Финансирование малых и средних технологических компаний в России: гранты и собственный капитал тема диссертации и автореферата по ВАК РФ 00.00.00, кандидат наук Гусева Ольга Александровна

• Гусева Ольга Александровна
• кандидат наук
• 2024

Оглавление диссертации кандидат наук Гусева Ольга Александровна

Table of Contents

Introduction

Section 1. Financing of high-tech SMEs: theoretical foundations and empirical studies

1.1 Definition of high-tech SMEs

1.2 High-tech SMEs in emerging markets

1.3 Theoretical background of SME financing

1.3.1. Resource-based view of the firm

1.3.2 Capital structure decisions of high-tech SMEs: equity financing

1.3.3 Grant financing and signaling theory

1.3.4 Sources of financing and support

1.4 Empirical evidence of the efficiency of SME financing

1.4.1 Government institutions

1.4.2. Venture capital funds

1.4.3 Other corporate and banking institutions

1.4.4 Entrepreneurs and managers

1.4.5 Family and friends

Section 2. High-tech SMEs in Russia

2.1 Russian high-tech SMEs

2.2 Russian SMEs supported by government institutions

2.3 Owners and managers of Russian startups

2.2.1 Entrepreneurs as founders and owners

2.2.2 Family and friends

2.2.3 Corporate industry investors

2.2.4 Government development institutions

2.2.5 Private equity and venture funds

2.2.6 Management

2.2.7 Interaction between ownership and management characteristics

Section 3. Empirical evidence: grant financing and performance of high-tech SMEs in Russia

3.1 Grant financing of seed-stage startups

3.1.1 Description of competition

3.1.2 Methodology

3.1.3 Sample description

3.1.4 Results

3.2 Grant financing of experienced high-tech SMEs

3.2.1 Program description

3.2.2 Methodology

3.2.3 Sample description

3.2.4 Matching procedure

3.2.5 Results

3.3 Limitations and further research

Section 4. Empirical evidence: equity financing and firm performance of high-tech SMEs in Russia

4.1 Theoretical background

4.2 Methodology

4.3 Sample description

4.4 Results

4.5 Limitations and future research

Conclusion

References

Appendix A. Correlation of government institutions' support and firm performance in

Appendix B. Correlation matrix of ownership and management characteristics of Skolkovo participants from the Space and Nuclear clusters in

Appendix C. Industry classifications and OKVED codes

Appendix D. Regression results for probability to receive grant for more experienced SMEs

Appendix E. Results for propensity score matching

Appendix F. Regression results for grant effect on performance of more experienced SMEs

Appendix G. The results of estimation of dose response functions

Appendix H. Correlation matrix of startup's characteristics and performance nuclear and space industries

Appendix I. Results of Hausman specification test

Appendix J. Regression results for robustness check

Appendix K. Regression results for ROA, profitability and revenue growth based on cross-section data

Введение диссертации (часть автореферата) на тему «Финансирование малых и средних технологических компаний в России: гранты и собственный капитал»

Introduction

Entrepreneurship and the entrepreneurial ecosystem are often considered as drivers of national economic growth [Acs, Estrin, Mickiewicz, Szerb, 2018; Van Stel, Carree, Thurik, 2005; Thurik, Wennekers, 2004]. Recent academic research identifies the effects on innovation development, job creation and the impact on big businesses and society as a main contribution of entrepreneurship to the economy [Barringer, Ireland, 2019].

In particular, small innovative enterprises in green technologies industries were found to be 16 times more productive than large innovative enterprises in terms of patents per employee in the company [Breitzman, Thomas, 2011]. In terms of job creation in developing countries, it is small enterprises (less than 20 people) that create the most significant number of jobs [Ayygari, Demirguc-Kunt, Maksimovic, 2014]. At the same time, there is a similar trend in developed countries: in the United States, firms with fewer than 500 employees were involved in creating 2/3 of private-sector jobs in 2014 [Barringer, Ireland, 2019]. Moreover, the business models of many ventures are often built around existing product and service production, thereby providing competition, and helping large firms become more efficient. New products and services provided by small and medium enterprises (SMEs) have also a major impact on the society by improving quality of life, health, productivity.

Meanwhile, among all types of SMEs, technology companies can create products and innovations with significant economic value that impact everyone's lives [Portincaso, de la Tour, Soussan, 2019].

In 2018 Russian state authorities introduced national projects in 12 areas of strategic development of the Russian Federation. The implementation of these projects is expected to contribute to scientific, technological, and socio-economic development of the country by improving living standards, creating conditions and opportunities for self-realization [The Russian government, 2019]. Despite turbulent geopolitical and economic environment, the government continues to be committed to realization of

national projects as basic and integral benchmarks for the country's development up to 2030 [President of Russia, 2022].

While some of national projects such as "Education", "Demography", "Safe quality roads" traditionally fall under the responsibility of government in countries worldwide, the issues related to "Labor productivity" or "Small and medium entrepreneurship and support of individual entrepreneurial initiative" are often left to the market forces ("invisible hand of the market"). Given this, one might inquire as to the reasoning behind a government's decision to focus on the development of entrepreneurship.

The specificity and opacity of SMEs in high-tech industries complicates the capital raising, especially in the emerging markets where asymmetric information leads to credit rationing [De Wet, 2004]. SMEs differ from corporations on average by their shorter history of operations, limited information about firm quality (for example, in many cases with a credit score based on the credit history of an owner) [Berger, Black, 2011].

Among the challenges faced by SMEs in emerging markets access to finance, insufficiency of expertise and barriers to international trade are identified as key obstacles for companies' growth [Sultan, 2019]. Financing SMEs is considered as a risky business throughout the world; however, in emerging markets it is much more difficult to find investors with suitable risk profiles. Therefore, development of SME finance especially in emerging markets requires not only smart investors and public but also subsides and tools of market discipline [Wood, Pratt, Hoff, 2006].

This explains the motivation of government participation in the support of hightech SMEs in emerging markets. Many developing markets recognize the need to foster tech companies by introducing liberalization of tax and customs regimes for such companies, funding government venture funds and other venture initiatives, and building technoparks with significant infrastructure equipment.

Currently Russian startups in advanced tech industries represent only 0,4% of the total number of startups globally, which is way less than the share of startups from developed countries and BRIC [CanTaHOBa, 2021]. According to Barinova et al., the

number of new high-tech companies in Russia decreases from 2016, and during the first year of the pandemic the number of newly registered Russian high-tech companies decreased by 16,8% [Баринова и др., 2020; Земцов и др., 2021]. Moreover, the total number of companies in Russia involved in research and development as identified in Spark-Interfax decreased by more than 30% from 2010 to 2020.

National project "Small and medium entrepreneurship and support of individual entrepreneurial initiative" is aimed to provide support to the entrepreneurs at every stage of the life-cycle: from business idea, registration and help in access to financing to implementation of project in particular industries and internationalization of the business [Passport of national project "SME and support of individual entrepreneurial initiative", 2018]. Besides national projects, the Russian government also allocates significant budget money to create a favorable environment for high-tech SMEs by establishing various government institutions for innovation development. During 2006-2020 more than 965 billion rubles of government funding were directed specifically into government institutions for innovation development [Соколов, 2021]. At recent meeting of Council for Strategic Development and National Projects fast-growing high-tech businesses were identified as primary recipients of support from financial system [President of Russia, 2022].

In this research we focus on available sources of financing for high-tech companies in Russia as a country with underdeveloped private capital market and significant government participation in the economy. Does existing government support positively contribute to high-tech SMEs performance and effectively substitute other sources of venture financing in Russia? The lack of information and the difficulty of obtaining the data complicates such analysis and explains the insufficient evidence from academic research on performance of high-tech SMEs in Russia. At the same time, a significant period since the establishment of the government institutions provides an opportunity to identify and compare the efficiency of financing available to Russian high-tech SMEs.

Overall, this dissertation fills the research gap in empirical and quantitative studies of efficiency of government support in form of equity and grant financing for

high-tech SMEs in Russia as in laboratory for emerging markets with significant government subsidies to the sector.

Therefore, the aim of the research is to reveal the impact of grant and equity financing on performance of high-tech SMEs in Russia, with a particular focus on a government financing.

The objectives of the research are as follows:

- To describe a landscape of Russian SMEs which are focused on research and development in life sciences and engineering;

- To examine ownership and management characteristics of high-tech SMEs in Russia;

- To investigate the impact of government institutions' grant financing on tech companies' performance in Russia with regard to the life cycle of the companies.

- To determine the relationship between equity financing from various sources and high-tech SME's performance with particular focus on government institutions' investments;

Current academic research.

In line with resource-based view of a new venture company [Coleman, Cotei, Farhat, 2013] we considered major resources which can contribute to firm performance, with a specific focus on equity and grant financing.

A significant difference between small and privately owned firms and big public corporations concerns the level of information opacity [Coleman, Cotei, Farhat, 2016, p.11]. Information opacity is reflected in the respective barriers for debt financing. Therefore, the pecking order hypothesis for high-tech companies is different: the primary source of startup financing is expected to be owners' resources; external equity is predicted to be the secondary source; and external debt is used as the last option for startup financing [Minola, Cassia, Criaco, 2013; Mann, Sanyal, 2010; Mac an Bhaird, 2010; Sjögren, Zackrisson, 2005].

Additionally, to overcome an information asymmetry and secure external

funding, firms extensively use various mechanisms and signals [Connelly et al., 2011].

8

For high-tech and small businesses government grants were found to be an important signal for outside investors [Islam et a., 2018].

Most studies about SME characteristics and their performance focused on firms in a developed capital market. Although debt financing has a significant role in capital structure of the firms in the emerged markets [Berger, Udell, 2003], the data about debt structure of SMEs are much more limited as such companies use non-public debt instruments (mostly loans from banks and microfinance institutions). Moreover, based on the joint study of "OPORA Russia", "Promsvyazbank" and "Magram Market Research" it was confirmed that compared to SMEs from developed capital markets, SMEs in Russia are more often denied in loans despite government subsidies [Musatova, M., 2020].

Overall, studies of developing markets show that high-tech firms face additional difficulties: for example, administrative barriers are higher for such firms [Баранов, Долгопятова, 2012]. Therefore, the role of equity investments and grants as key sources of financing for high-tech SMEs in Russia merits particular attention.

The research on SME and innovation companies in Russia mainly analyzed the influence of macroeconomic factors [Образцова и Чепуренко, 2020; Баринова, Еремкин, Земцов, 2015; Chadee, Roxas, 2013; Molz, Tabbaa, Totskaya, 2009; Aidis, Adachi, 2007; Hartarska, Gonzalez-Vega, 2006; Долгопятова, 1999] or firms on later stages of life-cycle [Земцов, Чернов, 2019; Iwasaki, Muzabata, Muravyev, 2018; Yusupova, Khalimova, 2017].

Additionally, the stream of academic research of Russian SMEs focuses on the specificity of managerial and entrepreneurial characteristics and styles of such firms in Russia, as well as their significance for firm performance [Shirokova et al., 2020; Salienko, Baev, Klyueva, 2020; Pletnev, Barkhatov, 2016; Pletnev, Nikolaeva, 2016; Mikhailitchenko, Lundstrom, 2006; Batjargal, 2003].

Despite the significant volume of government subsidies for Russian institutions for innovation development, the empirical and quantitative research on the efficiency of such support for high-tech business is limited and controversial. Based on the survey of 75 Russian medium tech companies, Medovnikov et al. showed that only 17% of

companies that used government support responded that it accelerated their development [Meg0BHHK0B h gp.,2016]. However, survey of 245 CEOs of companies that received grants from FASIE showed that 80% of CEOs found this support to be useful [fl,e^HHa, Meg0BHHK0B, po3mhpobhh, 2019].

Simachev and Kuzyk also showed that support from state development institutions, direct financing and tax reliefs contributed to the firm revenue growth [CnManeB h Ky3MK, 2020]. At the same time, the effect of government support to SMEs during the pandemic was also found to be heterogeneous and mostly ineffective PenypeHKO h gp., 2021; 3eM^B h gp. 2020].

Overall, we hypothesize that the effects of equity and grant financing for hightech SMEs in Russia are not trivial given previously found heterogeneity in surveys and studies on limited samples; and these effects can be different from the ones observed in developed capital markets. Based on the previous academic studies, in this research we study the effects of financing on firm performance by analyzing set of measures of the firm performance which account for specificity of industries and life-cycle stages of the companies.

The object of the research is a Russian high-tech small or medium enterprise, with a particular focus on the companies which interacted with government institutions in the form of equity and grant financing. Therefore, we study companies which are defined as SME according to the Federal Law of July 24, 2007 № 209-FZ "On the development of small and medium-sized businesses in the Russian Federation". However, in this research the affiliation of the company with high-tech industries is based either on the rules of government institutions or Russian National Classifier of Types of Economic Activity.

