Search results

Research on strategic alliances is concerned with two issues: continuation and reconfiguration. Building on prior research that examines the two issues separately, the paper studies them simultaneously. This paper aims to investigate how strategic alliances may exert the synergetic effect between dynamics and stability as well as to discuss the dynamic evolution process and influence factors of strategic alliances.

This paper describes the construction of a two-party evolutionary game model of alliance and partners. The model is used to analyze the evolution process of synergetic mechanism to determine when to terminate and when to continue with a partnership. Further, numerical simulation is used to quantify the results and to gain insight into the effects of various factors on the dynamic evolution of the synergetic mechanism.

This paper reveals several synergetic states of dynamics and stability in the alliances. The results show that synergy states are positively affected by the collaborative innovation benefits, alliance management capability, the intensity of intellectual property protection, liquidated damages and reputation losses, and negatively affected by the absorptive capacity of partners.

The study helps the alliance to achieve long-term development as well as to balance the paradoxical relationship. The results suggest that managers of strategic alliances should focus on building strong and long-term relationships in order to achieve high performance innovations. Managers should also pay close attention to their partners’ behaviors in previous alliances.

This paper provides new insights into the paradoxical relationship in alliance by revealing the evolution of synergetic mechanism between dynamics and stability. The results remind alliances to understand the relationship between dynamics and stability and to notice the influence factors of synergistic effects when they are making decisions.

Existing studies have paid less attention to the impact of knowledge accumulation on digital transformation and its boundary conditions. Hence, this study aims to investigate the effects of ambidextrous knowledge accumulation on manufacturing digital transformation under the moderation of dynamic capability.

This study divides knowledge accumulation into exploratory and exploitative knowledge accumulation and divides dynamic capability into alliance management capability and new product development capability. To clarify the relationship among ambidextrous knowledge accumulation, dynamic capability and manufacturing digital transformation, the authors collect data from 421 Chinese listed manufacturing enterprises from 2016 to 2020 and perform analysis by multiple hierarchical regression method, heterogeneity test and robustness analysis.

The empirical results show that both exploratory and exploitative knowledge accumulation can significantly promote manufacturing digital transformation. Keeping ambidextrous knowledge accumulation in parallel is more conducive than keeping single-dimensional knowledge accumulation. Besides, dynamic capability positively moderates the relationship between ambidextrous knowledge accumulation and manufacturing digital transformation. Moreover, the heterogeneity test shows that the impact of ambidextrous knowledge accumulation and dynamic capabilities on manufacturing digital transformation varies widely across different industry segments or different regions.

First, this paper shifts attention to the role of ambidextrous knowledge accumulation in manufacturing digital transformation and expands the connotation and extension of knowledge accumulation. Second, this study reveals that dynamic capability is a vital driver of digital transformation, which corroborates the previous findings of dynamic capability as an important driver and contributes to enriching the knowledge management literature. Third, this paper provides a comprehensive micro measurement of ambidextrous knowledge accumulation and digital transformation based on the development characteristics of the digital economy era, which provides a theoretical basis for subsequent research.

Political Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), based on ideas about deliberative democracy, have been criticised for increasing corporate power and democratic deficits. Yet, deliberative ideals are flourishing in the corporate world in the form of dialogues with a broad set of stakeholders and engagement in wider societal issues. Extractive industry areas, with extensive corporate interventions in weak regulatory environments, are particularly vulnerable to asymmetrical power relations when businesses engage with society. This paper aims to illustrate in what way deliberative CSR practices in such contexts risk enhancing corporate power at the expense of community interests.

This paper is based on a retrospective qualitative study of a Canadian oil company, operating in an Albanian oilfield between 2009 and 2016. Through a study of three different deliberative CSR practices – market-based land acquisition, a grievance redress mechanism and dialogue groups – it highlights how these practices in various ways enforced corporate interests and prevented further community mobilisation.

By applying Laclau and Mouffe’s theory of hegemony, the analysis highlights how deliberative CSR activities isolated and silenced community demands, moved some community members into the corporate alliance and prevented alternative visions of the area to be articulated. In particular, the close connection between deliberative practices and monetary compensation flows is underlined in this dynamic.

The paper contributes to critical scholarship on political CSR by highlighting in what way deliberative practices, linked to monetary compensation schemes, enforce corporate hegemony by moving community members over to the corporate alliance.

In contrast to Ahmet Kuru's argument that a critical juncture occurred in the 11th century when a repressive anti-intellectual state-ulema alliance appeared, which destroyed the creative spirit of the previous centuries in Islam, this review argues that the critical juncture must be sought in the modern era with the development of citizenship in the Middle East.

This paper aims to explore the significance of resource sharing in business to capture new market opportunities and securing competitive advantages. Firms enter strategic alliances (SAs), especially for designing new products and to overcome challenges in today’s fast changing environment. Research projects have dealt with the creation of SAs, however without concrete referencing the impact on selected supply chain resources. Furthermore, academia rather focused on elaborating the advantages and disadvantages of SAs and how this affects structural changes in the organization than examining the effects on supply chain complexity and performance.

