Determinants of alliance partner choice: Network distance,managerial incentives,and board monitoring

Research Summary: We ask if managerial opportunism is a significant problem in alliance partner choice and examine the role of corporate governance mechanisms in explaining this choice. Using a sample of 313 alliances of U.S. firms from the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries from 1992 to 2010, we find that managerial incentives lead to managerial preference for relationally risky distant partners over existing and new close partners. Further, board monitoring encourages managers to pursue existing and distant partners over new close ones, choices aligned with shareholder interests. In addition, we find that board monitoring substitutes for managerial incentives in alliance partner choice. We contribute to the literature on alliance partner choice to identify an important, and hitherto, unexplored perspective. Managerial Summary: This article examines whether managers and shareholders view alliance‐related risks differently, and how the divergent interests between managers and shareholders affect alliance partner choice. We argue that managers’ concern about their loss of employment and compensation from alliance failure impedes the choice of relationally risky alliance partners that may increase shareholder value. We also argue that managerial stock ownership and board monitoring mitigate this managerial propensity. Our findings suggest that stock ownership owned by managers and strong board monitoring are effective governance mechanisms to align managers’ interests with those of shareholders. Our study offers a novel perspective to understand alliance partner choice by viewing the firm as an entity comprised of fragmented interests.     

The impact of cultural differences in U.S. business-to-business export marketing channel strategic alliances

Given slower growth and fierce competition in the domestic market, combined with increasing opportunities in many overseas markets, more and more U.S. companies are going international. While many doing so may initially use a direct exporting approach that relies on foreign channel members to distribute the product in the host country, over time, strategic alliances among distribution partners may form based on trust, commitment, and cooperation. For these alliances to succeed, the partners' perceptions of these variables need to be congruent so that expectations on each side of the dyad are reasonably similar. However, what happens when the cultural backgrounds of each channel partner are substantially different? This study empirically examines whether cultural differences do affect trust, commitment, and cooperation in international marketing channel alliances between U.S. exporters and their foreign distribution partners. Based on the survey responses from 149 U.S. exporters with marketing alliances abroad, cultural differences do affect trust, commitment, and cooperation. The greater the cultural differences between channel partners, the lower the levels of trust, commitment, and cooperation. Managerial implications are discussed, and study limitations are identified.     

Rent appropriation of knowledge‐based assets and firm performance when institutions are weak: A study of Chinese publicly listed firms

Research summary : A firm's strategic investments in knowledge‐based assets through research and development (R&D) can generate economic rents for the firm, and thus are expected to affect positively a firm's financial performance. However, weak protection of minority shareholders, weak property rights, and ineffective law enforcement can allow those rents to be appropriated disproportionately by a firm's powerful insiders such as large owners and top managers. Recent data on Chinese publicly listed firms during 2007–2012 were used to demonstrate that the expected positive relationship between knowledge assets and performance is weaker in transition economies when a firm's ownership is highly concentrated and its managers have wide discretion. Moreover, rent appropriation by insiders was shown to vary with the levels of institutional development in which a firm operates. Managerial summary : Investing in knowledge‐based intangible assets (e.g., R&D) is an important value‐creation activity for the firm. Such value creation process can be facilitated by large shareholders and powerful managers, who can then take an advantageous position with critical insider information on these valuable intangible assets and therefore enjoy more opportunities to appropriate more value from them, leaving less value for other minority shareholders. The value distribution becomes increasingly skewed against minority shareholders when the institutional protection for them is weak. Indeed, in a large sample of Chinese publicly listed firms, we found that R&D investment becomes less positively associated with firm financial performance with the presence of large shareholders, high managerial equity, or CEO/Chairman duality, especially in Chinese provinces with weak institutional development. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Resource ambidexterity through alliance portfolios and firm performance

