Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T19:37:40.669Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part VIII - Innovation Networks and Alliances

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2019

Edited by
Farok J. Contractor  and
Jeffrey J. Reuer
Farok J. Contractor
Affiliation:
Rutgers University, New Jersey
Jeffrey J. Reuer
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Boulder
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Frontiers of Strategic Alliance Research
Negotiating, Structuring and Governing Partnerships
 , pp. 353 - 392
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Adams, P., Brusoni, S. & Malerba, F. (2013). Knowledge and the changing boundaries of firms and industries. In Dosi, G. & Galambos, L. (Eds.), The Third Industrial Revolution in Global Business. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Adler, P. S. (2001). Market, hierarchy, and trust: The knowledge economy and the future of capitalism. Organization Science, 12(2), 215–234.Google Scholar
Aharonson, B. S., Baum, J. A. C. & Feldman, M. P. (2007). Desperately seeking spillovers? Increasing returns, industrial organization and the location of new entrants in geographic and technological space. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(1), 89–130.Google Scholar
Ahuja, G. & Lampert, C. M. (2001). Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7), 521–543.Google Scholar
Alcácer, J., Cantwell, J. A. & Piscitello, L. (2016). Internationalization in the information age: A new era for places, firms, and international business networks? Journal of International Business Studies, 47(5), 499–512.Google Scholar
Amin, A. & Cohendet, P. (1999). Learning and adaptation in decentralised business networks. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 17(1), 87–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersson, U. & Forsgren, M. (2000). In search of center of excellence: Network embeddedness and subsidiary roles in multinational corporations. Management International Review, 40(4), 329–350.Google Scholar
Andersson, U., Forsgren, M. & Holm, U. (2002). The strategic impact of external networks: Subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11), 979–996.Google Scholar
Antonelli, C., Krafft, J. & Quatraro, F. (2010). Recombinant knowledge and growth: The case of ICTs. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 21(1), 50–69.Google Scholar
Arthur, W. B. (2007). The structure of invention. Research Policy, 36(2), 274–287.Google Scholar
Arthur, W. B. (2009). The Nature of Technology: What It Is and How It Evolves. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Baldwin, C. & Von Hippel, E. (2011). Modeling a paradigm shift: From producer innovation to user and open collaborative innovation. Organization Science, 22(6), 1399–1417.Google Scholar
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.Google Scholar
Bathelt, H. & Glückler, J. (2011). The Relational Economy: Geographies of Knowledge and Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bathelt, H. & Glückler, J. (2017). Relational research design in economic geography. In Clark, G. L., Feldman, M. P., Gertler, M. S. & Wojcik, D. (Eds.), The New Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography, 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bathelt, H., Malmberg, A. & Maskell, P. (2004). Clusters and knowledge: Local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography, 28(1), 31–56.Google Scholar
Birkinshaw, J. M. (1997). Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: The characteristics of subsidiary initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 18(3), 209–227.Google Scholar
Birkinshaw, J. M. & Hood, N. (1998). Multinational subsidiary evolution: Capability and charter change in foreign-owned subsidiary companies. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 773–795.Google Scholar
Birkinshaw, J. M., Hood, N. & Jonsson, S. (1998). Building firm-specific advantages in multinational corporations: The role of subsidiary initiative. Strategic Management Journal, 19(3), 221–241.Google Scholar
Brusoni, S., Prencipe, A. & Pavitt, K. (2001). Knowledge specialization, organizational coupling, and the boundaries of the firm: Why do firms know more than they make? Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 597–621.Google Scholar
Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349–399.Google Scholar
Cano-Kollmann, M., Cantwell, J. A., Hannigan, T. J., Mudambi, R. & Song, J. (2016). Knowledge connectivity: An agenda for innovation research in international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(3), 255–262.Google Scholar
