Investment idea but also to grow for

Investment Behavior of Venture Capitalists Submitted to: Dr. Smita Mehendale Authors: Shivam Ganatra B-4, Sonu Kumar Mishra B-23, Navneet Sahu B-27 Abstract: Venture capital investment decision-making process is the most vital part of a venture capital investment selection. There is a lot of uncertainty and complexity in the investment decision-making process.

As this is the most important step, it becomes essential to analyze what makes a venture capitalist decide a company to invest in – whether it is by analyzing the results of the prospect company or just sheer gut feeling? This review focuses on reviewing existing literature in this field and extract out content which guides us towards understanding how these venture capitalists choose to invest in a company. Keywords – systematic literature review, investment behavior, venture capitalist, rationality, irrationality, company selection parameters 1. Introduction The market of venture capital has captured a significant attention among various section of business community. Whether big multinational companies or latest trend of startups, every section of industry is vying up to seek heavy funding for investing in their innovation and future growth (Liu, 2009). The investment from these financial heavyweights creates lot of opportunities for the small startups to flourish themselves in the midst of settled market giants ready to crush them in the competition. These investment not only gives a chance to start the business idea but also to grow for the future competition (Liu, 2009). The venture capitalists provide a better infrastructure and support to these startups to plan their business operation and assistance for their logistics, human resource, partnership regulations, legalformalities and many more.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Their financial and non-financial support makes their brand to establish a better portfolio in the market. However, the venture capital market is not so coherent and the strategy with which the venture capitalists invest in a company has no specific parameters to select. Whether they get emotional or look only at the monetary benefit or view the business idea with a sense of social responsibility, it is hard to clarify (Liu, 2009). Hence this review of literature is conducted to understand and analyze the behavior and the pattern of venture capitalists and find out what drives them to invest their hard earned money in a business idea. This study is carried out under various sections resuming with the rational or irrational approaches of venture capitalists followed by sector or type of business do they invest in.

The study is then focuses on the cognitive and demographic aspects of venture capitalists in the decision making of the company (Dimov & Shepherd, 2005). Lastly, the review is then followed by post investment behavior of venture capitalists with respect to the decision they took to invest in a particular company (Zacharakis & Shepherd, 2001). A financial specialist can pick up certainty on a methodology that worked previously and on the procedure set up to quantify and guarantee that the system is repeatable. Financial specialists ought not to centre around things outside of their control, i.e. securities exchange costs, but instead on what they truly control, data and learning.

Enthusiastic torment of a budgetary misfortune is brief, yet stopping is lasting. Nothing is more troublesome, and thusly more valuable, than to have the capacity to choose (Mitroi, 2014). Post analysis in all the areas mentioned previously and assessing their strong point and flaws, we conclude by recognizing the limits of our present evaluation and providing proposals for the upcoming study. 2. Systematic Literature Review Method Following the general rules of the methodical writing audit technique, we show in the accompanying subsections the extent of this survey, the way toward recognizing applicable writing, and the papers incorporated into this survey.

1.1 2.1 Scope of the literature review The extent of this audit is characterized by two arrangements of criteria identifying with shape and substance. This audit incorporates scholastic articles, which are affirmed since they experience basic survey by associated analysts, and it avoids book sections and in addition non-scholarly articles, comprising of short magazine articles, perspectives, meetings, and publications. Regarding content, the focal point of this survey is on the investment behavior of venture capitalists, the parameters they set when they choose a company to fund and behavioral biases and patterns associated with such investments. 1.

2 2.2 Identification of Appropriate Literature The process of appropriate literature identification and review of the same resumed in July 2018. In this stage, we looked for mixes of the catchphrases ‘investment behavior’, ‘venture capitalist’, ‘rationality’, ‘irrationality’, ‘company selection parameters’ in five databases: Emerald, Ebsco, HBR, Jstor and Scopus. These databases were picked in view of the measure of value scholastic substance they give, and additionally their significance to administration and business research. In our ongoing search for articles we found 240 research papers from all the databases by using keyword search. The extracted information included the article’s title, author(s), journal name, document type, and database from which the article is extracted.

All the group members read the abstracts of the papers and sorted out relevant papers for the research. 30 research papers were eliminated due to duplicate records. This step planned to guarantee the consistency of the literature screening, as inability to establish it makes content examination futile. An aggregate of 123 articles were rejected for not matching to our scope. This brought about a set of 87 articles. Next, these articles were divided, and their full messages analyzed for conclusive consideration in the review, in light of the previously mentioned criteria. Joint appraisal brought about further barring 31 articles, bringing about 34 articles for the audit.Table 1.

