Three essays on a longitudinal analysis of business start-ups using the Kauffman Firm Survey

This dissertation focused on the longitudinal analysis of business start-ups using three waves of data from the Kauffman Firm Survey. ^ The first essay used the data from years 2004-2008, and examined the simultaneous relationship between a firm's capital structure, human resource policies, and its impact on the level of innovation. The firm leverage was calculated as, debt divided by total financial resources. Index of employee well-being was determined by a set of nine dichotomous questions asked in the survey. A negative binomial fixed effects model was used to analyze the effect of employee well-being and leverage on the count data of patents and copyrights, which were used as a proxy for innovation. The paper demonstrated that employee well-being positively affects the firm's innovation, while a higher leverage ratio had a negative impact on the innovation. No significant relation was found between leverage and employee well-being.^ The second essay used the data from years 2004-2009, and inquired whether a higher entrepreneurial speed of learning is desirable, and whether there is a linkage between the speed of learning and growth rate of the firm. The change in the speed of learning was measured using a pooled OLS estimator in repeated cross-sections. There was evidence of a declining speed of learning over time, and it was concluded that a higher speed of learning is not necessarily a good thing, because speed of learning is contingent on the entrepreneur's initial knowledge, and the precision of the signals he receives from the market. Also, there was no reason to expect speed of learning to be related to the growth of the firm in one direction over another.^ The third essay used the data from years 2004-2010, and determined the timing of diversification activities by the business start-ups. It captured when a start-up diversified for the first time, and explored the association between an early diversification strategy adopted by a firm, and its survival rate. A semi-parametric Cox proportional hazard model was used to examine the survival pattern. The results demonstrated that firms diversifying at an early stage in their lives show a higher survival rate; however, this effect fades over time.^

What does board capital really bring to the table? Exploring the effect of directors' human and social capital on effective governance during international expansion

What constitutes effective corporate governance? Which director characteristics render boards effective at positively influencing firm-level performance outcomes? This dissertation examines these questions by taking a multilevel, multidisciplinary approach to corporate governance. I explore the individual-, team-, and firm- level factors that enable directors to serve effectively as strategic resources during international expansion. I argue that directors' international experience improves their ability to serve as effective strategic consultants and resource providers to firms during the complex internationalization process. However, unlike prior research, which tends to assume that directors with the potential to provide important resources uniformly do so, I acknowledge contextual factors (i.e. board cohesiveness, strategic relevance of directors' experience) that affect their propensity to actually influence outcomes. I explore these issues in three essays: one review essay and two empirical essays.^ In the first empirical essay, I integrate resource dependence theory with insights from social-psychological research to explore the influence of board capital on firms' cross-border M&A performance. Using a sample of cross-border M&As completed by S&P 500 firms from 2004-2009, I find evidence that directors' depth of international experience is associated with superior pre-deal outcomes. This suggests that boards' deep, market-specific knowledge is valuable during the target selection phase. I further find that directors' breadth of international experience is associated with superior post-deal performance, suggesting that these directors' global mindset helps firms in the post-M&A integration phase. I also find that these relationships are positively moderated by board cohesiveness, measured by boards' internal social ties.^ In the second empirical essay, I explore the boundary conditions of international board capital by examining how the characteristics of firms' internationalization strategy moderate the relationship between board capital and firm performance. Using a panel of 377 S&P 500 firms observed from 2004-2011, I find that boards' depth of international experience and social capital are more important during early stages of internationalization, when firms tend to lack market knowledge and legitimacy in the host markets. On the other hand, I find that breadth of international experience has a stronger relationship with performance when firms' have higher scope of internationalization, when information-processing demands are higher.^

What Does Board Capital Really Bring to the Table? Exploring the Effect of Directors’ Human and Social Capital on Effective Governance During International Expansion

What constitutes effective corporate governance? Which director characteristics render boards effective at positively influencing firm-level performance outcomes? This dissertation examines these questions by taking a multilevel, multidisciplinary approach to corporate governance. I explore the individual-, team-, and firm- level factors that enable directors to serve effectively as strategic resources during international expansion. I argue that directors’ international experience improves their ability to serve as effective strategic consultants and resource providers to firms during the complex internationalization process. However, unlike prior research, which tends to assume that directors with the potential to provide important resources uniformly do so, I acknowledge contextual factors (i.e. board cohesiveness, strategic relevance of directors’ experience) that affect their propensity to actually influence outcomes. I explore these issues in three essays: one review essay and two empirical essays. In the first empirical essay, I integrate resource dependence theory with insights from social-psychological research to explore the influence of board capital on firms’ cross-border M&A performance. Using a sample of cross-border M&As completed by S&P 500 firms from 2004-2009, I find evidence that directors’ depth of international experience is associated with superior pre-deal outcomes. This suggests that boards’ deep, market-specific knowledge is valuable during the target selection phase. I further find that directors’ breadth of international experience is associated with superior post-deal performance, suggesting that these directors’ global mindset helps firms in the post-M&A integration phase. I also find that these relationships are positively moderated by board cohesiveness, measured by boards’ internal social ties. In the second empirical essay, I explore the boundary conditions of international board capital by examining how the characteristics of firms’ internationalization strategy moderate the relationship between board capital and firm performance. Using a panel of 377 S&P 500 firms observed from 2004-2011, I find that boards’ depth of international experience and social capital are more important during early stages of internationalization, when firms tend to lack market knowledge and legitimacy in the host markets. On the other hand, I find that breadth of international experience has a stronger relationship with performance when firms’ have higher scope of internationalization, when information-processing demands are higher.

Three Essays on a Longitudinal Analysis of Business Start-ups using the Kauffman Firm Survey

This dissertation focused on the longitudinal analysis of business start-ups using three waves of data from the Kauffman Firm Survey. The first essay used the data from years 2004-2008, and examined the simultaneous relationship between a firm’s capital structure, human resource policies, and its impact on the level of innovation. The firm leverage was calculated as, debt divided by total financial resources. Index of employee well-being was determined by a set of nine dichotomous questions asked in the survey. A negative binomial fixed effects model was used to analyze the effect of employee well-being and leverage on the count data of patents and copyrights, which were used as a proxy for innovation. The paper demonstrated that employee well-being positively affects the firm's innovation, while a higher leverage ratio had a negative impact on the innovation. No significant relation was found between leverage and employee well-being. The second essay used the data from years 2004-2009, and inquired whether a higher entrepreneurial speed of learning is desirable, and whether there is a linkage between the speed of learning and growth rate of the firm. The change in the speed of learning was measured using a pooled OLS estimator in repeated cross-sections. There was evidence of a declining speed of learning over time, and it was concluded that a higher speed of learning is not necessarily a good thing, because speed of learning is contingent on the entrepreneur's initial knowledge, and the precision of the signals he receives from the market. Also, there was no reason to expect speed of learning to be related to the growth of the firm in one direction over another. The third essay used the data from years 2004-2010, and determined the timing of diversification activities by the business start-ups. It captured when a start-up diversified for the first time, and explored the association between an early diversification strategy adopted by a firm, and its survival rate. A semi-parametric Cox proportional hazard model was used to examine the survival pattern. The results demonstrated that firms diversifying at an early stage in their lives show a higher survival rate; however, this effect fades over time.