Whether and when do alliance terminations pay off?

Engaging in multiple strategic alliances, a firm forms an alliance portfolio. While a larger alliance portfolio signals investors a firm's ability to exploit new opportunities and improve financial performance, having multiple alliances may also undermine financial performance due to a firm's limited ability to effectively manage these alliances. Announcing an alliance termination, a firm signals an intention to increase the effectiveness of a larger alliance portfolio. This article examines the extent to which alliance termination announcements create value for firms with multiple alliances. Building on the resource-based view of the firm and organizational learning literature, the paper hypothesizes a U-shaped relationship between alliance portfolio size and a firm's cumulative abnormal stock return following an alliance termination announcement. This effect is moderated by the amount of a firm's alternative resources and partner-specific experience that affect its ability to effectively manage multiple alliances. The results show that alliance termination announcements create firm value when an alliance portfolio is large.     

Resource relatedness and the mode of entry into new businesses: Internal resource accumulation vs. access by collaborative arrangement

When firms seek to enter a new business segment, they have to decide how to best gain access to the required resources. This paper analyzes how resource relatedness influences a firm's decision between internal development and collaborative arrangement as modes of entry. We distinguish between a firm's capacity to transfer its established resources to the new segment (resource transferability) and the integration and synergistic combination of current firm resources with target segment resources in day‐to‐day operations (resource complementarity). Resource transferability makes entry by internal development more likely, but this effect depends on segment characteristics. Synergies from complementary resources can be exploited more easily within firm boundaries than across an alliance interface. However, certain partner characteristics can substitute in part for belonging to the same firm. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Alliance portfolios and firm performance: A study of value creation and appropriation in the U.S. software industry

This study reveals the multifaceted contribution of alliance portfolios to firms' market performance. Extending prior research that has stressed the value‐creation effect of network resources, it uncovers how prominent partners may undermine a firm's capacity to appropriate value from its alliance portfolio. Analysis of a comprehensive panel dataset of 367 software firms and their 20,779 alliances suggests that the contribution of network resources to value creation varies with the complementarity of those resources. Furthermore, the relative bargaining power of partners in the alliance portfolio constrains the firm's appropriation capacity, especially when many of these partners compete in the focal firm's industry. In turn, the firm's market performance improves with the intensity of competition among partners in its alliance portfolio. These findings advance network research by highlighting the trade‐offs that alliance portfolios impose on firms that seek to manage and leverage their alliances. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Can entrepreneurial orientation improve R&D alliance performance? An absorptive capacity perspective

Research and Development (R&D) alliance studies maintain that alliance partners’ entrepreneurial interactions that pursue innovation opportunities through collective exploitation and exploration of knowledge resources lead to alliance success. Despite the importance of productive resource exchange and generation through such interactions, performance-by-alliance mechanisms remain under-researched. In this study, we develop a theoretical framework hypothesizing that the entrepreneurial orientation (EO) of alliance firms, which underlies their approach to seeking and utilizing resources productively, has a potential impact on their R&D alliance performance, depending on their absorptive capacity (AC). To specify the value creation and capture mechanism in the alliance, we adopt two performance indicators: technological competitiveness and business performance. Findings from a study of 218 small technology-intensive firms conducting R&D alliance projects show that EO translates into business performance through technological competitiveness and that AC leverages the alliance performance implications of EO. The results suggest that EO–AC complementarity is a strategic stimulant that triggers firms to extract greater benefits from R&D alliances.     

Successful Product Development after Firm Acquisitions: The Role of Research and Development

A major reason for carrying out a merger and acquisition (M&A) is to gain access to technological knowledge and to increase new product development (NPD) capabilities. To achieve the desired effect of improving a firm's capacity for innovation, this knowledge must be combined with the acquiring firm's existing resources. Previous research, however, has made it clear that M&A transactions tend to disrupt a company's innovation processes, resulting in reduced investment in research and development (R&D) activities as well as a lower innovative output in terms of patents and new products introduced to the market. In this regard, a successful postmerger integration of the firms' R&D units plays a decisive role. Conceptually, this exploratory article distinguishes between the strategic approach to integration and the integration instruments or measures to be employed within the approach. Whereas the former sets the general strategic direction of the integration or, in other words, establishes some kind of acquisition posture, the latter describe the relevant fields or dimensions to be addressed during integration. These integration strategies and instruments are subsequently investigated in a sample of 35 M&A transactions. It is shown that companies typically revert to three distinct integration strategies, depending on the need for strategic interdependence and organizational autonomy: symbiosis, absorption, and adjustment. Together with the integration instruments that relate to structural linking, process redesign, systems standardization, and culture building, the integration strategies are analyzed using seemingly unrelated regression models. It turns out that technological success and, hence, NPD capabilities benefit most from a symbiosis and an absorption strategy. Apparently, only wide‐ranging reorganization efforts in R&D focussing on common structures, processes, and systems can fully realize the benefits from a combination of resources. To achieve economic success or high integration quality, an adjustment strategy appears to be the best choice as reorganization efforts are rather limited. With respect to the integration instruments, the research shows that the structural linking exhibits a great impact on technological and economic success but no effect on integration quality. Obviously, common structural patterns and interlinked structures within the R&D units have a positive effect in that they facilitate better collaboration and research outcomes. A common organizational structure hence serves as a basis for realizing innovative resource combinations and streamlining the NPD process. A standardization of systems exhibits strong positive links with all success variables. Apparently, a consistent unification, offering orientation and comparability, is of high importance to achieve the best possible implementation of the integration and to foster innovative capabilities. Significant effects of culture building can be substantiated for economic success. Moreover, there tends to be a positive effect on integration quality. This underpins the importance of measures to encourage the build‐up of a common corporate culture. To sum up, the research provides a couple of insights on how to strengthen NPD capabilities following a merger.     

