While this exploratory work was conducted rigorously in order to yield trustworthy findings, they are subject to certain limitations. In the following, these limitations or shortcomings will be discussed in detail so that new subjects for future research can be derived from them. These limitations refer both to the applied theories, the defined scope, and the methodology in this work.
Challenging the Choice and Focus of Theories
First, the mentioned theories and their application within the work must be addressed in this context.
As only a synthesis of many overlapping concepts was presented, it cannot be guaranteed they are free of contextual distortions. Furthermore, a detailed review of their strengths and weaknesses from a theoretical point of view was deliberately avoided, as the focus was on their practical applicability.
Such critical examination might have altered the applied theories and, thus, the direction of the overall work. However, this was partly mitigated by the structured literature search and selection of peer-reviewed theories to ensure their quality from the outset.
When discussing the applied theories, it is also necessary to reflect on the chosen direction of the research question on the funding cycle and the overall strong emphasis on the chronological perspective in this work. Due to the different positions of the ventures in the APM in terms of their progress and technology, together with the widely accepted classification of the vehicles based on the funding stage, this seemed to be a reasonable starting point to investigate them. For instance, if instead
the business model canvas had been applied, which describes the value proposition, infrastructure, customers, and finances of the venture, this might have yielded more insight into the actual business models and hence the differences between the verticals (Osterwalder, Pigneur, Clark, & Smith, 2010).
In this work, however, conclusions about their properties were drawn retrospectively, according to the outcome, namely their course along the life cycle or funding stages. If this logic were reversed and then explored with concepts like the Business Model Canvas, the verticals could be elaborated much further on how they operate and what value they provide for customers but also to the overall food market in comparison to each other. After all, regardless of whether the life cycle and EVC theory or the funding stages, their depiction of ventures is rather superficial and would require more depth review by an approach that entails more proximity to the market and end-customer.
Neglected Relationships and Matchmaking
Another point that needs to be touched upon is the broad scope of this work. Due to the rather practical and complex nature of the topic, concretely the market, an explorative approach was intentionally chosen to identify relevant research items during the process. Therefore, many different perspectives and involved parties were considered but without addressing all possible connections or dependencies between them. One of these, which has been highlighted already in some research, relates to the relationship between the vehicles and their up- and downstream effects on future investment by other investors (Kim and Wagman 2012; Radojevich-Kelley and Hoffman 2012). The aim of this work was not to completely clarify the assessment process within the market but to develop a first conceptual model that can be explored and tested in further research, including these relationships and moderating effects.
Thus, the findings for the vehicles and ventures were also mostly regarded separately, just like the derived frameworks. Hence, the addressed needs that resulted from the proposal discussion and focused on the influence of vehicles on the assessment criteria were not further considered in the frameworks. This would have gone beyond the scope of this work, but also the available data of the empirical findings would not have been sufficient to allow it. In the next step, it would be noteworthy to investigate these identified implications and how they relate or even fit to each other. Besides the assessment process, another question worth researching would be how specific dimensions of the vehicles, such as the portfolio scope and investment approach, fit to the identified venture types such as hybrid ventures or vice versa. The empirical validation of this different matchmaking of the
vehicles and ventures through further research would significantly enhance the relevance and usefulness of the frameworks for practitioners.
Consequences of the Self-Imposed Scope
Going back to the delimitations, the self-imposed scope, including the separate consideration of the APM, must also be critically reflected. During the interviews, it became apparent that both the positioning of the considered verticals and the narrow specification of the APM can be questioned.
The former was rather dictated by the market itself, but it should be reconsidered not to group these together due to their varying application possibilities and underlying technologies. Hereby, it could be examined whether this market should be approached from a broader perspective, for example, from the perspective of the overall Food & AgTech market. This classification was pursued by many of the interviewed vehicles, which is reflected in one of the frameworks. This change of perspective might have resulted in entirely different solutions or might have proved to be unsuitable later on.
Nevertheless, it certainly appears to be an interesting area that should be given more attention in the research as well as in the market.
In the course of this work, a further issue emerged, concerning the sense of combining the considered verticals under the overall umbrella of the APM. The derived need for a new classification in the form of a new framework alone demonstrated that the ventures might be too dissimilar after all. If this issue would have been approached from a purely technology-driven perspective, this work might have considered a comparison between Moon-shot ventures and other deep technology companies, such as those in other more biotech-focused sectors. In this way, it could be explored how other sectors and also vehicles cope with the observed uncertainty and similar delayed life cycle progressions. The same could be applied to Recipe Ventures, which might be more comparable to regular food ventures.