Cantwell, J. A. (2013). Blurred boundaries between firms, and new boundaries within (large multinational) firms: The impact of decentralized networks for innovation. Seoul Journal of Economics, 26(1), 1–32.Google Scholar
Cantwell, J. A. & Mudambi, R. (2005). MNE competence-creating subsidiary mandates. Strategic Management Journal, 26(12), 1109–1128.Google Scholar
Cantwell, J. A. & Mudambi, R. (2011). Physical attraction and the geography of knowledge sourcing in multinational enterprises. Global Strategy Journal, 1(3–4), 206–232.Google Scholar
Cantwell, J. A. & Piscitello, L. (2014). Historical changes in the determinants of the composition of innovative activity in MNC subunits. Industrial and Corporate Change, 23(3), 633–660.Google Scholar
Cantwell, J. A. & Zhang, Y. (2009). The innovative MNC: The dispersion of creativity, and its implications. In Collinson, S. & Morgan, G. (Eds.), Images of the Multinational Firm. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cantwell, J. A. & Zhang, Y. (2011). Exploration and exploitation: The different impacts of two types of Japanese business group networks on firm innovation and global learning. Asian Business and Management, 10(2), 151–181.Google Scholar
Castellani, D. & Zanfei, A. (2006). Multinational Firms, Innovation and Productivity. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandler, A. D. (1977). The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Chesbrough, H. (2006). Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New Innovation Landscape. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Coase, R. H. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4(4), 386–405.Google Scholar
Cohen, W. M. & Levinthal, D. A. (1989). Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. The Economic Journal, 99(397), 569–596.Google Scholar
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 659–669.Google Scholar
Dosi, G. (1984). Technical Change and Industrial Transformation: The Theory and an Application to the Semiconductor Industry. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dunning, J. H. (1995). Reappraising the eclectic paradigm in an age of alliance capitalism. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(3), 461–491.Google Scholar
Ernst, D. (2005). Complexity and internationalisation of innovation: Why is chip design moving to East Asia? International Journal of Innovation Management, 9(1), 47–73.Google Scholar
Ernst, D. & Kim, L. (2002). Global production networks, knowledge diffusion and local capability formation. Research Policy, 31(8/9), 1417–1429.Google Scholar
Ferlie, E. & Pettigrew, A. (1996). The nature and transformation of corporate headquarters: A review of recent literature and a research agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 33(4), 495–523.Google Scholar
Fleming, L. (2001). Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Science, 47(1), 117–132.Google Scholar
Fleming, L. & Sorenson, O. (2001). Technology as a complex adaptive system: Evidence from patent data. Research Policy, 30(7), 1019–1039.Google Scholar
Forsgren, M., Holm, U. & Johanson, J. (2005). Managing the Embedded Multinational: A Business Network View. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Freeman, C. (1987). Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Freeman, C. & Louça, F. (2001). As Time Goes By: From the Industrial Revolutions to the Information Revolution. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Freeman, C. & Perez, C. (1988). Structural crises of adjustment, business cycles and investment behaviour. In Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R. R., Silverberg, G. & Soete, L. L. G. (Eds.), Technical Change and Economic Theory. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Gassmann, O., Enkel, E. & Chesbrough, H. (2010). The future of open innovation. R&D Management, 36(3), 223–228.Google Scholar
Granovetter, M. (1995). Coase revisited: Business groups in the modern economy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 4(1), 93–130.Google Scholar
Grant, R. M. (1996). Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: Organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 375–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grigoriou, K. & Rothaermel, F. T. (2014). Structural microfoundations of innovation: The role of relational stars. Journal of Management, 40(2), 586–615.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The Nature of Human Intelligence. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Hagedoorn, J. (2002). Inter-firm R&D partnerships: An overview of major trends and patterns since 1960. Research Policy, 31, 477–492.Google Scholar