According to academic literature startups are often defined as companies with a short history of operations [Coleman, Cotei, Farhat, 2016; Huyghebaert, Van De Gucht, 2007; Cassar, 2004] or as young high-tech firms [Wasserman, 2017; Davila, Foster, Gupta, 2003]. In this research, we do not limit the age of small and medium technology companies included in our sample. However, we use the term "startup" for

high-tech SME associated with government institutions (Skolkovo project) similar to Bruton and Rubanik [Bruton, Rubanik, 2002].

Our research methodology is based on the synthesis and adaptation of existing methodologies to emerging market conditions taking into account life cycle stage and various measures of firm performance. It includes steps as follows:

1) Application of automated data collection methods as well as manual data collection for the construction of the databases;

2) Statistic and correlation analysis of variables which characterize ownership structure, management, the operational and financial performance of high-tech SMEs in Russia;

3) Econometric analysis of the relationship between firm's type of financing and performance:

Research question

Section

Dependent variable(s)

Methodology

Dataset

Effect of grant financing on performance of hightech SMEs in Russia

Section 3.1:

early-stage

SMEs

Survival

Cox proportional hazard models

Foundation for Assistance to Small Innovative Enterprises in Science and Technology (FASIE) "Start-1" program (both grant recipients and non-recipients)

Section 3.2: experienced SMEs

Revenue, Assets, Employees, Debt,

Productivity, Profitability

Propensity score matching and fixed-effects panel regression for the matched sample

FASIE "Razvitie-NTF (Development -National Technological Initiative) program, 2 phases

Relationship between equity financing and performance of hightech SMEs in Russia

Section 4: high-tech SMEs

ROA,

Profitability,

Revenue

growth

Panel models

Skolkovo startups in the Space and Nuclear clusters

To study the effect of grant financing in Russia (Section 3) we focused on the available grant programs by FASIE, one of the oldest government institutions involved in the support of high-tech enterprises with high perspectives for commercialization. FASIE offers several types of programs dependent on the life-cycle stages of the

companies: "Umnik", "Student startup", "Start" for business ideas on development and seed stages; "Razvitie (Development)", "Commercialization" and "Internalization" for companies at later stages. As the programs target different companies, the expected effect from the grant financing varies.

In Section 3.1 we focus on grants for firms at early stages of life-cycle. The primary indicator for such firm performance is survival [Churchill and Lewis, 1983, Soto-Simeone, Siren, Antretter, 2020]. Therefore, for the evaluation of the effect of grant financing for seed companies, we estimate Cox proportional hazard model of company survivorship, which is a commonly used model in academic literature [Smith, Feldman, Anderson, 2018; Cabrer-Borras, Belda, 2018; Wagner amd Cockburn, 2010].

In Section 3.2 we focus on the grants that target later stage firms that have already an experience with sales of high-tech products. Given higher level of data availability for the firms that already had sales, on the first step we identified factors which influence decision making of grant financing by estimating a binary choice model. Second, we use these factors for propensity score matching with a sample of the companies that did not receive grant. Third, fixed-effects regression models are estimated on the sample of companies after matching. The terms of the competition specify that the expected results for the companies that received grant include the launch of knowledge-intensive production, growth in sales of innovative products, and an increase in the number of high-performance jobs. In this regard, as performance measures, we focus on the indicators of employment, firm size and revenues.

In Section 4 we focus on the effect of equity financing for high-tech SMEs in Russia. The data about equity investment and ownership structure of companies is very limited, given that the investors prefer to publish information about investments with high expected or realized returns. However, Skolkovo fund regularly publishes the list of project participants, which consist of the companies on different stages. We focused on two clusters - nuclear and space startups - to get more explicit results regarding the presence of institutional owners, especially government affiliated companies and government development institutions. For estimation of the effect of equity financing we used random effect regression model (with key independent variables lagged by 1

period). For estimation of the effect of equity investments, we focus on return on assets (ROA), profitability, and revenue growth, which are most frequent measures of performance in growth (change in sales), profit (net profit margin) and efficiency (ROA based on Net Income and EBIT) dimensions in entrepreneurial research [Murphy, Trailer, Hill, 1996]. Besides availability of these indicators in public sources of information, ROA is a measure of efficiency performance that does not depend on the capital structure of the company and allows to compare results for firms in different industries; and due to existence of trade-off between profitability and revenue growth in some cases [Robinson, 1999], it is important to consider both measures.

Overall, the database for the research consists of three samples with multidimensional data collected from 6 sources. To describe the landscape of Russian high-tech SMEs we used the list of 19,572 SMEs downloaded from the Register of Small and Medium Enterprises (rmsp.nalog.ru). The list of companies was enhanced by an automated collection (web scraping) of the names from Startuplist.ru (digital platform of interaction between government institutes for development) to identify companies that were supported by the government institutions for innovation development and then further enhanced by information from Spark-Interfax.

To estimate the impact of grant financing, we collected the second database, which includes information about SMEs which participated in competitions organized by FASIE. We were able to identify 764 startups participated in competition for the program "Start" and 1296 more experienced firms that applied for the "Razvitie-NTI" program in 2016-2017 based on the name and the region of the company as published by FASIE. Then the data about the operational and financial performance of these identified companies during 2015-2021 was accessed from Ruslana (Bureau van Djik).

To estimate the effect of equity financing, the list of startups for nuclear and space industries was manually collected from the Skolkovo website. Information about firms' characteristics (e.g., age, location, size) and financial statements of the companies were accessed from Spark-Interfax and/or Ruslana (Bureau van Djik), ownership structures (number, gender of owners, management ownership) were

tracked and individually collected for each company in Spark-Interfax. This information was traced during 2010-2017 for 416 companies.

Contribution. This research contributes to the understanding of the effects of different forms of financing on performance of high-tech SMEs in countries with limited private investments and significant government support. To study these effects, we developed methodology based on works of Smith, Feldman and Anderson [2018], Epure and Guasch [2020], Srhoj, Lapinski and Walde [2020], and adapted it to the Russian market. Then we collected data from 6 information sources to test the effects on Russian high-tech SMEs.

Overall, based on the analysis of the existing literature on financing of high-tech SMEs, we contribute to scientific research by (1) demonstrating the role of equity financing provided by the government and private sources on Russian tech companies; (2) revealing the effect of grant financing for companies on seed stage and more experienced firms. The results derived in this research are novel, as we are among the first authors who analyzed the effect of equity and grant financing for Russian hightech SMEs based on empirical data. Our results can be summarized as follows:

1. Grant financing was confirmed to positively influence on survival of high-tech SMEs in Russia.

For early-stage SMEs a survival analysis was conducted on the sample of 764 companies that participated in FASIE Start-1 program (for early-stage companies, up to 10 million rubles). On the first step, to adjust for selection bias probit model was used to estimate the probability of receiving a grant by high-tech SMEs. At the second step Cox proportional hazard model was applied with predicted probabilities of receiving a grant as independent variables.

We showed that grants of up to 2 million rubles given on a competitive basis to startups at the seed stage can increase the probability of survival of a young company by more than 50%. This result is in line with previous findings of the effect of grant on firm survivorship both for the early stage SMEs in emerged [Pellegrini, Muccigrosso, 2017] and emerging [Butler et al., 2016] markets.

2. We found no evidence of grant contribution to financial and operational performance for more experienced high-tech SMEs.

3. Grant financing was found to have a positive impact on access to debt for SMEs with experience in the development and sale of knowledge-intensive products.

The impact of grant financing on financial and operational performance of more experienced high-tech SMEs was studied on the sample of 1296 companies that participated in the FASIE "Razvitie - NTI" programs (R&D support for implementation of plans in accordance with National Technological Initiative, up to 20 million rubles). The grant impact on the company's activity was analyzed using fixed-effects regression models to estimate the average treatment effect after propensity score matching procedure.

Based on the estimation of average treatment effect on the treated in a sample of companies that received (treated sample) and applied but did not received (control sample) a grant, we found no evidence that grants significantly improve the financial and operational performance of more experienced high-tech firms measured by revenue, employees, profitability, and productivity.

However, the companies with grant financing were observed to survive longer and attract more debt later. Such results are in line with findings of Rodionov, Semenov, and Oskin that grant financing can be a determinant of future venture capital investment in Russia [Rodionov, Semenov, Oskin, 2021] and confirm the signaling value of government grants.

4. No evidence of positive contribution of equity financing from government-related organizations to firm performance was found based on the sample of Russian SMEs that participated in Skolkovo project.

To study the effects of equity financing we analyzed the performance of startups in nuclear and space industries using an unbalanced panel of startups from Skolkovo, the largest Russian innovation cluster, from 2010 to 2016. We focused on these particular industries to get more explicit results regarding the presence of institutional owners, especially government affiliated companies and government development institutions.

We found no evidence of the positive effect of the share of government-related organizations in ownership on firm performance proxied by ROA, profitability, and revenue growth. Such results can be explained by the fact that such organizations could be more interested in investments in strategically important startups rather than in companies that provide high returns. Additionally, we should take into consideration the specific features inherent in government institutions and identified by Alperovych, Groh, and Quas [Alperovych, Groh, Quas, 2020]: focus on underdeveloped regions, exposure to political interference, and lack of managerial competence. Such features can prevent government development institutions from competing with private venture capital.

5. The effect of private equity financing on high-tech SMEs performance in Russia is mostly insignificant; however, the impact of private venture capital on firm performance is industry-specific.

We found evidence of a significant contribution of venture capital considered as a private source of financing to firm performance in Russia; however, the effect is industry-specific: positive and significant for startup performance profitability for the Space cluster startups.

While family equity contributions were not found to have a significant impact on high-tech SME performance, we identified a positive relationship between the owner or CEO change and future firm performance.

Although CEO share is negatively correlated with the age and size of the company, the relationship between the share of CEO in ownership structure and performance was not confirmed.

To sum it up, the findings of this research indicate that in the setting of emerging markets, financial government support cannot fully substitute the expertise and capital of private investors but can complement it and help eliminate the institutional voids by using different channels.

Overall, the main idea of government financing of high-tech SMEs is to overcome market failures. It should provide financing to the firms in the situations when there are no market investors with suitable risk profiles. In this research we

showed that government financing is indeed significant for the firms at early stages of life cycle. However, the state institutions are not able to contribute by equity and grant investments to the financial and operational performance of companies at later stages, for which the capital market is more developed. According to the previous academic studies, the potential explanation of this can be the inability of government institutions to select the firms for investment.

However, further research should consider the effect of other measure of government support (including tax and custom exemption, assistance in internationalization), as well as the effect of collaborative actions with private businesses and institutions.

Limitations. A standard limitation of research of SMEs especially in technological industries concerns the data availability. Although we use various methods to control for endogeneity, unobserved characteristics which could not be captured from available data can lead to biases in the results (omitted variables). Such characteristics can be considered as predictors for both recipience of the support and firm performance. High-tech SMEs are highly specific, and the applications for grant as well as applications to become a participant of Skolkovo project are evaluated by experts and professionals based on specific criteria, which are not published in detail.

Moreover, we should pay a particular attention to the specificity of our sample. In the empirical section of our research, we focused on companies which were participants of Skolkovo innovation system or of FASIE competition. Although we were able to get significant results about the effect of equity and grant financing on firm performance for particular companies, such self-selection of the firms limits the possibility of making pronounced conclusions about the general population of Russian high-tech SME.

Theoretical implications. Our research contributes to the stream of academic literature on entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial finance. We synthesized the conclusions from previous research about the peculiarities of the pecking order and signaling theories for young tech companies to explain the focus on equity and grant financing of SMEs on emerging markets. Afterwards, we analyzed previous studies

about measures of support for SMEs and classified them based on possible sources of entrepreneurship financing and their influence on specific measures of firm performance.

We modified existing methodologies for studying the impact of different types of financing by considering conditions of markets in Russia. These methodologies can be applied in further research for analysis of the effects of investments to the nonpublic firms in the setting of emerging markets. We contribute to the empirical research on the effect of the impact of private and government financing in the form of a grant and equity, with the evidence from Russia as the country with significant government participation in the economy.

Practical implications. This research provides insights for public authorities to design an effective system of entrepreneurship support using appropriate instruments concerning policy goals.

While direct government financial support of firms with strategic technologies can be important for survival and long-term performance of such firms, equity investments of government institutions in such companies are unlikely to provide positive short-term financial return. Moreover, direct government funding should target firms at early stages of life cycles, while for experienced firms other measures for providing access to financing should be considered. The research also confirms the need for further studies of the efficiency of government support, which will take into account other forms of state participation besides funding, and also consider the effect of collaboration and common efforts with corporations and established businesses.

The findings of this research provide strategic management insights for entrepreneurs looking for support of their business to enhance the firm's performance. While government support can be vital for seed stages of the firms, at further stages of life cycle the search of investors should be focused on private market participants.