This could contribute to greater recognition of the actual sustainability and health aspects of the products and how they really relate to conventional products. Both examples reveal that the self-imposed scope and the corresponding selection of verticals within the APM have already partially constricted the possible outcomes and the direction of the work to some extent. Although it was possible to determine the specific characteristics of APM in the context of the assessment process, they may not be unique and hence do not only apply to APM but also other deep-tech or food sectors.
Therefore, further research and benchmarking of the identified venture types, detached from APM, could be a promising avenue to discover the extent to which the frameworks are transferable to other sectors and to determine which features are really unique in the market.
Selection of Interview Partners
The restricted amount of interview partner and empirical data also strains the possibilities of acquiring strong implications. All conducted interviews only involved experts within the vehicles and not within the ventures. Besides, these vehicles were all unintentionally engaged in the early funding stages. Therefore, it cannot be guaranteed that the derived findings are unrestricted by contextual peculiarities, or that the representative selection of respondents reflects the entire organizational reality. Likewise, the geographic scope of the selected interview partners should also be reconsidered, as they are all employed in European-focused companies. Two interview partners even elaborated on the increased deal activity and risk acceptance in the US compared to Europe (AC2, VC3). This could have severe implications on the venture classifications and criteria development, presented in Figure 10 and 11.
In future empirical research, the founders of alternative protein ventures should be explicitly included in the selection of the discussion partners. This could possibly paint a completely different picture of the venture landscape and dynamics. For example, such conversations could reveal from which type of investors the ventures would benefit from and what type of resources they actually lack. It could also disclose how the ventures perceive themselves in terms of their underlying technology and brand focus and whether there is a broad platform strategy behind their product that could be extended to other areas. In general, closer interaction with the ventures would be helpful for a more practical approach to comprehend and analyze the market fully.
Review of the Applied Methods
A further promising research approach for subsequent papers might be a case study, in which either one or multiple ventures within the APM are accompanied and monitored during early funding rounds. This research approach could deliver an even better picture of what investors demand from companies in the assessment and due diligence process and how the balance of power between the two sides is distributed, as these results suggest a founder-friendly environment currently.
A multiple case study approach from the investors' side instead, could shed light on the dissimilarities between the different verticals and elaborate even more on the importance of the different weightings along the different stages. Their activities and roles could be closely shadowed and similarities between vehicles detected and analyzed in an attempt to increase its transparency. However, any case study approach, would not have been feasible within the scope of this thesis due to the extensive process and general length of funding rounds.
Following this work, it would be particularly interesting to review the findings of the interviews through different forms of quantitative studies. One approach could be using dedicated databases like Crunchbase and perform a regression analysis between vehicles, ventures, and their funding or lifecycle stages. This could, for example, verify the focus on certain funding stages and venture types or could generate insights on whether vehicles should be positioned differently to overcome the competition and increase their deal flow. In the context of quantitative research, a further improvement of the present frameworks would be a validation of the criteria in the form of large-scale surveys. This would allow to substantiate the importance of the determined assessment criteria and to explore further differences between the vehicles but also along the stages.
References
Aernoudt, R. (1999). Business angels: Should they fly on their own wings? Venture Capital, 1(2), 187–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/136910699295965
Aerts, K., Matthyssens, P., & Vandenbempt, K. (2007). Critical role and screening practices of European business incubators. Technovation, 27(5), 254–267.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2006.12.002
Allan, G. (2003). A critique of using grounded theory as a research method. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 2(1), 1–10.
AT Kearney. (2019). How will cultured meat and meat alternatives disrupt the agricultural and food
industry? Retrieved May 10, 2020, from
http://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:39009414
Baeyens, K., Vanacker, T., & Manigart, S. (2006). Venture capitalists’ selection process: The case of biotechnology proposals. International Journal of Technology Management, 34(1–2), 28–46.
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2006.009446
Barclays. (2019). Carving up the alternative meat market. Retrieved March 19, 2020, from
https://www.investmentbank.barclays.com/our-insights/carving-up-the-alternative-meat-market.html
Baum, J. A. C., & Silverman, B. S. (2004). Picking winners or building them? Alliance, intellectual, and human capital as selection criteria in venture financing and performance of biotechnology startups. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(3), 411–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00038-7
Benjamin, G. A., & Bloomberg, J. M. (2001). Overall Applicability Innovation Style The Angel Investor’s Handbook How to Profit from Early-Stage Investing (Bloomberg: Princeton, Ed.).