Håkanson, H. & Johanson, J. (1993). The network as a governance structure: Interfirm cooperation beyond markets and hierarchies. In Grabher, G. (Ed.), The Embedded Firm: The Socioeconomics of Industrial Networks. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Håkanson, H. & Snehota, I. (Eds., 1995). Developing Relationships in Business Networks. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hedlund, G. (1986). The hypermodern MNC: A heterarchy? Human Resource Management, 25(1), 9–35.Google Scholar
Hedlund, G. (1993). Assumptions of hierarchy and heterarchy, with application to the management of the multinational corporation. In Ghoshal, S. & Westney, D. E. (Eds.), Organization Theory and the Multinational Corporation. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hobday, M., Davies, A. & Prencipe, A. (2005). Systems integration: A core capability of the modern corporation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(6), 1109–1143.Google Scholar
Jones, C., Hesterly, W. S. & Borgatti, S. P. (1997). A general theory of network governance: Exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 911–945.Google Scholar
Kaplan, S. & Vakili, K. (2015). The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 36(10), 1435–1457.Google Scholar
Katila, R. & Ahuja, G. (2002). Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1183–1194.Google Scholar
Kobrin, S. J. (2008). Sovereignty @ bay: Globalisation, multinational enterprise, and the international political system. In Rugman, A. M. & Brewer, T. L. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Business. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kodama, F. (1992). Technology fusion and the new R&D. Harvard Business Review, July–August, 70–78.Google Scholar
Langlois, R. N. (2002). Modularity in technology and organization. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 49(1), 19–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlois, R. N. (2003). The vanishing hand: The changing dynamics of industrial capitalism. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12(2), 351–385.Google Scholar
Laursen, K. (2012). Keep searching and you’ll find: What do we know about variety creation through firms’ search activities for innovation? Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(5), 1181–1220.Google Scholar
Laursen, K. & Salter, A. (2006). Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 131–150.Google Scholar
Lincoln, J. R. (1982). Intra-(and inter-) organizational networks. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 1(1), 1–38.Google Scholar
Lorenzen, M. & Mudambi, R. (2013). Clusters, connectivity and catch-up: Bollywood and Bangalore in the global economy. Journal of Economic Geography, 13(3), 501–534.Google Scholar
Mowery, D. C. (2009). Plus ça change: Industrial R&D in the “Third Industrial Revolution.” Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(1), 1–50.Google Scholar
Mudambi, R. & Navarra, P. (2004). Is knowledge power? Knowledge flows, subsidiary power and rent seeking within MNCs. Journal of International Business Studies, 35, 385–406.Google Scholar
Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.Google Scholar
Oh, H., Labianca, G. & Chung, M.-H. (2006). A multilevel model of group social capital. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 569–582.Google Scholar
Olsson, O. (2000). Knowledge as a set in idea space: An epistemological view on growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 5(3), 253–275.Google Scholar
Patel, P. & Pavitt, K. (1997). The technological competencies of the world’s largest firms: Complex and path-dependent, but not much variety. Research Policy, 26(2), 141–156.Google Scholar
Pavitt, K. (2002). Innovating routines in the business firm: What corporate tasks should they be accomplishing? Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(1), 117–133.Google Scholar
Pénin, J., Hussler, C. & Burger-Helmchen, T. (2011). New shapes and new stakes: A portrait of open innovation as a promising phenomenon. Journal of Innovation Economics, 7, 11–29.Google Scholar
Perez, C. (1985). Microelectronics, long waves and world structural change: New perspectives for developing countries. World Development, 13(3), 441–463.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Prahalad, C. K. (1976). Strategic choices in diversified MNCs. Harvard Business Review (July–August), 67–78.Google Scholar
Prahalad, C. K. & Doz, Y. L. (1981). An approach to strategic control in MNCs. Sloan Management Review (Summer), 5–13.Google Scholar
Robinson, D. T. & Stuart, T. E. (2007). Network effects in the governance of strategic alliances. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 23(1), 242–273.Google Scholar
Rothaermel, F. T. & Alexandre, M. T. (2009). Ambidexterity in technology sourcing: The moderating role of absorptive capacity. Organization Science, 20(4), 759–780.Google Scholar
