Venture Boards: Past Insights, Future Directions, and Transition to Public Firm Boards

Abstract

Research summary Venture boards are theoretically important and economically relevant. They are at the apex of a venture's organizational hierarchy and have significant influence on the most important decisions related to venture strategy and personnel. This article reviews the organizational and strategy research on venture boards, clarifying how venture boards differ from venture investors and from public firm boards. It lays out a systematic research agenda to stimulate more research on venture governance, including venture board composition and structure, venture board processes, and venture board transitions to public firm boards. This agenda attempts to illuminate the research opportunities related to the distinctive nature of venture boards and enable theoretical engagement with the broader corporate governance scholarship on public firms. Managerial summary A venture's board of directors is highly consequential for its most important strategic and personnel outcomes. Uber and Theranos are just two recent ventures whose boards have come under public spotlight. This article reviews organizational and strategy research on venture boards, mapping the evolution of the academic literature, summarizing key findings, and identifying the most important limitations. It explains how venture boards are different from venture investors and from public firm boards. Importantly, it lays out a systematic research agenda that draws upon the distinctive nature of venture boards and also creates a bridge to the broader literature on public firm boards. New insights on venture board composition, structure, process, and transition to public firm boards will be relevant to venture executives, investors, and directors. Copyright © 2017 Strategic Management Society.

The founder chief executive officer: A review of current insights and directions for future research

“…Hoang and Gimeno 2010 (Daily & Dalton, 1993;Johannisson & Huse, 2000;Nelson, 2003;Wasserman, 2017). Daily and Dalton (1993) In addition to the focus on the founder CEO's influence on director selection, the dynamics between the founder CEO and outside directors has been explored in the literature (e.g., Garg, 2013;Garg & Eisenhardt, 2017;Garg & Furr, 2017). Garg 2013 Finally, scholars have also explored the circumstances and impact of the founder's departure from the firm (Bamford, Bruton, & Hinson, 2006;Boeker & Karichalil, 2002;Guenther, Oertel, & Walgenbach, 2016).…”

The organizational design of entrepreneurial ventures

“…Indeed, an important evergreen challenge for entrepreneurial organizational design scholars is to clearly delineate when, how, and why entrepreneurial organizations are distinct from established organizations. Some recent examples of this style of work can be seen in Burton, Dahl, and Sorenson's () study of firm wages and in Garg and colleagues' papers on boards of directors (Garg, ; Garg & Eisenhardt, ; Garg & Furr, ).…”

Corporate governance in entrepreneurial firms: a systematic review and research agenda

“…We acknowledge that Monks and Minow's (2012) definition of corporate governance can be debated within the context of entrepreneurial firms, yet it provides an established framework that is instrumental in structuring this review.2 We acknowledge that two recent studies byGarg and Furr (2017) andGabrielsson (2017) reviewed the governance of entrepreneurial firms, but primarily focused on the board or limited number of theoretical perspectives. Our systematic review differs from these prior reviews by using a broader definition of corporate governance and entrepreneurial firms, embracing a multiplicity of governance mechanisms and theoretical perspectives.…”