Interfirm Network Structure and Firm Resources: Towards a Unifying Concept

• Autorzy: Jesse Karjalainen , Aku Valtakoski , Ilkka Kauranen
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

PURPOSE: The objective of this paper is to propose a concept of network resource distribution that systematically unifies the resource-based and network-based perspectives on interfirm networks and enables integrated analysis of how firm resources and network structure interact to affect firm performance. METHODOLOGY: This conceptual paper first reviews the extant literature on interfirm networks and then develops the unifying concept of network resource distribution. FINDINGS: The literature review indicates that strategy scholars have long sought to integrate the resource-based view and the social network explanations of firm performance but, thus far, only a partial integration has been achieved. In particular, studies on the resource-level heterogeneity of interfirm networks have largely been limited to the analysis of firm dyads. How firm resources and network structure beyond the immediate network partners interact to affect firm performance has not yet been adequately addressed. The proposed unified concept of network resource distribution systematizes prior research and illuminates how network structure and firm resources interact to affect firm performance beyond the immediate network partners. IMPLICATIONS FOR THEORY AND PRACTICE: For theory, this paper highlights gaps in the extant literature on interfirm networks and proposes a unifying concept that can be utilized to address these gaps and to develop further theory in the area. For practice, this paper encourages managers not to limit their analyses of strategic alliances to immediate partnerships; it is also crucial to consider the partners and their resources, and reflect on how they are related to one another outside of the immediate partnership portfolio. ORIGINALITY AND VALUE: Network resource distribution is a novel concept that ties together and systematizes various strands of research on interfirm networks, thus providing a foundation for future research in the area. The concept is also amenable to detailed operationalization, facilitating subsequent quantitative testing of theoretical arguments combining firm resources and the structure of a network. (original abstract)

CEL: Celem tego artykułu jest zaproponowanie koncepcji dystrybucji zasobów sieciowych, która systematycznie ujednolica zasobową i sieciową perspektywę sieci międzyorganizacyjnych oraz umożliwia zintegrowaną analizę interakcji zasobów firmy i struktury sieci w celu wpływania na wydajność firmy. METODYKA: Zawiera przegląd istniejącej literatury na temat sieci międzyorganizacyjnych, a następnie rozwija ujednoliconą koncepcję dystrybucji zasobów sieciowych. WYNIKI: Przegląd literatury wskazuje, że badacze strategii od dawna starali się zintegrować pogląd oparty na zasobach i wynikach firmy w sieciach społecznych, ale jak dotąd osiągnięto tylko częściową integrację. W szczególności badania nad heterogenicznością na poziomie zasobów sieci międzyorganizacyjnych ograniczyły się w dużej mierze do analizy diad firm. W jaki sposób zasoby firmy i struktura sieci poza bezpośrednimi partnerami sieci współdziałają, aby wpływać na wyniki firmy, nie zostało jeszcze odpowiednio wyjaśnione. Zaproponowana ujednolicona koncepcja dystrybucji zasobów sieciowych systematyzuje wcześniejsze badania i wyjaśnia, w jaki sposób struktura sieci i zasoby firmy oddziałują, wpływając na wydajność firmy poza bezpośrednimi partnerami sieci. IMPLIKACJE DLA TEORII I PRAKTYKI: Niniejszy artykuł zwraca uwagę na luki w istniejącej literaturze na temat sieci międzyorganizacyjnych i proponuje ujednoliconą koncepcję, którą można wykorzystać, aby zająć się lukami badawczymi i rozwijać dalszą teorię w tej dziedzinie. W praktyce niniejszy artykuł zachęca menedżerów, aby nie ograniczali swoich analiz strategicznych sojuszy do bezpośrednich partnerstw; ważne jest również, aby wziąć pod uwagę partnerów i ich zasoby oraz zastanowić się, w jaki sposób są ze sobą powiązani poza bezpośrednim portfolio partnerstwa. ORYGINALNOŚĆ I WARTOŚĆ: Dystrybucja zasobów sieciowych to nowatorska koncepcja, która łączy i systematyzuje różne wątki badań nad sieciami międzyorganizacyjnymi, stanowiąc w ten sposób podstawę dla przyszłych badań w tej dziedzinie. Koncepcja jest również podatna na szczegółową operacjonalizację, ułatwiając późniejsze ilościowe testowanie argumentów teoretycznych łączących zasoby firmy i strukturę sieci. (abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Resource approach in management; Strategic management; Organizational relationships; Network structure

