns on the East Coast of the U.S.A," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 11-29.
    13. Kevin Hindle & Robert Wenban, 1999. "Australia's informal venture capitalists: An exploratory profile," Venture Capital, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 169-186, April.
    14. Macmillan, Ian C. & Siegel, Robin & Narasimha, P. N. Subba, 1985. "Criteria used by venture capitalists to evaluate new venture proposals," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 119-128.
    15. Harrison, Richard T. & Mason, Colin M., 1992. "International perspectives on the supply of informal venture capital," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 7(6), pages 459-475, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sol:wpaper:09-037. 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: (Benoit Pauwels)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.