The results of the research are published in the papers:

1. Guseva, O., & Stepanova, A. (2019). Owners and CEOs of startups: Evidence from Russia. Journal of Corporate Finance Research, 13(1), 107-119

2. Guseva, O. A., & Stepanova, A. N. (2021). Startups in Russia: Ownership and performance. Journal of the New Economic Association, 52(4), 67-97

3. Guseva, O. (2021). Support of State and Private Institutions for Biomedical Start-ups in Russia. Journal of Corporate Finance Research, 15(2), 27-41.

The results of ^ research were presented and discussed at Russian and international conferences, seminars and workshops:

1. Report on Research Seminar of School of Finance "Empirical Research of Corporate Finance", 17 May 2022;

2. Report on Research Seminar of School of Finance "Empirical Research of Corporate Finance", 30 June 2021;

3. Report on XXI April International Academic Conference on Economic and Social, section L-25, 23 Apr 2020;

4. Report on REMI 1-st Annual Workshop, 30 Sep 2019, NRU HSE, St Petersburg, Russia;

5. Report on XX April International Academic Conference on Economic and Social, section L-04, 9 Apr 2019;

6. Report on 6th annual Ph.D. workshop "Financial Markets and Corporate Strategies: Comparative Studies", 13 Apr 2019;

7. Report on RENT XXXII - Research in Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Toledo, Spain, 15 Nov 2018;

8. Report on Analytics for Management and Economics Conference 2018, 21 Sep 2018;

9. Report on the Ph.D. workshop, Analytics for Management and Economics Conference, 19 Sep 2018.

The results of this dissertation were presented and discussed in the seminars organized by the Doctoral School of Economics in the Higher School of Economics.

Research findings are also used in the teaching process of course "Entrepreneurial Finance" for master students in the NRU HSE master program "Strategic Corporate Finance" and for academic supervisory of term papers and theses of master and bachelor students NRU HSE.

The text is organized as follows: In Section 1, we analyzed and systematized existing research about types and sources of support of SMEs. While most of the studies considered companies in the developed markets, this analysis allowed us to identify equity and grant funding as fundamental and widespread types of support, among others. In Section 2, we presented the current state of Russian small and medium companies, focusing on research and development activities. Moreover, we analyzed the sample of startups supported by government institutions for innovation development. Section 2 is concluded with a description of the ownership and management landscape of companies from the best-performing startup industries in Russia. In Section 3, we investigated the impact of equity and grant financing provided by various sources to Russian tech companies at different stages of their life-cycle.

The dissertation includes 22 tables, 3 graphs, and references to 420 academic and journalistic sources of information.

Заключение диссертации по теме «Другие cпециальности», Гусева Ольга Александровна

Conclusion

Innovations are usually defined as something new which creates value for the company [KPMG, 2015]. They also have a significant impact on the long-term development of the economy, contributing to the stimulation of technological development of the country, increasing the level of competitiveness of the economy and attracting investments [Verspagen, 2005; Fagerberg, Srholec, Verspagen, 2010; Hausman, Johnston, 2014]. The typical characteristics of a small tech company usually include agility of organizational structure, the propensity to risk, and the presence of new and promising ideas [Weiblen, Chesbrough, 2015], which generally makes such companies a productive environment for the development and implementation of innovations.

While most academic studies focus on the one type of support (financial or non-financial) from a specific source, in this research, we synthesized the recent evidence of the effect of grant and equity financing from various sources on SME performance. Based on the analysis of the existing literature we contributed to the current research by identifying differences and connections between sources of equity financing in emerging markets with significant government participation, as well as the empirical evidence on the importance of grant financing.

This research is among the first academic studies to provide evidence of ownership and management characteristics of Russian high-tech as well as the relationship between equity and grant financing and the high-tech SME performance in Russia. Moreover, the special attention is brought to the effect of government participation to performance of high tech SME, as during 2006-2020 more than 965 billion rubles of government funding were directed specifically into government institutions for innovation development [Соколов, 2021].

This research is based on the extensive database about different characteristics of Russian high-tech SME, which were collected manually and by automated data collection methods.

"Although the main sources of equity financing in Russian startups are similar to the ones observed on the developed markets, Russian technology firms have a unique set of ownership structure characteristics, which include higher participation of government institutions and corporate investors." [Guseva, Stepanova, 2021]. Moreover, according to financial statements of Russian biotech startups from Skolkovo, government institutes are more likely to support the startups with equity and grant financing, while startups supported by private institutions such as venture funds on average have higher leverage [Guseva, 2021]. Therefore, in the third section we focused on the relationship between a firm's financing in the form of equity and grant and a performance.

Our research shows that "alongside the macroeconomic environment observed by previous research [Hartarska, Gonzalez-Vega, 2006; Molz et al., 2009; Chadee and Roxas, 2013; Barinova et al.,2015], microeconomic factors play an important role contributing to startup performance in Russia." [Guseva, Stepanova, 2021].

First, we focused on different types of owners as reflected in the ownership structure of companies. To investigate the impact of equity financing, we considered the sample of the companies from Space and Nuclear clusters as presence of Russian companies and technologies is more pronounced and significant. Moreover, the recent research of Simachev et al. showed that nuclear technologies is the only sector in which the share of Russian startups is the highest [CanTaHOBa, 2021].

"We found no evidence of the positive relationship between the share of government-related organizations in ownership and firm performance proxied by ROA, profitability, and revenue growth. Although the scope of this paper does not include endogeneity tests and requires further investigation taking into account the influence of financial results on state institutional participation, we assume that our results can be explained by the fact that such organizations could be more interested in investments in strategically important startups rather than in companies which provide high returns. Additionally, we should take into consideration the specific features inherent in government institutions and identified by Alperovych, Groh, and Quas focus on underdeveloped regions, exposure to political interference, and lack of

managerial competence [Alperovych et al., 2016]. Such features can prevent government development institutions from competing with private venture capital.

In line with previous studies, we found evidence of a significant contribution of venture capital considered as a private source of financing to firm performance in Russia. However, the effect is industry-specific: it was confirmed to be positive and significant for startup performance profitability for the Space cluster startups." [Guseva, Stepanova, 2021].

Family equity contributions were not found to have a significant impact on startup performance; the relationship between the share of CEO in ownership structure and performance was also not confirmed.

We also showed that other firm characteristics such as foreign and offshore ownership and changes in the ownership structure are relevant for the future performance of the company.

Second, we investigated the impact of grant financing from government development institution on Russian startups. In line with previous academic research which confirms the importance of grant financing on the seed stage of the life-cycle for emerging markets23 [Srhoj, Skrinjaric, Radas, 2019; Hartsenko, Sauga, 2013], we showed that the obtaining of grant financing is a significant factor for future survival of SME in the early stages.

Additionally, we considered more experienced SMEs that already had research experience and sale of their own knowledge-intensive products. The grant itself was not confirmed to be an instrument significantly improving the financial and operational performance of such firms. However, the companies that received grant financing were observed to survive longer and have better access to outside financing in the form of debt.

Although we were able to get significant results about the effect of equity and grant financing on firm performance for particular companies, such self-selection of

23 The classification of emerging market countries is baaed on MSCI market classification: https://www.msci.com/index-country-membership-tool

the firms limits the possibility of making pronounced conclusions about the general population of Russian high-tech SME. At the same time, FASIE do not have any requirements for applications: any firm can apply to the competition even if the firm does not fulfil formal criteria. Therefore, we believe that selection bias in our research should not have a significant impact on the effect of grant financing. Although there exist special conditions for young firms, and spatial concentration of startups can generate strong cross-firms spillovers, we believe that sample of Skolkovo participants can be considered as a relevant proxy for a sample of Russian startups as there is a significant diversity observed within the sample. It is supported by rules of Skolkovo that allow high-tech startup from any region to become a participant based on transparent and clearly defined criteria.

While this thesis is one of the first academic studies which describe the performance and main characteristics of startups in Russia, further research should focus more on the approach which integrates startup characteristics, type, and source of support to determine the drivers of startup performance in a particular case. Moreover, our findings should be developed further by qualitative research, including personal interviews with startups' managers and owners to find more detail about the support provided by the government and private institutions, companies and family members, and managers.

Список литературы диссертационного исследования кандидат наук Гусева Ольга Александровна, 2024 год

References

Abadie, A., & Spiess, J. (2021). Robust post-matching inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1-13.

Abouzahr, K., Taplett, F. B., Krentz, M., & Harthorne, J. (2018). Why women-owned startups are a better bet. Boston Consulting Group https://www. bcg. com/de-de/publications/2018/why-women-owned-startups-are-betterbet.aspx

Acs, Z. J., Estrin, S., Mickiewicz, T., & Szerb, L. (2018). Entrepreneurship, institutional economics, and economic growth: an ecosystem perspective. Small Business Economics, 51(2), 501-514.

Adams, S. B. (2011). Growing where you are planted: Exogenous firms and the seeding of Silicon Valley. Research Policy, 40(3), 368-379.

Afful-Dadzie, E., & Afful-Dadzie, A. (2016). A decision making model for selecting start-up businesses in a government venture capital scheme. Management Decision.

Agarwal, R. (1997). Survival of firms over the product life cycle. Southern Economic Journal, 571-584.

Agostini, L., Nosella, A., & Filippini, R. (2017). Does intellectual capital allow improving innovation performance? A quantitative analysis in the SME context. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 18(2), 400-418.

Aguilera, R. V., & Crespi-Cladera, R. (2016). Global corporate governance: On the relevance of firm's ownership structure, Journal of World Business, 51(1), 5057.

Aidis, R. (2005). Institutional barriers to small-and medium-sized enterprise operations in transition countries. Small Business Economics, 25(4), 305-317.

Aidis, R., & Adachi, Y. (2007). Russia: Firm entry and survival barriers. Economic Systems, 31(4), 391-411.

Aiello, F., Bonanno, G., & Rossi, S. P. (2020). How firms finance innovation. Further empirics from European SMEs. Metroeconomica, 71(4), 689-714.

Alperovych, Y., Hübner, G., & Lobet, F. (2015). How does governmental versus private venture capital backing affect a firm's efficiency? Evidence from Belgium. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(4), 508-525.

Alperovych, Y., Groh, A., & Quas, A. (2020). Bridging the equity gap for young innovative companies: The design of effective government venture capital fund programs. Research Policy, 49(10), 104051.

Akbar, Y. H., Balboni, B., Bortoluzzi, G., & Tracogna, A. (2017). SME export performance, capabilities and emerging markets: the impact of institutional voids. European Journal of International Management, 11(2), 201-226.

Andersson, S., & Florén, H. (2011). Differences in managerial behavior between small international and non-international firms. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 9(3), 233-258.

Andreeva T., & Garanina T. (2017) Intellectual Capital and Its Impact on the financial Performance of Russian Manufacturing Companies, Foresight and STI Governance, vol. 11, no 1, pp. 31-40.

Andrieu, G., La Rocca, M., La Rocca, T., & Stagliano, R. (2021). Debt financing and firm growth: European evidence on startups. Available at SSRN.

Ang, J. S., Cole, R. A., & Lawson, D. (2010). The role of owner in capital structure decisions: an analysis of single-owner corporations. Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 14, 1-36.

Arizala, F., & Yang, D. (2021). What is an emerging market? URL: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2021/06/the-future-of-emerging-markets-duttagupta-and-pazarbasioglu.htm

Armour, J., & Cumming, D. (2006). The legislative road to Silicon Valley. Oxford Economic Papers, 58(4), 596-635.

Arthurs, J. D., Busenitz, L. W., Hoskisson, R. E., & Johnson, R. A. (2009). Signaling and initial public offerings: The use and impact of the lockup period. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(4), 360-372.

Artz, K. W., Norman, P. M., Hatfield, D. E., & Cardinal, L. B. (2010). A longitudinal study of the impact of R&D, patents, and product innovation on firm performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(5), 725-740.

Audretsch, D. B. (1991). New-Firm Survival and the Technological Regime. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 73(3), 441-450.

Ayyagari, M., Demirguc-Kunt, A., & Maksimovic, V. (2014). Who creates jobs in developing countries?. Small Business Economics, 43(1), 75-99.

Bahrami, H., & Evans, S. (1987). Stratocracy in high-technology firms. California Management Review, 30(1), 51-66.

Balcaen, S., Manigart, S., Buyze, J., & Ooghe, H. (2012). Firm exit after distress: differentiating between bankruptcy, voluntary liquidation and M&A. Small Business Economics, 39, 949-975.

Banerji, D., & Reimer, T. (2019). Startup founders and their LinkedIn connections: Are well-connected entrepreneurs more successful?. Computers in Human Behavior, 90, 46-52.

