Search results

The aim of this paper is to analyze the way in which organizational culture affects alliance performance. The literature has begun to focus on intra-firm antecedents of alliance success, but so far has mainly focused on structural aspects like the presence of an alliance department. This paper proposes that interrelated processes of sense-making in alliances and sense-making about alliances shape organizational culture to make it more supportive of alliances.

A survey was developed to operationalize an alliance supportive culture construct. Results from 179 alliance managers were analyzed to investigate the inter-relationship of alliance experience, alliance supportive culture and alliance performance.

Alliance supportive culture was found to fully mediate the relationship between alliance experience and performance. This finding suggests that experience with alliances leads to better alliance performance when this experience is translated into the organizational culture.

Further research may explore how alliance culture interacts with structural elements of alliance management as identified in the alliance capability literature. The interaction between alliance culture and alliance capability is as yet unexplored. In addition, research may take place to explore which elements determine sense-making about alliances.

Managers should not only focus on tools and processes to improve their alliance success. They should also augment the sense-making process about alliances and remove cultural impediments to working with alliances.

Many studies have found a relationship between alliance experience and success. This paper shows this is not a direct relationship, but that it operates via cultural change based on sense-making about alliance experience. This mediation effect has not been established before.

This study aims to build on the organizational learning theory and propose a complex strategy by combining strategic alliance with subsequent acquisitions to penetrate new product markets. The authors empirically examined whether and to what extent preacquisition alliance experience affects the short- and long-term stock performance of acquiring firms.

Data on acquisitions, in which the acquirers have experience from preacquisition alliance activities in their targets’ respective industry, were collected. Diversifying acquisitions were focused upon to ensure that preacquisition alliance experience is the major source of organizational learning. A standard event study to examine acquirers’ abnormal returns was used and a Fama-French calendar-time portfolio approach to gauge long-run abnormal stock performance was adopted. In addition, regression analysis was conducted to investigate the alliance–acquisition relationship, controlling a set of variables capturing firm and acquisition characteristics.

It has been documented that in the short run, alliance experience may not always benefit acquirers’ stock performance surrounding the acquisition announcements. In particular, for acquiring firms experiencing negative cumulative abnormal returns, investors value alliance experience negatively. However, for up to 36 months after acquisitions, acquirers with alliance experience outperform their counterparts in almost every acquisition category regardless of the short-term announcement returns.

The current study has used a large-scale representative sample to investigate the dynamic interaction between alliances and acquisitions as two organizational forms for firms to grow. Findings indicate that firms can deliberately learn from their alliance activities and, later on, enter new markets through acquisitions. More importantly, it was found that, at least for some acquirers, preacquisition alliance activities are associated with worse short-term stock price performance because of possible information spillover and lifted entry barriers. It was confirmed that short-term pain nets long-term gains for acquirers heading into new markets.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate alliance formation competence and attitudes toward brand alliances as antecedents of the firm's propensity to brand ally. It aims to test the hypothesis that the relationship between alliance experience and alliance competence is moderated by the relative quality of the experience, which the authors call valence of alliance experience.

Research hypotheses were empirically tested with a national sample of senior marketing executives and brand managers.

The firm's propensity to engage in brand alliances is a function of well‐developed strategic alliance capabilities and positive managerial attitudes toward brand alliances. Importantly, when the firm's prior experience in alliances is relatively more positive the relationship between alliance experience and alliance competence is strengthened.

Not all alliance experience is the same. This study, one of the first studies to examine the relative quality of alliance experience, confirms that the relationship between alliance experience and alliance competence is significantly stronger when that experience has been relatively more positive. This study also contributes to the strategic alliance literature by providing empirical evidence for the importance of managers' attitudes toward brand alliances in driving the firm's propensity to brand ally. By choosing brand alliances as the context for the study the paper contributes to the brand alliance literature by investigating the brand alliance phenomenon from the firm's perspective.

This study investigates how small firms develop preferences for varying levels of alliance partner diversity by applying a behavioral perspective.

Data were collected via an original survey administered by the Swedish National Bureau of Statistics (SCB) of 1,026 Swedish firms with 50 employees or less. Hypotheses were tested by specifying a series of fractional response regressions.

The results show a U-shaped relationship between experienced and preferred alliance partner diversity in small firms and further show moderating effects of firm age, prior growth and environmental dynamism. The findings suggest that preferences towards diverse alliance portfolios in small firms may arise, not only from well-informed deliberate strategic thinking based on prior experience, but also as a consequence of cognitive bias.

The findings suggest that (1) small firms considering a wide variety of alliance partners should carefully investigate whether they are, in fact, capable of mastering a highly diverse alliance portfolio or if they are overconfident novices. (2) Holders of homogenous alliance portfolios should recurringly investigate whether homogeneity is due to informed strategy or inertia.

This study contributes to the literature on alliance partner diversity and behavioral alliance portfolio configuration by shedding light on the learning mechanisms that shape alliance portfolio strategies of small firms by explicating the complexity of how different experience levels of partner variety affect current alliance portfolio preferences.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the underlying mechanism of the spillover effect from a service brand alliance to its parent brand at the post-consumption stage.

Online surveys were used to collect both qualitative and quantitative data from participants of an actual event. Conceptual models were developed and tested on two cross-sectional samples using structural equation modeling.

Results demonstrate perceived brand contribution and consumer involvement mediate the relationship between the service brand alliance experience and the evaluation of its parent brand at the post-consumption stage. While perceived brand fit had an indirect effect on the parent brand, the spillover was mostly driven by service alliance experience and perceived brand contribution.

Findings indicate brand managers should focus on consumers’ brand experience of the service brand alliance to drive spillover evaluations to the parent brand, and organizations could extend brand alliances to services with low category fit to the parent brand if consumers are to have a good experience with the service brand alliance.