Carve-outs under airline antitrust immunity

This paper offers the first formal economic analysis of carve-outs under airline antitrust immunity. Carve-outs are designed to limit the potential anticompetitive effects of cooperation by alliance partners in hub-to-hub markets, where they provide overlapping nonstop service. While the paper shows that carve-outs are beneficial when the alliance does not involve full integration of the partners' operations on the hub-to-hub route, its key point is that a carve-out may be harmful when imposed on a joint-venture alliance. A JV alliance involves full exploitation of economies of traffic density on the hub-to-hub route, and a carve-out prevents the realization of these benefits. While a carve-out may limit anticompetitive incentives on the hub-to-hub route, welfare may be reduced if the resulting gains are overshadowed by the efficiency loss generated by the carve-out.     

Learning to Reduce Interorganizational Learning: An Analysis of Architectural Product Innovation in Strategic Alliances*

There is wide agreement in analyses of strategic alliances that, regardless of the purpose of the alliance, members of the partner organizations should engage in intensive mutual learning to make the alliance a success. In contrast to this view, the present article shows that in strategic alliances aimed at product innovations by recombining partners' extant technologies, learning between specialists can be reduced considerably without jeopardizing success. This is made possible through four interconnected mechanisms integrated into the concept of transactive organizational learning (TOL): (1) modularization, which allows specialists of different domains to develop modules to a large extent independently of each other and to concentrate communication between themselves on the design of interfaces between modules; (2) storing of knowledge in artifacts instead of in organizational members' memories; (3) localization of knowledge not present in the project team but for which a need has arisen through transactive memory; and (4) knowledge integration by prototyping (i.e., by repeated testing of modules and of interactions between modules until a satisfactorily working end product is achieved). Although these four mechanisms reduce the need for cross‐learning between specialists of different domains, some common knowledge and some cross‐learning between the partners' specialists is still required. Case studies on four of SAP's strategic alliances for product innovation with different partners lend empirical support to this study's concept. The article concludes with implications for practice: Companies should find out whether the TOL mechanisms that reduce time to market are present, to what extent their potential is exploited, and how well they work together.     

Do ongoing networks block out new friends? Reconciling the embeddedness constraint dilemma on new alliance partner addition

Research Summary: This study addresses a theoretical dilemma regarding how alliance network constraint (reflected by network cohesion) affects a firm’s alliance formation with new partners. Using a network pluralism approach, we separate a firm’s ego alliance network into two activity‐based networks—an exploratory network and an exploitative network—based on the primary value chain activity involved in each alliance. We argue that the cohesion of exploratory or exploitative networks has an inverted U‐shaped effect on the addition of new partners in the same activity‐based network, and a positive effect on the addition of new partners in the other network. Results based on data from the biotechnology industry largely support our predictions with one exception. Our study contributes to both scholarly understanding of network embeddedness and alliance practice. Managerial Summary: The structure of firms’ ongoing alliance networks may have paradoxical implications for their efforts to search for and form alliance with new partners. That is, when a firm’s alliance partners are tightly connected with each other, the cohesive network tends to both encourage and impede the focal firm to add new partners. We resolve this dilemma by showing that when a firm is deeply entrenched in a cohesive alliance network conducting a certain type of activities (e.g., R&D activities), it may not easily add new R&D alliance partners. However, it may still be able to escape from the cohesive R&D alliance network by seeking new partners conducting other activities (e.g., manufacturing activities).     

