Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T10:18:03.672Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

15 - The Effect of Alliance Scope on Knowledge Flows

from Part V - Alliance Scope

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2019

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

Summary

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. 252 - 266
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

Aggarwal, V. A., Siggelkow, N., & Singh, H. 2011. Governing collaborative activity: Interdependence and the impact of coordination and exploration. Strategic Management Journal 32(7): 705730.Google Scholar
Anand, B., & Khanna, T. 2000. Do firms learn to create value? Strategic Management Journal 21: 295316.Google Scholar
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. (Technology, Organizations, and Innovation). Administrative Science Quarterly 35(1): 128152.Google Scholar
Contractor, F. J., & Reuer, J. J. 2014. Structuring and governing alliances: New directions for research. Global Strategy Journal 4(4): 241256.Google Scholar
Doz, Y. L. 1996. The evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances: Initial conditions or learning processes? Strategic Management Journal 17(S1): 5583.Google Scholar
Gomes-Casseres, B., Hagedoorn, J., & Jaffe, A. B. 2006. Do alliances promote knowledge flows? Journal of Financial Economics 80(1): 533.Google Scholar
Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Tratjenberg, M. 2001. The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. NBER Working Paper 8498.Google Scholar
Jaffe, A. B. 1986. Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: Evidence from firms’ patents, profits, and market value. American Economic Review 76(5): 9841001.Google Scholar
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): 747767.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. 2006. Dyadic Data Analysis. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Khanna, T. 1998. The scope of alliances. Organization Science 9(3): 340355.Google Scholar
Khanna, T., Gulati, R., & Nohria, N. 1998. The dynamics of learning alliances: Competition, cooperation, and relative scope. Strategic Management Journal 19(3): 193210.3.0.CO;2-C>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science 3(3): 383397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, M. V. S. 2010. Differential gains between partners in joint ventures: Role of resource appropriation and private benefits. Organization Science 21(1): 232248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, R., & Nti, K. O. 1998. Differential learning and interaction in alliance dynamics: A process and outcome discrepancy model. Organization Science 9(3): 356367.Google Scholar
Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. 1998. Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal 19(5): 461477.Google Scholar
Mansfield, E. 1986. Patents and innovation: An empirical study. Management Science 32(2): 173181.Google Scholar
McGahan, A. M., & Silverman, B. S. 2001. How does innovative activity change as industries mature? Evolution of Markets 19(7): 11411160.Google Scholar
Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. 1996. Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal 17: 7791.Google Scholar
Oxley, J. E., & Sampson, R. C. 2004. The scope and governance of international R&D alliances. Strategic Management Journal 25(8–9): 723749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oxley, J., & Wada, T. 2009. Alliance structure and the scope of knowledge transfer: Evidence from U.S.-Japan agreements. Management Science 55(4): 635649.Google Scholar
Pavitt, K. 1984. Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy 13(6): 343373.Google Scholar
Reuer, J. J., & Devarakonda, S. V. 2016. Mechanisms of hybrid governance: Administrative committees in non-equity alliances. Academy of Management Journal 59(2): 510533.Google Scholar
Sampson, R. C. 2007. R&D alliances and firm performance: The impact of technological diversity and alliance organization on innovation. Academy of Management Journal 50(2): 364386.Google Scholar
Schilling, M. A. 2009. Understanding the alliance data. Strategic Management Journal 30(3): 233260.Google Scholar
Schilling, M. A., & Steensma, H. K. 2001. The use of modular organizational forms: An industry-level analysis. Academy of Management Journal 44(6): 11491168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverman, B. S. 1999. Technological resources and the direction of corporate diversification: Toward an integration of the resource-based view and transaction cost economics. Management Science 45(8): 11091124.Google Scholar
Somaya, D., Kim, Y., & Vonortas, N. S. 2011. Exclusivity in licensing alliances: Using hostages to support technology commercialization. Strategic Management Journal 32(2): 159186.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(8): 791811.Google Scholar
Szulanski, G. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal 17(Winter Special Issue): 2743.Google Scholar
Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., & Jaffe, A. B. 1997. University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Economics of Innovation & New Technology 5(1): 19.Google Scholar
Tzabbar, D. 2009. When does scientist recruitment affect technological repositioning? Academy of Management Journal 52(5): 873896.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. 1991. Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly 36: 269296.CrossRefGoogle 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
×