Search results

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the influence of strategic alliances (knowledge/learning, efficiency and market motives) on the development of human capital.

To do so, a quantitative study was chosen, with data on technology-based small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Portugal, leading to 257 valid answers.

The results obtained from a structural equation model show that motives for strategic alliances (knowledge/learning, efficiency and market) have a strong influence on the human capital of the SMEs analysed.

These outcomes reveal that strategic alliances are a way for SMEs to overcome resource constraints in terms of human capital, representing an important implication for business practice. As strategic alliances influence human capital, the relations SMEs establish with other firms are increasingly important for their sustainability and development. Acting in isolation in the market can reduce this type of firm’s chances of survival.

Despite some studies relating the formation of strategic alliances and human capital, there is a gap regarding the relationship between the role of strategic alliances and human capital in the technology-based sector. Therefore, this research represents a contribution and innovation in academic terms in this area.

In this chapter, we empirically investigate an important question of “how does knowledge sharing and knowledge leakage impact the alliance performance in dyadic coopetitive alliance settings that involve small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).” Taking the perspective of the focal SME to address this question, we posit that while knowledge sharing positively associates with alliance performance, inadvertent knowledge leakage is negatively related to performance. We further postulate that under the conditions of high knowledge leakage, the positive impacts of knowledge sharing on performance would be reduced. Our structural model results based on a survey of 186 SMEs in the high-tech and knowledge-intensive industries in Sweden show support for two of the hypothesized relationships. More specifically, the results show that knowledge sharing has a positive effect on alliance performance but knowledge leakage has an insignificant direct effect on performance. However, knowledge leakage plays a negative moderating role on the relationship between knowledge sharing and performance. We contribute by demonstrating the effects of knowledge sharing and leakage in under-researched but important dyadic one-to-one coopetitive alliances involving SMEs.

Learning through international strategic alliances is usually influenced by dispersed locations and cultural difference between the countries of the two firms. This research highlights the importance of contextual factors on learning through international strategic alliances. Based on an empirical study of 271 alliances, our findings reveal that successful alliance learning not only depends on the partner’s openness to share knowledge but also relies on the firm’s capacity to identify and absorb such knowledge. Institutional differences between the countries from where partner firms originate are considered to hinder the alliance learning by decreasing the firm’s absorptive capacity and by enhancing knowledge ambiguity. However, our research suggests that frequent direct communication and high levels of mutual trust and reciprocal commitment between partner firms positively moderate the noxious effects of institutional differences on the alliance learning process.

Industry and academia are interested to understand how companies develop alliance capabilities through managing the knowledge, for alliance success. This study aims to investigate how alliance learning process is related to the overall success of any alliance, and how openness culture moderates the relationship of alliance learning process and alliance success.

English language questionnaires were sent to top executives of 400 companies because English is a commonly understood language at managerial level in Pakistani companies. In total, 186 usable answers were received. Hierarchical linear regression was used for hypothesis testing.

Alliance learning is significantly and positively related to alliance success. Openness plays a role as moderator between the relationship of alliance learning process and alliance success. Contrary to the literature, at low level of alliance learning, high level of openness increases the chances of alliance but as we move toward high level of alliance leaning, low level of openness is more effective to achieve the alliance success.

The data in this study was collected from Pakistan. The results may not be generalized to other regions, especially to developed countries.

The results have implications for managers involved in alliances. They can be benefitted by this study to understand the role of alliance (knowledge) learning process on alliance success and contingent role of openness on this relationship.

This study is an important contribution to understand the notion of organizational learning and knowledge management in alliance context. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to investigate openness as a moderator of the relationship between alliance learning process and alliance success.

The purpose of this paper is to show that following from the premise that knowledge comprises the fundamental source of competitive advantage, this study provides results of a meta‐analysis that examines whether and how alliance performance is influenced by the role knowledge plays in a strategic alliance.

Meta‐analysis is employed as the driving methodology in this study. The meta‐analysis approach permits the literature on interfirm knowledge management to be reviewed and synthesized such that the role of knowledge in the alliance, environmental risk, and alliance performance can be thoroughly and validly investigated.

