@misc{MochkabadiKleinertUrbigetal., author = {Mochkabadi, Kazem and Kleinert, Simon and Urbig, Diemo and Volkmann, Christine}, title = {Innovativeness and Legitimacy in Equity Crowdfunding}, series = {Academy of Management Proceedings}, volume = {2020}, journal = {Academy of Management Proceedings}, number = {1}, doi = {10.5465/AMBPP.2020.49}, pages = {1 -- 6}, abstract = {In this study, we examine the link between new venture innovativeness and legitimacy. While legitimacy research often assumes that all new ventures suffer in the same way from the liability of newness, entrepreneurial ventures may differ substantially in their degree of innovativeness, introducing either highly new or relying on established technologies. We argue that radically innovative new ventures face severe liability of newness and therefore are less successful when raising early stage equity financing. Further, we argue that this negative effect should turn positive if the new ventures are able to showcase legitimacy. An observational and a complementary experimental study support our arguments. Surprisingly, for non-innovative or incremental innovative ventures establishing legitimacy seems to provide little gains.}, language = {en} } @misc{SteinbergUrbigProcheretal., author = {Steinberg, Philip J. and Urbig, Diemo and Procher, Vivien D. and Volkmann, Christine}, title = {Knowledge transfer and home-market innovativeness: A comparison of emerging and advanced economy multinationals}, series = {Journal of International Management}, volume = {27}, journal = {Journal of International Management}, number = {4}, issn = {1075-4253}, doi = {10.1016/j.intman.2021.100873}, abstract = {Emerging market multinational enterprises (EMNEs) increasingly access foreign technology and knowledge by internationalizing their R\&D activities. Since technological laggardness hinders efficient knowledge transfer, a successful catch-up with advanced-economy multinational enterprises (AMNEs) requires EMNEs to transfer foreign knowledge across national boundaries more effectively. However, we lack a clear understanding of how EMNEs manage this knowledge transfer and integration and to what extent the employment and effectiveness of corresponding facilitation mechanisms may differ from AMNEs. Adopting a sender-recipient model and drawing on arguments from learning theory and transaction costs economics, we suggest that EMNEs benefit more from and, consequently, are more likely to engage in mechanisms to increase recipient capabilities and sender motivation. In a comparative analysis of Chinese, Indian, German, and U.S. MNEs and focusing on frequent international exchange of R\&D personnel regarding recipient capabilities and the governance of foreign R\&D activities regarding sender motivation, we observe positive relationships with home-market innovation for EMNEs, but not for AMNEs. Moreover, we observe that EMNEs exploit this positive effect and are more likely to use these mechanisms when focusing on technology- than on market-seeking.}, language = {en} } @misc{UrbigProcherSteinbergetal., author = {Urbig, Diemo and Procher, Vivien D. and Steinberg, Philip J. and Volkmann, Christine}, title = {The role of firm-level and country-level antecedents in explaining emerging versus advanced economy multinationals' R\&D internationalization strategies}, series = {International Business Review}, volume = {31}, journal = {International Business Review}, number = {3}, issn = {0969-5931}, doi = {10.1016/j.ibusrev.2021.101954}, pages = {1 -- 14}, abstract = {We examined firm-level and country-level antecedents of R\&D internationalization strategies, focusing on differences between enterprises in emerging and advanced economies. Previous research often focuses on the relative importance of home-base-exploiting versus home-base-augmenting knowledge transfer strategies. We suggest that country-level and firm-level effects differ for the two strategies, and hence, we examined each strategy independently. Collecting data in China, India, the United States, and Germany, we demonstrated that firms' relative technological position as a firm-level characteristic can explain differences in home-base-exploiting strategies between emerging and advanced economies. In contrast, home-base-augmenting is more closely related to exploratory institutional environments, a country-level factor. Thus, either firm- or country-level antecedents can gain a dominant role, depending on the strategy implemented.