The authors collected and triangulated a multi-industry data set containing primary data coming from more than 200 experts in the field of supply chain management along and secondary data coming from Refinitiv’s joint ventures (JVs) and SA database and IR solutions’ database for annual reports. The data is evaluated in three empirical settings using binomial testing and structural equation modeling.

The results show that nonequity SAs and JVs have varying degrees of impact on supply chain resources due to differences in the scope of the partnership. This has a negative impact on the complexity of the supply chain, with the creation of a JV leading to greater complexity than the creation of a nonequity SA. Furthermore, the findings prove that complexity negatively impacts overall supply chain performance. In addition, this study elaborates that increased management capabilities are needed to exploit the potentials of SAs and sheds light on hurdles that must be overcome within the supply network when forming a partnership. Finally, the authors give practical implications on how organizations can cope with increasing complexity to lower the risk of poor supply chain performance.

This study investigates occurring challenges when establishing nonequity SAs or JVs and how this affects their supply chain by examining supply networks in terms of complexity and performance.

This study investigates the extent to which a firm’s centrality and autonomy in its supply network are associated with the intensity and complexity of its competitive actions.

Utilizing social network analysis and dynamic panel data models, this study analyzes a comprehensive panel dataset with 10,802 firm-year observations across various industries between 2011 and 2018 to test the hypotheses.

Our findings show that a firm’s level of centrality in its supply network has an inverted U-shaped relationship with both competitive intensity and competitive complexity. In addition, the turning points of these two inverted U-shaped relationships differ in that firms with a lower level of centrality tend to compete aggressively by launching more actions within fewer categories, while firms with a higher level of centrality tend to compete aggressively by launching fewer actions that cover a larger range of categories. Finally, we find that a firm’s structural autonomy has a positive relationship with competitive complexity.

This study bridges the gap between the supply chain management literature and strategic management literature and investigates how supply networks shape competitive aggressiveness. In particular, this research investigates how a firm’s structural position in its supply network affects its competitive actions, an important intermediate mechanism for competitive advantage that has been overlooked in the supply chain management literature.

This study employs Stein Rokkan's methodological approach to analyse state formation in the Greater Middle East. It develops a conceptual framework distinguishing colonial, populist and democratic pacts, suitable for analysis of state formation and nation-building through to the present period. The framework relies on historical institutionalism. The methodology, however, is Rokkan's. The initial conceptual analysis also specifies differences between European and the Middle Eastern state formation processes. It is followed by a brief and selective discussion of historical preconditions. Next, the method of plotting singular cases into conceptual-typological maps is applied to 20 cases in the Greater Middle East (including Afghanistan, Iran and Turkey). For reasons of space, the empirical analysis is limited to the colonial period (1870s to the end of World War 1). Three typologies are combined into one conceptual-typological map of this period. The vertical left-hand axis provides a composite typology that clarifies cultural-territorial preconditions. The horizontal axis specifies transformations of the region's agrarian class structures since the mid-19th century reforms. The right-hand vertical axis provides a four-layered typology of processes of external intervention. A final section presents selected comparative case reconstructions. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first time such a Rokkan-style conceptual-typological map has been constructed for a non-European region.

Ahmet Kuru, in his book, suggests that the explanation for the lack of social and political development in the modern world can be traced back to a historical ‘state-ulama alliance’ from the 11th-century Saljuq empire or earlier. From the perspective of an historian, however, this dating displays some empirical problems. It is certain that the state eventually did gain the upper hand over the Muslim intellectuals, at least in the centre of the Ottoman empire. But the process to that point was different. In this comment, a different explanation is proposed that points instead to two crucial factors: the loss of a homogeneous Muslim state with the fall of the caliphate, and the rise of a unified Muslim world, an umma, through the independence, not subservience, of the class of scholars in the mediaeval period of Islam. Thus, a model is proposed that focuses on two turning points: the replacement of the effective caliphate with a fractious system of sultanates in the mid-tenth century, coinciding with the solidification of Islamic thought in a more strictly regulated form both in theology, law and in Sufism. The second moment is ca. 1500, when the period of political fragmentation comes to an end with the Ottoman state unifying the Middle East, flanked by Morocco and Iran, while challenges to the religious orthodoxy begin to grow at the margins. Such a model thus sees the ulama as actors for change as well as for orthodoxy throughout Muslim history, responding to changing developments in social and political contexts.

Political Science in the United States has focused too much on variable-oriented, quantitative methods and thus lost its ability to ask “big questions.” Stein Rokkan (d. 1979) was an eminent comparativist who asked big questions and provided such qualitative tools as conceptual maps, grids, and clustered comparisons. Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406), arguably the first social scientist, also asked big questions and provided a universal explanation about the dialectical relationship between nomads and sedentary people. This article analyzes to what extent Ibn Khaldun's concepts of asabiyya and sedentary culture help understand the rise and fall of the Muslim civilization. It also explores my alternative, class-based perspective in Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment. Moreover, the article explores how Rokkan's analysis of cultural, geographical, economic, and religio-political variations within Western European states can provide insights to the examination of such variations in the Muslim world.