Research summary : Partner resources can be an important alternative to internal firm resources for attaining dual and seemingly incompatible strategic objectives. We extend arguments about managing conflicting objectives typically made at the firm level to the level of a firm's alliance portfolio. Specifically, will a balance between revenue enhancement and cost reduction attained collectively through partner resources accessed via a firm's various alliances be similarly beneficial for firm performance? Additionally, how do strategic attributes of alliance portfolio configuration, specifically alliance portfolio size and partner resource scope, condition the balance‐performance relationship? Based on data from the global airline industry, we find support for the balance‐performance relationship, though such balance is less beneficial for firms in the case of access to a broader resource scope per partner . Managerial summary : Increasing revenue and reducing costs simultaneously can potentially enhance firm competitiveness. We highlight that an alliance strategy can be an important alternative to internal resources for attaining such dual strategic objectives, particularly when partner resources accessed through alliances are treated collectively as portfolios. We examine the importance of balancing product‐market extending and efficiency‐improving partner resources in the global airline industry as well as the impact of two alternate strategies for accessing resources through alliances: fewer partners with more resources per partner or more partners with fewer resources per partner. We find that resource balance at the portfolio level helps airlines improve performance. Our results also suggest that managers should be cautious of accessing too many resources through just a few partners . Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

How does the partner type in R&D alliances impact technological innovation performance? A study on the Korean biotechnology industry

The number of strategic alliances for R&D activities in the biotechnology industry is sharply increasing. Some studies show that each alliance partner type has different alliance motives, resources and capabilities, organizational structures and cultures, and degrees of competition with partners, which can lead to different performances of strategic alliances. In this regard, this study conducts an empirical analysis of the different impact of each type of alliance partner on technological innovation performance and finds the moderating effect of absorptive capacity and potential competition by categorizing strategic alliances for R&D activities in the biotechnology industry into three types: vertical-downstream alliances, vertical-upstream alliances, and horizontal alliances. This study analyzed 206 Korean biotechnology firms and their strategic alliances for a total of 292 R&D activities. The results of the analysis showed that vertical alliances have a positive impact on technological innovation performance, while horizontal alliances have an inverted U-shaped relationship with technological innovation performance caused by the effect of competition. Additionally, it was confirmed that the R&D intensity of biotechnology firms has a moderating effect of increasing the impact of vertical-upstream alliances on technological innovation performance.     

The intra‐alliance division of value created through collaboration

The differential benefits reaped by individual partners are a major determinant of the impact of strategic alliances on firm performance and an important (dis)incentive for alliance partners to collaborate in value creation. Theoretically, we lack an explicit theory of intra‐alliance value division; empirically, previous analysis has been hampered by methodological challenges. We propose a bargaining framework for intra‐alliance value appropriation, as well as a measure for capturing its variation. We test our hypotheses on a sample of 200 biotechnology R&D alliances, and are able to explain variation in value appropriation across alliance partners, partner types, and individual firms of each type. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The impact of strategic dissent on organizational outcomes: A meta‐analytic integration

Research summary: Strategic dissent represents divergence in ideas, preferences, and beliefs related to ideal and/or future strategic emphasis. Conventional wisdom in strategic management holds that such differences in managerial cognitions lead to higher‐quality strategic decisions, and thus to enhanced firm performance. However, 4 decades of empirical research have not provided consistent findings or clear insights into the effects of strategic dissent. Hence, we analyze the relative validity of predictions about these effects from both social psychological theories of group behavior and information processing perspectives on decision‐making. Then, we conduct a meta‐analytic path analysis (MASEM) based on current empirical evidence. Synthesizing data from 78 articles, we put to rest the notion that strategic dissent leads to positive outcomes for organizations and estimate how negative its effects actually are. Managerial summary: Top management teams (TMTs) set the tone and direction for their firms in important ways. Top managers, however, often disagree over fundamental issues related to strategy. Such strategic dissent affects how important decisions are made, and thus how the firm performs. In more specific terms and contrary to popular belief, strategic dissent creates not only dysfunctional relationships among top managers, but also disrupts the process by which these managers exchange, discuss, and integrate information and ideas in making strategic decisions. In short, firms have not yet generated value through numerous perspectives, ideas, and opinions among their top managers. We discuss interventions that could prove helpful in efforts to benefit from having diverse cognitions in a TMT.     

