Cash holdings and R&D smoothing

The sharp increase in R&D investment in recent decades has important but unexplored implications for corporate liquidity management. Because R&D has high adjustment costs and is financed with volatile sources, it is very expensive for firms to adjust the flow of R&D in response to transitory finance shocks. The main contribution of this paper is to directly examine whether firms use cash reserves to smooth their R&D expenditures. We estimate dynamic R&D models and find that firms most likely to face financing frictions rely extensively on cash holdings to smooth R&D. In particular, our estimates suggest that young firms used cash holdings to dampen the volatility in R&D by approximately 75% during the 1998–2002 boom and bust in equity issues. Firms less likely to face financing frictions appear to smooth R&D without the use of costly cash holdings. Our findings provide new insights into the value of liquidity and the financing of intangible investment, and suggest that R&D smoothing with cash reserves is now important for understanding cash management for a substantial fraction of publicly traded firms.     

Access to private equity and real firm activity: Evidence from PIPEs

We study how access to private equity financing affects real firm activities using a broad panel of publicly traded U.S. firms that raise external equity through private placements (PIPEs) between 1995 and 2008. The public firms relying on PIPEs are generally small, high-tech firms that cannot finance investment internally and likely face severe external financing constraints; PIPEs are by far the most important source of finance for these firms. We show that firms use PIPE inflows to maintain extremely high R&D investment ratios and to build substantial cash reserves. We also use GMM techniques that control for firm-specific effects and the endogeneity of the decision to raise private equity and find that PIPE funding has a substantial impact on corporate investment in cash reserves and R&D, and a smaller but significant impact on investment in non-cash working capital, but little impact on fixed investment or acquisitions. Our estimates indicate that R&D investment initially increases by $0.20–$0.25 for each dollar of private equity flowing into the firm, and that PIPE funds initially invested in cash ultimately go to R&D. These findings offer direct evidence that access to private equity finance has an important effect on the key input that drives innovation at the firm- and economy-wide levels.     

U.S., Anglo-Saxon European,and non-Anglo-Saxon European cash holdings around the financial crisis

For the period 2003–2018, we show that U.S. firms have a higher cash-to-assets ratio than European firms have—in particular, among firms with high R&D expenditures and those in industries with high cash flow volatility, indicating the potential roles of precaution and uncertainty respectively in cash holding. We find evidence that industry cash flow volatility is relevant throughout the period, while R&D seems to matter only during the crisis years of 2008–2009. With respect to European cash holdings, there are slight differences between Anglo-Saxon European and non-Anglo-Saxon European firms.     

Venture capital investment and the performance of entrepreneurial firms: Evidence from China

We examine the contributions of venture capital investment to entrepreneurial firms in China. Based on a panel dataset of Chinese manufacturing firms, we investigate the performance and R&D activities of venture capital-backed (VC-backed) and non-VC-backed firms during the period 1998 to 2007. We explore whether VC-backed firms in China generally outperform their non-VC-backed counterparts, and if so, whether this outperformance is mainly attributed to the ex-ante screening or ex-post monitoring efforts of venture capitalists (VCs). We then determine whether the different types of VCs and investment approaches affect the ex-post monitoring efforts of VCs, and consequently, the performance and R&D activities of the VC-backed firms. Our analysis shows that VC-backed firms outperform non-VC-backed firms in terms of profitability, labor productivity, sales growth, and R&D investment. First, VCs select firms with higher profitability, labor productivity, and sales growth, as well as firms that invest more in R&D activities. Moreover, the differences in profitability and labor productivity are significantly magnified after VC entry. After receiving investment from VCs, firms on average achieve magnified higher ROS, ROE, and labor productivity compared to non-VC-backed firms. However, no evidence demonstrates the magnified improvement in sales growth or R&D investment of the VC-backed firms after the venture investment is made. We distinguish the screening and value added effects by using propensity score matching. We also use instrumental variables to determine whether the post-investment performance improvements of the firms are driven by the venture capital investment. Finally, we find different types of VCs and investment approaches affect the performance of the firms after the investment is made. Foreign VCs add more value to the firms they invest in compared to domestic VCs. Firms backed by syndicated investment perform better and invest more in R&D after the investment is made compared to those backed by non-syndicated investment and non-VC-backed firms.     

