Serial Crowdfunding, Social Capital, and Project Success
Abstract
In this paper, we focus attention on serial crowdfunders, that is, entrepreneurs who repeatedly turn to crowdfunding to finance their projects. We argue that serial crowdfunders take advantage of the social contacts with those that backed their previous campaigns. This internal social capital developed within the platform, which is not available to “normal” serial entrepreneurs, makes serial crowdfunders’ campaigns more successful than those launched by novice crowdfunders. However, this type of social capital is a substitute for the internal social capital built by backing other campaigns, and has a limited lifespan. Econometric results on a sample of 31,389 Kickstarter campaigns confirm our contentions. Implications for research, practice, and policy are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
Adler P.S. & Kwon S.W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40.
Agrawal A., Catalini C., & Goldfarb A. (2011). The geography of crowdfunding. NBER Working Paper No. W16820. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Available at http://Papers.Ssrn.Com/Sol3/Papers.Cfm?Abstract_Id=1770375, accessed 19 November 2015.
Ai C. & Norton E.C. (2003). Interaction terms in logit and probit models. Economics Letters, 80(1), 123–129.
Albrecht J.W., Edin P.A., Sundström M., & Vroman S.B. (1999). Career interruptions and subsequent earnings: A reexamination using Swedish data. Journal of Human Resources, 34(2), 294–311.
Antoci A., Sabatini F., & Sodini M. (2012). See you on Facebook! A framework for analyzing the role of computer–mediated interaction in the evolution of social capital. The Journal of Socio–Economics, 41(5), 541–547.
Audia P.G., Locke E.A., & Smith K.G. (2000). The paradox of success: An archival and a laboratory study of strategic persistence following radical environmental change. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 837–853.
Baert C., Meuleman M., DeBruyne M., & Wright M. (in press). Resource orchestration and portfolio entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal.
Baker W.E., Faulkner R.R., & Fisher G.A. (1998). Hazards of the market: The continuity and dissolution of interorganizational market relationships. American Sociological Review, 63(2), 147–177.
Barney J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
Belleflamme P., Lambert T., & Schwienbacher A. (2014). Crowdfunding: Tapping the right crowd. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(5), 585–609.
Bengtsson O. (2013). Relational venture capital financing of serial founders. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 22(3), 308–334.
Bessen J. (2008). The value of US patents by owner and patent characteristics. Research Policy, 37(5), 932–945.
Blanchard A.L. & Markus M.L. (2004). The experienced sense of a virtual community: Characteristics and processes. ACM Sigmis Database, 35(1), 64–79.
Brettel M. (2003). Business angels in Germany: A research note. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 5(3), 251–268.
Broschak J.P. (2004). Managers’ mobility and market interface: The effect of managers’ career mobility on the dissolution of market ties. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(4), 608–640.
Brush C.G., Carter N.M., Greene P.G., Hart M.M., & Gatewood E. (2002). The role of social capital and gender in linking financial suppliers and entrepreneurial firms: A framework for future research. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 4(4), 305–323.
Burt R.S. (2002). Bridge decay. Social Networks, 24(4), 333–363.
Butticè V. & Colombo M.G. (in press). Industry specificity and the effect of internal social capital in reward–based crowdfunding. In Alvarez S.G, Carayannis E.G., Dagnino G.B., Faraci R. (Eds.), Entrepreneurial ecosystems and the diffusion of startups. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Butticè V., Franzoni C., Rossi–Lamastra C., & Rovelli P. (in press). The road to crowdfunding success: A review of extant literature. In Afuah A., Tucci C., & Viscusi G. (Eds.), Crowdsourcing contexts, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Chua C.E.H., Lim W.K., Soh C., & Sia S.K. (2012). Enacting clan control in complex IT projects: A social capital perspective. MIS Quarterly—Management Information Systems, 36(2), 577–600.
Coleman J.S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120.
Colombo M.G., Franzoni C., & Rossi–Lamastra C. (2015). Internal social capital and the attraction of early contributions in crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(1), 75–100.
Cope J. (2005). Toward a dynamic learning perspective of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 373–397.
Dahlander L. & McFarland D.A. (2013). Ties that last tie formation and persistence in research collaborations over time. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(1), 69–110.
Donath J. & Boyd D. (2004). Public displays of connection. BT Technology Journal, 22(4), 71–82.
Eggers J.P. & Song L. (2014). Dealing with failure: Serial entrepreneurs and the costs of changing industries between ventures. Academy of Management Journal, 58(6), 1785–1803.
Ellison N.B., Steinfield C., & Lampe C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer–Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168.