PL

Podejście zasobowe w zarządzaniu; Zarządzanie strategiczne; Relacje organizacyjne; Struktury sieciowe

• Czasopismo: Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI)
• Rocznik: 2021
• Tom: 17
• Numer: nr 3 A Network Approach in Strategic Management : Emerging Trends and Research Concepts
• Strony: 227--264

Twórcy

autor

Jesse Karjalainen

• Aalto University School of Science, Finland

autor

Aku Valtakoski

• Linköping University, Sweden

autor

Ilkka Kauranen

• Aalto University School of Science, Finland

Bibliografia

• Afuah, A. (2000). How much do your co-opetitors' capabilities matter in the face of technological change? Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 397-404. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200003)21:3%3C397::AID-SMJ88%3E3.0.CO;2-1
• Aggarwal, V. A. (2020). Resource congestion in alliance networks: How a firm's partners' partners influence the benefits of collaboration. Strategic Management Journal, 41(4), 627-655. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3109
• Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 425-455. https://doi.org/10.2307/2667105
• Andrevski, G., Brass. D., & Ferrier, W. (2016). Alliance portfolio configurations and competitive action frequency. Journal of Management, 42(4), 811-837. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313498901
• Arya, B., & Lin, Z. (2007). Understanding collaboration outcomes from an extended resource-based view perspective: The roles of organizational characteristics, partner attributes, and network structures. Journal of Management, 33(5), 697-723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307305561
• Asgari, N., Tandon, V., Singh, K., & Mitchell, W. (2018). Creating and taming discord: How firms manage embedded competition in alliance portfolios to limit alliance termination. Strategic Management Journal, 39, 3273-3299. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2784
• Bae, J., & Gargiulo, M. (2004). Partner substitutability, alliance network structure, and firm profitability in the telecommunications industry. Academy of Management Journal, 47(6), 843-859. https://doi.org/10.5465/20159626
• Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
• Baum, J. A. C., Calabrese, T., & Silverman, B. S. (2000). Don't go it alone: Alliance network composition and startups' performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 267-294. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200003)21:3<267::AID-SMJ89>3.0.CO;2-8
• Borgatti, S. P., & Halgin, D. S. (2011). On network theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1168-1181. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0641
• Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/000169939403700410
• Burt, R. S. (2000). The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22, 345-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-3085(00)22009-1
• Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349-399. https://doi.org/10.1086/421787
• Burt, R. S., & Soda, G. (2021). Network capabilities: Brokerage as a bridge between network theory and the resource-based view of the firm. Journal of Management, forthcoming. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320988764
• Carlile, P. R. (2004). Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15(5), 555-568. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0094
• Carnabuci, G., & Operti, E. (2013). Where do firms' recombinant capabilities come from? Intraorganizational networks, knowledge, and firms' ability to innovate through technological recombination. Strategic Management Journal, 34(13), 1591-1613. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2084
• Carpenter, M. A., Li, M., & Jiang, H. (2012). Social network research in organizational contexts: A systematic review of methodological issues and choices. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1328-1361. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312440119
• Chiambaretto, P., Masse, D., & Mirc, N. (2019). "All for One and One for All?" - Knowledge broker roles in managing tensions of internal coopetition: The Ubisoft case. Research Policy, 48, 584-600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.009
• Chiambaretto, P., & Wassmer, U. (2019). Resource utilization as an internal driver of alliance portfolio evolution: The Qatar Airways case (1993-2010). Long Range Planning, 52, 51-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.02.004
• Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-52. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553
• Cui, A. S., & O'Connor, G. (2012). Alliance portfolio resource diversity and firm innovation. Journal of Marketing, 76(4), 24-43. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.11.0130
• Das, T. K., & Teng, B. S. (2000). A resource-based theory of strategic alliances. Journal of Management, 26(1), 31-61. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.11.0130
• Dittrich, K., & Duysters, G. (2007). Networking as a means to strategy change: The case of open innovation in mobile telephony. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24(6), 510-521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2007.00268.x
• Dushnitky, G., & Shaver, J. M. (2009). Limitations to inter-organizational knowledge acquisitions: The paradox of corporate venture capital. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 1045-1064. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.781
• Dyer, J. H., & Hatch, N. W. (2006). Relation-specific capabilities and barriers to knowledge transfers: Creating advantage through network relationships. Strategic Management Journal, 27(8), 701-719. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.543
• Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660-679. https://doi.org/10.2307/259056
• Eisenhardt, K. M., & Schoonhoven, C. B. (1996). Resource-based view of strategic alliance formation: Strategic and social effects in entrepreneurial firms. Organization Science, 7(2), 136-150. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.7.2.136