Retrieved from www.getAbstract.com
Bhave, M. P. (1994). A process model of entrepreneurial venture creation. Journal of Business Venturing, 9(3), 223–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(94)90031-0
Bliemel, M., de Klerk, S., Flores, R., & Miles, M. P. (2018). Emergence of accelerators and accelerator policy: The case of Australia. Accelerators: Successful Venture Creation and Growth, 162–187. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786434098.00013
Bogner, A., Littig, B., & Menz, W. (2009). Introduction: Expert Interviews — An Introduction to a New Methodological Debate. In Interviewing experts (pp. 1–13).
https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230244276_1
Bruneel, J., Ratinho, T., Clarysse, B., & Groen, A. (2012). The evolution of Business incubators:
Comparing demand and supply of business incubation services across different incubator generations. Technovation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2011.11.003
Brush, C. G., Carter, N. M., Gatewood, E. J., Greene, P. G., & Hart, M. M. (2006). The use of bootstrapping by women entrepreneurs in positioning for growth. Venture Capital, 8(1), 15–31.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13691060500433975
Bryant, C., & Barnett, J. (2018). Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: A systematic review. Meat
Science, 143, 8–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.04.008
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2015). Business Research Metods. Oxford University Press.
Camp, J. J. (2002). Venture capital due diligence : a guide to making smart investment choices and increasing your portfolio returns (Vol. 102). John Wiley & Sons.
CBInsights. (2015). Inside the Minds of Corporate Venture Capitalists. Retrieved March 5, 2020, from https://www.cbinsights.com/research/inside-corporate-vc-minds/
CFI. (2020). Business Life Cycle - Understanding the 5 Different Stages. Retrieved May 10, 2020, from https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/finance/business-life-cycle/
Chang, C. (2013). Portfolio Company Selection Criteria: Accelerators vs Venture Capitalists.
Scholarship Claremont.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2002). Making sense of corporate venture capital. Harvard Business Review, 80(3), 90.
Cochrane, J. H. (2005). The risk and return of venture capital. Journal of Financial Economics, 75(1), 3–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2004.03.006
Cohen, B., Smith, B., & Mitchell, R. (2008). Toward a sustainable conceptualization of dependent variables in entrepreneurship research. Business Strategy and the Environment, 17(2), 107–119.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.505
Cohen, S., & Hochberg, Y. V. (2014). Accelerating Startups: The Seed Accelerator Phenomenon.
SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2418000
Cole, C., & Lysiak, L. (2017). Due diligence: Recognizing the role of patent research in the start-up life cycle. Journal of Business and Finance Librarianship, 22(3–4), 222–230.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08963568.2017.1372014
Colombo, M. G., D’Adda, D., & Quas, A. (2019). The geography of venture capital and entrepreneurial ventures’ demand for external equity. Research Policy, 48(5), 1150–1170.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.12.004
Cumming, D. J., & MacIntosh, J. G. (2003). A cross-country comparison of full and partial venture capital exits. Journal of Banking and Finance, 27(3), 511–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4266(02)00389-8
Curley, M. (1992). The Entrepreneur’s Dilemma: Valuing the Venture Capitalist’s Contribution - ProQuest. Economic Development Review, 10(2), 47.
Davila, A., Foster, G., & Gupta, M. (2003). Venture capital financing and the growth of startup firms.
Journal of Business Venturing, 18(6), 689–708. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(02)00127-1
de Montgolfier, Éric; Krantz, J. (2019). The VC Factor: Data-driven insights about VC-backed start-ups in Europe.
Denis, D. J. (2004). Entrepreneurial finance: An overview of the issues and evidence. Journal of Corporate Finance, 10(2), 301–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0929-1199(03)00059-2
Drover, W., Busenitz, L., Matusik, S., Townsend, D., Anglin, A., & Dushnitsky, G. (2017). A Review
and Road Map of Entrepreneurial Equity Financing Research: Venture Capital, Corporate Venture Capital, Angel Investment, Crowdfunding, and Accelerators. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1820–1853. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317690584
Dushnitsky, G., & Lenox, M. J. (2006). When does corporate venture capital investment create firm
value? Journal of Business Venturing, 21(6), 753–772.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.04.012
Eckblad, J., & Gutmann, T. (2019). Corporate Venturing 2019 Report.