The findings suggest that the level of risk associated with the environment in which the alliance partners join forces does not moderate the relationship between the various “roles” of knowledge and alliance performance, whereas the magnitude and type of interfirm cohesiveness enjoyed or endured by the alliance participants does materially impact alliance performance. These performance differences suggest that – when the subject is alliance performance – knowledge management strategies matter more than environmental factors.

The environmental uncertainty construct proved the biggest surprise, given conventional views that alliances should prove more effective in turbulent environments. However, implications are limited by observations that suggest the current alliance literature lacks well‐developed and corroborated knowledge and performance constructs. This, in turn, implies researchers should systematically assess the validity of extant knowledge and performance measures.

The observed positive relationship between increased levels of knowledge interchange, alliance cohesion, and alliance performance is a materially practical implication. This was especially true within industries that are inherently more dependent on vertical supplier or buyer relationships, such as manufacturing and services. Active interfirm knowledge management appears to contribute more to alliance performance than environmental factors.

This paper describes the first study to meta‐analyze the role and influence of knowledge constructs within the alliance literature. As such, the results empirically confirm some presumed conventional wisdoms while calling others into question.

The purpose of this paper is to define co-exploitation, co-exploration, and alliance ambidexterity from the perspective of organizational learning; to analyze how knowledge bases, structural arrangements, and control mechanisms of R&D alliances influence co-exploitation and co-exploration; and to discuss how to achieve alliance ambidexterity by managing paradoxes around knowledge bases, structural arrangements, and control mechanisms.

This is a conceptual paper focussing on how to balance exploitation and exploration at the alliance level through managing three paradoxes of cooperation: similarity vs complementarity, integration vs modularity, and contracts vs trust.

While technological similarity, structural integration, and contracts are more likely to promote co-exploitation, technological complementarity, structural modularity, and trust are more likely to facilitate co-exploration. Alliance ambidexterity, which is beneficial for alliance performance, derives from either the combination of technological complementarity, structural integration, and contracts, or the combination of technological similarity, structural modularity, and trust temporally.

Researchers should analyze the possibility of building alliance ambidexterity in other types of interorganizational relationships, and find other possible antecedents of interorganizational learning.

Managers should not simply treat R&D alliances as one of exploratory interorganizational relationships, but pay equal attention to co-exploitation and co-exploration. To achieve this balance, practitioners should combine technological complementarity with structural integration and contracts, or integrate technological similarity with structural modularity and trust.

This paper is one of the first contributions that analyze how an R&D alliance could gain its ambidexterity through the management of nested cooperation paradoxes.

Drawing upon the importance of research and development (R&D) alliances in driving firm innovation performance, extant research has analyzed individually the impact of R&D alliance partner attributes on firm innovation performance. Despite such analyzes, research has generally underestimated the configurations of partner attributes leading to firm innovation performance. This research gap is interesting to explore, as firms involved in R&D alliances usually face a combination of partner attributes. Moreover, gaining a better understanding of how R&D partner attributes tie into configurations is an issue that is attracting particular interest in coopetition research and alliance literature. This paper aims to obtain a better knowledge of this underrated, but important, aspect of alliances by exploring what configurations of R&D alliance partner attributes lead firms involved in R&D alliances to achieve high innovation performance. To tackle this question, first, this study reviews the extant literature on R&D alliances by relying on the knowledge-based view of alliances to identify the most impactful partner attributes on firms’ innovation performance. This paper then applies a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to explore the configurations of R&D alliance partner attributes that lead firms involved in R&D alliances to achieve high innovation performance.

This study selects 27 R&D alliances formed worldwide in the telecom industry. This paper explores the multiple configurations of partner attributes of these alliances by conducting a fsQCA.

The findings of the fsQCA show that the two alternate configurations of partner attributes guided the firms involved in these alliances to achieve high innovation performance: a configuration with extensive partner technological relatedness and coopetition, but no experience; and a configuration with extensive partner experience and competition, but no technological relatedness.

