Search

An entrepreneur’s digital identity matters for resource acquisition and venture development. However, we know little about the factors that influence or change entrepreneurs’ digital identities. This study explores how entrepreneurs’ digital identities change after a venture capital (VC) funding round. Applying a language-based text analysis to a large sample of tweets from 2,094 US entrepreneurs, we analyze entrepreneurs’ digital identities before and after VC funding. The results of our analysis show that VC funding can impact the entrepreneur’s digital identity in both a positive and a negative way. On the positive side, entrepreneurs increasingly use language indicative of higher self-confidence, positive emotions, and increased professionalism. On the negative side, we find that the entrepreneur’s digital identity loses its authenticity, particularly with high funding amounts raised. The latter can be problematic as authenticity is shown to be a critical resource that entrepreneurs possess to build legitimacy and engage stakeholders in their venture. Our study contributes to research on the consequences of VC funding for entrepreneurs as well as to research on entrepreneurial digital identities. Practical implications exist for entrepreneurs managing their entrepreneurial identities over the course of venture development.

The field of entrepreneurship has seen remarkable growth, increasing the expectations of academic audiences. Articles need to balance novelty with rigorous methodology, theoretical contributions, social implications, and coherent argumentation to succeed in the publication process. However, navigating these varied and sometimes conflicting expectations to achieve optimal distinctiveness in academic narratives is challenging for authors. To explore how authors can achieve optimal distinctiveness amidst these complex expectations, we studied academic narratives and related editorial decisions of two leading entrepreneurship journals, Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice (ETP, 4,151 papers) and Small Business Economics Journal (SBEJ, 4,043 papers), using computer-aided text analysis. Our study debunks common assumptions about what makes a successful entrepreneurship paper, providing an empirical basis for understanding actual versus perceived publication requisites. Furthermore, we extend optimal distinctiveness theory by demonstrating that high distinctiveness is not uniformly advantageous, meeting numerous expectations is not necessarily beneficial, and clear language is crucial for complex narratives. Our study underscores that crafting narratives is more nuanced than traditionally believed.

We assess the impact of monetary policy (i.e., central bank interest rates) on the activity of venture capitalists (VC). Using data from 31 countries from 2004 to 2019, we find that VC firms’ fundraising activity increases when interest rates become negative. We explain this finding by referring to the principal-agent relationship between general and limited partners of VC firms in combination with behavioral finance arguments. Specifically, we identify three channels pertaining to a legal motivation (i.e., legislative hurdles and litigation risks), a liquidity motivation (i.e., substitution effect relative to other asset classes), and behavioral biases (i.e., mental accounting, conservatism, disposition effect, or prospect theory).

With the global rise of impact investments to achieve societal goals, an increasing number of new ventures that aim to create societal impact now seek to go public. However, while many conceptual studies suggest that impact investors are less likely to pursue financially oriented exit plans in exchange for generating societal impact, there is little empirical evidence to back up this claim. Using a propensity score matching approach, we draw on data from Crunchbase and empirically compare the initial public offering (IPO) performance of a large sample of 3398 investments by impact investors with 3398 investments by matched venture capital (VC) investors. We find that impact investor investments are less likely to lead to an IPO than VC investments. Besides, our results indicate that syndication by impact investors increases the likelihood of an IPO. This suggests that companies funded by impact investors benefit more from syndication than their VC-funded counterparts. Our findings have practical implications for impact investors, portfolio ventures, and policymakers.