}, language = {en} } @misc{MochkabadiKleinertUrbigetal., author = {Mochkabadi, Kazem and Kleinert, Simon and Urbig, Diemo and Volkmann, Christine}, title = {From distinctiveness to optimal distinctiveness: External endorsements, innovativeness and new venture funding}, series = {Journal of Business Venturing}, volume = {39}, journal = {Journal of Business Venturing}, number = {1}, issn = {0883-9026}, doi = {10.1016/j.jbusvent.2023.106340}, abstract = {We examine how external endorsements help new ventures with varying degrees of innovativeness to attract funding. According to optimal distinctiveness theory, new ventures should be as different from competitors as legitimately possible. However, initial research suggests that new ventures can also buffer their legitimacy through external endorsements. We clarify that effects of such legitimacy buffers depend critically on an audience's unique legitimacy-distinctiveness relationship. Specifically, external endorsements lead to different predictions about shifts in optimal distinctiveness for return-seeking audiences compared to novelty-seeking audiences as relevant new venture funders. For return-seeking audiences, new ventures are perceived as less legitimate when they are non-innovative or radically innovative so that incrementally innovative new ventures are most attractive without endorsements. External endorsements can thus buffer the legitimacy of non-innovative and radically innovative new ventures, but they lead to different performance implications for a return-seeking audience. While non-innovative new ventures increase their attractiveness, only radically innovative new ventures can become optimally distinctive and outperform other distinctiveness configurations. In contrast, novelty-seeking audiences already have a higher tolerance for radically innovative new ventures, so the effects of external endorsements are less pronounced. Four empirical studies, using observational data and experiments in equity and reward-based crowdfunding, provide strong support for this theory and account for alternative explanations such as risk perceptions. In turn, we shed new light on the crucial, audience-specific function of external endorsements, namely, as a means to alter optimal distinctiveness levels.}, language = {en} } @misc{MochkabadiKleinertUrbigetal., author = {Mochkabadi, Kazem and Kleinert, Simon and Urbig, Diemo and Volkmann, Christine}, title = {Innovativeness and legitimacy in equity crowdfunding}, series = {G-Forum conference 2020 - Virtual Edition, 24th Annual Interdisciplinary Conference on Entrepreneurship, Innovation and SMEs}, volume = {24}, journal = {G-Forum conference 2020 - Virtual Edition, 24th Annual Interdisciplinary Conference on Entrepreneurship, Innovation and SMEs}, pages = {2}, abstract = {We examine how radical innovativeness affects how new ventures can establish legitimacy. While legitimacy research often assumes that new ventures similarly suffer from the liability of newness, radically innovative new ventures face stronger liabilities and are less successful when raising early-stage equity financing. Consequently, they may benefit more from identity-related, associative, and organizational legitimacy-building mechanisms, which mitigate the adverse effect and may turn radical innovativeness into an asset. Campaign-level observations for technology ventures and complementary individual-level experimental analyses of financial resource providers' legitimacy assessments suggest that legitimation mechanisms are less effective for less radically innovative ventures and might even be counter-productive.}, language = {en} } @misc{KleinertBaferaUrbigetal., author = {Kleinert, Simon and Bafera, Julian and Urbig, Diemo and Volkmann, Christine}, title = {Access denied: How equity crowdfunding platforms use quality signals to select new ventures}, series = {Entrepreneurship, Theory \& Practice}, volume = {46 (2022)}, journal = {Entrepreneurship, Theory \& Practice}, number = {6}, issn = {1042-2587}, doi = {10.1177/10422587211011945}, pages = {1626 -- 1657}, abstract = {Among the new ventures actively seeking funds through equity crowdfunding, only a lucky few seemingly survive the rigorous selection process imposed by equity crowdfunding platforms (ECFPs). With a conjoint experiment involving decision-makers from 50 platforms in 22 countries, this study provides first quantitative evidence regarding how ECFPs actually use quality signals to select new ventures to start fundraising campaigns. The ECFPs interpret signals differently, depending on whether they impose a co-investment requirement or generate revenues from new ventures' long-term performance. The effectiveness of the signals also is contingent on the applicant's industry background and the signals' accessibility in the country where the ECFP operates.