The research highlights the importance of how partner attributes (i.e. partner technological relatedness, partner competitive overlap, partner experience and partner relative size) tie, with regard to the firms’ access to external knowledge and consequently to their willingness to achieve high innovation performance. Moreover, this paper reveals the beneficial effect of competition on the innovation performance of the firms involved in R&D alliances when some of the other knowledge-based partner attributes are considered. Despite these insights for alliance and coopetition literature, some limitations are to be noted. First, some of the partners’ attributes considered could be further disentangled into sub-partner attributes. Second, other indicators might be used to measure firms’ innovation performance. Third, as anticipated this study applies fsQCA to explore the combinatory effects of partner attributes in the specific context of R&D alliances in the telecom industry worldwide and in a specific time window. This condition may question the extensibility of the results to other industries and times.

This study also bears two interesting implications for alliance managers. First, the paper suggests that R&D alliance managers need to be aware that potential alliance partners have multiple attributes leading to firm innovation performance. In this regard, partner competitive overlap is particularly important for gaining a better understanding of firm innovation performance. When looking for strategic partners, managers should try to ally with highly competitive enterprises so as to access their more innovative knowledge. Second, the results also highlight that this beneficial effect of coopetition in R&D alliances can be amplified in two ways. On the one hand, when the partners involved in the alliance have not yet developed experience in forming alliances. Partners without previous experience supply ideal stimuli to unlock more knowledge in the alliance because new approaches to access and develop knowledge in the alliance could be explored. On the other hand, this paper detects the situation when the allied partners are developing technologies and products in different areas. When partnering with firms coming from different technological areas, the knowledge diversity that can be leveraged in the alliances could drive alliance managers to generate synergies and economies of scope within the coopetitive alliance.

Extant research has analyzed individually the impact of R&D alliance partner attributes on firm innovation performance but has concurrently underestimated the configurations of partner attributes leading to firm innovation performance. Therefore, this paper differs from previous studies, as it provides an understanding of the specific configurations of R&D alliance partner attributes leading firms involved in R&D alliances to achieve high innovation performance.

The purpose of this paper is explore an organizational design that allows firms to invest in transferable strategic human capital. Strategic human capital requires considerable investment in training costs, effective compensation, opportunities for professional development and expectancy of long employment relationship within a firm. A firm can undertake investment in strategic knowledge and workers can engage in learning only in these circumstances. However, there are a number of risks that are associated with investment in strategic human capital within a firm. In this paper, the author argues that providing strategic human capital to other firms within alliances could be a strategy for leveraging resource. Strategic knowledge facilitates transactions between firms possessing co-specialized human capital and tangible resources. Organizational design of an alliance based on co-specialization allows to balance costs and returns for the human capital supplier, as well as for beneficiary and workers. Within an alliance, the human capital supplier provides workers to a beneficiary firm and coordinates their activities. Supplier specialized in human capital investment ensures improved performance, productivity and efficiency of workers. Possibility to form a greater pool of labor force and to centralize training allows optimizing cost and sharing risks associated with investment activity among alliance participants. Human resource practices in an alliance system foster long-term employment relationship. Entering an alliance increases number of job positions, professional development opportunities through horizontal mobility, promotion and learning opportunities for workers. Finally, alliances allow leveraging investment in human capital beyond a single organization.

This paper conceptualizes the use of alliance based on co-specialization as a strategy to optimize investment in strategic human capital resource. It draws upon the resource-based view (Barney, 1991; Wernerfelt, 1995) and transaction cost theory (Coase, 1937; Williamson, 1981) to examine an alliance as a strategy for leveraging the human capital resources for accessing new markets, building reputation and sharing the risks across more than one organization.

First, the paper reviews the theoretical literature on human capital as a strategic resource (Becker, 1962; Coff, 1997), its sourcing on internal and external labor markets and respective employment systems (Delery and Doty, 1996; Doeringer and Piore, 1971). Second, it focuses on the features of human capital resource (Barney, 1986; Chi, 1994; Doz and Hamel, 1998). Third, it conceptualizes the use of alliances based on co-specialization as organizational structures for investment in human capital across organizations and examines respective employment system and HR practices (Delery and Doty, 1996; Doeringer and Piore, 1971). As result, the author argues that an alliance can be an alternative mean to optimize returns on investment in human capital with strategic transferable knowledge. By consequence, the author describes an alliance employment system and illustrates the arguments with a case of human capital trading in a co-specialization alliance under a long-term management contract in the luxury hotel industry.