Alliance portfolio reconfiguration following a technological discontinuity

Research summary : We study how technological discontinuities generate first‐ and second‐order effects on alliance formation and termination, leading to reconfiguration of firms' alliance portfolios. Following technological shocks, we argue that firms often seek alliances that provide new resources while also having incentives to form alliances for reinforced and challenged resources that complement the new resources. In parallel, alliance terminations, even involving resources otherwise unaffected by the discontinuity, increase due to limits in firms' alliance carrying capacity. We study biopharmaceutical firms between 1990 and 2000, which faced a technological discontinuity in 1995 in the form of combinatorial chemistry and high‐throughput screening. We improve understanding of how technological discontinuities affect the value of resources and how firms reconfigure alliance portfolios in response. Managerial summary : When firms form alliances to gain new resources during technological discontinuities that disrupt their industry, they cannot consider only the focal new partnerships. Instead, new alliances create complementarity and substitution pressures that lead to broader reconfiguration of the firms' alliance portfolios: (1) complementarity creates incentives to also form alliances for resources that the technological discontinuity reinforces or challenges in order to improve the collective value of co‐specialized assets; (2) substitution creates incentives to terminate existing alliances, even if their value is otherwise unaffected by the discontinuity, in order to create carrying capacity for new alliances. Thus, one new alliance can generate a cascade of reconfiguration that challenges the balance between the benefits of stability and the need for change in an alliance portfolio. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Stepping in and stepping out: Strategic alliance partner reconfiguration and the unplanned termination of complex projects

Research summary : I add to work that emphasizes the stability of strategic alliances by considering the consequences of alliance partner reconfiguration. I offer two contrasting perspectives: (1) alliance partner reconfiguration leads to disruption, hence increases the risk of subsequent project termination; (2) partner reconfiguration leads to adaptation, hence decreases this risk. Data on 1,025 interfirm Australian mining alliances (2002–2011) shows that on average alliance partner reconfiguration increases the risk of project termination. For firm exit from an alliance, the effect is contingent on a firm's resource base, but not for firm entry. Surprisingly, I do not find that alliance partner reconfiguration is beneficial in a dynamic environment. I discuss the implications of these findings for the literature on strategic alliance dynamics and that on strategic alliance outcomes. Managerial summary : This paper studies what happens when over time strategic alliances change their original membership. The research shows that both entry in and exit from an alliance increase the risk of project termination. Hence, weathering difficult times and managing conflict by keeping teams stable should be a prime directive if project survival is the alliance partners' overriding concern. In addition, I find that the exit of a firm with a comparatively large resource base increases the hazard of termination more than if the departing firm has a relatively small resource base. Therefore, one cannot underestimate the importance of trying to keep on board those alliance partners who bring a critical resource to the table. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Unraveling the mechanisms of reputation and alliance formation: A study of venture capital syndication in China

Extant research shows that resources are significant to a firm's choice of alliance formation. We focus on an important form of intangible resource—firm reputation—and examine how it affects a firm's propensity to form alliances. We propose an inverted U‐shaped relationship between a firm's reputation and its likelihood of alliance formation, resulting from the opposing mechanisms of opportunity and need. We also examine how this relationship may vary across two contingencies: (1) foreign and domestic firms; and (2) different levels of institutional development. Empirical analyses of China's venture capital (VC) industry provide support for our hypotheses. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Network resource stocks and flows: how do alliance portfolios affect the value of new alliance formations?

We examine how new network resources accessed through alliance formations interact with network resources present in a firm's alliance portfolio. We test our theoretical model using event study methodology and data from the global air transportation industry. We find that the market rewards firms forming alliances that contribute resources that can be synergistically combined with firms' own resources as well as with network resources accessed through their alliance portfolios. Our results also indicate that the market penalizes firms entering into alliances that create resource combinations that are substitutes to resource combinations deployed by existing alliance partners. Copyright © 2011 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.     

The effect of strategic alliance resource accumulation and process characteristics on new product success: Exploration of international high-tech strategic alliances in China

This paper examines two research questions: (1) how do strategic alliance resources influence new product outcomes, and (2) how do these effects differ under different NPD process characteristics. By integrating resource-based view and coordination literature, the authors argue that both marketing and technology resources demonstrate independent and interactive effects on new product innovativeness, speed to market, and market performance. Further, the individual effects of marketing and technology resources are moderated by the process characteristics of partner interdependence, while the interactive effect between marketing and technology resources is moderated by the development process characteristic of task interdependence. Using primary dyadic data collected from 142 international high-tech strategic alliances in China, we test and find general support for these arguments. The results provide significant theoretical implications for a variety of research streams, as well as managerial implications for strategic alliances with Chinese firms.     

Explaining alliance success: Competences, resources, relational factors, and resource-advantage theory

Business alliances, by filling critical resource gaps, enable firms to have positional advantages that lead to superior financial performance. Some alliances, however, are more successful than others. The three prominent theoretical approaches to explaining alliance success rely on resources, competences, and relational factors. The authors theorize that the three approaches are interdependent and, using resource-advantage (R-A) theory as a framework, develop an integrative model. This model proposes that the three approaches are linked by means of relationships among (1) alliance competence, (2) complementary resources, (3) idiosyncratic resources, and (4) cooperation. A test of the model, using a sample of alliance professionals, finds support for the theory that the three approaches are, indeed, interdependent and that resources, construed in the manner of R-A theory, influence alliance success through positional advantage.     

