Firm-Specific Resources and Wealth Creation in High-Technology Ventures: Evidence from Newly Public Biotechnology Firms

We explore the relationship between wealth creation in high-technology ventures and firm-specific resources. We argue that Market Value Added is a particularly appropriate measure of entrepreneurial performance because of its focus on wealth creation, which is the essence of entrepreneurship. We present a model of wealth creation in new ventures based on the resource-based theory of firm behavior. The model suggests that firm-specific research and scientific capabilities are associated with wealth creation. The model is tested on a sample of 89 biotechnology firms. The results provide strong evidence for the hypothesized relationship between firm-specific capabilities and wealth creation in new ventures.

[1]  Jitendra V. Singh,et al.  Theory and Research in Organizational Ecology , 1990 .

[2]  C. Brush,et al.  Achieving Empirical Progress in an Undefined Field , 1990 .

[3]  James B. Wade,et al.  Density dependence in the organizational evolution of the American brewing industry across different levels of analysis , 1991 .

[4]  Jeff W. Trailer,et al.  Measuring performance in entrepreneurship research , 1996 .

[5]  J. Grant.  Foundations of EVA™ for Investment Managers , 1996 .

[6]  Robert J. Litschert,et al.  Environment-strategy relationship and its performance implications: An empirical study of the , 1994 .

[7]  I. Cockburn,et al.  Measuring competence?: exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research , 1994 .

[8]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Speeding Products to Market: Waiting Time to First Product Introduction in New Firms. , 1990 .

[9]  Shaker A. Zahra,et al.  Technology strategy and new venture performance: A study of corporate-sponsored and independent biotechnology ventures , 1996 .

[10]  Hardy M. Thomas,et al.  UK Evidence on the Market Valuation of Research and Development Expenditures , 1996 .

[11]  William S. Comanor,et al.  Research and Technical Change in the Pharmaceutical Industry , 1965 .

[12]  T. Hout,et al.  Competing Against Time , 1990 .

[13]  D. Schendel,et al.  Introduction to ‘Competitive Organizational Behavior: Toward an Organizationally-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage’ , 1994 .

[14]  David L. Deeds,et al.  Predictors of Capital Structure in Small Ventures , 1996 .

[15]  G. Carroll,et al.  Density Dependence in the Evolution of Populations of Newspaper Organizations , 1989 .

[16]  J. T. Wallmark,et al.  Measurement of output from university research: a case study , 1988 .

[17]  John M. Vernon,et al.  Technical Change and Firm Size: The Pharmaceutical Industry , 1974 .

[18]  Margaret A. Peteraf.  The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource‐based view , 1993 .

[19]  Samuel B. Graves,et al.  Innovative productivity and returns to scale in the pharmaceutical industry , 1993 .

[20]  J. Tobin.  A General Equilibrium Approach to Monetary Theory , 1969 .

[21]  D. Newbery,et al.  Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly , 1982 .

[22]  D. B. Montgomery,et al.  First‐mover advantages , 1988 .

[23]  E. Mansfield.  The speed and cost of industrial innovation in Japan and the United States: external vs. internal technology , 1988 .

[24]  Harry Rothman,et al.  An experiment in science mapping for research planning , 1986 .

[25]  P. David,et al.  Toward a new economics of science , 1994 .

[26]  E. Lindenberg,et al.  Tobin's q Ratio and Industrial Organization , 1981 .

[27]  Henry G. Grabowski,et al.  A New Look at the Returns and Risks to Pharmaceutical R&D , 1990 .

[28]  B. C. Griffith,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Literatures I: Identifying and Graphing Specialties , 1974 .

[29]  Merton H. Miller.  The Cost of Capital, Corporation Finance and the Theory of Investment , 1958 .

[30]  B. Kogut,et al.  Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology , 1992 .

[31]  A. Jaffe.  Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms&Apos; Patents, Profits and Market Value , 1986 .

[32]  Francis Narin,et al.  Bibliometric analysis of U.S. pharmaceutical industry research performance , 1988 .

[33]  Robert Heinkel,et al.  Signaling and the Valuation of Unseasoned New Issues , 1982 .

[34]  C. van der Eerden,et al.  The use of science and technology indicators in strategic planning , 1991 .

[35]  R. Sen,et al.  Using Patent Information in Technology Business Planning—I , 1988 .

[36]  G. Pisano.  Knowledge Integration and the Locus of Learning: An Empirical Analysis , 1994 .

[37]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[38]  AnnaLee Saxenian,et al.  Regional Networks and the Resurgence of Silicon Valley , 1990 .

[39]  Sheridan Titman,et al.  Information quality and the valuation of new issues , 1986 .

[40]  Peter Vinkler,et al.  Management system for a scientific research institute based on the assessment of scientific publications , 1986 .

[41]  David L. Deeds,et al.  The impact of firmspecific capabilities on the amount of capital raised in an initial public offering: Evidence from the biotechnology industry , 1997 .

[42]  Murray B. Low,et al.  Entrepreneurship: Past Research and Future Challenges , 1988 .

[43]  C. Brush,et al.  A comparison of methods and sources for obtaining estimates of new venture performance , 1992 .

[44]  Jay R. Ritter,et al.  The "Hot Issue" Market of 1980 , 1984 .

[45]  J. Blau.  The Disjunctive History of U.S. Museums, 1869–1980 , 1991 .

[46]  Brett Trueman.  The Relationship between the Level of Capital Expenditures and Firm Value , 1986, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

[47]  Ken G. Smith,et al.  Using Subjective Evaluations of Organizational Performance in Small Business Research , 1988 .

[48]  Nathan Rosenberg,et al.  Why are Americans Such Poor Imitators , 1988 .

[49]  K. Lehn,et al.  EVA & MVA as performance measures and signals for strategic change , 1996 .