The Role of Structural and Planning Autonomy in the Performance of Internal Corporate Ventures

Abstract

Historically, autonomy has been treated as a broad one‐dimensional construct. This paper proposes that there are two major types of autonomy for internal corporate ventures (ICVs)—planning autonomy and structural autonomy—and examines their respective impact on performance. Little prior knowledge exists regarding the autonomy–performance relationship for ICVs despite the billions of dollars of corporate investment in ICVs. In this study, I collect primary data on 38 ICVs at different stages of development from both venture‐level and corporate‐level managers from over a dozen companies in the U.S. Midwest. I find that a negative relationship exists for planning autonomy regardless of venture stage. However, for venture structural autonomy, a more complex relationship was discovered, which ranged from positive to negative to curvilinear based on the venture's stage of development.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Kevin L. Johnson

Kevin L. Johnson is assistant professor of Management in the Opus College of Business at the University of St. Thomas.