Organization–stakeholder fit: A dynamic theory of cooperation,compromise, and conflict between an organization and its stakeholders

Research Summary : We advance the concept of organization–stakeholder fit (O–S fit) to explain cooperative behavior between an organization and its stakeholders. O–S fit describes the compatibility that exists between an organization and a stakeholder when their characteristics are well matched. We highlight two dimensions of O–S fit: value congruence, or the supplementary fit of organizational and stakeholder values, and strategic complementarity, or the complementary fit of strategic needs and resources. For each dimension, we detail the unique relational factors—including core elements of trust, predictability, attraction/exchange, and communication—that motivate cooperation. We then explicate the ways in which value congruence and strategic complementarity dynamically interrelate over time. Finally, we consider how organization‐stakeholder misfit may result in alternative relational behaviors, such as conflict or compromise. Managerial Summary : We develop a new way of thinking about the relationship between organizations and stakeholders. Recognizing that positive relationships require a degree of fit or compatibility, we argue that cooperative behavior between an organization and its stakeholders is maximized when relational partners share both core values and strategic priorities. We explain that high fit along these two dimensions increases trust, relational predictability, attraction/exchange, and communication. We also describe how positive relationships might be formed with fit along only one dimension, and how negative relationships might result in the presence of misfit. Ultimately, we suggest that managers who want to foster positive relationships with stakeholders should concentrate on aligning their values and priorities, rather than simply concentrating on one or the other.     

Achieving success in technology alliances: The Rover-Honda strategic collaboration

Dynamic changes within global markets are creating a need for different strategies for firms in the pursuit of competitive advantage. International technology alliances are one mode of organising the acquisition of competitive technologies which is especially important in technology-intensive industries. However, managers have an especially difficult challenge when trying to deal with problems of high technical risk, frequent changes in technologies, different cultural and managerial styles and perspectives. This article addresses these issues as it examines the planning and implementation of the international technology alliance between Rover and Honda, during the past fourteen years. By most criteria used, this alliance was highly successful, and the article discusses not only the areas of successful technical impact which the alliance had on these companies, but also the insights learned by Rover from the management process of the alliance. It also develops a framework of issues which managers can use to implement and manage international technology alliances.     

The impact of R&D‐specific factors on the attractiveness of small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises as partners vis‐à‐vis alliance formation in large emerging economies

This study examines the impact of research and development (R&D)‐specific factors in determining the likelihood of small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) from developed countries to be attractive partners vis‐à‐vis forming alliances with SMEs from large emerging economies (LEEs). This study is founded on the knowledge‐accessing theory of alliance formation, which emphasises the higher efficiency gains of knowledge application as opposed to knowledge generation. We extend this theory to SMEs on the basis that smaller firms, because of their resources constraints and drive to survive, are likely to use alliances to access external knowledge bases leading to new product development (NPD) opportunities because of the low feasibility of acquiring knowledge. As a mix of complex knowledge is necessary to develop most modern products and services, SMEs are also likely to adopt a more flexible operational approach and to accept compromises to forge knowledge‐accessing alliances. We illustrate this theoretical development using primary data collected from British and German biotechnology SMEs, declaring the intention prospectively to form alliances with their counterparts in Brazil. Binary logistic regression was used to identify the factors influencing the likelihood of a firm as an attractive alliance partner. Our results indicate that R&D‐specific factors influence the likelihood of firms to be attractive alliance partners. In particular, firms showing an in‐house innovation history focused on one or few products are more likely to be attractive alliance partners with LEE firms than those that do not. Another R&D‐specific predictor that enhances the chances of alliance partner attractiveness with LEE firms is the firm's focused searching and identifying capability relative to technology or equipment that demonstrates good prospects to improve the firm's line of products. A third predictor refers to the firm's awareness regarding non‐cost obstacles for its own technological development. Implications for policy makers and practitioners are also discussed.     

Performance feedback and middle managers’ divergent strategic behavior: The roles of social comparisons and organizational identification

Research Summary: What drives middle managers to search for new strategic initiatives and champion them to top management? This behavior—labeled divergent strategic behavior—spawns emergent strategies and thereby provides one of the essential ingredients of strategic renewal. We conceptualize divergent strategic behavior as a response to performance feedback. Data from 123 senior middle managers overseeing 21 multi‐country organizations (MCOs) of a Fortune 500 firm point to social performance comparisons rather than historical comparisons in driving divergent strategic behavior. Moreover, managers’ organizational identification affects whether they attend to organizational‐ or individual‐level feedback. These results contribute to research on performance aspirations and strategy process by providing a multilevel, multidimensional framework of performance aspirations in middle management driven strategic renewal. Managerial Summary: Middle managers are essential actors in strategic renewal. Their unique positions offer insights into operations alongside knowledge of strategy. In contrast to typical assessments of managerial performance with reference to a prior year, this research shows that performance comparisons relative to peers and other organizational units better motivate managers’ divergent strategic behavior. Our results also show that managers who identify with the firm are more attentive to organizational rather than individual performance discrepancies. Thus, our study unveils an important approach for organizations aiming to spark strategic renewal.     

Free‐riding in multi‐party alliances: The role of perceived alliance effectiveness and peers' collaboration in a research consortium

Research summary : Multi‐party alliances rely on partners' willingness to commit and pool their efforts in joint endeavors. However, partners face the dilemma of how much to commit to the alliance. We shed light on this issue by analyzing the relationship between partners' free‐riding—defined as their effort‐withholding—and their perceptions of alliance effectiveness and peers' collaboration. Specifically, we posit a U‐shaped relationship between partners' subjective evaluations of alliance effectiveness and their free‐riding. We also hypothesize a negative relation between partners' perceptions of the collaboration of peer organizations and their free‐riding. Results from a mixed‐method study—combining regression analysis of primary data on a major inter‐organizational research consortium and evidence from two experimental designs—support our hypotheses, bearing implications for the multi‐party alliances literature. Managerial summary : Free‐riding is a major concern in multi‐party alliances such as large research consortia, since the performance of these governance forms hinges on the joint contribution of multiple partners that often operate according to different logics (e.g., universities, firms, and government agencies). We show that, in such alliances, partners' perceptions have relevant implications for their willingness to contribute to the consortium's shared goals. Specifically, we find that partners free‐ride more—that is, contribute less—when they perceive the effectiveness of the overall alliance to be either very low or very high. Partners also gauge their commitment to the alliance on the perception of the effort of their peers—that is, other organizations similar to them. These findings provide managers of multi‐party alliances with additional levers to motivate partners to contribute fairly to such joint endeavor. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Problems faced by R&D managers in Canadian federal government laboratories

The paper conducts a critical review of the problems faced by middle to first-line managers in managing R&D in Canadian government laboratories. The data come from the published literature, interviews with R&D managers, and information obtained from government employees undergoing training as R&D managers.
The problems are numerous and serious. They arise from a multiplicity of causes related to underfunding and bureaucratic management practices that do not allow for the special nature of R&D. Hiring freezes, staff reductions, travel restrictions and reductions in training budgets are all consequences of underfunding, resulting in an aging workforce and technological obsolescence. Bureaucratic administration rules set by central agencies constrain the freedom of R&D managers to manage effectively, and limit low-level participation in policy-making and planning. The result is that too many management posts are filled by under-achieving scientists and engineers, with resultant consequences for originality and efficiency.
The authors believe that the only cure is to undertake proper funding, recognise the special operational needs of R&D management, and select managers for managerial ability in addition to technical competence.     

Managing knowledge leakage in strategic alliances: The effects of trust and formal contracts

Although strategic alliances offer opportunities for knowledge sharing and leveraging, they also carry the risk of knowledge leakage to partner firms. In this study, we conceptualize the notion of knowledge leakage as a multidimensional construct and formalize its measurement. We examine the effects of two dominant governance mechanisms—trust (goodwill trust and competence trust) and formal contracts on knowledge leakage. A survey of 205 partnering firms in China indicates that goodwill trust has a U-shaped relationship with knowledge leakage, whereas competence trust has a negative impact. Moreover, goodwill trust and competence trust interact differently with formal contracts on knowledge leakage. This study offers important theoretical and managerial insights for firms to manage knowledge leakage in strategic alliances.     

Comment on “fishing for sharks: Partner selection in biopharmaceutical R&D alliances” by diestre and rajagopalan

A recent study of R&D alliances between new biotechnology firms (NBFs) and pharmaceutical firms investigated how NBFs deal with the “swimming with sharks” dilemma involved in allying with firms capable of appropriating value. It concludes that NBFs are less likely to select alliance partners with related expertise because of greater appropriation risk. Based on our experience as NBF managers and a survey of NBF executives, we believe that such situations are uncommon, and that the study more likely shows pharmaceutical firms seeking diversification. Thousands of NBFs seek alliances with the top 100 pharmaceutical firms, and the larger company is much more likely to be the one to select among multiple potential partners. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Knowledge sharing and safeguarding in R&D collaborations: The role of steering committees in biotechnology alliances

