Corporate versus independent new ventures: Resource,strategy, and performance differences

This study examines differences between independent ventures (IVs), which are established by individual entrepreneurs, and corporate ventures (CVs), which are controlled by larger companies. It focuses on differences between these ventures related to the resources, strategies, and performance of firms in the computer and communications equipment manufacturing industries. Thus, the findings increase the understanding of the different challenges faced by each venture type and provide insight into how each venture type should be managed.The study finds that managers of CVs and IVs emphasized different resources and strategies. Specifically, CVs emphasized the following resources: internal capital sources, proprietary knowledge, and marketing expertise. IVs emphasized external capital sources, technical expertise, and development of brand identification. They also differed in their strategies; IVs pursued greater strategic breadth, more customer service, and focused more on specialty products. The findings that CVs had less strategic breadth was surprising in that CVs emphasized resources, such as internal capital sources, which could make pursuing broad strategies more feasible for CVs. It is possible that some CVs do not pursue broad strategies because they may be “infringing upon someone else's turf” within the corporation and thus may be discouraged.In spite of finding significant strategy and resource differences, the study found that IVs and CVs did not differ in performance and that resources were not directly related to performance. Based on the concept of equifinality, it follows that both venture types can be equally successful, even if they follow different roads to success. Success may be less a function of the different resources IVs and CVs have and more a function of what strategies the firms choose based upon their resources.Strategy variables did relate to performance: a low cost strategy lowered performance regardless of venture type and the influence of an aggressive strategy (i.e., wide strategic breadth) on performance depended upon venture origin. Managers pursuing a low cost strategy may have had lower performance if they became penny wise and pound foolish, missing opportunities in their efforts to lower costs. This suggests that regardless of venture type, managers of new ventures in these industries and perhaps in other volatile industries may need to be opportunistic.This study indicates that pursuing broad strategies increased the performance of IVs and decreased the performance of CVs. This finding was surprising in that CVs had greater resources, which one might think would lead to successful implementation of aggressive strategies. In securing enough resources to pursue aggressive strategies from their parents, CVs may lose the freedom of action they need to cope with the dynamism of high technology industries. This suggests that managers of CVs within the computer and communications equipment manufacturing industries should either not pursue broad strategies, or if pursuing broad strategy, they should maintain their flexibility. In contrast, IVs that pursued broad strategies achieved higher performance, indicating that perhaps IVs, unencumbered by the bureaucracy that characterizes CVs, may be able to pursue aggressive strategies while simultaneously maintaining flexibility.Thus, this study offers IV and CV managers several valuable insights. First, it argues that managers of each type of venture may need to pursue different strategies to increase venture performance and make optimal use of their unique resources. Furthermore, it suggests that CV managers encounter difficulties in applying resources to strategies and not in accessing resources. Whereas political obstacles may occur, CV managers may primarily encounter these difficulties when trying to implement strategies rather than when accumulating resources from the parent, suggesting a pitfall that managers of CVs and their parents need to avoid. Although this study has indicated that both venture types can be equally successful, it suggests that they may face different obstacles and follow different roads to success.