벤처기업의 성장요인에 관한 연구: 벤처확인유형을 중심으로 (A Study on the Factors Affecting the Growth of Venture Firms)
KDI Policy Study 2011-14, 1-64
78 Pages Posted: 9 Jun 2016
Date Written: December 31, 2011
Korean Abstract: 기업 창업의 촉진과 벤처기업 육성은 경제의 역동성을 유지하는 데 중요한 정책과제의 하나이다. 최근 들어 벤처인증기업의 수가 크게 증가하면서 ‘제2의 벤처 붐’에 대한 기대 섞인 전망이 나오고 있다. 그러나 우리나라의 ‘벤처기업’은 법적 개념으로서, 전통적인 의미의 벤처투자기업뿐만 아니라 연구개발기업 및 기술평가 보증대출 기업의 유형도 포괄하고 있다는 특징을 지닌다. 이에 본고는 1998~2010년 동안의 벤처확인기업 명단을 KED 기업 재무데이터와 연계한 미시자료를 바탕으로, 최근 벤처인증기업 수의 증가가 어떠한 함의를 지니며 우리나라 벤처기업들이 지난 10여 년간 어떻게 성장해 왔는지를 실증적으로 분석하였다. 본 연구는 특히 상이한 벤처확인 유형에 속한 기업들이 성장하는 데 있어서의 차이를 분석하는 데 초점을 두었다. (이하 생략)
English Abstract: Encouraging start-ups and fostering venture companies are one of the most important policy agendas in sustaining dynamics of an economy. As the number of officially certificated venture companies has increased remarkably in recent years, expectations on a ‘second venture boom’ also grow. Venture companies in Korea are legally defined and include not only the conventional ‘venture-capital investing companies’ but also ‘R&D-intensive companies’ and the companies supported by policy funds through technology evaluation guarantee/loan scheme. Under this context, this study empirically analyzes the development of Korean venture companies for the past decade as well as the implications of the recent increase in the number of venture companies using the list of officially registered venture companies. The study particularly focuses on analyzing growth differences between types of venture certification.
The analysis shows that such rapid rise in the number of venture companies since 2006 is attributable more to the sharp rise in the number of companies in the certification type of ‘technology evaluation guarantee/loan firms’ rather than for venture capital financed companies. Consequently, the number of venture companies in government statistics increased sharply, whereas that of venture investing companies remained stagnant and that of KOSPI listed venture companies turned out very few. This can be considered as a gap between statistics and reality. For this reason, it may not be safe to diagnose that the second venture boom is in progress. Rather, it seems to be the result of that an excessively and unnecessarily large number of companies are given venture certification.
As for venture investing companies, the size of newly registered companies appears to be growing significantly since 2002, meaning that the venture capital investment has turned increasingly conservative in favor of more stable companies, compared to the trend in the late 1990s. This can be understood as the growing tendency of venture capital to retrieve their investment safely, but could eventually lead to hinder the boom of adventurous start-ups. On the other hand, the size of newly certificated ‘technology evaluation guarantee/loan companies’ has been on the decline entering the late 2000s, which seems to be partly due to the increased inflow of policy funds targeting SMEs and start-ups. We need to give attention to this result, because, if such decrement had been caused by easing criteria on technology/business evaluation, it could deteriorate the effectiveness of policy funds for SMEs.
It is found that, on average, the venture companies are using the venture-support programs for about four years, which may be considered appropriate given that it takes usually 3~5 years for a company from start-up to a firmly established company. However, the fact that 1,309 companies used the venture authentication system for over ten years means that they are comfortably dependent on the system.
The analysis on the growth of venture companies reveals significantly high fluctuations in sales and employment of venture investing companies, whereas R&D-intensive companies and technology evaluation guarantee/loan companies have grown in a more stable way. Despite several outstanding performances of venture investing companies, no stable growth pattern is identified for this business group, meaning that the growth depends on idiosyncrasy of each company considerably.
Venture investing companies turned out to have more possibility of Initial Public Offering (IPO) and show higher growth rates in sales and employment compared to technology evaluation guarantee/loan companies. This implicates that market selection by venture capital would be more effective in terms of business growth than by policy considerations. As the age of venture firm at the time of authentication is younger, the growth rates of sales and employment by 3 and 5 year later turn out higher. This means that concentrating support on start-ups at their early phases could be more effective. On the other hand, as the company size at the time of the first certification is larger, the growth rate of sales has decreased and that of employment has increased. This implicates that policy consideration may be needed on the size of target companies depending on which goals to pursue between supporting corporate growth or increasing job creation.
Note: Downloadable document is in Korean.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation