“…Whereas earlier studies often used simple approaches, such as lagging variables or conducting additional subgroup analyses as indicators for causal relationships (e.g., Barker & Mueller, 2002;Deutsch, 2007), recent studies employ more sophisticated methods, such as incorporating fixed effects (e.g., Ammann, Horsch, & Oesch, 2016;Makri, Lane, & Gomez-Mejia, 2006), employing two-stage analyses (e.g., Gerstner, König, Enders, & Hambrick, 2013;Maula, Keil, & Zahra, 2013), or using suitable instrument variables (e.g., Chemmanur, Kong, Krishnan, & Yu, 2019;Kini & Williams, 2012). In addition, some scholars use matched sample approaches (e.g., Ammann, Horsch, & Oesch, 2016;Cremers, Litov, & Sepe, 2017) or examine changes in innovation outcomes after exogenous events, such as exogenous executive turnover (e.g., Balsam, Puthenpurackal, & Upadhyay, 2016;Cummings & Knott, 2018) and regulatory changes (e.g., Balsmeier, Fleming, & Manso, 2017;Mao & Zhang, 2018) or shocks, such as terrorist attacks and the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy (Hutton, Jiang, & Kumar, 2014).…”