• Galunic, D. C., & Rodan, S. (1998). Resource recombinations in the firm: Knowledge structures and the potential for Schumpeterian innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 19(12), 1193-1201. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(1998120)19:12<1193::AID-SMJ5>3.0.CO;2-F
• Gargiulo, M., & Benassi, M. (2000). Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital. Organization Science, 11(2), 183-196. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.11.2.183.12514
• Gilsing, V., Nooteboom, B., Vanhaverbeke, W., Duysters, G., & van den Oord, A. (2008). Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: Technological distance, betweenness centrality and density. Research Policy, 37(10), 1717-1731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.08.010
• Grigoriou, K., & Rothaermel, F. (2017). Organizing for knowledge creation: Internal knowledge networks and the contingent effect of external knowledge sourcing. Strategic Management Journal, 38, 395-414. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2489
• Grant, R. M., & Baden-Fuller, C. (2004). A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances. Journal of Management Studies, 41(1), 61-84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00421.x
• Guan, J., & Liu, N. (2016). Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: A patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy. Research Policy, 45(1), 97-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.08.002
• Gulati, R. (1995a). Social structure and alliance formation patterns: A longitudinal analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(4), 619-652. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393756
• Gulati, R. (1995b). Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 85-112. https://doi.org/10.5465/256729
• Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 293-317. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199804)19:4<293::AID-SMJ982>3.0.CO;2-M
• Gulati, R. (1999). Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 20(5), 397-420. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199905)20:5<397::AID-SMJ35>3.0.CO;2-K
• Gulati, R. (2007). Managing Network Resources: Alliances, Affiliations and Other Relational Assets. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Gulati, R., & Higgins, M. C. (2003). Which ties matter when? The contingent effects of interorganizational partnerships on IPO success. Strategic Management Journal, 24(2), 127-144. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.287
• Gulati, R., Lavie, D., & Madhavan, R. (2011). How do networks matter? The performance effects of interorganizational networks. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31, 207-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2011.09.005
• Gulati, R., Nohria, N., & Zaheer, A. (2000). Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 203. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200003)21:3<203::AID-SMJ102>3.0.CO;2-K
• Hagedoorn, J., Lokshin, B., & Zobel, A-K. (2018). Partner type diversity in alliance portfolios: Multiple dimensions, boundary conditions and firm innovation performance. Journal of Management Studies, 55(5), 809-836. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12326
• Hamel, G. (1991). Competition for competence and interpartner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 83-103. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250120908
• Hansen, M. T. (2002). Knowledge networks: Explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organization Science, 13(3), 232-248. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.3.232.2771
• Hargadon, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1997). Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(4), 716-749. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393655
• Hernandez, E., & Shaver, J. M. (2019). Network synergy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 64(1), 171-202. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839218761369
• Howells, J. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35(5), 715-728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.03.005
• Huggins, R. (2010). Forms of network resource: Knowledge access and the role of inter firm networks. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(3), 335-352. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00266.x
• Inkpen, A. C. (2000). Learning through joint ventures: A framework of knowledge acquisition. Journal of Management Studies, 37(7), 1019-1044. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00215
• Inkpen, A. C., & Tsang, E. W. K. (2005). Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 146-165. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159100
• Jiang, R. J., Tao, Q. T., & Santoro, M. D. (2010). Alliance portfolio diversity and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 31(10), 1136-1144. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.869
• Kale, P., Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (2002). Alliance capability, stock market response, and long-term alliance success: The role of the alliance function. Strategic Management Journal, 23(8), 747-767. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.248
• Kale, P., Singh, H., & Perlmutter, H. (2000). Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: Building relational capital. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 217-237. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200003)21:3<217::AID-SMJ95>3.0.CO;2-Y
• Koka, B. R., & Prescott, J. E. (2002). Strategic alliances as social capital: A multidimensional view. Strategic Management Journal, 23(9), 795-816. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.252
• Koka, B. R., & Prescott, J. E. (2008). Designing alliance networks: The influence of network position, environmental change, and strategy on firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29(6), 639-661. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.679
• Kraatz, M. S. (1998). Learning by association? Interorganizational networks and adaptation to environmental change. Academy of Management Journal, 41(6), 621-643. https://doi.org/10.5465/256961
