00:00:04
I'm interested in the way that firms
00:00:06
develop specifically I look at the
00:00:10
origin of firm differences and within a
00:00:13
technological context now the the
00:00:16
subject of why firms are different has
00:00:19
received some attention in the
00:00:22
literature but traditionally people have
00:00:24
sort of waved it away the standard view
00:00:26
in economics is to actually control for
00:00:28
firm differences and then to look at you
00:00:31
know apples-to-apples comparisons across
00:00:33
firms and that works within that context
00:00:35
pretty well even within the traditional
00:00:38
strategic frameworks it is very normal
00:00:40
to take a stock of the firm's strengths
00:00:44
weaknesses capabilities and then allow
00:00:47
the firm to do an analysis of where it
00:00:49
can fit into a competitive landscape now
00:00:52
all of that person's that the firm's
00:00:54
strengths and weaknesses are relatively
00:00:56
fixed and that has served us pretty well
00:00:59
you know in management but what happens
00:01:02
when the environment change if the
00:01:05
activity that your firm is engaged in at
00:01:07
any given moment is serving you well and
00:01:10
then there's a radical shift in the
00:01:11
environment the firm might find itself
00:01:13
had a loss as to how to react to that
00:01:15
and so it turns out that we don't have a
00:01:18
lot of very good frameworks to allow a
00:01:20
firm to enact change and to consciously
00:01:23
adapt to the new environment we know
00:01:27
that firms can sometimes change we have
00:01:28
observed that and documented it but even
00:01:31
more frequently we see firms not being
00:01:33
able to change and react and then the
00:01:35
splendor and fail so for me my interest
00:01:39
is to try to understand firm evolution
00:01:41
from the early stages so that we can see
00:01:43
periods during which firms are changing
00:01:45
and adapting then possibly glean some
00:01:47
insights into how that can then be
00:01:49
consciously applied by firms add
00:01:52
maturity in order to deal with the
00:01:55
environmental turbulence that they might
00:01:56
be experiencing now more specifically
00:02:00
what I do is that I look at a sample of
00:02:02
about 1,200 firms around the time when
00:02:05
they go public my hypothesis is that
00:02:08
this is a time of radical change for the
00:02:10
firm during which they're much more
00:02:13
plastic than they would be otherwise
00:02:14
given the amount of things that are
00:02:16
changing in terms of both the four
00:02:18
normal and the informal structures so
00:02:20
then what I do is I control for firms
00:02:23
that went through the IPO as planned
00:02:26
versus a set of groups as it affirms
00:02:29
that experience a shock that was
00:02:31
unexpected around the time of going
00:02:32
public and then I compared to see
00:02:34
whether that shock leads to divergent
00:02:36
development afterwards so what I'm
00:02:39
trying to find is to see if I can pick
00:02:41
up a case of more hiding plasticity in
00:02:44
the firm as it's going through this IPO
00:02:46
process and then what I find is that in
00:02:50
fact there's a very short window of
00:02:53
about 18 months around the time when
00:02:54
they go public where they are
00:02:56
particularly susceptible to the
00:02:58
environment and thus the conditions that
00:03:00
they experienced at that point seemed to
00:03:02
determine even 20 years later the type
00:03:04
of firm that they are their strengths
00:03:06
their weaknesses in terms of their
00:03:07
technological direction
00:03:13
some of the key takeaways from the
00:03:15
research are that we find that not only
00:03:18
do firms develop tastes and in
00:03:22
preferences but rather they seem to be
00:03:24
actually developing what we would call
00:03:26
capabilities that is the the
00:03:28
technological ability to do things
00:03:30
differently the firms that were exposed
00:03:33
to for example non conducive
00:03:36
environments for acquisitions
00:03:37
counterbalance that by developing
00:03:39
stronger internal research capabilities
00:03:41
and so that suggests that what is
00:03:45
driving this is not so much the top
00:03:48
management predilection or preferences
00:03:51
for doing one thing versus another but