Bang, V. V., Joshi, S. L., & Singh, M. C. (2016). Marketing strategy in emerging markets: a conceptual framework. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 24(2), 104117.

Baptista, R., Karaöz, M., & Mendon5a, J. (2014). The impact of human capital on the early success of necessity versus opportunity-based entrepreneurs. Small Business Economics, 42(4), 831-847.

Baptista, R., Karaöz, M., & Mendon5a, J. (2014). The impact of human capital on the early success of necessity versus opportunity-based entrepreneurs. Small Business Economics, 42(4), 831-847.

Barker III, V. L., & Mueller, G. C. (2002). CEO characteristics and firm R&D spending. Management Science, 48(6), 782-801.

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.

Barringer B. R., & Ireland R. (2019). Entrepreneurship: Successfully Launching New Ventures, 6e. Pearson Education Limited.

Bart, C. K. (1996). High tech firms: does mission matter?. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 7(2), 209-225.

Batjargal, B. (2003). Social capital and entrepreneurial performance in Russia: A longitudinal study. Organization Studies, 24(4), 535-556.

Bascha, A., & Walz, U. (2007). Financing practices in the German venture capital industry: an empirical study. In Venture capital in Europe (pp. 217-231). Butterworth-Heinemann.

Baum, J. A., & 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.

Beckman, C. M., Burton, M. D., & O'Reilly, C. (2007). Early teams: The impact of team demography on VC financing and going public. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(2), 147-173.

Belderbos, R., Gilsing, V., Lokshin, B., Carree, M., & Sastre, J. F. (2018). The antecedents of new R&D collaborations with different partner types: On the dynamics of past R&D collaboration and innovative performance. Long Range Planning, 51(2), 285-302.

Belot, F., & Serve, S. (2018). Earnings quality in private SMEs: do CEO demographics matter?. Journal of Small Business Management, 56, 323-344.

Belso-Martinez, J. A. (2006). Why are some Spanish manufacturing firms internationalizing rapidly? The role of business and institutional international networks. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 18(3), 207-226.

Benson, D., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2009). Corporate venture capital as a window on new technologies: Implications for the performance of corporate investors when acquiring startups. Organization Science, 20(2), 329-351.

Bergek, A., & Norrman, C. (2008). Incubator best practice: A framework. Technovation, 28(1-2), 20-28.

Berger, A. N., & Black, L. K. (2011). Bank size, lending technologies, and small business finance. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(3), 724-735.

Berger, A. N., & Udell, G. F. (1998). The economics of small business finance: The roles of private equity and debt markets in the financial growth cycle. Journal of Banking & Finance, 22(6-8), 613-673.

Berger, A. N., & Udell, G. F. (2003). Small business and debt finance. Handbook of entrepreneurship research: An interdisciplinary survey and introduction, 299328.

Bernini, C., & Pellegrini, G. (2011). How are growth and productivity in private firms affected by public subsidy? Evidence from a regional policy. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 41(3), 253-265.

Bertoni, F., & Tykvová, T. (2015). Does governmental venture capital spur invention and innovation? Evidence from young European biotech companies. Research Policy, 44(4), 925-935.

Bertoni, F., Colombo, M. G., & Croce, A. (2010). The effect of venture capital financing on the sensitivity to cash flow of firm's investments. European Financial Management, 16(4), 528-551.

Bertoni, F., Colombo, M. G., & Grilli, L. (2011). Venture capital financing and the growth of high-tech start-ups: Disentangling treatment from selection effects. Research Policy, 40(7), 1028-1043.

Bertoni, F., Croce, A., & Guerini, M. (2015). Venture capital and the investment curve of young high-tech companies. Journal of Corporate Finance, 35, 159-176.

Bertoni, F., Martí, J., & Reverte, C. (2019). The impact of government-supported participative loans on the growth of entrepreneurial ventures. Research Policy, 48(1), 371-384.

Bia, M., & Mattei, A. (2012). Assessing the effect of the amount of financial aids to Piedmont firms using the generalized propensity score. Statistical Methods & Applications, 21(4), 485-516.

Blagburn, N. (2016). Why startup boards matter. Technovation, 57, 45-46.

Block, J. H. (2012). R&D investments in family and founder firms: An agency perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2), 248-265.

Block, J. H., Jaskiewicz, P., & Miller, D. (2011). Ownership versus management effects on performance in family and founder companies: A Bayesian reconciliation. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 2(4), 232-245.

Boeker, W., & Wiltbank, R. (2005). New venture evolution and managerial capabilities. Organization Science, 16(2), 123-133.

Bondonio, D., & Greenbaum, R. T. (2014). Revitalizing regional economies through enterprise support policies: an impact evaluation of multiple instruments. European Urban and Regional Studies, 21(1), 79-103.

Bosma, N., Van Praag, M., Thurik, R., & De Wit, G. (2004). The value of human and social capital investments for the business performance of startups. Small Business Economics, 23(3), 227-236.

Brachert, M., Dettmann, E., & Titze, M. (2018). Public investment subsidies and firm performance-evidence from Germany. Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, 238(2), 103-124.

Brander, J. A., Du, Q., & Hellmann, T. (2015). The effects of government-sponsored venture capital: international evidence. Review of Finance, 19(2), 571-618.

Brander, J. A., Egan, E., & Hellmann, T. F. (2010). Government sponsored versus private venture capital: Canadian evidence. In International differences in entrepreneurship (pp. 275-320). University of Chicago Press.

Brav, A., & Gompers, P. A. (1997). Myth or reality? The long-run underperformance of initial public offerings: Evidence from venture and nonventure capital-backed companies. Journal of Finance, 52(5), 1791-1821.

Breitzman A., & Thomas P. (2011) Analysis of Small Business Innovation in Green Technologies. URL:

https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/rs389tot.pdf

Brinkhuis, E., & Scholtens, B. (2018). Investor response to appointment of female CEOs and CFOs. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(3), 423-441.

Brown, J. D., & Earle, J. S. (2017). Finance and growth at the firm level: Evidence from SBA loans. The Journal of Finance, 72(3), 1039-1080.

Brüderl, J., & Preisendörfer, P. (1998). Network support and the success of newly founded business. Small Business Economics, 10(3), 213-225.

Bruton, G. D., & Rubanik, Y. (2002). Resources of the firm, Russian high-technology startups, and firm growth. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(6), 553-576.

Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Li, H. L. (2010). Institutional theory and entrepreneurship: where are we now and where do we need to move in the future?. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(3), 421-440.

Bruton, G., Filatotchev, I., Chahine, S., & Wright, M. (2010). Governance, ownership structure, and performance of IPO firms: The impact of different types of private equity investors and institutional environments. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 491-509.

Buchanan L. (2018). Study: U.S. businesses no longer dominate in venture capital funding. Inc.com. URL: https://www.inc.com/leigh-buchanan/american-businesses-no-longer-dominate-venture-capital.html

Burgel, O., & Murray, G. C. (2000). The international market entry choices of start-up companies in high-technology industries. Journal of International Marketing, 8(2), 33-62.

Butler, I., Galassi, G., & Ruffo, H. (2016). Public funding for startups in Argentina: an impact evaluation. Small Business Economics, 46(2), 295-309.

Capelleras, J. L., Contin-Pilart, I., & Larraza-Kintana, M. (2011). Publicly funded prestart support for new firms: who demands it and how it affects their employment growth. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 29(5), 821-847.

Cassar, G. (2004). The financing of business start-ups. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(2), 261-283.

Cassion, C., Qian, Y., Bossou, C., & Ackerman, M. (2021). Investors Embrace Gender Diversity, Not Female CEOs: The Role of Gender in Startup Fundraising. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.12008.

Castaldo, A., De Luca, G., & Barile, B. (2021). Does initial access to bank loans predict start-up's future default probability? Evidence from Italy. Contemporary Economic Policy, 39(1), 83-106.

Cefis, E., & Marsili, O. (2006). Survivor: The role of innovation in firms' survival. Research policy, 35(5), 626-641.

Cerqua, A., & Pellegrini, G. (2014). Do subsidies to private capital boost firms' growth? A multiple regression discontinuity design approach. Journal of Public Economics, 109, 114-126.

CGAP. (2017). Crowdfunding in China: The financial inclusion dimension. URL: http://documents.shihang.org/curated/zh/834091504764640588/pdf/119207-BRI-PUBLIC-Brief-Crowdfunding-in-China-Jul-2017-0.pdf

Chadee, D., & Roxas, B. (2013). Institutional environment, innovation capacity and firm performance in Russia. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 9 (1-2), 19-39.

Charity, E., Austin, O. C., Orji, O. C., Steve, E. E., & Okechukwu, A. J. (2019). Capital structure determinants and performance of startup firms in developing economies: A conceptual review. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 25(3), 1-9.

Chemmanur, T. J., Krishnan, K., & Nandy, D. K. (2011). How does venture capital financing improve efficiency in private firms? A look beneath the surface. The Review of Financial Studies, 24(12), 4037-4090.

Chemmanur, T. J., Loutskina, E., & Tian, X. (2014). Corporate venture capital, value creation, and innovation. The Review of Financial Studies, 27(8), 2434-2473.

Chernykh, L. (2008). Ultimate ownership and control in Russia. Journal of Financial Economics, 88(1), 169-192.

Chew, Y. T., & Yeung, H. W. C. (2001). The SME advantage: adding local touch to foreign transnational corporations in Singapore. Regional studies, 35(5), 431448.

Chong, A., & Lopez de Silanes, F. (2007). Investor protection and corporate governance: Firm- level evidence across Latin America. The World Bank.

Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., Kellermanns, F., & Wu, Z. (2011). Family involvement and new venture debt financing. Journal of Business Venturing, 26 (4), 472-488.

Churchill, N. & Lewis, V. (1983). The five stages of small business growth. Harvard Business Review, 61 (May- June), 30-50.

Cin, B. C., Kim, Y. J., & Vonortas, N. S. (2017). The impact of public R&D subsidy on small firm productivity: evidence from Korean SMEs. Small Business Economics, 48(2), 345-360.

Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Fan, J. P., & Lang, L. H. (2002). Disentangling the incentive and entrenchment effects of large shareholdings. The Journal of Finance, 57(6), 2741-2771.

Coad, A., & Rao, R. (2008). Innovation and firm growth in high-tech sectors: A quantile regression approach. Research Policy, 37(4), 633-648.

Cole, R. A., & Sokolyk, T. (2018). Debt financing, survival, and growth of start-up firms. Journal of Corporate Finance, 50, 609-625.

Coleman, A. (2018). Profitability versus growth: A balancing act for startups. Forbes.com.URL:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisoncoleman/2018/03/04/profitability-versus-growth-a-balancing-act-for-startups/?sh=4feaaa563e3e

Coleman, S., Cotei, C., & Farhat, J. (2013). A resource-based view of new firm survival: New perspectives on the role of industry and exit route. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 18(01), 1350002.

Coleman, S., Cotei, C., & Farhat, J. (2016). The debt-equity financing decisions of US startup firms. Journal of Economics and Finance, 40(1), 105-126.

Coleman, S., & Robb, A. (2012). Capital structure theory and new technology firms: is there a match? Management Research Review.

Colombelli, A., Krafft, J., & Vivarelli, M. (2016). To be born is not enough: the key role of innovative start-ups. Small Business Economics, 47, 277-291.

Colombo, M. G., & Delmastro, M. (2002). How effective are technology incubators?: Evidence from Italy. Research Policy, 31(7), 1103-1122.

Colombo, M. G., Croce, A., & Murtinu, S. (2014). Ownership structure, horizontal agency costs and the performance of high-tech entrepreneurial firms. Small Business Economics, 42(2), 265-282.

Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011). Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management, 37(1), 39-67.

Conti, A., Thursby, M., & Rothaermel, F. T. (2013). Show me the right stuff: Signals for high-tech startups. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 22(2), 341-364.

Cornell, B., & Shapiro, A. C. (1987). Corporate stakeholders and corporate finance. Financial Management, 5-14.

Cornelli, F., & Yosha, O. (2003). Stage financing and the role of convertible securities. The Review of Economic Studies, 70(1), 1-32.

Cox, D. R. (1972). Regression models and life-tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 34(2), 187-202.

Cressy, R. (1996). Are business startups debt-rationed?. The Economic Journal, 106(438), 1253-1270.

Criscuolo, C., Martin, R., Overman, H. G., & Van Reenen, J. (2019). Some causal effects of an industrial policy. American Economic Review, 109(1), 48-85.

Cui, H., & Mak, Y. T. (2002). The relationship between managerial ownership and firm performance in high R&D firms. Journal of Corporate Finance, 8(4), 313336.

Cumming, D. (2006). Adverse selection and capital structure: Evidence from venture capital. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(2), 155-183.

Cumming, D. (2007). Government policy towards entrepreneurial finance: Innovation investment funds. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(2), 193-235.