This paper discusses collaborative ventures as a sourcing strategy of the human capital. An alliance strategy is relevant for sourcing the strategic human capital resources. Human capital resource can be accessed by firms through transfer of skills and organizational routines within collaborative agreements, such as alliances based on co-specialization. In this case, alliance is an organizational architecture between organizations that improves the efficiency and productivity, reduces marginal cost on training due to larger scale of operations and reduces risk by splitting investment in human capital and by offering more career and development opportunities for strategic knowledge workers.

This study aims to empirically investigate the role of contracts in tacit knowledge acquisition in research and development (R&D) alliances. By combining the perspectives of sensemaking and transaction cost economics (TCE), this study proposes a model about the mechanisms through which shared goals and contract completeness jointly affect tacit knowledge acquisition.

This study adopted a quantitative design and used the questionnaire survey method to collect data. The authors finally collected data on 196 R&D alliance samples in China. Multiple regression analysis was used to test the hypotheses.

There is strong empirical support that contract completeness has a positive effect on shared goals and that shared goals have a positive effect on tacit knowledge acquisition. Meanwhile, contract completeness weakens the positive effect of shared goals on tacit knowledge acquisition. Therefore, this study reveals that contract completeness has an inverted U-shaped effect on tacit knowledge acquisition.

The findings suggest that managers should consider both the psychological and rational effects of contract governance simultaneously, thus recognizing the importance of a moderate level of contract completeness for tacit knowledge acquisition in R&D alliances.

This study enhances the current understanding of contract governance by integrating the sensemaking and TCE perspectives. The findings provide a possible explanation of how contracts affect tacit knowledge acquisition in R&D alliances. The authors expand the research on contract governance and alliance knowledge acquisition by revealing the inverted U-shaped relationship between contract governance and tacit knowledge acquisition.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate alliance partner diversity (APD) as a driving force that potentially enhances firms’ innovation generation (IG) in interfirm open alliance contexts. The authors propose that APD enhances IG but that the effects depend on both alliance network position and the double-edged external knowledge search strategy. Building on the knowledge-based view and social capital theory, the authors formally model how external knowledge search strategies can lead to productive or destructive acquisitions of external knowledge in interfirm open alliance networks. The authors theorize that when an individual firm adopts a central position in a complex interfirm open alliance network, its propensity toward beneficial IG depends on its knowledge search strategy (i.e. its breadth and depth) due to the joint influence of network position and knowledge search strategy on innovation.

Using an original large-scale survey of high-tech firms, this study shows that the relationship between partner diversity and IG is contingent on a firm’s network position and knowledge search strategy. The authors also offer an original analysis of how knowledge search strategy (i.e. its breadth and depth) in network centrality (NC) affects the efficacy of knowledge acquisition in interfirm open alliance networks. Empirically, the authors provide an original contribution to the open innovation literature by integrating social capital and knowledge-based theory to rigorously measure firm IG.

Overall, our findings suggest that the knowledge search strategy imparts a double-edged effect that may promote or interfere with external knowledge in IG in the context of the diversity of alliance partners.

The work has important limitations, such as its analysis of a single industry in the empirical models. Therefore, further studies should consider multiple industries that may provide useful insights into innovation decisions.

External knowledge search is valuable, particularly in the high-tech industry, as external knowledge acquisition generates innovation output. This study serves to raise managers’ awareness of various approaches to external knowledge searches and highlights the importance of network position in knowledge acquisition from interfirm open alliance collaborations.

This paper is the first to investigate the double-edged effect of knowledge search on interfirm open alliance networks. It also contributes to the theoretical and practical literature on interfirm open alliance networks by reflecting on external knowledge search and underlying network centrality and APD factors.