Database Search Results Database Scope and search criteria Search Date Number of papers Emerald Database Search: All journals Abstract, keywords, and titles Document type: research papers 14/07/2018 46 Ebscohost Search: All journals Abstract, keywords, and titles Document type: research papers 14/07/2018 33 Scopus Search: All journals Abstract, keywords, and titles Document type: research papers 15/07/2018 92 Jstor Search: All journals Abstract, keywords, and titles Document type: research papers 16/07/2018 52 HBR Search: All journals Abstract, keywords, and titles Document type: research papers 17/07/2018 17 Figure 1. Flow chart of the screening process for the research paper “Investment Behavior of Venture Capitalists” Records identified through database search (n=240)Duplicates eliminated (n=30)Screening based on abstracts (n=210)Records eliminated for not matching with the research scope (n=123)Articles included in the review (n=65)Articles remaining after final assessment and 31 exclusions in the review (n=34)2.3 Systematic literature review results The 34 articles finally considered this review between 1994 and 2017, with articles published throughout the first ten-year, few re?ecting the same pattern and few with similar mentions of steady research on investment behavior and pattern lately picked up in the next five-ten years of the 21st century at more frequency overall. This can be explained by the fact that the study on the investment pattern by venture capitalist, emerged more in numbers in last few years. The last decade has witnessed a huge rise of MNCs in terms of revenue growth and the rapid change in technology lead to multiple startups craving for funding’s by Venture capitalists. Figure 2. Number of articles included in the literature review by the year of publication 3. Methodological review This methodological review expects to give an outline of the strategies utilized as a part of research on venture capitalist’s behavior, without altogether depicting the examination plans and systems of the assessed writing.

As far as methodology is concerned, portions portraying the connected techniques were separated from each article. A joint work session and interview with every one of the writers prompted naming article strategies (a) blended techniques, consolidating both qualitative and quantitative methodologies; and (b) non-empirical research, comprising principally of reasonable papers and re?ective papers. Non-empirical research strategies were utilized as a part of 62% of the investigated articles, trailed by blended techniques in 38% of the writing. This methodological fracture can be clarified by the examination attempted in the inspected article. The 0246810Numbers of Articles publishedpredominance of non-observational in this audited writing can be clarified by the peculiarity of the subject. Research in new zones is ?rst centered on de?nitional issues, trailed by investigation before consideration is moved towards hypothesis, strategies, and measures. In this way, early investigations on investment behavior of capitalists would be comprised of reasonable papers, hypothetical discourses, preparing for more hypothesis based and quantitative research.

4. Thematic Review After careful review of the selected research papers for the systematic literature review, the team members have identified 3 themes emerging out of all the selected papers. The themes are chosen keeping in mind the keywords selected for the systematic literature review and the overall objective of the review. 4.1 Biases The approach we have taken is based on the belief that if we can better understand the drivers and uncertainties that are involved in and around the Venture Capital investment drivers, we will have a better chance of understanding the related decision processes and behaviour of Venture Capitalists.

In traditional finance theory, the investors are expected to be rational decision-makers going along with the expected utility theory. Behavioural finance, in contrary to this, criticizes this rational perspective and they argue that the investors tend to deviate from rationality whenever making investment decisions. In the 1980’s, behavioural finance emerged as a new concept combining behavioural and psychological aspects in economic and financial decision-making.

When looking at different studies done in relation to the behavioural biases, most of the top researchers in the field have focused on such behavioural biases as overconfidence, disposition effect, herd behaviour and home bias (Kumar & Goyal, 2016). According to Kumar and Goyal, “herding” refers to the situation wherein rational people start behaving irrationally by imitating the judgements of others while making decisions. This behaviour is considered to be rational for less sophisticated investors, who attempt to mimic financial gurus or follow the activities of successful investors, since using their own information/knowledge would incur a higher cost (Chiang & Zheng, 2010). In Venture Capital markets, the information overload and the “fear of missing out” increase the pressure on VC investors which pushes them to adopt a herding behaviour towards reputed and/or familiar ecosystems instead of analysing the available information to choose otherlocations that could be less risky and get potentially higher returns over time. The fear of missing out on continued gains (i.e.

regret) outweighs the potential psychic and economic benefit of moving against the trend (Wood & Zaichkowsky, 2004). Every financial investment balances risks and returns, and Venture Capital is no exception. When herding occurs risk perception is underweighted that results in to low abnormal returns (Kumar & Goyal, 2016). Bias factors also include overconfidence, inconsistency, habit and framing (Mitteness, Sudek, & Cardon, 2012).

VCs may perceive the same information differently based on their past beliefs, experience and biasness. When arguing about gender biasing, recent work has attempted to interpret the features of entrepreneurial ventures, which are most important to evaluators. In a paper using experimental variation in startup profiles, studies have shown that information on co-founder background is most salient (Bernstein, Korteweg, & Laws, 2016) and that attributes such as gender and attractiveness have a strong impact on the evaluation idea quality. In the case of startup evaluation, there are aspects of new venture that are observable to the judges and directly inform the potential performance of the venture: for instance, the quality of the thought 8 informing the choice of market and technology. Even in cases where objective performance evaluation is available, it is possible that men and women are judged using different yardsticks.