Cumming, D. J., & MacIntosh, J. G. (2006). Crowding out private equity: Canadian evidence. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(5), 569-609.

Cumming, D. J., Grilli, L., & Murtinu, S. (2017). Governmental and independent venture capital investments in Europe: A firm-level performance analysis. Journal of Corporate Finance, 42, 439-459.

Dang, C., Li, Z. F., & Yang, C. (2018). Measuring firm size in empirical corporate finance. Journal of banking & finance, 86, 159-176.

Danis, W. M., Chiaburu, D. S., & Lyles, M. A. (2010). The impact of managerial networking intensity and market-based strategies on firm growth during institutional upheaval: A study of small and medium-sized enterprises in a transition economy. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(2), 287-307.

Darby, M. R., Zucker, L. G., & Wang, A. (2004). Joint ventures, universities, and success in the advanced technology program. Contemporary Economic Policy, 22(2), 145-161.

Davidsson, P., & Honig, B. (2003). The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 301-331.

Davila, A., Foster, G., & Gupta, M. (2003). Venture capital financing and the growth of startup firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(6), 689-708.

De Carolis, D. M., Litzky, B. E., & Eddleston, K. A. (2009). Why networks enhance the progress of new venture creation: The influence of social capital and cognition. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(2), 527-545.

De Chaisemartin, C., & Ramirez-Cuellar, J. (2020). At What Level Should One Cluster Standard Errors in Paired Experiments, and in Stratified Experiments with Small Strata? (No. w27609). National Bureau of Economic Research.

De Silva, D. G., & McComb, R. P. (2012). Geographic concentration and high tech firm survival. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 42(4), 691-701.

De Wet, W. A. (2004). The role of asymmetric information on investments in emerging markets. Economic Modelling, 21(4), 621-630.

Debrulle, J., Steffens, P., De Bock, K. W., De Winne, S., & Maes, J. (2020). Configurations of business founder resources, strategy, and environment determining new venture performance. Journal of Small Business Management, 1-38.

Decramer, S., & Vanormelingen, S. (2016). The effectiveness of investment subsidies: evidence from a regression discontinuity design. Small Business Economics, 47(4), 1007-1032.

Deloitte. (2020). Women CEOs in Russia. URL: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/ru/Documents/research-center/women-ceo-2020-18-03-en.pdf

Demartini, P. (2018). Innovative female-led startups. Do women in business underperform?. Administrative Sciences, 8(4), 70.

Demirel, P., & Danisman, G. O. (2019). Eco-innovation and firm growth in the circular economy: Evidence from European small-and medium-sized enterprises. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(8), 1608-1618.

Dimitratos, P., Amorós, J. E., Etchebarne, M. S., & Felzensztein, C. (2014). Micromultinational or not? International entrepreneurship, networking and learning effects. Journal of Business Research, 67(5), 908-915.

Djankov, S., Miguel, E., Qian, Y., Roland, G., & Zhuravskaya, E. (2005). Who are Russia's entrepreneurs?. Journal of the European Economic Association, 3(2-3), 587-597.

Dolvin, S. (2005). Venture capitalist certification of IPOs. Venture Capital, 7(2), 131148.

Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65-91.

Dong, Y., & Men, C. (2014). SME financing in emerging markets: Firm characteristics, banking structure and institutions. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 50(1), 120-149.

Dvoulety, O., Srhoj, S., & Pantea, S. (2021). Public SME grants and firm performance in European Union: A systematic review of empirical evidence. Small Business Economics, 57(1), 243-263.

Edelman, L. F., Manolova, T., Shirokova, G., & Tsukanova, T. (2016). The impact of family support on young entrepreneurs' start-up activities. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(4), 428-448.

Elfring, T., & Hulsink, W. (2003). Networks in entrepreneurship: The case of high-technology firms. Small Business Economics, 21(4), 409-422.

Entis L. (2013). Where startup funding really comes from (Infographic). URL: https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/230011

Epure, M., & Guasch, M. (2020). Debt signaling and outside investors in early stage firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 35(2), 105929.

Esteve-Perez, S., & Manez-Castillejo, J. A. (2008). The resource-based theory of the firm and firm survival. Small Business Economics, 30, 231-249.

Estrin, S., Mickiewicz, T., & Stephan, U. (2013). Entrepreneurship, social capital, and institutions: Social and commercial entrepreneurship across nations. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(3), 479-504.

EU Startup Monitor. (2018). URL: http://startupmonitor.eu/EU-Startup-Monitor-2018-Report-WEB.pdf

Evans, J. S. (1991). Strategic flexibility for high technology manoeuvres: a conceptual framework. Journal of Management Studies, 28(1), 69-89.

Ewens, M., & Marx, M. (2018). Founder replacement and startup performance. The Review of Financial Studies, 31(4), 1532-1565.

Faccio, M., Marchica, M. T., & Mura, R. (2016). CEO gender, corporate risk-taking, and the efficiency of capital allocation. Journal of Corporate Finance, 39, 193209.

Fagerberg, J., Srholec, M., & Verspagen, B. (2010). The role of innovation in development. Review of Economics and Institutions, 1(2), 1-29.

Feeser, H. R., & Willard, G. E. (1990). Founding strategy and performance: A comparison of high and low growth high tech firms. Strategic Management Journal, 11(2), 87-98.

Feldman, M. P., & Kelley, M. R. (2006). The ex ante assessment of knowledge spillovers: Government R&D policy, economic incentives and private firm behavior. Research Policy, 35(10), 1509-1521.

Ferina, N., Khurotul, A. E., & Sukowidyanti, A. P. (2018). Does family social support affect startup business activities?. Russian Journal of Agricultural and SocioEconomic Sciences, 74(2).

Filatotchev, I., Liu, X., Buck, T., & Wright, M. (2009). The export orientation and export performance of high-technology SMEs in emerging markets: The effects

of knowledge transfer by returnee entrepreneurs. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(6), 1005-1021.

Fitza, M., & Tihanyi, L. (2017). How much does ownership form matter? Strategic Management Journal, 38(13), 2726-2743.

Fitza, M., Matusik, S. F., & Mosakowski, E. (2009). Do VCs matter? The importance of owners on performance variance in start-up firms. Strategic Management Journal, 30(4), 387-404.

Foreman-Peck, J., Makepeace, G., & Morgan, B. (2006). Growth and profitability of small and medium-sized enterprises: Some Welsh evidence. Regional Studies, 40(4), 307-319.

Fotopoulos, G., & Louri, H. (2000). Location and survival of new entry. Small business economics, 14, 311-321.

Freel, M. S., & Harrison, R. T. (2006). Innovation and cooperation in the small firm sector: Evidence from 'Northern Britain'. Regional Studies, 40(4), 289-305.

Galasso, A., & Simcoe, T. S. (2011). CEO overconfidence and innovation. Management Science, 57(8), 1469-1484.

Galbreath, J. (2005). Which resources matter the most to firm success? An exploratory study of resource-based theory. Technovation, 25(9), 979-987.

Galkina, T., & Chetty, S. (2015). Effectuation and networking of internationalizing SMEs. Management International Review, 55(5), 647-676.

Galloway, T. L., Miller, D. R., Sahaym, A., & Arthurs, J. D. (2017). Exploring the innovation strategies of young firms: Corporate venture capital and venture capital impact on alliance innovation strategy. Journal of Business Research, 71, 55-65.

Gao, C., Zuzul, T., Jones, G., & Khanna, T. (2017). Overcoming institutional voids: A reputation-based view of long-run survival. Strategic Management Journal, 38(11), 2147-2167.

Garanina, T. A. (2011). Intellectual capital structure and value creation of a company: evidence from Russian companies. Open Journal of Economic Research, 22-34.

George, G., Wiklund, J., & Zahra, S. A. (2005). Ownership and the internationalization of small firms. Journal of Management, 31(2), 210-233.

George, G., Zahra, S. A., & Wood Jr, D. R. (2002). The effects of business-university alliances on innovative output and financial performance: a study of publicly traded biotechnology companies. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(6), 577609.

Gerasymenko, V., De Clercq, D., & Sapienza, H. J. (2015). Changing the business model: effects of venture capital firms and outside CEOs on portfolio company performance. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 9(1), 79-98.

Gershman, M., & Thurner, T. (2016). New development: State-owned enterprises as powerhouses for innovation—the Russian case. Public Money & Management, 36(4), 297-302.

Girma, S., Gorg, H., Strobl, E., & Walsh, F. (2008). Creating jobs through public subsidies: An empirical analysis. Labour Economics, 15(6), 1179-1199.

Gompers, P. A. (1995). Optimal investment, monitoring, and the staging of venture capital. The Journal of Finance, 50(5), 1461-1489.

Grant, R. M. (1991). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review, 33(3), 114-135.

Gregory, B. T., Rutherford, M. W., Oswald, S., & Gardiner, L. (2005). An empirical investigation of the growth cycle theory of small firm financing. Journal of Small Business Management, 43(4), 382-392.

Grilli, L. (2005). Internet start-ups access to the bank loan market: evidence from Italy. Applied Economics, 37(3), 293-305.

Grilli, L., & Murtinu, S. (2014). Government, venture capital and the growth of European high-tech entrepreneurial firms. Research Policy, 43(9), 1523-1543.

Grimpe, C., Murmann, M., & Sofka, W. (2019). Organizational design choices of hightech startups: How middle management drives innovation performance. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 13(3), 359-378.

Guerini, M., & Quas, A. (2016). Governmental venture capital in Europe: Screening and certification. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(2), 175-195.

Guo, D., & Jiang, K. (2013). Venture capital investment and the performance of entrepreneurial firms: Evidence from China. Journal of Corporate Finance, 22, 375-395.

Gupta, N. (2005). Partial privatization and firm performance. The Journal of Finance, 60(2), 987-1015.

Gupta, J., Barzotto, M., & Khorasgani, A. (2018). Does size matter in predicting SMEs failure?. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 23(4), 571-605.

Gupta, J., Gregoriou, A., & Ebrahimi, T. (2018). Empirical comparison of hazard models in predicting SMEs failure. Quantitative Finance, 18(3), 437-466.

Gurvich, E., & Prilepskiy, I. (2015). The impact of financial sanctions on the Russian economy. Russian Journal of Economics, 1(4), 359-385.

Guseva, O., & Stepanova, A. (2019). Owners and CEOs of startups: Evidence from Russia. Journal of Corporate Finance Research, 13(1), 107-119

Guseva, O. A., & Stepanova, A. N. (2021). Startups in Russia: Ownership and performance. Journal of the New Economic Association, 52(4), 67-97

Hansen, E. L., & Bird, B. J. (1998). The stages model of high-tech venture founding: tried but true?. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 22(2), 111-122.

Harris, R., & Trainor, M. (2005). Capital subsidies and their impact on Total Factor Productivity: Firm-level evidence from Northern Ireland. Journal of Regional Science, 45(1), 49-74.

Hartarska, V., & Gonzalez-Vega, C. (2006). What affects new and established firms' expansion? Evidence from small firms in Russia. Small Business Economics, 27(2-3), 195-206

Hartsenko, J., & Sauga, A. (2013). The role of financial support in SME and economic development in Estonia. Business & Economic Horizons, 9(2).

Harwell, M. R., Rubinstein, E. N., Hayes, W. S., & Olds, C. C. (1992). Summarizing Monte Carlo results in methodological research: The one-and two-factor fixed effects ANOVA cases. Journal of Educational Statistics, 17(4), 315-339.

Hausman, A., & Johnston, W. J. (2014). The role of innovation in driving the economy: Lessons from the global financial crisis. Journal of Business Research, 67(1), 2720-2726.

Hegde, D., & Tumlinson, J. (2014). Does social proximity enhance business partnerships? Theory and evidence from ethnicity's role in US venture capital. Management Science, 60(9), 2355-2380.

Hellman, T., & Puri, M. (2002). Venture capital and the professionalization of startups: Empirical Evidence. Journal of Finance, 57.

Henisz, W. J., & Zelner, B. A. (2010). The hidden risks in emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 88(4), 88-95.

Henry Z. (2018). Like it or not, startups are soaring in Russia. Here's why. Inc.com. URL: https://www.inc.com/zoe-henry/inc-5000-europe-moscow-startup-

ecosystem.html

Hewitt-Dundas, N., & Roper, S. (2011). Creating advantage in peripheral regions: The role of publicly funded R&D centres. Research Policy, 40(6), 832-841.

Hmieleski, K. M., & Corbett, A. C. (2008). The contrasting interaction effects of improvisational behavior with entrepreneurial self-efficacy on new venture performance and entrepreneur work satisfaction. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(4), 482-496.

Ho, D. E., Imai, K., King, G., & Stuart, E. A. (2007). Matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference. Political Analysis, 15(3), 199-236.