Eckermann, M. (2007). Venture Capital Investing - Venture Capitalists’ Exit Strategies under Information Asymmetry. In Springer Fachmedien. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8350-9018-7_2
Eisele, F., Haecker, C., & Oesterle, R. (2011). German Venture Capitalists Investment Criteria Over Financing Stages. International Business & Economics Research Journal (IBER), 3(3).
https://doi.org/10.19030/iber.v3i3.3675
Eriksson, P., & Kovalainen, A. (2011). Research Philosophy. Qualitative Methods in Business Research, 11–24. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857028044.d8
Espinasse, P. (2014). IPO: A Global Guide, Expanded Second Edition. Hong Kong University Press.
FAO. (2018). The future of food and agriculture, alternative pathways to 2050 (2018).
Fiet, J. O. (1995). Risk Avoidance Strategies in Venture Capital Markets. Journal of Management Studies, 32(4), 551–574. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1995.tb00788.x
Financial Times. (2019). Have we reached ‘peak meat’? |.
Finnigan, T. J. A., Wall, B. T., Wilde, P. J., Stephens, F. B., Taylor, S. L., & Freedman, M. R. (2019).
Mycoprotein: The Future of Nutritious Nonmeat Protein, a Symposium Review. Current Developments in Nutrition, 3(6). https://doi.org/10.1093/CDN/NZZ021
Flick, U. (2011). Introducing Research Methodology: A Beginner’s Guide to Doing a Research Project. In Sage Publications.
Freear, J., Sohl, J. E., & Wetzel, W. (2002). Angles on angels: Financing technology-based ventures-a historical perspective. Venture Capital, 4(4), 275–287.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1369106022000024923
Freear, J., Sohl, J. E., & Wetzel, W. E. (1990). Raising venture capital: Entrepreneurs’ views of the process. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 14, 223–237.
Gartner, W. B. (1985). A Conceptual Framework for Describing the Phenomenon of New Venture Creation. The Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 696. https://doi.org/10.2307/258039 Gaston, R. J. (1989). Finding private venture capital for your firm: A complete guide. John Wiley &
Sons Inc.
Ghosh, S. (2012). The Venture Capital Secret: 3 Out of 4 Start-Ups Fail. Retrieved February 28, 2020, from Harvard Business School website: https://www.hbs.edu/news/Pages/item.aspx?num=487 Golafshani, N. (1992). Understanding and Validity in Qualitative Research. Harvard Educational
Review, 62(3), 279–301. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.62.3.8323320856251826
Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597–606.
Gompers, P. A., & Lerner, J. (2004). The Venture Capital Cycle. MIT Press - Journals.
Gompers, P., Kovner, A., & Lerner, J. (2009). Specialization and Success: Evidence from Venture Capital. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 18(3), 817–844.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9134.2009.00230.x
Gompers, P., & Lerner, J. (2001). The venture capital revolution. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(2), 145–168. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.15.2.145
Grislain, J.-H. (2016). The venture capital in the biotechnology industry. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Guion, L. A., Diehl, D. C., & Mcdonald, D. (2011). Triangulation : Establishing the Validity of Qualitative. University of Florida IFAS Extension, 2–4.
Harrison, R. T., & Mason, C. (2005). Does Gender Matter? Women Business Angels and the Supply of Entrepreneurial Finance in the United Kingdom. Management School and Economics. The University of Edinburgh.
Harvard Business Review. (1998). How Venture Capital Works. Retrieved February 23, 2020, from https://hbr.org/1998/11/how-venture-capital-works
Hathaway, I. (2016). What Startup Accelerators Really Do. Retrieved March 29, 2020, from Harvard Business Review website: https://hbr.org/2016/03/what-startup-accelerators-really-do
Hellmann, T., & Thiele, V. (2015). Friends or foes? The interrelationship between angel and venture capital markets. Journal of Financial Economics, 115(3), 639–653.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2014.10.009
Hill, B. E., & Power, D. (2002). Attracting Capital From Angels. Jon Wiley and Sons.
Hudson, J., & Khazragui, H. F. (2013). Into the valley of death: Research to innovation. Drug Discovery Today, Vol. 18, pp. 610–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2013.01.012
Imenda, S. (2014). Is there a conceptual difference between theoretical and conceptual frameworks?
Journal of Social Sciences, 38(2), 185–195.
