Sofia Avdeitchikova

What do we mean when we talk about business angels? Some reflections on definitions and sampling

Early research on business angels recognized a couple of methodological obstacles that significantly have hindered knowledge accumulation about the phenomenon. In this article we will reflect upon these methodological obstacles with focus on definitional issues and sampling techniques. The purpose is to provide a framework that systemizes and inter-relates the variety of definitions within the field as well as to critically review the sampling techniques currently applied in the research field. We maintain that researchers need to make conscious definitional choices when conducting studies of informal investors and business angels, and argue that changing the unit of analysis from investor level to deal level can help to avoid definitional inconsistencies. Further, we suggest two alternative ways of creating high quality samples of business angels and informal investors – the random sample approach and the multi-sample approach. Both procedures reduce the sample bias and allow for longitudinal analysis which is argued to be essential in future research.

False expectations: Reconsidering the role of informal venture capital in closing the regional equity gap1

The role of informal venture capital in entrepreneurial process and economic development is increasingly recognized by scholars and policy-makers around the world. Much of the attention that this form of financing has received during the last couple of decades is due to its potential to bridge the regional equity gap. This study is concerned with regional distribution of informal venture capital and factors explaining the allocation of informal investments, and it is based on a large random sample of informal venture capital investors in Sweden. The key findings are that the informal venture capital market in Sweden shows a considerable concentration in metropolitan areas and university cities. Further, investments conducted in these places are allocated in proportion to the new business formation rate and concentration of technology-based firms, while the only factor that provides some explanation for the location of informal investments in the peripheral regions is the proportion of the regional population that is considering starting their own business. Finally, there is a small but significant reallocation of informal venture capital from peripheral regions to metropolitan areas and university cities, which shows that the informal venture capital market in Sweden contributes rather to sustaining the regional equity gap than to bridging it.