Hochberg, Y. V., Ljungqvist, A., & Lu, Y. (2007). Whom you know matters: Venture capital networks and investment performance. The Journal of Finance, 62(1), 251-301.

Holmes, P., Hunt, A., & Stone, I. (2010). An analysis of new firm survival using a hazard function. Applied Economics, 42(2), 185-195.

Hong, S., Werner, D. (2020). How Many People Does It Take to Start a Company? Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis. URL: https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/second-quarter-2020/many-people-does-it-take-start-company

Hornsby, J. S., Kuratko, D. F., Shepherd, D. A., & Bott, J. P. (2009). Managers' corporate entrepreneurial actions: Examining perception and position. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(3), 236-247.

Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L., Lau, C. M., & Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 249-267.

Hottenrott, H., & Richstein, R. (2020). Start-up subsidies: Does the policy instrument matter?. Research Policy, 49(1), 103888.

Hottenrott, H., Lins, E., & Lutz, E. (2018). Public subsidies and new ventures' use of bank loans. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 27(8), 786-808.

Howell, S. T. (2017). Financing innovation: Evidence from R&D grants. American Economic Review, 107(4), 1136-64.

Huang, C. J. (2011). Equity financing and the pecking order hypothesis in the emerging market: Evidence from Taiwan's relocated firms in China (TRFC). Global Economic Review, 40(2), 193-210.

Huang, J., & Kisgen, D. J. (2013). Gender and corporate finance: Are male executives overconfident relative to female executives? Journal of Financial Economics, 108(3), 822-839.

Huang, M., Li, P., Meschke, F., & Guthrie, J. P. (2015). Family firms, employee satisfaction, and corporate performance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 34, 108127.

Hungarian Startup Report 2020. (2021). URL:

https://uploads.strikinglycdn.com/files/76b55c6b-63d7-4b22-85af-

4a06186f8b8f/Startup%20Hungary%20-

%20Hungarian%20Startup%20Report%202020.pdf

Hussain, J., Millman, C., & Matlay, H. (2006). SME financing in the UK and in China: a comparative perspective. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development.

Huyghebaert, N., & Van de Gucht, L. M. (2007). The determinants of financial structure: new insights from business start-ups. European Financial Management, 13(1), 101-133.

Hyytinen, A., Pajarinen, M., & Rouvinen, P. (2015). Does innovativeness reduce startup survival rates?. Journal of business venturing, 30(4), 564-581.

Iskandar, T. M., Hassan, N. H., Sanusi, Z. M., & Mohamed, Z. M. (2017). Board of directors and ownership structure: a study on small and medium enterprises (smes) in Malaysia. Jurnal Pengurusan (UKM Journal of Management), 49.

Islam, M., Fremeth, A., & Marcus, A. (2018). Signaling by early stage startups: US government research grants and venture capital funding. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(1), 35-51.

Iwasaki, I., Mizobata, S., & Muravyev, A. (2018). Ownership dynamics and firm performance in an emerging economy: a meta-analysis of the Russian literature. Post-Communist Economies, 30(3), 290-333.

Ivanov, I. (2010). Capital structure determinants of Russian public companies. Journal of Corporate Finance Research, (1 (13)), 5-38.

Ivashkovskaya, I., & Solntseva, M. (2007). The capital structure of Russian companies: testing trade-off theory versus pecking order theory. Journal of Corporate Finance Research/KopnopaTHBHbie OHHaHCbi| ISSN: 2073-0438, 1(2), 17-31.

Iwasaki, I., Kocenda, E., & Shida, Y. (2021). Institutions, financial development, and small business survival: Evidence from European emerging markets. Small Business Economics, 1-23.

Jawahar, I. M., & McLaughlin, G. L. (2001). Toward a descriptive stakeholder theory: An organizational life cycle approach. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 397-414.

Jensen, K. W., & Sch0tt, T. (2014). Firms' innovation embedded in their networks of collaboration: China compared to the world. Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, 12(3), 273-292.

Johannisson, B. (2008). Regional development as entrepreneurial networking: from rational choice to self-organizing. Networks, Governance and Economic Development, 57-77.

Kang, M.Y. (2020) Sustainable Profit versus Unsustainable Growth: Are Venture Capital Investments and Governmental Support Medicines or Poisons? Sustainability, 12(18):7773.

Kauermann, G., Tutz, G., & Brüderl, J. (2005). The survival of newly founded firms: a case-study into varying-coefficient models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 168(1), 145-158.

Keller, M. R., & Block, F. (2013). Explaining the transformation in the US innovation system: the impact of a small government program. Socio-Economic Review, 11(4), 629-656.

Khanin, D., & Turel, O. (2012). Short-termism, long-termism, and regulatory focus in venture capitalists' investment decisions. Venture Capital, 14(1), 61-76.

Kim, P. H., & Longest, K. C. (2014). You can't leave your work behind: Employment experience and founding collaborations. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(6), 785-806.

Kirsch, D., Goldfarb, B., & Gera, A. (2009). Form or substance: the role of business plans in venture capital decision making. Strategic Management Journal, 30(5), 487-515.

Klonowski, D. (2012). Liquidity gaps in financing the SME sector in an emerging market: evidence from Poland. International Journal of Emerging Markets.

Kölling, A. (2015). Does public funding work? A causal analysis of the effects of economic promotion with establishment panel data. Kyklos, 68(3), 385-411.

Kösters, S. (2010). Subsidizing start-ups: Policy targeting and policy effectiveness. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 10(3-4), 199-225.

KPMG. (2015). Why are big businesses looking to start-ups for innovation? URL: https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/pdf/2015/02/big-business-start-ups-innovation.pdf

KPMG. (2018). Venture Pulse Q4 2017: Global analysis of venture funding. URL: https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2018/01/venture-pulse-report-q4-17.pdf

KPMG. (2022).Venture Pulse Q4 2021: Global analysis of venture funding. URL: https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2022/01/venture-pulse-q4-2021.pdf

Kravchenko, N. A., Kuznetsova, S. A., Yusupova, A., Jithendranathan, T., Lundsten, L. L., & Shemyakin, A. (2015). A comparative study of regional innovative entrepreneurship in Russia and the United States. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development.

La Rocca, M., La Rocca, T., & Cariola, A. (2011). Capital structure decisions during a firm's life cycle. Small Business Economics, 37(1), 107-130.

Lang, P., Nagy, G., & Stancsics, M. (2017). Impact evaluation of EU subsidies for economic development on the Hungarian SME sector (No. 2017/8). MNB Working Papers.

Large, D., & Muegge, S. (2008). Venture capitalists' non-financial value-added: an evaluation of the evidence and implications for research. Venture Capital, 10(1), 21-53.

Leach, J., & Melicher, R. (2011). Entrepreneurial finance. Cengage Learning.

Lee, B. (2019). Human capital and labor: the effect of entrepreneur characteristics on venture success. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research.

Lee, C., Lee, K., & Pennings, J. M. (2001). Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: a study on technology-based ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 615-640.

Lee, N., Sameen, H., & Cowling, M. (2015). Access to finance for innovative SMEs since the financial crisis. Research Policy, 44(2), 370-380.

Lerner, J. (1996). The government as venture capitalist: The long-run effects of the SBIR program (No. w5753). National Bureau of Economic Research.

Lerner, J. (2000). The government as venture capitalist: the long-run impact of the SBIR program. The Journal of Private Equity, 3(2), 55-78.

Lev, B. (2000). Intangibles: Management, measurement, and reporting. Brookings institution press.

Li, H., & Zhang, Y. (2007). The role of managers' political networking and functional experience in new venture performance: Evidence from China's transition economy. Strategic Management Journal, 28(8), 791-804.

Li, J. J. (2005). The formation of managerial networks of foreign firms in China: The effects of strategic orientations. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 22(4), 423443.

Li, W. (1998). Government loan, guarantee, and grant programs: An evaluation. FRB Richmond Economic Quarterly, 84(4), 25-51.

Liu, Y. (2011). High-tech ventures' innovation and influences of institutional voids: A comparative study of two high-tech parks in China. Journal of Chinese Entrepreneurship.

Lofsten, H., & Lindelof, P. (2002). Science Parks and the growth of new technology-based firms—academic-industry links, innovation and markets. Research Policy, 31(6), 859-876.

Lu, J., & Beamish, P. (2001). The internationalization and performance of SMEs. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 565-586.

Lukason, O., & Camacho-Miñano, M. D. M. (2019). Bankruptcy risk, its financial determinants and reporting delays: Do managers have anything to hide?. Risks, 7(3), 77.

Luukkonen, T., Deschryvere, M., & Bertoni, F. (2013). The value added by government venture capital funds compared with independent venture capital funds. Technovation, 33(4-5), 154-162.

Lynskey, M. J. (2004). Determinants of innovative activity in Japanese technology-based start-up firms. International Small Business Journal, 22(2), 159-196.

Mac an Bhaird, C. (2010). The Modigliani-Miller proposition after fifty years and its relation to entrepreneurial finance. Strategic Change, 19(1-2), 9-28.

Manjón-Antolín, M.C., Arauzo-Carod, JM. Firm survival: methods and evidence. Empirica 35, 1-24 (2008).

Mann, C. L., & Sanyal, P. (2010). The financial structure of startup firms: The role of assets, information, and entrepreneur characteristics. Available at SSRN.

Marti, C., Rovira-Val, M., & Drescher, L. (2015). Are firms that contribute to sustainable development better financially? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 22(5), 305-319.

Martí, J., & Quas, A. (2018). A beacon in the night: government certification of SMEs towards banks. Small Business Economics, 50(2), 397-413.

Masulis, R. W., & Nahata, R. (2009). Financial contracting with strategic investors: Evidence from corporate venture capital backed IPOs. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 18(4), 599-631.

Maula, M., Autio, E., & Murray, G. (2005). Corporate venture capitalists and independent venture capitalists: What do they know, who do they know and should entrepreneurs care?. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 7(1), 3-21.

McAdam, R., Reid, R., Harris, R., & Mitchell, N. (2008). Key determinants of organisational and technological innovation in UK SMEs: an empirical study. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 8(1), 114.

McCarthy, D. J., & Puffer, S. M. (2016). Institutional voids in an emerging economy: From problem to opportunity. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 23(2), 208-219.

McGuinness, G., Hogan, T., & Powell, R. (2018). European trade credit use and SME survival. Journal of Corporate Finance, 49, 81-103.

Megginson, W. L., & Weiss, K. A. (1991). Venture capitalist certification in initial public offerings. The Journal of Finance, 46(3), 879-903.

Meisler, L., & Cannon, C. (2018). US Venture Capital Swells and Spreads. Bloomberg. com, Bloomberg, 25.

Mersland, R., & Str0m, R. 0. (2009). Performance and governance in microfinance institutions. Journal of Banking & Finance, 33(4), 662-669.

Meuleman, M., & De Maeseneire, W. (2012). Do R&D subsidies affect SMEs' access to external financing?. Research Policy, 41(3), 580-591.

Mikhailitchenko, A., & Lundstrom, W. J. (2006). Inter-organizational relationship strategies and management styles in SMEs: The US-China-Russia study. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 27(6), 428-448.

Miloud, T., Aspelund, A., & Cabrol, M. (2012). Startup valuation by venture capitalists: an empirical study. Venture Capital, 14(2-3), 151-174.

Minola, T., Cassia, L., & Criaco, G. (2013). Financing patterns in new technology-based firms: An extension of the pecking order theory. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business 25, 19(2), 212-233.

Mohan, N. (2014). A review of the gender effect on pay, corporate performance and entry into top management. International Review of Economics & Finance, 34, 41-51.

Molz, R., Tabbaa, I., & Totskaya, N. (2009). Institutional realities and constraints on change: The case of SME in Russia. Journal of East-West Business, 15(2), 141156.

Motta, V. (2020). Lack of access to external finance and SME labor productivity: does project quality matter?. Small Business Economics, 54(1), 119-134.

Müller, E., & Zimmermann, V. (2009). The importance of equity finance for R&D activity. Small Business Economics, 33(3), 303-318.

Mundlak, Y. (1978). On the pooling of time series and cross section data. Econometrica: journal of the Econometric Society, 69-85.

Murphy, G. B., Trailer, J. W., & Hill, R. C. (1996). Measuring performance in entrepreneurship research. Journal of business research, 36(1), 15-23.

Murtinu, S. (2021). The government whispering to entrepreneurs: Public venture capital, policy shifts, and firm productivity. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 15(2), 279-308.

Musatova, M. (2020). Financing architecture and current trends in the development of Russian small and medium enterprises. Entrepreneurial Finance in Emerging Markets: Exploring Tools, Techniques, and Innovative Technologies, 161-175.

Myers, S.C. (1984), The Capital Structure Puzzle. The Journal of Finance, 39: 574-59.