Rugman, A. M. (2005). The Regional Multinationals: MNEs and ‘Global’ Strategic Management. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sanchez, R. & Mahoney, J. T. (1996). Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organizational design. Strategic Management Journal, 17(1), 63–76.Google Scholar
Santangelo, G. D. (2002). Innovation in Multinational Corporations in the Information Age: The Experience of the European ICT Industry. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1962). The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106(6), 467–482.Google Scholar
Sölvell, Ö. & Zander, I. (1998). International diffusion of knowledge: Isolating mechanisms and the role of the MNE. In Chandler, A. D., Hagström, P. & Sölvell, Ö. (Eds.), The Dynamic Firm: The Role of Technology, Strategy, Organization, and Regions. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sorenson, O. (2005) Social networks and industrial geography. In Cantner, U., Dinopoulos, E. & Lanzillotti, R. F. (Eds.), Entrepreneurships, the New Economy and Public Policy. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 55–69.Google Scholar
Sorenson, O., Rivkin, J. W. & Fleming, L. (2006). Complexity, networks and knowledge flow. Research Policy, 35(7), 994–1017.Google Scholar
Sorenson, O. & Singh, J. (2007). Science, social networks and spillovers. Industry and Innovation, 14(2), 219–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takeishi, A. (2002). Knowledge partitioning in the interfirm division of labor: The case of automotive product development. Organization Science, 13(3), 321–338.Google Scholar
Thomas, D. C. (2016). The Multicultural Mind: Unleashing the Hidden Force for Innovation in your Organization. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.Google Scholar
Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R. & Jaffe, A. (1997). University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 5(1), 19–50.Google Scholar
Vanhaverbeke, W., Cloodt, M. & Van de Vrande, V. (2008). Connecting absorptive capacity and open innovation. SSRN working paper no. 1091265, February.Google Scholar
Weigelt, C. & Miller, D. J. (2013). Implications of internal organization structure for firm boundaries. Strategic Management Journal, 34(12), 1411–1434.Google Scholar
Weitzman, M. L. (1998). Recombinant growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(2), 331–360.Google Scholar
Whitley, R. (2006). Project-based firms: New organizational form or variations on a theme? Industrial and Corporate Change, 15(1), 77–99.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. (1984). Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 5(3), 287–320.Google Scholar
Yasmin, M. & Forsgren, M. (2006). Hymer’s analysis of the multinational organization: Power retention and the demise of the federative MNE. International Business Review, 15(2), 166–179.Google Scholar

References

Ahuja, G. (2000a). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45: 425–455.Google Scholar
Ahuja, G. (2000b). The duality of collaboration: Inducements and opportunities in the formation of interfirm linkages. Strategic Management Journal, 21: 317–343.Google Scholar
Albers, S. (2010). Configurations of alliance governance systems. Schmalenbach Business Review, 62: 204–233.Google Scholar
Albers, S., Wohlgezogen, F., & Zajac, E. J. (2016). Strategic alliance structures: An organization design perspective. Journal of Management, 42: 582–614.Google Scholar
Barley, S. R., Freeman, J., & Hybels, R. C. (1992). Strategic alliances in commercial biotechnology. In Nohria, N. and Eccles, R. G., eds., Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, pp. 311–347.Google Scholar
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: 267–294.Google Scholar
Berg, S. V. & Friedman, P. (1977). Joint ventures, competition, and technological complementarities: Evidence from chemicals. Southern Economic Journal, 43: 1330–1337.Google Scholar
Bojanowski, M., Corten, R., & Westbrock, B. (2012). The structure and dynamics of the global network of inter-firm R&D partnerships 1989–2002. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37: 967–987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cainarca, G. C., Colombo, M. G., & Mariotti, S. (1992). Agreements between firms and the technological life cycle model: Evidence from information technologies. Research Policy, 21: 45–62.Google Scholar
Cloodt, M., Hagedoorn, J., & Roijakkers, N. (2006). Trends and patterns in interfirm R&D networks in the global computer industry: An analysis of major developments, 1970–1999. Business History Review, 80: 725–746.Google Scholar
Cloodt, M., Hagedoorn, J., & Roijakkers, N. (2010). Inter-firm R&D networks in the global software industry: An overview of major trends and patterns. Business History, 52: 120–149.Google Scholar