Banks and innovation: Microeconometric evidence on Italian firms

In this paper we investigate the effect of local banking development on firms’ innovative activities, using a rich data set on innovation for a large number of Italian firms over the 1990s. There is evidence that banking development affects the probability of process innovation, particularly for firms in high-tech sectors, in sectors more dependent upon external finance, and for firms that are small. The evidence for product innovation is much weaker and not robust. There is also some evidence that banking development reduces the cash flow sensitivity of fixed investment spending, particularly for small firms, and that it increases the probability they will engage in R&D.     

The Effects of Private Investments in Public Equity on R&D Investment in Small and Medium-Size Enterprises

This paper provides evidence that small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs) use a portion of private investments in public equity (PIPEs) for current research and development (R&D) investment, hold the rest in liquidity reserves such as cash assets and working capital, and ultimately use these reserves to smooth R&D investment. That is, PIPEs may have a direct effect on R&D investment and an indirect or smoothing effect using liquidity reserves. This paper also shows that innovative SMEs such as venture businesses, inno-biz firms, and management innovative firms are more likely to use PIPEs for R&D investment than are noninnovative SMEs. The implications of this paper are that PIPEs can be used as an important source of external financing to fund R&D investment and can be particularly valuable for R&D investment in innovative SMEs.     

Board reforms and innovation

We study the effect of board reforms on firms' research and development (R&D) investments utilizing a sample of 41 countries. Using a difference-in-differences analysis, we find that firms invest more in R&D following corporate governance reforms. Of these, two legal reforms — having an independent audit committee and board independence — have a greater impact on R&D investment. Additionally, we show that board reforms have a more pronounced effect on R&D investment in hi-tech industries and the health sector.     

Can foreign suppliers act as “innovation springboards” for firms? Evidence from China

This study provides a new approach for measuring supplier characteristics by distinguishing the countries where they are located. Using data of Chinese listed companies, we explore how firms' R&D investment and innovation efficiency (patents and citations) are affected by having foreign suppliers in their top five suppliers. Our findings suggest that foreign suppliers acting as transmitters of international technology increase firms' innovation efficiency based on organizational learning theory. Moreover, a series of uncertainties caused by foreign suppliers encourages firms to invest more in R&D based on strategic growth option theory. Mechanism tests show that foreign suppliers from countries with high innovation capacity and a similar Eastern culture have a greater impact on corporate innovation. Firms conduct more R&D activities to mitigate the uncertainties caused by foreign suppliers when they have insufficient overseas channels to acquire international knowledge and a high degree of dependence on foreign suppliers. These results are consistent with a series of robustness tests after accounting for endogeneity.     

Does innovation and financial constraints affect the propensity to save in emerging markets?

Despite the surge in corporate savings and heightened interest in understanding the reasons for this behaviour, little is known about the forces behind this stylised phenomenon in emerging markets (EMs). Using a large sample of firms from nine African countries over the period 2001–2015, we posit and find that the propensity to save is higher in this context due to limited access to external finance. However, when we examine the effects of innovation on corporate savings, we find that the results are reversed as, relative to Non-R&D firms, R&D firms save less of their operating cash flow. This is in stark contrast to the extant literature in advanced economies, which shows that savings are essential to smoothen lumpy, irreversible and risky investments in innovation. We find this is due to the reversal in firm-specific factors, with R&D firms in this context being larger and more mature; hence, relying less on internal financing sources compared to young and less-mature R&D firms in advanced economies. We interpret our results as suggestive of the overarching influence of access to external finance as a major determinant of the propensity to save and deterrent to investing in innovation. Our finding helps explain the glut in innovation amongst small and young firms in emerging markets and calls for policies that promote innovation.     

Do major customers promote firms’ innovation?

This study examines whether and how a concentrated supply chain relationship affects a firm’s innovation decisions. Using data from Chinese listed firms in the manufacturing industry, we find that a concentrated customer base constrains a firm’s R&D investment, where a 1% increase in customer concentration is associated with a 0.011% decrease in R&D investment. To establish causality, we use the instrumental variable method, the reverse causality model, and the Granger causality test to re-examine the relationship and arrive at a consistent conclusion. Results from mechanism analysis suggest that a concentrated customer base constrains the internal fund availability and that the negative relationship between customer concentration and firms’ innovation is less pronounced for firms with more external financial support. Additional analysis reveals that the negative effect of customer concentration mainly affects R&D investment expenditure and that customer concentration also constrains innovation output in China. Overall, our paper reveals the dark side of close customer-supplier relationships and provides new insights into how supply chain relationships affect firms’ innovation decisions.     