This research extends findings on brand alliance research that was based on hypothetical brands and indicated that the spillover effect from a brand alliance to the parent brand is influenced by perceived brand fit. The findings highlight the importance of consumer experiences in driving the spillover effect at the post-consumption stage, where consumers evaluate brand relationships from a value-added perspective that goes beyond the service category fit.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of alliance experience in firm innovation; it argues that, while cumulative alliance experience has a marginally diminishing contribution to likelihood of firm innovation over time, frequent engagement in alliances and an expanding alliance portfolio inhabit an enhancing role. This reveals new dimensions to the role of alliance experience as an antecedent to firm learning in managing alliances and to the development of alliance capabilities.

The paper estimates a range of models identifying the relationship between alliance experience and firm innovation. The panel data sample captures the full range of firms active in the UK bio-pharmaceuticals sector during the early stages of its development observing them from 1991 to 2001. An exploratory case study analysis is employed to shed light on the nuanced factors linking frequent engagement in alliances to the development of practices for efficient alliance management.

The paper shows that cumulative alliance experience has a marginally diminishing contribution to likelihood of firm innovation over time, while frequent engagement in alliances and the ensuing expansion of alliance portfolios enhance firm innovation. The exploratory case analysis demonstrates a link between frequent engagement in alliances and the development of processes for alliance management that could collectively reflect alliance capabilities.

Contribution derives from a longitudinal analysis of an original panel data set that maps the UK bio-pharmaceuticals sector over the initial period of its development. The paper sheds light on factors that can compel firms to form alliance capabilities, and extends a currently thin body of work on the foundations and antecedents to alliance and alliance portfolio capabilities.

Built upon brand attitude literature, particularly the cognitive dissonance theory and contrast theory, the authors' conceptual framework aims to explain how prior consumer satisfaction with each alliance partner affects consumer attributions (i.e. credit or blame) directed toward each partner for both highly satisfying and less‐than‐highly satisfying alliance experiences.

This paper extends the cognitive dissonance theory and contrast theory to the brand alliance context. Survey responses from 1,510 consumers, each having had purchase experiences with one of 18 brand alliances, were used to test hypotheses.

The authors identify which of the two theories provides greater explanatory power under varying conditions. Further, they find an intriguing host effect. That is, consumers tend to hold host partners more responsible for both highly satisfying and less‐than‐highly satisfying alliance encounters.

The authors' findings help firms better understand how consumers respond to alliance encounters. Practical insights include distinct advice for host versus guest partners in partner selection and resource commitments to alliance platforms.

This paper is among the first to investigate consumer reactions to actual alliance encounters, especially in market rather than experimental conditions. Further, whereas the literature has focused on positive consumer experiences with brand alliances, the authors' research includes both highly satisfying and less‐than‐highly satisfying alliance experiences and thus they uniquely report on the full range of alliance encounter outcomes.

This paper has a threefold purpose. First, we offer a literature review on alliance capability based on strategic and competence-based management literature. Second, we extend existing literature on alliance capability by breaking this concept down into five subcapabilities, each of which is linked to a stage of the alliance life cycle. Finally, we suggest how firms can support these capabilities through structural, technological, and people-related tools and techniques. We argue that current literature has focused mainly on organization-wide characteristics, the general alliance function, and alliance experience to explain the level of alliance capability. Although we acknowledge the importance of these elements, we stress that more attention needs to be given to the various stage-specific components, actions, and supportive mechanisms that can result in an improved alliance capability.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual framework and propositions on a capability-based view that examine the role of a firm’s primary type of alliances, i.e., exploration or exploitation, in the determinants and impact of alliance portfolio capability.

This is a conceptual research paper, which builds on prior conceptual and empirical management research.

Regarding determinants, capability-based arguments indicate that firms with an emphasis on exploration alliances have higher levels of alliance portfolio capability. However, a focus on exploration alliances aggravates the development of alliance portfolio capability through alliance experience and a dedicated alliance function. Regarding impact, alliance portfolio capability may positively affect a firm’s alliance, innovation, and financial performance. While alliance portfolio capability is assumed to have an equally positive effect on alliance performance for all types of alliance portfolios, a relative focus on exploration alliances is expected to limit the positive effects of alliance portfolio capability on innovation and subsequent financial performance.

These new conceptual arguments help to reconcile inconsistent earlier findings, and they deepen the understanding of interfirm differences in alliance portfolio capability and performance.

This study aims to identify critical factors and examine their impact on alliance performance from an organizational learning point of view.

A modified total interpretive structural modeling (M-TISM) methodology was used in this study. The different paths/links in the developed M-TISM model were further validated by using the Mahindra-Ford alliance case study.

In this study, a total of seven critical factors were identified using an extensive literature review, and a hierarchical model was developed. Results show that prior alliance experience, inter-partner learning, knowledge transfer, absorptive capacity and knowledge internalization have a positive on the alliance productivity and performance. Furthermore, the findings indicate that prior alliance experience remains essential for alliance productivity and performance, while knowledge transfer and absorptive capacity can contribute to inter-partner learning and knowledge internalization in strategic alliances.

This study can help managers and policymakers to understand the identified critical factors from an organizational learning perspective and understand their impact on the alliance performance in a competitive environment. The managers should know that previous alliance experience, learning from partner firms, building an absorptive capacity, etc., are necessary to achieve superior alliance productivity and performance. For academicians, the M-TISM methodology used in this study can provide a mechanism to perform exploratory research and build a hierarchical model in different management research fields.

The study fills research gaps by identifying key factors, developing a hierarchical model, and examining their impact on the performance of strategic alliances in the Indian automotive industry.