From a corporate venture to an independent company: a base for a taxonomy for corporate spin-off firms

Abstract This paper proposes a taxonomy of corporate spin-off firms by exploring the nature of parent firm–spin-off firm relationship. Relying on the resource-based and the resource-dependence theory, special attention is paid to the complementarity of the resource base of the parent firm relative to its spin-off, the intensity of collaboration between the parent and the spin-off, and the dependence of the spin-off firm on the resources provided by the parent organization. Based on cluster analysis, we were able to identify three distinct groups of corporate spin-off firms: spin-offs developing new technologies, spin-offs serving new markets and restructuring spin-offs. These groups differ from one another in terms of the intensity of resource sharing linkages and knowledge transfer between the parent and the spin-off, timing of separation, as well as the direction and breadth of their new product development activities.

[1]  R. Bettis.  Performance differences in related and unrelated diversified firms , 1981 .

[2]  Robert A. Burgelman.  A Process Model of Internal Corporate Venturing in the Diversified Major Firm , 1983 .

[3]  A. Heene,et al.  Managing articulated knowledge in competence-based competition , 1996 .

[4]  A. Cooper,et al.  Spin-offs and technical entrepreneurship , 1971 .

[5]  G. Krogh,et al.  Managing Knowledge: Perspectives on Cooperation and Competition , 1996 .

[6]  Karel Cool,et al.  Asset Stock Accumulation and the Sustainability of Competitive Advantage: Reply , 1989 .

[7]  Simon Peck,et al.  Corporate Restructuring and New Forms of Organising: Evidence from Europe , 1999 .

[8]  D. Jacobs,et al.  Dependency and Vulnerability: An Exchange Approach to the Control of Organizations. , 1974 .

[9]  R. Sanchez,et al.  Strategic Learning and Knowledge Management , 1997 .

[10]  B. Hedberg.  How Organizations Learn and Unlearn , 1981 .

[11]  Jay B. Barney,et al.  Returns to bidding firms in mergers and acquisitions: Reconsidering the relatedness hypothesis , 1988 .

[12]  Karel Cool,et al.  Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage , 1989 .

[13]  R. Grant.  On 'Dominant Logic', Relatedness and the Link between Diversity and Performance , 1988 .

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

[15]  Cynthia A. Montgomery,et al.  Corporate acquisition strategies and economic performance , 1987 .

[16]  A. Lewin,et al.  Prolegomena on Coevolution: a Framework for Research on Strategy and New Organizational Forms , 1999 .

[17]  Robert A. Burgelman.  Fading Memories: A Process Theory of Strategic Business Exit in Dynamic Environments , 1994 .

[18]  Rolph E. Anderson,et al.  Multivariate data analysis (4th ed.): with readings , 1995 .

[19]  James D. Thompson.  Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[20]  Urs Daellenbach,et al.  Spin‐off performance: A case of overstated expectations? , 1992 .

[21]  C. Prahalad,et al.  The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance , 1986 .

[22]  Carolyn Y. Woo,et al.  Spin‐offs: What Are the Gains? , 1989 .

[23]  Keith Pavitt,et al.  Key Characteristics of the Large Innovating Firm , 1991 .

[24]  N. Dorfman,et al.  Route 128 : The Development of a Regional High Technology Economy : Research Policy , 1983 .

[25]  H. Charles Romesburg,et al.  Cluster analysis for researchers , 1984 .

[26]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Role of Individual Attachments in the Dissolution of Interorganizational Relationships , 1992 .

[27]  G. Hamel,et al.  Competence-based competition , 1994 .

[28]  Åsa Lindholm Dahlstrand,et al.  Growth and inventiveness in technology-based spin-off firms , 1997 .

[29]  Charles J. Fombrun,et al.  Shifting gears: Enabling change in corporate aggressiveness , 1990 .

[30]  David J. Teece,et al.  Towards an economic theory of the multiproduct firm , 1982 .

[31]  Erkko Autio,et al.  NEW, TECHNOLOGY-BASED FIRMS IN INNOVATION NETWORKS SYMPLECTIC AND GENERATIVE IMPACTS , 1997 .

[32]  K. Cook.  Exchange and Power in Networks of Interorganizational Relations , 1976 .

[33]  R. Emerson.  Power-Dependence Relations , 1962, Power in Modern Societies.

[34]  Robert K. Kazanjian,et al.  An empirical test of a stage of growth progression model , 1989 .

[35]  E. Penrose.  The theory of the growth of the firm twenty-five years after , 1960 .

[36]  Vasudevan Ramanujam,et al.  Research on corporate diversification: A synthesis , 1989 .

[37]  M. Aiken,et al.  Organizational interdependence and intra-organizational structure. , 1968 .

[38]  Cynthia A. Montgomery,et al.  Tobin's q and the Importance of Focus in Firm Performance , 1988 .

[39]  Henk W. Volberda,et al.  Co-evolution of Firm Absorptive Capacity and Knowledge Environment: Organizational Forms and Combinative Capabilities , 1999 .

[40]  John A. Pearce,et al.  Business unit relatedness and performance: A look at the pulp and paper industry , 1992 .

[41]  Birger Wernerfelt,et al.  The link between resources and type of diversification: Theory and evidence , 1991 .

[42]  Michael A. Hitt,et al.  Antecedents and Performance Outcomes of Diversification: A Review and Critique of Theoretical Perspectives , 1990 .

[43]  Robert K. Kazanjian.  Relation of Dominant Problems to Stages of Growth in Technology-Based New Ventures , 1988 .

[44]  David J. Ketchen,et al.  THE APPLICATION OF CLUSTER ANALYSIS IN STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT RESEARCH: AN ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUE , 1996 .

[45]  Cynthia A. Montgomery,et al.  Diversified expansion by large established firms , 1991 .

[46]  Leonid Hurwicz,et al.  Technological change and economic theory , 1972 .

[47]  S. Winter,et al.  An evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .

[48]  Jens Frøslev Christensen.  Asset profiles for technological innovation , 1995 .

[49]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness , 1997 .

[50]  R. Rumelt.  Strategy, structure, and economic performance , 1974 .

[51]  P. Green,et al.  Analyzing multivariate data , 1978 .

[52]  B. Wernerfelt,et al.  Related or Unrelated Diversification: A Resource Based Approach. , 1988 .

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

[54]  Joseph T. Mahoney,et al.  The resource-based view within the conversation of strategic management , 1992 .

[55]  Keith Chapman,et al.  Mergers/Acquisitions and Restructuring in the EU Chemical Industry: Patterns and Implications , 2000 .

[56]  M. J. Norušis,et al.  SPSS professional statistics 6.1 , 1994 .

[57]  Å. Dahlstrand.  Entrepreneurial Origin and Spin-Off Performance , 2000 .

[58]  G. Hamel.  Competition for competence and interpartner learning within international strategic alliances , 1991 .

[59]  Edward B. Roberts,et al.  The technological base of the new enterprise , 1991 .

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

[61]  Constantinos C. Markides,et al.  Consequences Of Corporate Refocusing: Ex Ante Evidence , 1992 .

[62]  Mario Sorrentino,et al.  Relatedness and corporate venturing: Does it really matter? , 1995 .

[63]  Luis R. Gomez-Mejia,et al.  Structure and process of diversification, compensation strategy, and firm performance , 1992 .

[64]  David A. Garvin,et al.  Spin-offs and the New Firm Formation Process , 1983 .