Davis, J. P. (2016). The group dynamics of interorganizational relationships: Collaborating with multiple partners in innovation ecosystems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61: 621–661.Google Scholar
Frankort, H. T. W. (2013). Open innovation norms and knowledge transfer in interfirm technology alliances: Evidence from information technology, 1980–1999. Advances in Strategic Management, 30: 239–282.Google Scholar
Frankort, H. T. W. (2016). When does knowledge acquisition in R&D alliances increase new product development? The moderating roles of technological relatedness and product-market competition. Research Policy, 45: 291–302.Google Scholar
Gomes-Casseres, B., Hagedoorn, J., & Jaffe, A. B. (2006). Do alliances promote knowledge flows? Journal of Financial Economics, 80: 5–33.Google Scholar
Gulati, R. (1995). Social structure and alliance formation patterns: A longitudinal analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 619–652.Google Scholar
Hacklin, F., Battistini, B., & von Krogh, G. (2013). Strategic choices in converging industries. MIT Sloan Management Review, 55: 65–73.Google Scholar
Hagedoorn, J. (1993). Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 371–385.Google Scholar
Hagedoorn, J. (1995). A note on international market leaders and networks of strategic technology partnering. Strategic Management Journal, 16: 241–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagedoorn, J. (2002). Inter-firm R&D partnerships: An overview of major trends and patterns since 1960. Research Policy, 31: 477–492.Google Scholar
Hagedoorn, J. & Narula, R. (1996). Choosing organizational modes of strategic technology partnering: International and sectoral differences. Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 265–284.Google Scholar
Hagedoorn, J. & Schakenraad, J. (1992). Leading companies and networks of strategic alliances in information technologies. Research Policy, 21: 163–190.Google Scholar
Hagedoorn, J. & Schakenraad, J. (1994). The effect of strategic technology alliances on company performance. Strategic Management Journal, 15: 291–309.Google Scholar
Hamel, G., Doz, Y. L., & Prahalad, C. K. (1989). Collaborate with your competitors – and win. Harvard Business Review, 67: 133–139.Google Scholar
Harrigan, K. R. (1985). Joint Ventures, Alliances, and Corporate Strategy, Washington, DC: Beard Books.Google Scholar
Heckman, J. J. & Borjas, G. J. (1980). Does unemployment cause future unemployment? Definitions, questions and answers from a continuous time model of heterogeneity and state dependence. Economica, 47: 247–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heidl, R. A., Steensma, H. K., & Phelps, C. (2014). Divisive faultlines and the unplanned dissolutions of multipartner alliances. Organization Science, 25: 1351–1371.Google Scholar
Khanna, T. (1998). The scope of alliances. Organization Science, 9: 340–355.Google Scholar
Li, D., Eden, L., Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D. (2008). Friends, acquaintances, or strangers? Partner selection in R&D alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 51: 315–334.Google Scholar
Li, D., Eden, L., Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., & Garrett, R. P. (2012). Governance in multilateral R&D alliances. Organization Science, 23: 1191–1210.Google Scholar
Li, J. & Zhong, J. (2003). Explaining the growth of international R&D alliances in China. Managerial and Decision Economics, 24: 101–115.Google Scholar
Lincoln, J. R. (1984). Analyzing relations in dyads: Problems, models, and an application to interorganizational research. Sociological Methods & Research, 13: 45–76.Google Scholar
Link, A. N. (1996). Research joint ventures: Patterns from Federal Register filings. Review of Industrial Organization, 11: 617–628.Google Scholar
Lundqvist, B. (2015). Joint Research and Development under US Antitrust and EU Competition Law, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Mariti, P. & Smiley, R. H. (1983). Co-operative agreements and the organization of industry. Journal of Industrial Economics, 31: 437–451.Google Scholar
McNamara, G., Vaaler, P. M., & Devers, C. (2003). Same as it ever was: The search for evidence of increasing hypercompetition. Strategic Management Journal, 24: 261–278.Google Scholar
Misangyi, V. F., Greckhamer, T., Furnari, S., et al. (2017). Embracing causal complexity: The emergence of a neo-configurational perspective. Journal of Management, 43: 255–282.Google Scholar
Mowery, D. C. (1998). The changing structure of the US national innovation system: Implications for international conflict and cooperation in R&D policy. Research Policy, 27: 639–654.Google Scholar
Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17: 77–91.Google Scholar
Negro, G., Koçak, Ö., & Hsu, G. (2010). Research on categories in the sociology of organizations. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 31: 3–35.Google Scholar
Oxley, J. E. (1997). Appropriability hazards and governance in strategic alliances: A transaction cost approach. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 13: 387–409.Google Scholar
Oxley, J. E. (2009). Alliances and performance. Advances in Strategic Management, 26: 147–164.Google Scholar
Oxley, J. E. & Sampson, R. C. (2004). The scope and governance of international R&D alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 25: 723–749.Google Scholar
Park, W. G. (2008). International patent protection: 1960–2005. Research Policy, 37: 761–766.Google Scholar
Pisano, G. P. (1989). Using equity participation to support exchange: Evidence from the biotechnology industry. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 5: 109–126.Google Scholar
Pisano, G. P., Russo, M. V., & Teece, D. J. (1988). Joint ventures and collaborative arrangements in the telecommunications equipment industry. In Mowery, D. C., ed., International Collaborative Ventures in U.S. Manufacturing. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company, pp. 23–70.Google Scholar
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: 116–145.Google Scholar
Powell, W. W., White, D. R., Koput, K. W., & Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 110: 1132–1205.Google Scholar
Reich, R. B. & Mankin, E. D. (1986). Joint ventures with Japan give away our future. Harvard Business Review, 64: 78–86.Google Scholar
Reuer, J. J. & Devarakonda, S. V. (2016). Mechanisms of hybrid governance: Administrative committees in non-equity alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 59: 510–533.Google Scholar
Reuer, J. J., Tong, T. W., Tyler, B. B., & Ariño, A. (2013). Executive preferences for governance modes and exchange partners: An information economics perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 34: 1104–1122.Google Scholar
Roijakkers, N. & Hagedoorn, J. (2006). Inter-firm R&D partnering in pharmaceutical biotechnology since 1975: Trends, patterns, and networks. Research Policy, 35: 431–446.Google Scholar
Rosenkopf, L. & Schilling, M. A. (2007). Comparing alliance network structure across industries: Observations and explanations. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1: 191–209.Google Scholar
Rothaermel, F. T. & Boeker, W. (2008). Old technology meets new technology: Complementarities, similarities, and alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 29: 47–77.Google Scholar
Rothaermel, F. T. & Deeds, D. L. (2004). Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: A system of new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 25: 201–221.Google Scholar
Ryall, M. D. & Sampson, R. C. (2009). Formal contracts in the presence of relational enforcement mechanisms: Evidence from technology development projects. Management Science, 55: 906–925.Google Scholar
Santoro, M. D. & McGill, J. P. (2005). The effect of uncertainty and asset co-specialization on governance in biotechnology alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 26: 1261–1269.Google Scholar
Schilling, M. A. (2009). Understanding the alliance data. Strategic Management Journal, 30: 233–260.Google Scholar
Schilling, M. A. (2015). Technology shocks, technological collaboration, and innovation outcomes. Organization Science, 26: 668–686.Google Scholar
Schilling, M. A. & Phelps, C. C. (2007). Interfirm collaboration networks: The impact of large-scale network structure on firm innovation. Management Science, 53: 1113–1126.Google Scholar
Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas, Interests, and Identities, 4th edn., Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
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: 668–698.Google Scholar
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: 791–811.Google Scholar
Sytch, M., Tatarynowicz, A., & Gulati, R. (2011). Toward a theory of extended contact: The incentives and opportunities for bridging across network communities. Organization Science, 23: 1658–1681.Google Scholar
Tatarynowicz, A., Sytch, M., & Gulati, R. (2016). Environmental demands and the emergence of social structure: Technological dynamism and interorganizational network forms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61: 52–86.Google Scholar
Vonortas, N. S. (1997). Research joint ventures in the US. Research Policy, 26: 577–595.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1991). Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36: 269–296.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×