Faraj S. & Johnson S.L. (2011). Network exchange patterns in online communities. Organization Science, 22(6), 1464–1480.
Gallager D. & Salfen J. (2015). By the numbers: When creators return to Kickstarter. Available at https://www.kickstarter.com/blog/by-the-numbers-when-creators-return-to-kickstarter.
Gedajlovic E., Honig B., Moore C., Payne T., & Wright M. (2013). Social capital and entrepreneurship: A schema and research agenda. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(3), 455–478.
Gerber E.M., Hui J.S., & Kuo P.Y. (2012). Crowdfunding: Why people are motivated to post and fund projects on crowdfunding platforms. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Design, Influence, and Social Technologies: Techniques, Impacts and Ethics.
Gompers P., Kovner A., Lerner J., & Scharfstein D. (2010). Performance persistence in entrepreneurship. Journal of Financial Economics, 96(1), 18–32.
Granovetter M.S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.
Greer B.G. (2000). Psychological and support functions of an e–mail mailing list for persons with cerebral palsy. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 3(2), 221–235.
Gulati R. & Gargiulo M. (1999). Where do interorganizational networks come from? American Journal of Sociology, 104(5), 1439–1493.
Hsu D.H. (2007). Experienced entrepreneurial founders, organizational capital, and venture capital funding. Research Policy, 36(5), 722–741.
Hutto C.J. & Gilbert E. (2014). Vader: A parsimonious rule–based model for sentiment analysis of social media text. ICWSM proceedings. Palo Alto, CA: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). Available at http://comp.social.gatech.edu/papers/icwsm14.vader.hutto.pdf, accessed 11 January 2017.
Ingram P. & Torfason M.T. (2010). Organizing the in–between: The population dynamics of network–weaving organizations in the global interstate network. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(4), 577–605.
Jack S.L. (2005). The role, use and activation of strong and weak network ties: A qualitative analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 42(6), 1233–1259.
Jones Q., Ravid G., & Rafaeli S. (2004). Information overload and the message dynamics of online interaction spaces: A theoretical model and empirical exploration. Information Systems Research, 15(2), 194–210.
King G., Tomz M., & Wittenberg J. (2000). Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. American Journal of Political Science, 44(2), 347–361.
King G. & Zeng L. (2001). Logistic regression in rare events data. Political Analysis, 9(2), 137–163.
Kisfalvi V. (2000). The threat of failure, the perils of success and CEO character: Sources of strategic persistence. Organization Studies, 21(3), 611–639.
Kuppuswamy V. & Bayus B.L. (2015). A review of crowdfunding research and findings. Available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2685739, accessed 1 December 2015.
Kwak H., Moon S.B., & Lee W. (2012). More of a receiver than a giver: Why do people unfollow in Twitter? ICWSM proceedings. Available at https://an.kaist.ac.kr/~haewoon/papers/2012-icwsm-poster.pdf, accessed 22 June 2016.
Lafontaine F. & Shaw K. (2014). Serial entrepreneurship: Learning by doing? NBER Working Paper No. w20312. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w20312, accessed 23 November 2015.
MacMillan I.C. (1986). To really learn about entrepreneurship, let's study habitual entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 1(1), 241–243.
Maurer I. & Ebers M. (2006). Dynamics of social capital and their performance implications: Lessons from biotechnology start–ups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(2), 262–292.
Mincer J. & Ofek H. (1982). Interrupted work careers: Depreciation and restoration of human capital. Journal of Human Resources, 17(1), 3–24.
Mockus A., Fielding R.T., & Herbsleb J.D. (2002). Two case studies of open source software development: Apache and Mozilla. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), 11(3), 309–346.
Mollick E. (2013). The dynamics of crowdfunding: Determinants of success and failure. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 1–16.
Mollick E. & Nanda R. (2015). Wisdom or madness. Comparing crowds with expert evaluation in funding the arts. Management Science.
Moran P. (2005). Structural vs. relational embeddedness: Social capital and managerial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(12), 1129–1151.
Nahapiet J. & Ghoshal S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.
Parker S.C. (2013). Do serial entrepreneurs run successively better–performing businesses? Journal of Business Venturing, 28(5), 652–666.
Pitschner S. & Pitschner–Finn S. (2014). Non–profit differentials in crowd–based financing: Evidence from 50,000 campaigns. Economics Letters, 123(3), 391–394.
Prashantham S. & Dhanaraj C. (2010). The dynamic influence of social capital on the international growth of new ventures. Journal of Management Studies, 47(6), 967–994.
Preece J. (1999). Empathic communities: Balancing emotional and factual communication. Interacting with Computers, 12(1), 63–77.