Using real options theory to explain patterns in the valuation of research and development expenditures

Real options theory posits that the value of the firm is a combination of the value generated by the assets in place and the value of the option to invest in the future. It is based on the idea that many decisions are difficult to reverse, and valuing the outcome of these decisions is more complicated than estimating the present value of future cash flows. R&D activities often generate real options due to the nature of these activities, and examining the valuation of R&D expenditures through the lens of real options theory can help explain differing results documented in both the R&D and value relevance of earnings and book value literatures. Numerous studies have documented that the stock market positively values R&D expenditures; however, recent work has raised questions about whether this positive relation occurs across firms reporting both profits and losses. Consistent with real options theory, I find that the negative coefficient on the R&D expenditures of profitable firms documented by prior studies only exists for low growth firms. In addition, for all R&D firms experiencing high sales growth, the market places a lower value on assets in place and a higher value on R&D expenditures.     

Tax credit rating and corporate innovation decisions

The tax credit rating mechanism was formally implemented in 2014. As an important tax collection and management innovation, it has attracted the attention of regulatory authorities and scholars. Different from the literature that directly examines corporate tax compliance, we focus on the impact of tax credit rating implementation on corporate research and development (R&D) investment decisions. Using listed companies’ data from 2014 to 2019, we find that companies with higher tax credit ratings invest more in innovation, because the system helps managers identify R&D opportunities, alleviates corporate financing constraints and reduces agency costs. We confirm that tax credit ratings have manifold impacts on corporate information environments and business decisions, with better ratings positively affecting firms’ business decisions. This discovery can inform tax policy reform, encourage corporate innovation and construct social credit systems.     

R&D sensitivity to asset sale proceeds: New evidence on financing constraints and intangible investment

We examine the intersection between corporate divestitures of tangible assets and investment in intangible capital (R&D) to provide new tests for the impact financing constraints have on real activity. A positive R&D sensitivity to asset sale proceeds indicates binding financing constraints since cash inflows from tangible asset sales are negatively correlated with productivity shocks and not otherwise connected to intangible investment via non-financial channels. Using a variety of estimation approaches, we document a strong, positive link between cash inflows from fixed asset sales and corporate R&D investment, but only among firms most likely facing binding financing constraints. These results offer robust evidence that financing frictions impact the increasingly important yet understudied intangible corporate investments that drive innovative activity, and they highlight a previously unexplored but potentially valuable use of proceeds from fixed asset divestitures.     

Financing Innovation and Growth: Cash Flow, External Equity, and the 1990s R&D Boom

The financing of R&D provides a potentially important channel to link finance and economic growth, but there is no direct evidence that financial effects are large enough to impact aggregate R&D. U.S. firms finance R&D from volatile sources: cash flow and stock issues. We estimate dynamic R&D models for high-tech firms and find significant effects of cash flow and external equity for young, but not mature, firms. The financial coefficients for young firms are large enough that finance supply shifts can explain most of the dramatic 1990s R&D boom, which implies a significant connection between finance, innovation, and growth.     

Q,Cash Flow and Investment: An Econometric Critique

The effects of measurement and specification error on estimates of the Q and cash flow model of investment are investigated. Two sources of error are considered: expensing of RcD expenditures and failing to identify that component of cash flow which relaxes financing constraints. We apply random-effects and instrumental variables estimators to a model that addresses these sources of error. We find that: (1) the capitalization of R& D strengthens the explanatory power of the model; (2) expected and unexpected components of cash flow have different effects; and (3) the effects of Q are much more evident in firms facing low costs of external finance.     