}, language = {en} } @misc{ProcherUrbigVolkmann, author = {Procher, Vivien D. and Urbig, Diemo and Volkmann, Christine}, title = {Time to BRIC it? Internationalization of European family firms in Europe, North America and the BRIC countries}, series = {Applied Economics Letters}, volume = {20}, journal = {Applied Economics Letters}, number = {16}, issn = {1350-4851}, doi = {10.1080/13504851.2013.815302}, pages = {1466 -- 1471}, abstract = {For a sample of 1243 European companies, we analyse the link between firm type and foreign direct investment (FDI) locations. We find substantial empirical evidence that being a family firm does not only affect the overall propensity for FDI, but that this effect is also specific to target regions. Overall, family firms invest more than managerial-led firms, particularly in Europe and North America. Furthermore, the BRIC countries, Brazil, Russia, India and China do not constitute a homogeneous attractiveness cluster for FDI.}, language = {en} } @misc{MochkabadiKleinertUrbigetal., author = {Mochkabadi, Kazem and Kleinert, Simon and Urbig, Diemo and Volkmann, Christine}, title = {Turning extreme distinctiveness into an asset? How radically innovative ventures can achieve optimal distinctiveness in early-stage funding contexts}, series = {Frontiers of entrepreneurship research 2022: Proceedings of the forty-second annual Babson College Entrepreneurship Research Conference}, journal = {Frontiers of entrepreneurship research 2022: Proceedings of the forty-second annual Babson College Entrepreneurship Research Conference}, publisher = {Arthur M. Blank Center for Entrepreneurship}, address = {Babson Park, Massachusetts}, isbn = {978-0-910897-00-6}, pages = {73 -- 78}, abstract = {This study relies on optimal distinctiveness theory to investigate how radically innovative ventures might attract funding. Conforming with existing norms can help new ventures gain legitimacy from resource providers, yet radically innovative ventures instead feature extreme distinctiveness. The results of three complementary empirical studies affirm that these radically innovative ventures suffer from reduced funding chances among equity crowdfunders. Contributing to optimal distinctiveness theory, the authors show that extremely distinctive ventures can shift to become optimally distinctive. Thus, radically innovative ventures can reverse the negative effect and avoid the downsides of non-conformity by leveraging external legitimacy sources, such as endorsements from alliance partners or professional investors. The optimal level of distinctiveness also varies by audience, such that radically innovative ventures' extreme distinctiveness evokes more negative judgments among equity crowdfunders who expect returns than among reward crowdfunders who seek novelty. Surprisingly though, without external legitimacy sources, radical innovativeness is never favored, even by novelty-seeking audiences. This fresh evidence that radical innovativeness constitutes both a liability and an asset, contingent on new ventures' external endorsements and audience expectations, points to important boundary conditions for optimal distinctiveness theory.}, language = {en} } @misc{MochkabadiKleinertUrbigetal., author = {Mochkabadi, Kazem and Kleinert, Simon and Urbig, Diemo and Volkmann, Christine}, title = {From distinctiveness to optimal distinctiveness: External endorsements, innovativeness and new venture funding}, series = {26th Annual Interdisciplinary Conference on Entrepreneurship, Innovation and SMEs, 2023}, journal = {26th Annual Interdisciplinary Conference on Entrepreneurship, Innovation and SMEs, 2023}, abstract = {To maximize their performance, new ventures should be optimally distinctive, that is, as differentiated from competitors as is legitimately possible. External endorsements, through affiliations with reputable third-parties, might alter the level of optimal distinctiveness for new ventures among different resource-providing audiences. To develop and test this prediction, the authors study new ventures with varying degrees of innovativeness that seek funding from return- and novelty-seeking resource providers. The former expect some distinctiveness but reject too little or too much (e.g., non- or radically innovative new ventures). External endorsements can buffer the legitimacy of these non-innovative and radically innovative ventures, but they lead to different performance implications. For non-innovative ventures, external endorsements function as a shield against low legitimacy, so they are less penalized for their lack of novelty. For radically innovative ventures, external endorsements function as a performance booster; they can become even optimally distinctive and outperform other distinctiveness configurations. In contrast, novelty-seeking audiences already have a higher tolerance for more innovative new ventures, so these effects are less pronounced among these resource providers. Four empirical studies, using observational data and experiments in equity and reward-based crowdfunding, provide strong support for this theory and account for several alternative explanations. In turn, this study sheds new light on the crucial, audience-specific function of external endorsements, namely, as a means to alter optimal distinctiveness levels.}, language = {en} }