Antecedents of functional integration during new product development: The purchasing–marketing link

In response to different economic and business trends, companies are becoming increasingly dependent on external resources and capabilities as they seek to cater for an ever more complex and challenging demand. Such dependence has led an important group of scholars to draw attention to the inevitable integration of the purchasing and marketing functions. We stress here the need for such integration during new product development, and seek the mechanisms that may promote purchasing–marketing integration. Accordingly, this study describes two essential components underlying the concept of purchasing–marketing integration, and tests the effect of different integration mechanisms gathered from the literature on these two components. The model is tested on a sample of 141 Spanish industrial companies. Our results show that each one of these integration mechanisms varies in its effectiveness in promoting each key component of purchasing–marketing integration. Taking these asymmetric effects into account is crucial for selecting the appropriate purchasing and marketing integration devices within companies.     

Performance of alliances: formative stages and changing organizational and environmental influences

There is near unanimous agreement that the performance of alliances usually falls short of expectations. Studies have identified several generic reasons for poor performance: inadequate communication, lack of trust, insufficient complementarity of resources, inappropriate organizational structures and processes, and so on. While we broadly agree with these, knowledge of these self-evident reasons does not seem to have turned the tide of bad news in any way. We show in this paper that it is important to unpack a broad set of antecedent variables, including the ones identified above, and to track them over the crucial formative stages of an alliance. Based on our interviews with 24 senior and middle level managers and professionals of a focal company about 10 of its major alliances, we identify the following four formative stages of an alliance: (1) Recognition , (2) Research , (3) Relationship Set-up , and (4) Ramp up . We show that the primary predictors of success across these stages are not identical, nor their effect uniform. Further, proper completion of all the preceding stages is essential for the success of subsequent stages. We finally show that the compaction of the various successful stages, in particular of the Ramp-Up stage, is one of the best predictors of overall success of an alliance.     

Ties' repeatedness,partners' social value,and alliance portfolio performance in emerging economy: The moderating roles of firm-government linkages

Repeatedly collaborating with previous partners or following peers' decisions are two primary strategies employed by emerging economy firms in selecting their alliance partners. As a result, the alliance portfolios of firms often feature a high level of ties' repeatedness and partners' social value—the extensiveness of a firm's partners being selected by other players in the industry. However, few studies examine whether these two features can result in superior alliance portfolio performance. Leveraging data collected from 566 fund product distribution alliances initiated by 62 fund companies in a 5-year period (2007–2011), we find that ties' repeatedness does not significantly improve alliance portfolio performance. In fact, a high level of social value of the current partners produces a negative effect. However, firms' linkages to governments can change the performance consequences of these two features. As a category of formal government–firm linkages, state ownership improves the positive effect of ties' repeatedness on alliance portfolio performance, while it strengthens the negative effect of partners' social value. As a category of informal linkages, political ties weaken the positive effect of ties' repeatedness on alliance portfolio performance but cannot significantly alleviate the negative effect of the social value of current partners.     

Alliance or Acquisition? A Mechanisms‐Based,Policy‐Capturing Analysis

Research summary : While alliance researchers view prior partner‐specific alliance experience as influencing firms' subsequent alliance or acquisition decisions, empirical evidence on the alliance versus acquisition decision is surprisingly mixed. We offer a reconciliation by proposing and testing an analytical framework that recognizes prior partner‐specific experiences as heterogeneous along three fundamental dimensions: partner‐specific trust, routines, and value certainty. This allows us to use a policy‐capturing methodology to rigorously operationalize and test our mechanism‐level predictions. We find that all three mechanisms can increase the likelihood of a subsequent alliance or acquisition, and in terms of the comparative choice between alliances versus acquisitions, partner‐specific trust pulls towards alliances, and value certainty pulls towards acquisitions. We conclude with a discussion of the theoretical and empirical implications of our approach and method . Managerial summary : This study focuses on an important corporate decision: When a firm has had an alliance with another firm, how would that experience affect the likelihood of a future alliance or acquisition with that same firm? We first suggest that it will depend on three factors: the level of trust that existed in that prior alliance, the extent to which specific work routines were developed, and the degree to which the firm was able to confidently assess the value of the partner firm's resources. We then find that trust is a particularly strong predictor of future alliances, while confidence regarding value more strongly predicts future acquisitions. In this way, we demonstrate more precisely how past corporate choices can affect (consciously or unconsciously) future ones . © 2017 The Authors. Strategic Management Journal Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.