Token-based blockchain financing and governance: A transaction cost economics approach

• Authors: Lesław Pietrewicz

Title variants

PL

Tokeny w finansowaniu i zarządzaniu blockchainem: Perspektywa ekonomii kosztów transakcyjnych

Abstracts

PL

Artykuł przedstawia koncepcyjną analizę finansowania i zarządzania (governance) blockchainem z wykorzystaniem tokenów. Celem opracowania jest zbadanie cech tokenów w zakresie governance, co ma służyć lepszemu zrozumieniu konstrukcji tokenów i ich wykorzystaniu w blockchainach. Jako teoretyczną podstawę do analizy wybrano ekonomię kosztów transakcyjnych. Przeprowadzone badania wprowadzają tę teorię na nowy obszar – blockchaina i nowego instrumentu finansowego token. Badania te pozwalają lepiej zrozumieć funkcjonowanie blockchaina – agregowanie i koordynowanie wkładów podmiotów tworzących społeczność blockchaina przy pomocy zasad zapisanych na protokole blockchaina, co eliminuje potrzebę utrzymywania biurokracji (jednostki hierarchicznej) i bieżącego zarządzania, umożliwiając obniżenie kosztów transakcyjnych. W pracy wykazano także zasadnicze różnice między tokenami (i w szczególności tokenami użytkowymi) a tradycyjnymi instrumentami finansowymi – kapitałem własnym i długiem. Tokeny mają łączyć w sobie niski koszt governance opartego na zasadach z wysokimi zdolnościami adaptacyjnymi charakterystycznymi dla bardziej zaangażowanych i elastycznych systemów opartych na kapitale własnym. Uzyskane wyniki niosą implikacje dla zarządzania strategicznego i przedsiębiorczości, pomagając identyfikować branże najbardziej narażone na niszczący wpływ blockchainów i konstruować oparte na blockchainie modele biznesowe.

EN

The paper presents a conceptual analysis of token-based blockchain financing and governance. Its aim is to explore governance attributes of tokens – a new financial instrument issued by blockchain startups – with a view to understanding deployment of tokens by blockchains and their design. Transaction cost economics (TCE) has been chosen as a theoretical perspective for the analysis. The paper extends the scope of TCE theory by applying it to the blockchain context, and to the study of the role and nature of tokens in particular. It is argued that blockchains aggregate and coordinate the contributions of a distributed network of peers using a set of rules encoded in the blockchain protocol, thus eliminating the need for a hierarchy and day-to-day management, and promising to reduce typical coordination problems plaguing hierarchical organizations. Tokens, and particularly utility tokens, are found to differ fundamentally from equity and debt in their financial and governance attributes as they aim to combine the low cost of the rule-based governance with added adaptability characteristic of equity-based governance. The analysis offers insights for both strategy and entrepreneurship research and practice as it helps identify industries most vulnerable to disruption by blockchains and inform promising blockchain-based business model designs.

Keywords

EN

blockchain; corporate finance; corporate governance; token; transaction cost; economics

PL

blockchain; ekonomia kosztów transakcyjnych; finanse przedsiębiorstwa; ład korporacyjny; token

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydział Nauk Ekonomicznych
• Journal: Studia i Materiały
• Year: 2018
• Issue: 2(28), cz. 1
• Pages: 126-139

