A Theory of Interfirm Organization

The Two Facets of Collaboration: Cooperation and Coordination in Strategic Alliances

“…This emergent process of coordination relies on partners' careful staffing of the alliance (Phillips, 1960), inter-organizational boundary spanners and liaisons (Gittell, 2002;Provan & Milward, 1995), strong interpersonal relationships among those boundary spanners and liaisons (Ancona & Caldwell, 1992;Hansen, 1999;Kale, Singh, & Perlmutter, 2000), and regular opportunities for them to interact within supportive but relatively unstructured communication and decision-making channels (Thomas & Trevino, 1993). The effectiveness of this approach is constrained, however, by the cognitive limitations of the -active coordinators‖ and their ability to overcome cultural differences.…”

Inter-firm Networks: Antecedents, Mechanisms and Forms

“…An increasing number of sub-units to be coordinated poses limits on the size of hierarchies (Williamson 1970) but, through networks, firms can expand their activities beyond those limits (Vaccà 1986). The number of separate but interdependent firms requiring coordination has been shown to be a predictor of the relative presence and consistency of central staff in networks (Phillips 1960) and of the degree of network formalization (Van de Ven, Walker and Liston 1979). The complexiy of interdependent activities has long been considered a predictor of organizational arrangements, and it has also been shown to be positively related to the complexity of inter-firm organizational arrangements (Turati 1990;Osborn and Baughn 1990;Killing 1988;Van de Ven, Walker and Liston 1979).…”

“…Where the scope of inter-firm cooperation is wide and/or the number of cooperating firms is high, coordination activities become quite significant and dedicated staff may be necessary. In fact, network forms regulating the cooperation between many firms, such as franchising and associations, set up consistent central coordination structures, and a pos-195 itive relation has been found between the number of affiliated firms and the size of central staff (Phillips 1960). For example, joint ventures and consortia, that usually regulate joint-action cooperation, or franchising agreements, that usually aim at co-aligning a wide range of firm behaviours, are characterized by the presence of central coordination structures.…”

“…Trade associations have been traditionally employed to provide common services to coordinate behaviours among large numbers of similar firms (Staber and Aldrich 1983;Staber 1987;Phillips 1960) where inter-firm interdependency matters are not highly specific and complex. For the same reason, cartels could be assimilated to an horizontal association, when lawful and explicit (Bower and Rhenman 1985;Pfeffer and Salancik 1978), as well as federations (Provan 1983;Daems 1983).…”

Markets-as-Networks Theory: A Review

“…MAN theorists also take advantage of (more or less) distant but stimulating sources of ideas on interdependence and interfirm cooperation (e.g., Aiken & Hage, 1968;Aldrich, 1976;Blau, 1964;Chamberlain, 1968;Dill, 1958;Emerson, 1962;Emery & Trist, 1965;Evan, 1966;Granovetter, 1985;Jacobs, 1974;Levine & White, 1961;Lincoln, 1982;Litwak & Hylton, 1962;Macauley, 1963;Macneil, 1980;Miles, Snow, & Pfeffer, 1974;Negandhi, 1975;Phillips, 1960;Telser, 1980;Van de Ven, 1976, Van de Ven & Koenig, 1975Warren, 1967;Whetten & Leung, 1979). Other inspirational fountainheads are mentioned in the overview of MAN theory's state-of-the-art (Section 4).…”