Through field and experimental evidence, scholars have demonstrated more stringent evaluation criteria being applied to women relative to their male counterparts, a phenomenon called “double standards” (Foschi, Lai, & Sigerson, 1994). A number of cognitive factors are present in decision process that may affect the VCs decision making, but only a few of them received the attention in VCs decision-making process. This provides the opportunity for future research and unfolds the other areas. 4.2 Rationality The Prospect Theory is a behavioural economic theory developed by Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky in 1979. It divides the decision process in two phases: the first phase of framing and the second phase of evaluation (Jha, 2016). The theory explains the obvious anomaly in human behaviour when evaluating risk under scenarios where there is uncertainty.

The theory says that humans are not constantly risk-averse; relatively they are risk-averse in gains and risk-takers in losses (Jha, 2016). This explains why not all investing decisions taken are successful; only few out of the total firms invested in by the VCs generate considerable return on the investment. The decision to invest in a firm is made under considerable pressure, there is a pressure to meet thedeadline and the risk of the investment going into loss. Another pressure for the VCs is adverse selection. Two companies outright may seem good to invest in; but one of them is a lemon (good from the outside but is not a viable investment once you get into the operations). This issue is aggravated when under market pressure to choose lucrative looking companies faster than the competition.

The market uncertainty makes venture capital firms to delay investing at each round of financing, whereas competition, project success/failure uncertainty make venture capital firms invest sooner in prospect companies (Zhang, 2012). So, under such a scenario it becomes challenging to determine if an investment made in a company is a rational decision or an irrational one. Economics assumes that consumers (in our case, investors) make rational decisions.

Finance, as well as Behavioural Finance, has come from Economics as a science so this assumption holds true for our context too. The various behavioural biases mentioned in the first theme affect the rationality of the decision making process for Venture Capitalists. 4.3 Venture Capitalist’s Experience Does more experience at being venture capitalist results in better decision making? Past research on the same shows that experienced VC’s often get an edge over others as they keep doing the same task time & again. For instance, they learn to focus attention primarily on the key dimensions—the ones that contribute most variance to the outcome of decisions (Chase and Simon, 1973). Experienced decision-makers create categories of information based on a deep structure that involves more and stronger links between concepts (Gobbo and Chi, 1986). They also adopt decision policies that utilize a rich connection among concepts (Chi and Koeske, 1983).

Taken together, this evidence suggests that decision-makers experienced in a given task may indeed utilize superior decision processes relative to those with less experience (Anderson,1983) and, by extrapolation, that VCs may become more accurate in choosing the ”right” companies as their experience increases. However, past research in the area of judgment/decision-making suggests that increasing experience does not always lead to better decisions. The answer may involve a curvilinear relationship between experience with the venture capital task and the accuracy or efficiency of their decision processes.It is found that as VCs experience increases, intrajudge reliability at first increases but then decreases.

This may be true for several reasons. First, experienced decision makers appear to rely on various heuristics and other forms of mental shortcuts to the same extent as those lacking experience and this can lead them into equally serious errors (Libby and Lewis, 1982). Similarly, with high levels of experience, decision-makers may become increasingly susceptible to the pitfall of cognitive or mental ruts.

In short, their thoughts may tend to become increasingly channelled by their past experience. Such effects may make it more difficult for them to recognize new opportunity or to notice that the scenario has changed and thus requires new approaches (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974). This prediction, in turn, raises a key issue: How can VCs’ decision-making be assessed? One possibility is to examine their actual decision accuracy: To what extent do they make good (i.e., accurate or successful) decisions? Another possibility is to focus decision process rather than decision outcome: The manner in which VCs combine information to form an overall decision. However, there are obstacles to determining ”actual” decision accuracy. For instance, many unforeseen circumstances can impact new venture performance during the elapsed time from when a VC makes a decision to invest and when the outcome of that decision is known. The issue brings a whole new subject for future research and explore more facts.

5. Limitations This is a systematic literature review which uses keyword search to find out relevant research papers for a review. This kind of a search may lead to elimination of certain relevant research papers for review only because of the fact that the keywords do not match. Another limitation of this research is that the paucity of time to conduct the review. We had to finish the review up in a month which is a short time to complete a systematic literature review. This review also has a limitation that the group did not have direct contact to venture capitalists for getting real-time insight into their investment behavior.

This limitation hinders our findings of the review.6. Directions for Future Research All the research papers reviewed by the group have had less empirical research and focus is more on the American or the European perspective. There has not been major research in the Asian context especially the Indian context that shows substantial findings which can be applied here.