Nahata, R. (2019). Success is good but failure is not so bad either: Serial entrepreneurs and venture capital contracting. Journal of Corporate Finance, 58, 624-649.

Newbert, S. L. (2007). Empirical research on the resource-based view of the firm: an assessment and suggestions for future research. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2), 121-146.

Nguyen, B., & Canh, N. P. (2020). Formal and informal financing decisions of small businesses. Small Business Economics, 1-23.

Nigam, N., Benetti, C., & Johan, S. A. (2020). Digital start-up access to venture capital financing: What signals quality?. Emerging Markets Review, 45, 100743.

Nunes, P. M., Serrasqueiro, Z., & Leitao, J. (2012). Is there a linear relationship between R&D intensity and growth? Empirical evidence of non-high-tech vs. high-tech SMEs. Research Policy, 41(1), 36-53.

Nyikos, G., Béres, A., Laposa, T., & Závecz, G. (2020). Do financial instruments or grants have a bigger effect on SMEs' access to finance? Evidence from Hungary. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies.

Omran, M. M., Bolbol, A., & Fatheldin, A. (2008). Corporate governance and firm performance in Arab equity markets: Does ownership concentration matter?. International Review of Law and Economics, 28(1), 32-45.

Ortín-Ángel, P., & Vendrell-Herrero, F. (2010). Why do university spin-offs attract more venture capitalists?. Venture Capital, 12(4), 285-306.

Pahnke, E. C., Katila, R., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2015). Who takes you to the dance? How partners' institutional logics influence innovation in young firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 60(4), 596-633..

Paik, Y., & Woo, H. (2017). The effects of corporate venture capital, founder incumbency, and their interaction on entrepreneurial firms' R&D investment strategies. Organization Science, 28(4), 670-689.

Palepu, K. G., & Khanna, T. (1998). Institutional voids and policy challenges in emerging markets. Brown J. World Aff., 5, 71.

Park, H. D., & Steensma, H. K. (2012). When does corporate venture capital add value for new ventures?. Strategic Management Journal, 33(1), 1-22.

Park, H. D., & Steensma, H. K. (2013). The selection and nurturing effects of corporate investors on new venture innovativeness. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 7(4), 311-330.

Passport of national project "Small and medium entrepreneurship and support of individual entrepreneurial initiative". (2018). Approved at a meeting of the Presidium of the Presidential Council for Strategic Development and National Projects on December 24, 2018.

http://static. government.ru/media/files/qH8voRLuhAVWSJhIS8XYbZB sAvcs 8A5t.pdf

Pellegrini, G., & Muccigrosso, T. (2017). Do subsidized new firms survive longer? Evidence from a counterfactual approach. Regional Studies, 51(10), 1483-1493.

Persson, H. (2004). The Survival and Growth of New Establishments in Sweden, 19871995. Small Business Economics, 23(5), 423-440.

Picken, J. C. (2017). From founder to CEO: An entrepreneur's roadmap. Business Horizons, 60(1), 7-14.

Pletnev, D., & Barkhatov, V. (2016). Business success of small and medium sized enterprises in Russia and social responsibility of managers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 221, 185-193.

Pletnev, D., & Nikolaeva, E. (2016). Success indicators and factors for small and medium-sized enterprises in Chelyabinsk Region of Russia. In Entrepreneurship, Business and Economics-Vol. 1 (pp. 115-127). Springer, Cham.

Plummer, L. A., Allison, T. H., & Connelly, B. L. (2016). Better together? Signaling interactions in new venture pursuit of initial external capital. Academy of Management Journal, 59(5), 1585-1604.

Pollock, T. G., Chen, G., Jackson, E. M., & Hambrick, D. C. (2010). How much prestige is enough? Assessing the value of multiple types of high-status affiliates for young firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(1), 6-23.

Portincaso M., de la Tour A., & Soussan P. (2019) The Dawn of the Deep Tech Ecosystem. The BCG Henderson Institute. URL: https://www.bcg.com/publications/2019/dawn-deep-tech-ecosystem2019

President of Russia. (2022). Заседание Совета по стратегическому развитию и национальным проектам. http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/70086

Puffer, S. M., McCarthy, D. J., & Boisot, M. (2010). Entrepreneurship in Russia and China: The impact of formal institutional voids. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(3), 441-467.

Puffer, S. M., McCarthy, D. J., & Jaeger, A. M. (2016). Institution building and institutional voids: can Poland's experience inform Russia and Brazil?. International Journal of Emerging Markets.

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.

Purkayastha, S., Veliyath, R., & George, R. (2019). The roles of family ownership and family management in the governance of agency conflicts. Journal of Business Research, 98, 50-64.

Quas, A., Martí, J., & Reverte, C. (2020). What money cannot buy: a new approach to measure venture capital ability to add non-financial resources. Small Business Economics, 1-22.

Radas, S., Anic, I. D., Tafro, A., & Wagner, V. (2015). The effects of public support schemes on small and medium enterprises. Technovation, 38, 15-30.

Radosevic, S., & Myrzakhmet, M. (2009). Between vision and reality: Promoting innovation through technoparks in an emerging economy. Technovation, 29(10), 645-656.

Riding, A. L., & Haines Jr, G. (2001). Loan guarantees: Costs of default and benefits to small firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(6), 595-612.

Revest, V., & Sapio, A. (2012). Financing technology-based small firms in Europe: what do we know?. Small Business Economics, 39(1), 179-205.

Robb, A. M., & Coleman, S. (2010). Financing strategies of new technology-based firms: A comparison of women-and men-owned firms. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 5(1), 30-50.

Robb, A. M., & Robinson, D. T. (2014). The capital structure decisions of new firms. The Review of Financial Studies, 27(1), 153-179.

Robinson D. (2016). China puts faith in start-up boom. Financial Times. URL: https://www.ft.com/content/11aed256-1209-11e6-91da-096d89bd2173

Robinson, K. C. (1999). An examination of the influence of industry structure on eight alternative measures of new venture performance for high potential independent new ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 14(2), 165-187.

Rodionov I. I., Semenov A., & Oskin А. (2020). The Definition of Money Grand Received as a Key Determinant of Venture Investment Size in IT Russian Based Startups. Journal of Corporate Finance Research, 14(3), 19-27.

Romero-Jordan, D., Delgado-Rodríguez, M. J., Alvarez-Ayuso, I., & de Lucas-Santos, S. (2014). Assessment of the public tools used to promote R&D investment in Spanish SMEs. Small Business Economics, 43(4), 959-976.

Roper, S., & Hewitt-Dundas, N. (2001). Grant assistance and small firm development in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 48(1), 99-117.

Rossi, M., Festa, G., Solima, L., & Popa, S. (2017). Financing knowledge-intensive enterprises: evidence from CVCs in the US. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(2), 338-353.

Rothaermel, F. T., & Thursby, M. (2005). University-incubator firm knowledge flows: assessing their impact on incubator firm performance. Research Policy, 34(3), 305-320

Rottig, D. (2016). Institutions and emerging markets: effects and implications for multinational corporations. International Journal of Emerging Markets.

Rubin, T. H., Aas, T. H., & Stead, A. (2015). Knowledge flow in technological business incubators: evidence from Australia and Israel. Technovation, 41, 1124.

Salienko, N., Baev, G., & Klyueva, V. (2019, October). Managerial Problems of Russian Technology Startups. In International Conference on Reliability and Statistics in Transportation and Communication (pp. 654-661). Springer, Cham.

Samila, S., & Sorenson, O. (2011). Venture capital, entrepreneurship, and economic growth. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 93(1), 338-349.

Sanders, W. G., & Boivie, S. (2004). Sorting things out: Valuation of new firms in uncertain markets. Strategic Management Journal, 25(2), 167-186.

Schmid, T. (2013). Control considerations, creditor monitoring, and the capital structure of family firms. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(2), 257-272.

Sch0tt, T., & Jensen, K. W. (2016). Firms' innovation benefiting from networking and institutional support: A global analysis of national and firm effects. Research Policy, 45(6), 1233-1246.

Serrasqueiro, Z., Nunes, P. M., & da Rocha Armada, M. (2016). Capital structure decisions: old issues, new insights from high-tech small-and medium-sized enterprises. The European Journal of Finance, 22(1), 59-79.

Serrasqueiro, Z. S., & Nunes, P. M. (2008). Performance and size: empirical evidence from Portuguese SMEs. Small Business Economics, 31(2), 195-217.

Shinkle, G. A., & Suchard, J. A. (2019). Innovation in newly public firms: The influence of government grants, venture capital, and private equity. Australian Journal of Management, 44(2), 248-281.

Shirokova, G., Osiyevskyy, O., Laskovaia, A., & MahdaviMazdeh, H. (2020). Navigating the emerging market context: Performance implications of effectuation and causation for small and medium enterprises during adverse economic conditions in Russia. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 14(3), 470500.

Siepel, J., Cowling, M., & Coad, A. (2017). Non-founder human capital and the longrun growth and survival of high-tech ventures. Technovation, 59, 34-43.

Simachev, Y., Kuzyk, M., & Feygina, V. (2015). Public support for innovation in Russian firms: looking for improvements in corporate performance quality. International Advances in Economic Research, 21(1), 13-31.

Sjögren, H., & Zackrisson, M. (2005). The search for competent capital: financing of high technology small firms in Sweden and USA. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 7(1), 75-97.

Small Business Survey 2019. (2020). Small Business Survey 2019: panel report. URL: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/att achment_data/ file/895768/LSB S_2019_panel_rev.pdf

Smith, D., Feldman, M., & Anderson, G. (2018). The longer term effects of federal subsidies on firm survival: evidence from the advanced technology program. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(3), 593-614.

Smith, R. L., & Smith, J. K. (2019). Entrepreneurial finance: strategy, valuation, and deal structure. Stanford University Press.

Söderblom, A., Samuelsson, M., Wiklund, J., & Sandberg, R. (2015). Inside the black box of outcome additionality: Effects of early-stage government subsidies on resource accumulation and new venture performance. Research Policy, 44(8), 1501-1512.

Soto-Simeone, A., Siren, C., & Antretter, T. (2020). New venture survival: A review and extension. International Journal of Management Reviews, 22(4), 378-407.

Spiegel, O., Abbassi, P., Zylka, M. P., Schlagwein, D., Fischbach, K., & Schoder, D. (2016). Business model development, founders' social capital and the success of early stage internet start-ups: a mixed-method study. Information Systems Journal, 26(5), 421-449.

Srhoj, S., Lapinski, M., & Walde, J. (2020). Impact evaluation of business development grants on SME performance. Small Business Economics, 1-17.

Srhoj, S., Skrinjaric, B., & Radas, S. (2021). Bidding against the odds? The impact evaluation of grants for young micro and small firms during the recession. Small Business Economics, 56, 83-103.

Startup Barometer. (2020) Исследование рынка технологического предпринимательства в России 2020. URL: https://vc-barometer.ru/startup

Startup Muster. (2018). Startup Muster Annual Report. URL: https://startupmuster.com/reports

State of European Tech. (2018). URL:

https://2018.stateofeuropeantech.com/chapter/state-european-tech-2018/article/welcome-state-european-tech-2018/

Steenkamp, N., & Kashyap, V. (2010). Importance and contribution of intangible assets: SME managers' perceptions. Journal of intellectual capital, 11(3), 368390.

Stepanova, A., & Tereshchenko, A. (2016). The influence of independent directors, insider ownership and scientific connections on risky R&D investments: Evidence from emerging markets. Корпоративные финансы, 10(3), 5-23.

Stephan, U., Uhlaner, L. M., & Stride, C. (2015). Institutions and social entrepreneurship: The role of institutional voids, institutional support, and institutional configurations. Journal of International Business Studies, 46(3), 308-331.

Storey, D. J., & Tether, B. S. (1998). Public policy measures to support new technology-based firms in the European Union. Research Policy, 26(9), 10371057.

Strotmann, H. (2007). Entrepreneurial survival. Small business economics, 28, 87-104.

Stucki, T. (2016). How the founders' general and specific human capital drives export activities of start-ups. Research Policy, 45(5), 1014-1030.

Sultan, T. (2019, April 1). Unlocking the potential of SMEs in emerging markets. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/857e4a80-5492-11e9-91f9-b6515a54c5b1

Suzuki, K. I., Kim, S. H., & Bae, Z. T. (2002). Entrepreneurship in Japan and Silicon Valley: a comparative study. Technovation, 22(10), 595-606.

Talaia, M., Pisoni, A., & Onetti, A. (2016). Factors influencing the fund raising process for innovative new ventures: an empirical study. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development.

Terjesen, S., Couto, E., & Francisco, P. (2016). Does the presence of independent and female directors impact firm performance? A multi-country study of board diversity. Journal of Management and Governance, 20(3), 447-483.

