Corporate venturing is a strange pursuit, as the brand being created is by definition a derivative of its parent company, while the value of the activity is in large part down to backing entrepreneurial successes, which, when they succeed, will also become more prominent than the corporate venturing unit. Given this, groups such as Intel Capital, which feel like institutions in their own right, seem even more impressive.
This is why the change in leadership there is of huge interest to everyone in corporate venturing. In our first interview with Intel Capital’s incoming head Wendell Brooks, published in this issue, he talked about his initial thoughts on strategy for the group. Brooks says his “predisposition” is for a more concentrated portfolio with “larger bets” on fewer deals. It will be fascinating to find out what this means in practice over the coming months at Intel Capital’s Global Summit on November 2-4, and at our Global Corporate Venturing and Innovation Summit on January 27-28, both in California.
In his interview, Brooks was highly complimentary about his outgoing predecessor, Arvind Sodhani, who has run Intel Capital for the past decade, but Brooks also made the case for doing things differently. This may be a time when such an institution either consolidates or disappears, as leadership from one strong individual to another inevitably changes how a group operates.
The other big change under Brooks is the decision to combine Intel Capital into the wider mergers and acquisitions (M&A) group that Brooks also runs. Brooks says he views this as “a coordinated acquisition and investing strategy”, and that venturing, M&A and research and development are “three parts of a triangle of growth”, allowing Intel Corporation to ensure it stays on top in terms of innovation.
As ever with big changes such as this, opinions within the industry vary with regard to what Intel Capital is doing. Brooks is conscious there is “speculation” about what the move means. He is keen to make clear that Intel Capital has the “full endorsement of the executive management team and the board” and that “Arvind has created the best VC [venture capital] firm bar none, and it just happens to be a corporate VC”. The message is that Intel Capital will be different under new leadership, but will also be looking to build on a brand developed over many years.
Given how relationship-driven corporate venturing is as a business, it will be interesting to see how Brooks looks to build Intel Capital beyond its position as the best known and most active corporate venturing group. No doubt he will be ambitious – having joined Intel only last year to head the M&A group, he has already sealed its largest acquisition, the $16.7bn purchase of chipmaker Altera. A successful transition will be a great example for others in corporate venturing – as with all investment firms, succession is always a thorny topic. Interviewing Brooks, it seems he is likely to be driven to make this closely watched transition succeed.
Besides the interview with Brooks, there is plenty of other great content in this issue, including Tom Whitehouse’s article – Oscillated, not stirred – a chemistry homage to James Bond, Andrew Gaule interviewing Distill Ventures’ Frank Lampen, Silicon Valley Bank on the wearables revolution, and our annual look at the energy sector.
I will also be speaking at US trade body the National Venture Capital Association’s corporate venture group’s annual summit in California on October 22, drawing on some of our latest data using our new data platform, GCV Analytics. You can see this month’s data at the back of the magazine, and we will also be using this charting ability to make our annual sector features more informative.
We will be showcasing this data at a GCV Academy session on October 14-15 in California, and we have been using it to inform our forthcoming supplements The World of Corporate Venturing 2016 and Rising Stars, which come out in January.
Enjoy the issue, and be sure to let us know what more we should be looking at.