• Krishnan, R., Martin, X., & Noorderhaven, N. G. (2006). When does trust matter to alliance performance? Academy of Management Journal, 49(5), 894-917. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.22798171
• Kwon, S.-W., Rondi, E., Levin, D. Z., De Massis, A., & Brass, D. J. (2020). Network brokerage: An integrative review and future research agenda. Journal of Management, 46(6), 1092-1120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320914694
• Lado, A. A., Boyd, N. G., & Hanlon, S. C. (1997). Competition, cooperation, and the search for economic rents: A syncretic model. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 110-141. https://doi.org/10.2307/259226
• Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 461-477. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199805)19:5<461::AID-SMJ953>3.0.CO;2-L
• Lavie, D. (2006). The competitive advantage of interconnected firms: An extension of the resource-based view. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 638-658. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159233
• Lavie, D. (2007). Alliance portfolios and firm performance: A study of value creation and appropriation in the US software industry. Strategic Management Journal, 28(12), 1187-1212. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.637
• Lee, D., Kirkpatrick-Husk, K., & Madhavan, R. (2017). Diversity in alliance portfolios and performance outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 43(5), 1472-1497. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314556316
• Lin, C., Wu, Y-J., Chang, C., Wang, W., & Lee, C-Y. (2012). The alliance innovation performance of R&D alliances-the absorptive capacity perspective. Technovation, 32(5), 282-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2012.01.004
• Madhok, A., & Tallman, S. B. (1998). Resources, transactions and rents: Managing value through interfirm collaborative relationships. Organization Science, 9(3), 326-339. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.9.3.326
• Martinez, M., Zouaghi, F., & Garcia, S. (2017). Capturing value from alliance portfolio diversity: The mediating role of R&D human capital in high and low tech industries. Technovation, 59, 55-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.06.003
• McEvily, B., & Marcus, A. (2005). Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 26(11), 1033-1055. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.484
• Mesquita, L. F., Anand, J., & Brush, T. H. (2008). Comparing the resource-based and relational views: Knowledge transfer and spillover in vertical alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 29(9), 913-941. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.699
• Monaghan, S., Lavelle, J., & Gunnigle, P. (2017). Mapping networks: Exploring the utility of social network analysis in management research and practice. Journal of Business Research, 76, 136-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.03.020
• Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 77-91. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250171108
• Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242-266. https://doi.org/10.2307/259373
• Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2004). Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: The effects of spillovers in the Boston biotechnology community. Organization Science, 15(1), 5-21. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1030.0054
• Parachuri, S., Goosen, M., & Phelps, C. (2019). Conceptual foundations of multilevel social networks. In S. E. Humphrey & J. M. LeBreton (Eds.), The Handbook of Multilevel Theory, Measurement, and Analysis (pp. 201-221). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000115-010
• Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179-191. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250140303
• Phelps, C. (2010). A longitudinal study of the influence of alliance network structure and composition on firm exploratory innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 53(4), 890-913. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.52814627
• Phelps, C., Heidl, R., & Wadhwa, A. (2012). Knowledge, networks, and knowledge networks: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1115-1166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311432640
• Polidoro, F., Ahuja, G., & Mitchell, W. (2011). When the social structure overshadows competitive incentives: the effects of network embeddedness on joint venture dissolution. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 369-392. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.59215088
• Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116-145. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393988
• Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79-91.
• Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 240-267. https://doi.org/10.2307/3556658
• Rodan, S., & Galunic, C. (2004). More than network structure: How knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 25(6), 541-562. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.398
• Rothaermel, F. T., & Boeker, W. (2008). Old technology meets new technology: Complementarities, similarities, and alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 29(1), 47-77. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.634
• Rothaermel, F. T., & Deeds, D. L. (2006). Alliance type, alliance experience and alliance management capability in high-technology ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 429-460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.02.006
• Rulke, D. L., & Galaskiewicz, J. (2000). Distribution of knowledge, group network structure, and group performance. Management Science, 46(5), 612-625. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.5.612.12052
• Schilling, M. A. (2009). Understanding the alliance data. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 233-260. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.731