00:03:52
rather something that is ingrained at
00:03:54
deeper levels of the organization in
00:03:56
terms of what the people and the
00:03:58
routines and the structures of the firm
00:04:01
allow it to do in my case looking at
00:04:03
research intensive activities and you
00:04:07
know so that is valuable in allowing us
00:04:10
to actually locate you know the locus of
00:04:12
where the persistence of these temporary
00:04:16
sharks ultimately resides in the long
00:04:18
term
00:04:23
for businesses my research might
00:04:25
ultimately give them a more insight into
00:04:28
what they can change what they cannot
00:04:30
change and how now this is a big agenda
00:04:33
and for now I've barely scratched the
00:04:35
surface by documenting that short
00:04:37
periods of sensitivity can have lasting
00:04:39
effect on what the firm can ultimately
00:04:40
do but for managers even in the short
00:04:43
term it hints at perhaps the importance
00:04:47
of being aware of when they're going
00:04:48
through a transition such as going
00:04:50
public in how that might have unintended
00:04:52
effects in disrupting their prior plans
00:04:56
so the best-laid business plan up to the
00:04:59
IPO may not be what works best going
00:05:02
forward given for example an unexpected
00:05:04
shock so you know for managers managing
00:05:07
the transition from being a private firm
00:05:10
to a public firm this should inform at
00:05:12
least the awareness to be much more
00:05:14
conscious about what the environment was
00:05:16
like at the time and how that may have
00:05:18
inadvertently influence decisions that
00:05:20
you know seem trivial at the time such
00:05:22
as what type of people they're hiring in
00:05:24
what sort of routines are developing but
00:05:27
also might end up shifting the direction
00:05:29
of the firm in ways that they had not
00:05:31
anticipated now stepping away from the
00:05:35
IPO context I think it's important to
00:05:37
note that these things are actually you
00:05:40
know probably not limited to the IPO
00:05:41
there's other disruptive events and I
00:05:44
think that you know some of these
00:05:45
findings should generalize for managers
00:05:47
to think about whether other disruptions
00:05:49
such as changes in management or mergers
00:05:52
can also be disruptive in also managing
00:05:54
that transition I think that my research
00:05:56
suggests that it is important to look at
00:05:59
the way that the environment is a
00:06:02
hitherto you know relatively ignored
00:06:04
component of what is shaping the firm
00:06:06
and how it affects the firm differently
00:06:09
at different times
00:06:14
the choice of looking at IPOs is a
00:06:16
convenient one from a data perspective
00:06:18
in that looking at a very large sample
00:06:20
it provides a very clean before and
00:06:23
after situation where we can you know
00:06:25
pinpoint when change what's happening
00:06:28
but theoretically there's nothing to
00:06:30
limit us to saying that the IPO is
00:06:32
somehow privileged as a window I mean as
00:06:35
I said there might be mergers
00:06:37
acquisitions death of founders in all
00:06:40
sorts of transfer transformative events
00:06:41
that might have a similar impact on the
00:06:43
firm so I'm extending my research by
00:06:45
looking at different conditions that
00:06:47
might also precipitate these periods of
00:06:49
hiding plasticity in the firm moving
00:06:52
beyond just the sort of temporal effects
00:06:55
I'm also looking at digging deeper into
00:06:57
what precisely is going within the firm
00:06:59
so whereas you know my study so far have
00:07:02
looked at large sample firms and
00:07:04
statistical data that that hints at
00:07:06
what's really going on to get a much
00:07:08
more tangible feel for that requires
00:07:10
getting into a smaller set of firms or
00:07:12
going deeper in looking at actually
00:07:14
interviews and more case grounded type
00:07:16
of approach to really you know provide
00:07:18
much more tangible evidence that the
00:07:21
like I said the whether the change is
00:07:24
being perpetuated through formal or
00:07:26
informal routines or formal or informal
00:07:28
relationships or whether it's at the top
00:07:31
or at the bottom of the organization
00:07:49
you
