Chesbrough Henry W
Harvard Business School, Boston, USA.
Harv Bus Rev. 2002 Mar;80(3):90-9, 133.
Large companies have long sensed the potential value of investing in external start-ups, but more often than not, they fail to get it right. Remember the dash to invest in new ventures in the late 1990s and the hasty retreat when the economy turned? This article presents a framework that will help a company decide whether it should invest in a particular start-up by first understanding what kind of benefit might be realized from the investment. The framework--illustrated with examples from Intel, Lucent, and others--explains why certain types of corporate VC investments proliferate only when financial returns are high, why other types persist in good times and in bad, and why still others make little sense in any phase of the business cycle. The framework describes four types of corporate VC investments, each defined by its primary goal--strategic and financial--and by the degree of operational linkage between the start-up and the investing company. Driving investments are characterized by a strong strategic rationale and tight operational links. Enabling investments are also made primarily for strategic reasons, but the operational links are loose. Emergent investments, which are characterized by tight operational links, have little current--but significant potential--strategic value. Passive investments, offering few potential strategic benefits and only loose operational links, are made primarily for financial reasons. Passive corporate VC investments dry up in a down economy, but enabling and driving investments usually have more staying power. That's because their potential returns are primarily strategic, not financial. In other words, they can foster business growth. Emergent investments may make sense even in a weak market because of their potential strategic value--that is, their ability to help companies identify and spark the growth of future businesses.
大公司早就意识到投资外部初创企业的潜在价值，但往往不得要领。还记得20世纪90年代末一窝蜂投资新企业，以及经济转向时的匆忙撤退吗？本文提出了一个框架，通过首先了解投资可能实现何种收益，帮助公司决定是否应该投资某一特定初创企业。该框架——以英特尔、朗讯等公司的例子加以说明——解释了为何某些类型的企业风险投资仅在财务回报高时才会激增，为何其他类型在经济好坏时期都持续存在，以及为何还有其他类型在商业周期的任何阶段都毫无意义。该框架描述了四种类型的企业风险投资，每种类型都由其主要目标——战略目标和财务目标——以及初创企业与投资公司之间的运营联系程度来界定。驱动型投资的特点是具有强烈的战略依据和紧密的运营联系。赋能型投资也主要出于战略原因进行，但运营联系较为松散。涌现型投资的特点是运营联系紧密，当前战略价值不大，但具有重大潜在战略价值。被动型投资几乎没有潜在战略收益，运营联系也很松散，主要出于财务原因进行。在经济低迷时期，被动型企业风险投资会枯竭，但赋能型和驱动型投资通常更具持久力。这是因为它们的潜在回报主要是战略性的，而非财务性的。换句话说，它们可以促进业务增长。由于具有潜在战略价值，即能够帮助公司识别并推动未来业务的增长，即使在疲软的市场中，涌现型投资也可能是合理的。
