MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128688534 · doi:10.1142/s021759082150020x

CORPORATE VENTURE CAPITAL DIVERSIFICATION, PARENT COMPANY VALUE SPILLOVERS AND VALUE CREATION OF START-UPS

2021· article· en· W3128688534 on OpenAlexaff
Lei Wang, Yang Ye, Yunbi An

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Singapore Economic Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPrivate Equity and Venture Capital
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversification (marketing strategy)Corporate venture capitalBusinessPortfolioVenture capitalValue (mathematics)Start upEnterprise valueParent companyValue creationIndustrial organizationMarketingBusiness administrationFinanceSubsidiaryMultinational corporation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Corporate venture capital (CVC) not only promotes value creation for CVC parent companies but also brings rich entrepreneurial resources to invested start-ups. This paper explores the mechanisms through which CVC portfolio diversification promotes value creation for both parent companies as well as the invested start-ups. Focusing on 142 start-ups in China from 2003 to 2015, invested in by 49 companies listed on the Shanghai and Shenzhen Main Boards, we find that CVC portfolio diversification has a positive impact on the value of invested start-ups and CVC parent company value spillovers play a mediating role in this effect. In addition, CVC portfolio diversification has a nonlinear U-shaped relationship with the value of parent companies. Finally, geographical proximity between parent companies and their invested start-ups renders a significant reciprocal positive moderating effect on the relationship between CVC diversification and the value of parent companies, as well as the relationship between the value of parent companies and the value of invested start-ups.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Singapore Economic ReviewSame topicPrivate Equity and Venture CapitalFrench-language works237,207