Corporate responsibility towards employees and innovation: Evidence from an emerging market

Against a background of rising labor costs and the need to build a harmonious labor–capital relationship in China, this paper focuses on non-pecuniary incentives for employees and discusses the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) towards employees on innovation performance. The empirical results show that CSR towards employees significantly promotes corporate innovation, and that this effect remains robust after accounting for alternative proxies and endogeneity issues. In addition, the positive effect of CSR towards employees on innovation is more significant for firms in high-tech industries, with high levels of R&D inputs and high valuation of employee collaboration. Further analysis indicates that CSR towards employees does not promote R&D investment, but does significantly improve innovation efficiency and the marginal output of R&D investment and reduces the turnover rate of management-level staff with production and R&D backgrounds, which is conducive to stability of the innovation team. In addition, this paper also finds that for companies with high R&D expenditures, CSR towards employees significantly eases the sensitivity between executive turnover and performance, which helps executives resist pressure arising from a decline in short-term performance. The findings of this paper have implications for improving labor–capital relations and enhancing firm innovation capabilities.     

Uncertainty and R&D investment: Does product market competition matter?

In recent years, the question of how uncertainty influences corporate decisions has received greater interest among academics, researchers, and corporations. This study is an attempt to investigate how uncertainties (firm-specific uncertainty (fsu), market-based uncertainty (mu), and economic policy uncertainty (epu)) influence research and development (R&D) investment and to further examine whether this relation is moderated by product market competition across firms of different sizes. Using a sample of Chinese listed firms covering 2000–2017, this study applies a two-step system GMM model to perform estimations and control for endogeneity issues. The findings show that uncertainties (fsu, mu, and epu) negatively influence R&D investment and that this negative relationship is more prominent for firms operating in competitive industries. In concentrated industries, however, the negative impact of uncertainty is mitigated for large firms, which have more internal resources and better access to external financing. This study contributes to real options theory by illustrating how different forms of uncertainty embedded in a firm’s internal and external environment reduce R&D investment, and by indicating how this relationship is moderated by product market competition.     

R&D investment and distress risk

This paper proposes that besides volatility, R&D can increase firms' distress risk through another channel. Unlike capital investment, R&D is more inflexible and subject to high adjustment costs. Moreover, R&D intensive firms face severe financial constraints and are more likely to suspend/discontinue R&D projects. Therefore, firms' distress risk increases with their R&D intensity. Using a large panel of US companies over the 1980 to 2011 period, I find a robust empirical relation between R&D and distress risk, primarily among financially constrained firms. Moreover, the effect of R&D on distress risk is magnified during economic downturns. I also find that firms that have been previously successful in R&D or firms with high analyst coverage can mitigate the relationship between R&D and distress risk.     

Shareholder governance, bondholder governance, and managerial risk-taking

We examine the relation between the overall corporate governance structure and managerial risk-taking behavior. We find that the overall governance structure has a significant impact on how managers make decisions on investment policy: strong bondholder governance motivates more low-risk investments such as capital expenditure and lower high-risk investments such as R&D expenditures, whereas weak shareholder governance (entrenched managers) leads to more R&D expenditures. Moreover, we find that the effects of governance on investment policy differ significantly between speculative and investment-grade firms. For speculative firms, strong bondholder or shareholder governance leads to more capital expenditures and low R&D investments. For investment-grade firms, strong bondholder or shareholder governance leads to low capital expenditures and an insignificant impact on R&D investments. Furthermore, financing and investment covenants exhibit strong binding power to deter risky investments. Finally, a more dependent (or a less independent) board is associated with low capital expenditures and high R&D investments.     

Vertical merger,R&D collaboration and innovation

This paper studies the effects of vertical merger and R&D collaboration activities on firms' innovation decisions and stock returns based on a continuous-time real option model under market and technological uncertainties. Our analysis confirms vertical merger's benefit in amplifying the potential gain from innovation through eliminating inefficiencies. We show that vertical merger boosts innovation incentives in two ways: it reduces the optimal innovation threshold when firms suspend the project and increases R&D investment when firms launch the project. If vertical merger is not possible, R&D collaboration can improve firms' innovation levels as an alternative decision, but inefficiencies still exist which implies less pronounced stimulation effects. Both vertical merger and R&D collaboration can reduce firms' risk when conducting innovation project and weaken the positive R&D-returns relation and financial constraints-returns relation, while these effects of vertical merger are stronger than those of R&D collaboration.