Invest Europe. (2019). 2018 European Private Equity Activity. Retrieved April 20, 2020, from
https://www.investeurope.eu/media/2585/invest-europe-2018-european-private-equity-activity.pdf
Jensen, M. C. (1993). The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit, and the Failure of Internal Control Systems. The Journal of Finance, 48(3), 831–880. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1993.tb04022.x
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
Kang, H. D. (2018). Start-up’s R and D stages and the evolution of financing sources: Evidence from the biotechnology industry. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 8(3).
https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2017-0159
Kaplan, S. N., & Stromberg, P. (2000). How do Venture Capitalist Choose Investments. Working
Paper, 1–40. Retrieved from
http://www.hec.fr/heccontent/download/3629/101265/version/2/file/71.pd
Kaushik, V., & Walsh, C. A. (2019). Pragmatism as a research paradigm and its implications for Social Work research. Social Sciences, 8(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8090255
Khanin, D., Baum, J. R., Mahto, R. V., & Heller, C. (2008). Venture capitalists’ investment criteria:
40 years of research. Small Business Institute. Small Business Institute Journal, 35.
Kim, J.-H., & Wagman, L. (2012). Early-Stage Financing and Information Gathering: An Analysis of Startup Accelerators. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2142262
Knockaert, M., Clarysse, B., & Wright, M. (2010). The extent and nature of heterogeneity of venture capital selection behaviour in new technology-based firms. R&D Management, 40(4), 357–371.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2010.00607.x
Kolchinsky, P. (2004). The Entrepreneur’s Guide To A Biotech Startup. Hunter Centre for Entrepreneurship Working Paper, University of Strathclyde, 1–98.
KPMG Enterprise. (2019). Venture Pulse Q2 2019.
Levie, J., & Lichtenstein, B. B. (2008). From “Stages ” of Business Growth to a Dynamic States Model of Entrepreneurial Growth and Change. Hunter Centre for Entrepreneurship Working Paper, University of Strathclyde.
Levit, T. (1963). Exploit the Product Life Cycle. Retrieved May 10, 2020, from Harvard Business Review website: https://hbr.org/1965/11/exploit-the-product-life-cycle
Lewis, V. L., & Churchill, N. C. (1983). The Five Stages of Small Business Growth. Harvard Business Review, 61(3), 30–50.
Ma, S. (2020). The Life Cycle of Corporate Venture Capital. The Review of Financial Studies, 33(1), 358–394. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhz042
Macmillan, I. C., Zemann, L., & Subbanarasimha, P. N. (1987). Criteria distinguishing successful from unsuccessful ventures in the venture screening process. Journal of Business Venturing, 2(2), 123–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(87)90003-6
Mason, C. M. (2006). Informal Sources of Venture Finance. In The Life Cycle of Entrepreneurial Ventures (pp. 259–299). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-32313-8_10
Mason, C. M., & Harrison, R. T. (2000). The Size of the Informal Venture Capital Market in the United Kingdom. Small Business Economics, 15(2), 137–148.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008143713722
Mason, C., & Stark, M. (2004). What do investors look for in a business plan? A comparison of the investment criteria of bankers, venture capitalists and business angels. International Small Business Journal, 22(3), 227–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242604042377
McKinsey. (2019). The market for alternative protein: Pea protein, cultured meat, and more.
Retrieved March 10, 2020, from https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/agriculture/our-insights/alternative-proteins-the-race-for-market-share-is-on
Miloud, T., Aspelund, A., & Cabrol, M. (2012). Startup valuation by venture capitalists: an empirical
study. Venture Capital, 14(2–3), 151–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691066.2012.667907 Mishra, C. S., & Zachary, R. K. (2014). The Entrepreneurial Value Creation Theory. In The Theory
of Entrepreneurship (pp. 253–292). https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137371461_10
Moore, C. F. (1986). Understanding Entrepreneurial Behavior: A Definition and Model. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1986(1), 66–70. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.1986.4978712 Mordor Intelligence. (2019). Protein Alternatives Market | Growth | Trends | Forecast. Retrieved May
5, 2020, from https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/protein-alternatives-market Morgan, D. L. (2020). Pragmatism as a basis for grounded theory. Qualitative Report, 25(1), 64–73.
Morrissette, S. G. (2007). A Profile of Angel Investors. The Journal of Private Equity, 10(3), 52–66.
https://doi.org/10.3905/jpe.2007.686430
Neher, D. V. (1999). Staged Financing: An Agency Perspective. Review of Economic Studies, 66(2), 255–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-937X.00087
Osnabrugge and Robinson, R. J., M. (2000). Angel Investing: Matching Startup Funds with Startup Companies–A Guide for Entrepreneurs, Individual Investors, and Venture Capitalists. John Wiley & Sons.
Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., Clark, T., & Smith, A. (Designer). (2010). Business model generation : a handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers.
Oxford Research Denmark. (2019). Corporate Venture Capital Report - An analysis of corporate venture capital in the Nordics. Retrieved March 5, 2020, from https://www.nordicinnovation.org/2019/corporate-venture-capital-report
Passaro, R., Rippa, P., & Quinto, I. (2016). The start-up lifecycle : an interpretative framework proposal. RSA AiIG 2016, 1–25.
Pauwels, C., Clarysse, B., Wright, M., & Van Hove, J. (2016). Understanding a new generation incubation model: The accelerator. Technovation, 50, 13–24.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.09.003
Phelps, R., Adams, R. J., & Bessant, J. (2007). Life cycles of growing organizations: A review with implications for knowledge and learning. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00200.x
Puri, M., & Zarutskie, R. (2012). On the Life Cycle Dynamics of Venture-Capital- and Non-Venture-Capital-Financed Firms. The Journal of Finance, 67(6), 2247–2293.
Rabobank. (2017). Watch out... or They Will Steal Your Growth! Why Alternative Proteins Are Competing So Successfully for the Centre of the Plate. Retrieved March 20, 2020, from https://research.rabobank.com/far/en/sectors/animal-protein/why-alternative-proteins-are-competing-for-the-centre-of-the-plate.html
Radojevich-Kelley, N., & Hoffman, D. (2012). Analysis of accelerator companies: An exploratory case study of their programs, processes, and early results. Small Business Institute Journal, 8(2), 54–70.
Ramadani, V. (2009). Business angels: who they really are. Strategic Change: Briefings in Entrepreneurial Finance, 18(7), 249–258. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.852
Redburn. (2019). Agrichemicals What ’ s Your Beef ?
Reihlen, M., & Werr, A. (2012). Handbook of research on entrepreneurship in professional services (Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd., Ed.). https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781009109
Reuters. (2020). Lab-grown meat producer Memphis Meats raises $161 million in funding led by SoftBank. Retrieved May 10, 2020, from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-memphis-meats- funding/lab-grown-meat-producer-memphis-meats-raises-161-million-in-funding-led-by-softbank-idUSKBN1ZL2OO
Ridler, J. (2019). Quorn Foods´ R&D Investements Dents Profits. Retrieved February 28, 2020, from Food Manufacture website: https://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Article/2019/05/29/Meat-alternatives-firm-profits-hit-by-R-D-costs
Riquelme, H., & Watson, J. (2002a). Do Venture Capitalists’ Implicit Theories on New Business Success/Failure have Empirical Validity? International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, 20(4), 395–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242602204002
Riquelme, H., & Watson, J. (2002b). Do Venture Capitalists’ Implicit Theories on New Business Success/Failure have Empirical Validity? International Small Business Journal, 20(4), 395–420.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242602204002
Röhm, P., Köhn, A., Kuckertz, A., & Dehnen, H. S. (2018). A world of difference? The impact of corporate venture capitalists’ investment motivation on startup valuation. Journal of Business Economics, 88(3–4), 531–557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-017-0857-5
Rose, S., Spinks, N., & Canhoto, A. I. (2014). Management Research: Applying the Principles.
Routledge.
Rowley, J., & Slack, F. (2004, June 1). Conducting a literature review. Management Research News, Vol. 27, pp. 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1108/01409170410784185
Rungi, M., Saks, E., & Tuisk, K. (2016). Financial and strategic impact of VCs on start-up development: Silicon valley decacorns vs. Northern-European experience. IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 2016-December, 452–
456. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEM.2016.7797916
Sahlman, W. A. (1990). The structure and governance of venture-capital organizations. Journal of Financial Economics, 27(2), 473–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(90)90065-8
Salamzadeh, A., & Kawamorita Kesim, H. (2015). Startup Companies: Life Cycle and Challenges.
SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2628861
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2016). Research Method For Business Students Seventh Edition. In Pearson Education Limited.
Sayrs, L. (1998). InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing Steinar Kvale.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1996. 326 pp. The American Journal of Evaluation, 19(2), 267–270.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s1098-2140(99)80208-2
Shepherd, D. A. (2016). Venture capitalists’ assessment of new venture survival. Decision Making in Entrepreneurship: Selected Joint Papers of Dean A. Shepherd, (March 2020), 417–426.
https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784716042