Richter C. (2015). Crowdcreation as a dimension of crowdsourcing: Conditions for entrepreneurs. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, 7(4), 324–340.
Seabright M.A., Levinthal D.A., & Fichman M. (1992). Role of individual attachments in the dissolution of interorganizational relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 35(1), 122–160.
Shaw E. & Carter S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship: Theoretical antecedents and empirical analysis of entrepreneurial processes and outcomes. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 14(3), 418–434.
Sobel M.E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13(1982), 290–312.
Steier L. & Greenwood R. (2000). Entrepreneurship and the evolution of angel financial networks. Organization Studies, 21(1), 163–192.
Trester J.J. (1998). Venture capital contracting under asymmetric information. Journal of Banking & Finance, 22(6), 675–699.
Ucbasaran D., Westhead P., & Wright M. (2009). The extent and nature of opportunity identification by experienced entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(2), 99–115.
Ucbasaran D., Wright M., & Westhead P. (2003). A longitudinal study of habitual entrepreneurs: Starters and acquirers. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 15(3), 207–228.
Uzzi B. (1999). Embeddedness in the making of financial capital: How social relations and networks benefit firms seeking financing. American Sociological Review, 64(4), 481–505.
Vismara S. (2016). Equity retention and social network theory in equity crowdfunding. Small Business Economics, 46(4), 579–590.
von Krogh G., Spaeth S., & Lakhani K.R. (2003). Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: A case study. Research Policy, 32(7), 1217–1241.
Wainer H. (1976). Estimating coefficients in linear models: It don't make no never mind. Psychological Bulletin, 83(2), 213–217.
Wash R. (2013). The value of completing crowdfunding projects. ICWSM proceedings. Available at http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.374.6606&rep=rep1&type=pdf, accessed 3 January 2016.
Wasko M.M. & Faraj S. (2000). “It is what one does”: Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2), 155–173.
Wasko M.M. & Faraj S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 35–57.
Wellman B. & Gulia M. (1999). Net surfers don't ride alone: Virtual communities as communities. In Wellman B. (Ed.), Networks in the global village (pp. 331–366). Boulder, CO: Westwiew.
Westhead P., Ucbasaran D., & Wright M. (2003). Differences between private firms owned by novice, serial and portfolio entrepreneurs: Implications for policy makers and practitioners. Regional Studies, 37(2), 187–200.
Westhead P., Ucbasaran D., & Wright M. (2005). Decisions, actions, and performance: Do novice, serial, and portfolio entrepreneurs differ? Journal of Small Business Management, 43(4), 393–417.
Wiklund J. & Shepherd D.A. (2008). Portfolio entrepreneurship: Habitual and novice founders, new entry, and mode of organizing. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(4), 701–725.
Wright M., Robbie K., & Ennew C. (1997). Venture capitalists and serial entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(3), 227–249.
Zelner B.A. (2009). Using simulation to interpret results from logit, probit, and other nonlinear models. Strategic Management Journal, 30(12), 1335–1348.
Zhang J. (2011). The advantage of experienced start–up founders in venture capital acquisition: Evidence from serial entrepreneurs. Small Business Economics, 36(2), 187–208.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: March 1, 2017
Issue published: March 2017
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Journals metrics
This article was published in Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice.
View All Journal MetricsArticle usage*
Total views and downloads: 6513
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 229 view articles Opens in new tab
Crossref: 294
- Predicting reward-based crowdfunding success with multimodal data: A theory-guided framework
- The effect of the degree of early-stage failure on entrepreneurial pivoting and success: Evidence from crowdfunding
- Selection of a crowdfunding platform by entrepreneurs using a multi-criteria approach: an application to green energy investment projects
- Preserving Cultural Heritage in Post-Disaster Urban Renewal
- Kickstarter-driven crowdfunding: advancing sustainable innovation and mindful consumption in environmental entrepreneurship
- Sustainable Financing—A Contemporary Guide for Green Finance, Crowdfunding and Digital Currencies
- Factors influencing the success and failure of crowdfunding campaigns: a systematic review and bibliometric analysis
- Intelligent Computing and Optimization
- How Much Is Too Much? The Impact of Update Frequency on Crowdfunding Success
- The power of machine learning methods to predict crowdfunding success: Accounting for complex relationships efficiently
- View More
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
I am signed in as:
View my profileSign out
I can access personal subscriptions, purchases, paired institutional access and free tools such as favourite journals, email alerts and saved searches.
loading institutional access options
USASBE members can access this journal content using society membership credentials.
USASBE members can access this journal content using society membership credentials.
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