The Russian Government. (2019). Национальные проекты: ключевые цели и ожидаемые результаты. http://government.ru/news/35675/

Thurik, R., & Wennekers, S. (2004). Entrepreneurship, small business and economic growth. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 11(1), 140-149.

Tipu, S. A. A., & Arain, F. M. (2011). Managing success factors in entrepreneurial ventures: a behavioral approach. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research.

Tonoyan, V., Strohmeyer, R., Habib, M., & Perlitz, M. (2010). Corruption and entrepreneurship: How formal and informal institutions shape small firm behavior in transition and mature market economies. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(5), 803-832.

Tracey, P., & Phillips, N. (2011). Entrepreneurship in emerging markets. Management International Review, 51(1), 23-39.

Tripathi, N., Oivo, M., Liukkunen, K., & Markkula, J. (2019). Startup ecosystem effect on minimum viable product development in software startups. Information and Software Technology, 114, 77-91.

Tzabbar, D., & Margolis, J. (2017). Beyond the startup stage: The founding team's human capital, new venture's stage of life, founder-CEO duality, and breakthrough innovation. Organization Science, 28(5), 857-872.

Ullah, B. (2019). Firm innovation in transition economies: The role of formal versus informal finance. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 50, 58-75.

UNCTAD (2019). World investment report 2019//

https://unctad.org/en/pages/PublicationWebflyer.aspx?publicationid=2460

Van Stel, A., Carree, M., & Thurik, R. (2005). The effect of entrepreneurial activity on national economic growth. Small Business Economics, 24(3), 311-321.

Van Weele, M., van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Nauta, F. (2017). You can't always get what you want: How entrepreneur's perceived resource needs affect the incubator's assertiveness. Technovation, 59, 18-33.

Verspagen, B. (2005). Innovation and economic growth. In The Oxford Handbook of Innovation.

Vinturella, J. B., & Erickson, S. M. (2003). Raising entrepreneurial capital. Elsevier.

Wallsten, S. J. (2000). The effects of government-industry R&D programs on private R&D: the case of the Small Business Innovation Research program. The RAND Journal of Economics, 82-100.

Wang, K., and Shailer, G. (2015). Ownership concentration and firm performance in emerging markets: a meta-analysis. Journal of Economic Surveys, 29(2), 199229.

Wang, Y., Li, J., & Furman, J. L. (2017). Firm performance and state innovation funding: Evidence from China's Innofund program. Research Policy, 46(6), 1142-1161.

Wasserman, N. (2017). The throne vs. the kingdom: Founder control and value creation in startups. Strategic Management Journal, 38(2), 255-277.

Weiblen, T., & Chesbrough, H. W. (2015). Engaging with startups to enhance corporate innovation. California Management Review, 57(2), 66-90.

Wennberg, K., & Lindqvist, G. (2010). The effect of clusters on the survival and performance of new firms. Small Business Economics, 34, 221-241.

Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180.

West, G. P., & Noel, T. W. (2009). The impact of knowledge resources on new venture performance. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(1), 1-22.

Wilcox, J. A., & Yasuda, Y. (2008, March). Do government loan guarantees lower, or raise, banks' non-guaranteed lending? Evidence from Japanese banks. In World Bank Workshop Partial Credit Guarantees (pp. 1-53).

Wise, S., & Valliere, D. (2014). The impact on management experience on the performance of start-ups within accelerators. The Journal of Private Equity, 18(1), 9-19.

Wolff, J., & Pett, T. (2006). Small-firm performance: Modeling the role of product and process improvements. Journal of Small Business Management, 44(2), 268-284.

Wood, D., Pratt, C., & Hoff. B. (2006). Investing in the Backbone of Emerging Markets. Working Paper from Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship's Institute for Responsible Investment.

https://iri.hks.harvard.edu/files/iri/files/iri_-_sustainable_sme_investment_-_investing_in_the_backbone_of_emerging_markets.pdf

Wooldridge, J. M. (2009). Econometrics: Panel Data Methods. URL: https://www.cemmap.ac.uk/wp-

content/legacy/uploads/cemmap/programmes/Background%20reading%20May %202016.pdf

Wu, L., & Xu, L. (2020). The role of venture capital in SME loans in China. Research in International Business and Finance, 51, 101081.

Xia, F., & Walker, G. (2014). How much does owner type matter for firm performance? Manufacturing firms in China 1998-2007. Strategic Management Journal, 36(4), 576-585.

Xiang, D., & Worthington, A. C. (2017). The impact of government financial assistance on the performance and financing of Australian SMEs. Accounting Research Journal.

Xiao, L., & North, D. (2012). Institutional transition and the financing of high-tech SMEs in China: A longitudinal perspective. Venture Capital, 14(4), 269-287.

Yakovlev, E., & Zhuravskaya, E. (2013). The unequal enforcement of liberalization: evidence from Russia's reform of business regulation. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11(4), 808-838.

Yang, C., Bossink, B., & Peverelli, P. (2017). High-tech start-up firm survival originating from a combined use of internal resources. Small Business Economics, 49(4), 799-824.

Yazdanfar, D., & Abbasian, S. (2013). The Determinants of Informal Capital in the Financing of Small Firms at Start-Up:: An Ethnic Comparison of Small Firms in Sweden. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 5(3), 62-72.

Yong-hai, Y. (2010). Impact of CEO characteristics on enterprise R&D expenditure: Empirical evidence coming from small and medium listed companies in China. 3rd international conference on information management, innovation management and industrial engineering (Vol. 3, p. 587-592).

Yongqi H. (2017). Startups to gain government funds. ChinaDaily.com. URL: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2017-07/28/content_30275307.htm

Yukhanaev, A., Fallon, G., Baranchenko, Y., & Anisimova, A. (2015). An investigation into the formal institutional constraints that restrict entrepreneurship and SME growth in Russia. Journal of East-West Business, 21(4), 313-341.

Yusupova, A., & Khalimova, S. (2017). Characteristics, features of development, regional and sectoral determinants of high-tech business in Russia. Voprosy ekonomiki, (12), 142-154.

Zahra, S. A., Neubaum, D. O., & Naldi, L. (2007). The effects of ownership and governance on SMEs' international knowledge-based resources. Small Business Economics, 29(3), 309-327.

Serrasqueiro, Z., Nunes, P. M., & da Rocha Armada, M. (2016). Capital structure decisions: old issues, new insights from high-tech small-and medium-sized enterprises. The European Journal of Finance, 22(1), 59-79.

Zhang, D., Zheng, W., & Ning, L. (2018). Does innovation facilitate firm survival? Evidence from Chinese high-tech firms. Economic Modelling, 75, 458-468.

Zhao, L., & Aram, J. D. (1995). Networking and growth of young technology-intensive ventures in China. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(5), 349-370.

Zhao, X. Y., Frese, M., & Giardini, A. (2010). Business owners' network size and business growth in China: The role of comprehensive social competency. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 22(7-8), 675-705.

Абрамов, А. Е., Аксёнов, И. В., Радыгин, А. Д., & Чернова, М. И. (2018). ^временные подходы к измерению государственного сектора: методология и эмпирика. Экономическая политика, 13(1), 36-69.

Баранов, А. Ю., & Долгопятова, Т. Г. (2012). Инновационное поведение фирм и деловой климат в странах с переходной экономикой. Российский журнал менеджмента, 10(4).

Баринова В. А., Земцов С. П., Зинов В. Г., Кидяева В. М., Красносельских А. Н., Куракова Н. Г., Семенова Р. И., Федотов И. В., Халимова С. Р., Хафизов Р. Р., Царева Ю. В. (2020) Национальный доклад «Высокотехнологичный бизнес в регионах России». М.: РАНХиГС, АИРР.

Баринова, В. А., Еремкин, В. А., & Земцов, С. П. (2015). Факторы развития инновационных компаний на ранних стадиях. Государственное управление. Электронный вестник, (49).

Быкова, А. А., & Молодчик, М. А. (2011). Влияние интеллектуального капитала на результаты деятельности компании. Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Менеджмент, (1), 27-55.

Дежина, И. Г., Медовников, Д. С., & Розмирович, С. Д. (2019). О государственной поддержке малых инновационных компаний Фондом содействия инновациям. Социологические исследования, (11), 110-119.

Долгопятова, Т. Г. (1999). Институциональное развитие малого и среднего предпринимательства в российской экономике. Экономическая наука современной России, (3).

Ефремов Д., Лурье В., & Чумаков А. (2020). Конверт в законе: новая "как бы" жизнь конвертируемого займа. URL: https://vc.ru/legal/161770-konvert-v-zakone-novaya-kak-by-zhizn-konvertiruemogo-zayma

Земцов, С., Чепуренко, А., & Михайлов, А. (2021). Вызовы пандемии для технологических стартапов в регионах России. Форсайт, 15(4), 61-77.

Земцов, С. П., Чепуренко, А. Ю., Баринова, В. А., & Красносельских, А. Н. (2020). Новая предпринимательская политика для России после кризиса 2020 года. Вопросы экономики, 10, 44-67.

Земцов, С. П., & Чернов, А. В. (2019). Какие высокотехнологичные компании в России растут быстрее и почему. Журнал Новой экономической ассоциации, 41(1), 68-99.

Ивашковская, И. В. (2011). Развитие стейкхолдерского подхода в методологии финансового анализа: гармоничная компания. Корпоративные финансы, 5(3).

Медовников, Д. С., Оганесян, Т. К., & Розмирович, С. Д. (2016). Кандидаты в чемпионы: средние быстрорастущие компании и программы их поддержки. Вопросы экономики, (9), 50-66.

МК Байкал (2014). Предприятие "Усолье-Сибирский силикон" потерпело

фиаско. URL: https://sia.ru/?section=484&action=show_news&id=273955

Образцова, О. И., & Чепуренко, А. Ю. (2020). Предпринимательская активность в России и ее межрегиональные различия. Журнал Новой экономической ассоциации, 14(2), 199.

Подцероб М. (2018). Почему руководители так стремятся в бизнес-ангелы. Ведомости. URL:

https://www.vedomosti.ru/management/articles/2018/03/15/753564-rukovoditeli-biznes-angeli

РАВИ. (2018). Обзор рынка прямых и венчурных инвестиций за 2017 год. URL: http://www.rvca.ru/rus/resource/library/rvca-yearbook/

РАВИ. (2021). Обзор рынка прямых и венчурных инвестиций за 2021 год. URL: http://www.rvca.ru/upload/files/lib/RVCA-yearbook-2020-Russian-PE-and-VC-market-review-ru.pdf/

РВК (2018). Венчурный барометр 2018. Исследование российского рынка венчурных инвестиций. URL: https://www.rvc.ru/upload/doc/vc-barometer_2018.pdf

Родионов, И. И., & Гусамов, С. А. (2015). Эффективность фондов прямых инвестиций на развивающихся рынках. Корпоративные финансы, 9(4).

Салтанова С. (2021) Отстать нельзя догонять. Россия на рынках передового производства. URL: https://iq.hse.ru/news/463561256.html

Салтыкова, М. (2020). «Государство раз за разом доказывает, что оно ничего не понимает». Как венчурный рынок отреагировал на арест главы РВК. Inc. URL: https://incrussia.ru/understand/arest-glavy-rvk/

Симачев, Ю. В., & Кузык, М. Г. (2020). Государственная поддержка предприятий: бенефициары и эффекты. Вопросы экономики, (3), 63-83.

Соколов А. (2021). «Институты развития провалили инновации». Ведомости. URL: https://www.vedomosti.ru/economics/articles/2021/03/01/859742-instituti-razvitiya

Стартап Барометр 2018. (2018). Исследование рынка технологического

предпринимательства в России. URL: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uI1y-Fdsa-cAhjVwsstDu2Y6LZulgYKt/view

Сухаревская А. (2018). Венчурные инвестиции в России должны вырасти в десять раз к 2030 году. Ведомости. URL: https://www.vedomosti.ru/technology/articles/2018/12/18/789646-venchurnie-investitsii-rossii-virasti-desyat

Толстоухова Н. (2019). Ноу-хау и патенты нужно оценивать и ставить на баланс предприятия. Российская газета. URL: https://rg.ru/2019/04/17/nou-hau-i-patenty-nuzhno-ocenivat-i-stavit-na-balans-predpriiatiia.html

ФРИИ (2018). Как выглядит российский IT-стартап - исследование «Стартап Барометр 2018». URL: https://www.iidf.ru/media/articles/trends/kak-vyglyadit-rossiyskiy-it-startap-issledovanie-startap-barometr-2018/

Цыбина, А. (2015). Красивая история нанотехнологий разбилась о рынок. Коммерсант. URL: https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2876822

Чепуренко, А. Ю., Галицкий, Е. Б., Духон, А. Б., & Ослон, А. А. (2021). Государственная политика в отношении малого предпринимательства в период пандемии в оценках бенефициаров. Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления, (4), 66-89.