Dates

published

2018

Contributors

author

Lesław Pietrewicz

References

• Ahad, A. and Osman-Gani, M. (1999). International technology transfer for competitive advantage: A conceptual analysis of the role of HRD, Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 9(1), 9–18.
• Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29, 627–655.
• Chakrabarti, A.K. (1973). Some Concepts of Technology Transfer: Adoption of Innovations in Organizational Context. R&D Management, 3, 111–130.
• Dahlander, L. and Gann, D.M. (2010). How open is innovation? Research Policy, 39, 699–709.
• Esposito Vinzi, V., Chin, W.W., Henseler, J. and Wand, H. (eds.) (2010). Handbook of Partial Least Squares: Concepts, Methods and Applications. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
• Eveland, J.D. (1986). Diffusion, Technology Transfer, and Implementation Thinking and Talking About Change. Science Communication, 8(2), 303–322.
• Fosfuri, A., Motta, M and Ronde, Th. (2001). Foreign Direct Investment and Spillovers through Workers’ Mobility. Journal of International Economics, 53(1), 205–222.
• Fowler, F.J. Jr. (1995). Improving Survey Questions: Design and Evaluation. Applied Social Research Methods Series, 38. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Freeman, Ch. (1972). The Economics of Industrial Innovation. London: Penguin Books.
• Gassmann, O., Enkel, E. and Chesbrough, H. (2010). The future of open innovation. R&D Management, 40(3), 213–221.
• Gilbert, M. and Cordey-Hayes, M. (1996). Understanding the process of knowledge transfer to achieve successful technological innovation, Technovation, 16, 301–312.
• Glass, A. and Saggi, K. (2002), Multinational Firms and Technology Transfer. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 104, 495–514.
• Gupta, S. and Malhotra, N. 2013, Marketing innovation: A resource-based view of international and local firms. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 31(2), 111–126.
• Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data (2005). Oslo Manual, OECD and Eurostat.
• Hayami, Y. and Ruttan, V.W. (1985). Agricultural Development: An International Perspective. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
• Huarng, K., Yu, T.H. and Lai, W. (2015). Innovationand diffusion of high-tech products, services, and systems. Journal Of Business Research, 68(11), 2223–2226.
• Keller, W. (2009). International Trade, Foreign Direct Investment, and Technology Spillovers. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 15442
• Kim, S.H. and Huarng, K.H. (2011). Winning strategies for innovation and high-technology products management. Journal of Business Research, 64(11), 1147–1150.
• Lei, D., Hitt, M.A. and Bettis, R. (1996). Dynamic core competences through meta-learning and Strategic Context. Journal of Management, 22(4), 549–569.
• Lomhmöller, J.-B. (1989). Latent Variable Path Modeling with Partial Least Squares. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.
• Lundquist, G. (2003). A rich vision of technology transfer technology value management, Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(3–4), 284.
• Lynn, G.S., Skov, R.B. and Abel, K.D. (1999). Practices that support team learning and their impact on speed to market and new product success. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16(5).
• Mansfield, E. (1975). East-West technological transfer issues and problems, international technology transfer: Forms, resource requirements, and policies, American Economic Review, 65(2), 372–376.
• Mansfield, E. (1982). Technology Transfer, Productivity, and Economic Policy. New York: W.W. Norton&Co.
• Mayer, S. and Blaas, W. (2002). Technology transfer: an opportunity for small open economies, Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(3), 275–289.
• Ortega-Argilés, R., Vivarelli, M. and Voigt, P. (2009). R&D in SMEs: a paradox? Small Business Economics, 33(1), 3–11.
• Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2000). Coopting customer competence. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 79–90.
• Ramanathan, K. (2011). An overview of technology transfer and technology transfer models. W: K. Ramanathan, K. Jacobs and M. Bandyopadhyay, Technology Transfer and small & medium enterprises. India: Daya Publishing House.
• Rogers, M. (1998). The definition and measurement of productivity. Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research.
• Rogowski, J. (1990). Modele miękkie. Teoria i zastosowanie w badaniach ekonomicznych. Bialystok: Wydawnictwo Filii UW w Białymstoku.
• Sazali, W.A., Haslinda, A. and Raduan, C.R. (2009). A holistic model of the inter-firm technology transfer based on integrated perspective of knowledge-based view and organizational learning. The Journal of International Social Research, 2(9).
• Skrodzka, I. (2018). International Technology Transfer and Smart Growth of EU countries in 2010–2015. Socio-Economic Modelling and Forecasting, 1, 463–472.
• Skrodzka I. (2018). Social capital and smart growth of the EU countries. Economic and Environmental Studies, 18(2), 841–858.
• Steele, L. (1989). Managing technology: The strategic view. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Technology and Industrial Performance (1997). Paris: OECD.
• Teece, D. (1977). Technology Transfer by Multinational Firms: The Resource Cost of Transferring Technological Know-How. The Economic Journal, 87(346), 242–261.
• Teece, D. J. (1977). Time-cost tradeoffs: Elasticity estimates and determinants for international technology transfer projects. Management Science, 23(8).
• Un, C. A., Cuervo Cazurra, A. and Asakawa, K. (2010). R&D collaborations and product innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(5), 673–689.
• Utterback, J.M. and Abernathy, W.J. (1975). A dynamic model of process and product innovation. Omega, 3(6), 639–656.
• Von Hippel, E. (1988). The source of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press. Wm. E. Souder, Ahmed S. Nashar, Venkatesh
• Padmanabhan (1990). A guide to the best technology- transfer practices, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 15(1–2), 5–16.
• Wold, H. (1980). Soft modelling: Intermediate between Traditional Model Building and Data Analysis. Mathematical Statistics, 6(1), 333–346.
• Wold, H. (1982). Soft modeling: The basic design and some extensions. In: K.G. Joreskog, H. Wold (red.), Systems under indirect observation: Causality, structure, prediction. Amsterdam: North Holland.

Identifiers

DOI

10.7172/1733-9758.2018.28.11

Biblioteka Nauki

2188983