According to a careful empirical study by Lerner, Sorenson, and Stromberg, the answer is yes:
Our main finding is that firms pursue more influential innovations, as measured by patent citations, in the years following private equity investments. Firms display no deterioration in their research, as measured either by patent “originality” and “generality,” and the level of patenting does not appear to change after these transactions. We find some evidence that the patent portfolios become more focused in the years after private equity investments. The increase in patent quality is greatest in the patent classes where the firm has been focused historically and in the classes where the firm increases its patenting activity after the transaction. The patterns are robust to a variety of specifications and controls. Collectively, these findings are largely inconsistent with the hypothesis that private equity-backed firms sacrifice long-run investments. Rather, private equity investments appear to be associated with a beneficial refocusing of firms’ innovative portfolios.Via the Harvard Law School Corporate Governance and Financial Regulation blog (actually "forum"). (Am I wrong or does their name keep getting longer-winded?)
Comments