Research Summary: This research contributes to alliance governance research by demonstrating how partners' administrative controls in nonequity collaborations regulate knowledge transfers across partners. These administrative controls can take the form of board‐like joint committees having explicitly delineated authority over certain alliance activities. We illuminate governing committees as an important, albeit neglected, instrument for administrative control in the governance of non‐equity alliances, and we demonstrate that these organizational mechanisms facilitate knowledge flows within the scope of an alliance. We also show that governing committees safeguard against misappropriation hazards, particularly when a partner possesses the incentive and ability to engage in such behavior. This study extends alliance governance research beyond the implications of the equity‐nonequity dichotomy to consider a wider and richer gamut of governance instruments available to address the challenges associated with knowledge transfers in alliances. Managerial Summary: Non‐equity alliances are important vehicles to collaborate with external partners, particularly in the biopharmaceutical industry and other high‐tech sectors. To guide these collaborations effectively, partners can use the contract to custom‐build jointly‐staffed managerial units with clearly demarcated decision‐making responsibilities. We demonstrate that these organizational mechanisms facilitate knowledge flows within the scope of an alliance. We also show that governing committees also safeguard against misappropriation hazards, particularly when a partner values a firm's knowledge highly, or it possesses the required ability to absorb and assimilate a firm's knowledge. Our results imply that contractually‐defined managerial interfaces provide a channel to regulate knowledge‐sharing in collaborative alliances.     

Managing alliance relationships: Key challenges in the early stages of collaboration

Recent surveys indicate that executives of technology companies consider strategic alliances to be central to their competitive strategies. Yet the barriers to successful alliances are formidable. In many instances, these barriers develop in the early stages of an alliance. This study identifies and analyzes the types of challenges that companies face in the start–up phase of their alliances. It is based on a survey and interviews with executives in the Canadian high technology industry. The study finds that the principal challenges in the first year of an alliance relate to relationship issues between the partners. It suggests stronger attention to these issues in the design and implementation of an alliance. The paper concludes with guidelines to build and sustain effective working relationships between partners.     

UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCES IN KOREAN AND U.S. EXECUTIVES’ STRATEGIC ORIENTATIONS

Competitive positioning in a global market requires an understanding of the decision processes and behavioral attributes of executives from different countries. These attributes reflect the executives’ cultural background, the national policies under which they have worked, and their home country’s level of economic development (institutional context). The current research compared strategic decision models of U.S. and Korean executives and the results suggest that criteria employed by the executives from the two countries differ. Differences in institutional context between Korea and the U.S.A. were reflected in the weightings of objective criteria used by the executives. Korean executives emphasized industry attractiveness, sales and market share (because of policies that encourage growth) and U.S. executives emphasized projected demand, discounted cash flow and ROI (because of policies and institutions that focus on profitability). The results suggest the importance of understanding the strategic orientations of international competitors, partners in international strategic alliances and managers of international subsidiaries or divisions. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

National and corporate culture differences in international strategic alliances: Perceptions of Chinese partners

We consider the effect of national culture and corporate culture differences on the management of international strategic alliances (ISAs). Findings are based on the perceptions of a relatively large sample of Chinese partner firms in ISAs with foreign partners. We find that differences in national culture and corporate culture have contributed to a similar extent to differing views on ISA management. However, findings indicate that differences in national culture and corporate culture have a differential impact on aspects of ISA management. Perception of national culture and corporate culture differences and the contribution of those differences to differing views on the management of ISAs are greater in relatively younger ISAs compared with older ISAs. Managers in equity-based ISAs report fewer problems with culture related impediments to managing ISAs than managers in non-equity-based ISAs.

The influence of desire for control on monitoring decisions and performance outcomes in strategic alliances

Strategic alliances are fraught with risks, such as the uncontrolled disclosure of core knowledge via opportunistic learning. The usefulness of monitoring in policing opportunism notwithstanding, a contrasting view is that monitoring mechanisms can themselves manifest the dark side of strategic alliances. The present study argues that a novel dark personality trait—the focal firm's desire for control—may influence key decisions pertaining to how to monitor strategic alliances, which in turn can negatively impact performance outcomes. Our conceptual model was developed and tested, based on a survey of 404 strategic alliances. The results demonstrate that a focal firm's desire for control is positively associated with process monitoring as well as output monitoring. The firm's use of process monitoring to oversee the counterpart drives its performance outcomes only if there is a low level of information exchange between the alliance partners; as such, information exchange norms substitute for process monitoring. By contrast, the focal firm's use of outcome monitoring is negatively linked to performance unless complemented by a high level of information exchange. Key implications for alliance management and future research are derived from the findings.