• Schilling, M. A., & Phelps, C. C. (2007). Interfirm collaboration networks: The impact of large-scale network structure on firm innovation. Management Science, 53(7), 1113-1126. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0624
• Shan, W., Walker, G., & Kogut, B. (1994). Interfirm cooperation and startup innovation in the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 15(5), 387-394. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250150505
• Shohet, S., & Prevezer, M. (1996). UK biotechnology: Institutional linkages, technology transfer and the role of intermediaries. R&D Management, 26, 283-298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.1996.tb00962.x
• Simonin, B. L. (2004). An empirical investigation of the process of knowledge transfer in international strategic alliances. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5), 407-427. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400091
• Soh, P. (2010). Network patterns and competitive advantage before the emergence of a dominant design. Strategic Management Journal, 31(4), 438-461. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.819
• Subramanian, A., & Soh, P. (2017). Linking alliance portfolios to recombinant innovation: The combined effects of diversity and alliance experience. Long Range Planning, 50(5), 636-652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2016.11.001
• Subramanian, A., Bo, W., & Kah-Hin, C. (2018). The role of knowledge base homogeneity in learning from strategic alliances. Research Policy, 47: 158-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.10.005
• Stuart, T. E. (1998). Network positions and propensities to collaborate: An investigation of strategic alliance formation in a high-technology industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(3), 668-698. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393679
• Stuart, T. E. (2000). Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates in a high-technology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 21(8), 791-811. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0266(200008)21:8<791::AID-SMJ121>3.0.CO;2-K
• Tasselli, S., Kilduff, M., & Menges, J. (2015). The microfoundations of organizational social networks: A review and an agenda for future research. Journal of Management, 41(5), 1361-1387. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315573996
• Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6), 285-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2
• Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z
• Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 996-1004. https://doi.org/10.5465/3069443
• Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998) Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464-476. https://doi.org/10.5465/257085
• Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review, 61, 674-698. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096399
• Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35-67. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393808
• Vasudeva, G., Zaheer, A., & Hernandez, E. (2013). The embeddedness of networks: Institutions, structural holes, and innovativeness in the fuel cell industry. Organization Science, 24(3), 645-663. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0780
• Walker, G., Kogut, B., & Shan, W. (1997). Social capital, structural holes and the formation of an industry network. Organization Science, 8(2), 109-125. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.8.2.109
• Wang, L., & Zajac, E. J. (2007). Alliance or acquisition? A dyadic perspective on interfirm resource combinations. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1291-1317. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.638
• Wang, C., Rodan, S., Fruin, M., & Xu, X. (2014). Knowledge networks, collaboration networks, and exploratory innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 57(2), 484-514. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0917
• Wassmer, U. (2010). Alliance portfolios: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 36(1), 141-171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308328484
• Wassmer, U., Li, S., & Madhok, A. (2017). Resource ambidexterity through alliance portfolios and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 38(2), 384-394. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2488
• Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050207
• Whittington, K., Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. (2009). Networks, propinquity, and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(1), 90-122. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2009.54.1.90
• Wibbens, P. (2019). Performance persistence in the presence of higher-order resources. Strategic Management Journal, 40, 181-202. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2979
• Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. A. (2008). The effectiveness of alliances and acquisitions: The role of resource combination activities. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(1), 193-212. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2008.00286.x
• Wuyts, S., & Dutta, S. (2014). Benefiting from alliance portfolio diversity: The role of past internal knowledge creation strategy. Journal of Management, 40(6), 1653-1674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312442339
• Yan, Y., & Guan, J. (2018). Social capital, exploitative and exploratory innovations: The mediating roles of ego-network dynamics. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 126, 244-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.004
• Zaheer, A., & Bell, G. G. (2005). Benefiting from network position: Firm capabilities, structural holes, and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(9), 809-825. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.482
• Zaheer, A., Gözübüyük, R. & Milanov, H. (2010). It's the connections: The network perspective in interorganizational research. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(1), 62-77. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.24.1.62

Identyfikatory

DOI

https://doi.org/10.7341/20211737