Another direction for future research is doing a quantitative study and using regression models on quantitative primary data collected. Many papers have regression models run but they are on codified qualitative primary data. This kind of an analysis becomes subjective and thus does not allow for an objective interpretations of the findings. 7.

Conclusion Post review of the selected research paper, the group members have had a comprehensive idea regarding the investment behaviour of the venture capitalists and the biases involved in the same. The biases affect the choice of the company and determine if the decision is a rational one or an irrational decision. A general perception is that if the VC is experienced, the decisions taken by him will be rational and there will be lower rate of failures.

The investment behaviour of the venture capitalist in that sense is not rational entirely. It is dependent upon a lot of behavioural aspects than just effective evaluation of the prospect companies. References Bernstein, S.

, Korteweg, A., ; Laws, K. (2016). Attracting early-stage investors: evidence from a randomized field experiment. The Journal of Finance, 72. doi:10.1111/jofi.

12470 Chiang, T., ; Zheng, D. (2010). An empirical analysis of herd behavior in global stock markets. Journal of Banking and Finance, 34, 1911-1921. doi:10.

1016/j.jbankfin.2009.12.014. Dimov, D.

P., ; Shepherd, D. A. (2005). Human capital theory and venture capital firms: exploring “home runs” and “strike outs”. Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 1-10.

Retrieved July 15, 2018, from;acdnat=1532060837_bc5c94b2454fbdde9bb3969a534aa6ea Foschi, M., Lai, L., ; Sigerson, K.

(1994). Gender and Double Standards in the Assessment of Job Applicants. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 326-336. doi:10.2307/2787159 Fried, V. H.

, ; Hisrich, R. D. (1994).

Toward a Model of Venture Capital Investment Decision Making. Wiley on behalf of the Financial Management Association International. Retrieved July 14, 2018, from Gompers, P. A., Lerner, J., Blair, M.

M., ; Hellman, T. (1998). What Drives Venture Capital Fundraising? Brookings Institution Press. Retrieved July 14, 2018, from Hassan, A.

, ; Leece, D. (2008). The Influence of Venture Capitalists’ Source of Finance on their Post-Investment Behavior. Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC. Retrieved July 14, 2018, from http://www. Jha, P. K. (2016). Investors’ Irrationality: Insights from Behavioural Finance. IJMBF, 5(1), 10-17.

Retrieved July 29, 2018 Kollmann, T., ; Kuckertz, A. (2010). Evaluation uncertainty of venture capitalists’ investment criteria. Journal of Business Research, 63, 741-747.


2009.06.004 Kumar, S., & Goyal, N. (2016). Evidence on rationality and behavioral biases in investment decision making.

Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, 8(4), 270-287. doi:

1108/QRFM-05-2016-0016 Lahr, H., & Mina, A. (2016). Venture capital investments and the technological performanceof portfolio firms.

Research Policy, 45, 303-318. Retrieved July 15, 2018, from

2015.10.001 Li, W., Cao, T., & Feng, Z. (2016). Heterogeneous venture capital, M&A activity, and market response. Emerging Markets Review, 29, 168-199.

Retrieved July 20, 2018, from

08.008Liu, C. (2009). A comparison of the venture capitalists’ investment. Umea School of Business, 1-5. Retrieved July 15, 2018, from http://www. Mitroi, D. (2014). Behavioral finance: biased individual investment decision making; like the company but dislike the investment. Theoretical and Applied Economics, XXI(1 (590)), 63-74. Retrieved July 20, 2018, from

pdf Mitteness, C., Sudek, R., ; Cardon, M. (2012). Investor characteristics that determine whether perceived passion leads to higher evaluation of funding potential.

Journal of Business Venturing, 27, 592-606. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.

2011.11.003 Shepherd, D. A., Zacharakis, A., ; Baron, R.

A. (2002). VCs’ decision processes: Evidence suggesting more experience may not always be better. Elsevier Science Inc. doi:10.1016/S0883-9026(02)00099-X Wood, R., & Zaichkowsky, J. L.

(2004). Attitudes and Trading Behavior of Stock Market Investors: A Segmentation Approach. Journal of Behavioral Finance, 5(3), 170-179. doi:10.1207/s15427579jpfm0503_5 Zacharakis, A. L., & Meyer, G.

D. (1998). A lack of insight: Do venture capitalists really understand their own decision process? New York: Elsevier Science Inc. Retrieved July 16, 2018 Zacharakis, A. L., & Shepherd, D. A.

(2001). The Nature of Information and Overconfidence on Venture Capitalists’ Decision Making. Journal of Business Venturing. doi:10.

1016/S0883-9026(99)00052-X Zhang, X. (2012). Venture Capital Investment Selection Decision-making Base on Fuzzy Theory. Physics Procedia, 25, 1369-1375.



I'm Mary!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out