The market for acquisitions has been a blind spot in exploration-exploitation research in the new venture context. The introduction of the acquisition exit outcome as a performance dimension for new ventures, especially among high-tech ventures, shifts the traditional temporal logic of exploration-exploitation theory by introducing previously unacknowledged short-term benefits of exploration. We bring the acquisition outcome into the picture and investigate the relationship between the exploration-exploitation continuum and profitability, survival, and acquisition likelihood simultaneously. Using the Kauffman Firm Survey data, we provide evidence for a link between exploration and the likelihood of acquisition (defined as the business being sold to or merged with another business), although industry technology level poses a boundary condition such that the association is not observed in low- and medium-technology firms. An inverse U-shaped relationship that is monotone negative for most of the data range was found between exploration and the profitability of low- and medium-tech firms, and a negatively linear relationship was found for exploration and the profitability of high-tech firms. Our findings lend some support to the viability of “born to flip” strategies involving comparatively higher exploration levels in high-tech start-ups and sacrifice of short-term profitability.

Plain English Summary Built-to-flip strategy really does work, but only for some startups. There has been a debate on whether start-ups should be managed specifically with the aim of short-term exit through M&As (built to flip) or if they should always focus on long-term viability (built to last). We tap into the Kauffman Firm Survey data to provide evidence-based insights on this issue. Our results support the viability of “built-to-flip” strategies among some new firms at least when it comes to the balance of exploration and exploitation, measured as relative allocation of employees to R&D vs. sales. High-tech ventures that exited through M&A had higher exploration levels compared to all other sub-groups including high-tech ventures that closed or did not exit, and all low- and medium-tech ventures. Among high-tech ventures, increased exploration does—to a point—lead to a higher likelihood of acquisition, but it comes at the price of reduced profitability. After this peak point, further increase in exploration reduces both acquisition likelihood and profitability.

在新的风险环境下，收购市场一直是勘探开发研究中的盲点。收购退出结果作为新企业（尤其是高科技企业）的绩效维度的引入，通过引入以前未认识到的短期勘探收益，改变了传统的勘探开发理论的时间逻辑。我们将收购结果带入图片，并同时研究勘探开发连续性与获利能力，生存率和收购可能性之间的关系。使用考夫曼公司调查数据，我们为勘探与收购可能性（定义为出售给另一企业或与另一企业合并的企业）之间的联系提供了证据，尽管行业技术水平构成了边界条件，使得在中低端技术公司中未发现这种关联。在勘探与中低技术企业的获利能力之间发现了一个在大多数数据范围内呈单调负向的U型倒数关系，而对于高科技企业的勘探与获利能力则发现了一个负线性关系。我们的发现为“天生翻转”策略的可行性提供了一些支持，这些策略涉及高科技初创企业的相对较高的勘探水平，并牺牲了短期盈利能力。高科技企业的勘探和盈利能力呈负线性关系。我们的发现为“天生翻转”策略的可行性提供了一些支持，这些策略涉及高科技初创企业的相对较高的勘探水平，并牺牲了短期盈利能力。高科技企业的勘探和盈利能力呈负线性关系。我们的发现为“天生翻转”策略的可行性提供了一些支持，这些策略涉及高科技初创企业的相对较高的勘探水平，并牺牲了短期盈利能力。

普通英语摘要内置翻转策略确实有效，但仅适用于某些初创公司。关于是否应专门针对初创企业进行管理，目的是通过并购（退出并购）短期退出（是否建立倒转），还是应始终专注于长期生存能力（持久建立），一直存在争议。我们利用考夫曼公司调查数据来提供有关此问题的基于证据的见解。我们的研究结果至少在涉及勘探与开发的平衡方面（以员工相对于研发与销售的相对分配来衡​​量）支持了一些新公司中“按订单生产”策略的可行性。与所有其他子类别相比，通过并购退出的高科技企业的勘探水平更高，包括已关闭或未退出的高科技企业以及所有中低端科技企业。在高科技企业中，在一定程度上，增加勘探确实会增加收购的可能性，但这是以降低盈利能力为代价的。在这个峰值之后，勘探的进一步增加会降低收购可能性和盈利能力。