Alliance management knowledge and alliance performance: unveiling the moderating role of the dedicated alliance function

Abstract

This study attempts to increase the understanding of how different solutions to build alliance management capability influence alliance performance. We propose that both reliance on the informal accumulation of alliance experience (i.e., tacit alliance management knowledge, AMK) and articulation of alliance know-how in the form of usable guidelines, checklists, or manuals (i.e., codified AMK) have an inverted U-shaped influence on alliance performance. Additionally, we investigate the moderating role of having the dedicated alliance function (DAF) on the curvilinear relationships between reliance on AMK and performance. Based on a sample of 113 large firms involved in strategic alliances, we find support for the inverted U-shaped relationship between reliance on tacit and codified AMK and alliance performance. Moreover, our results indicate that the DAF has a positive impact on the deployment of AMK. The DAF turns into improved performance when the reliance on experiential learning and the codification of AMK are both limited. Moreover, the DAF also reduces the potential downside effects of relying on higher levels of both types of AMK. Finally, DAF diversity, in terms of educational, functional, and tenure heterogeneity of its members, emerges as relevant to achieve effective alliance know-how collection and deployment for superior alliance performance.

Co-exploitation (or co-exploration) vs go it alone? The role of alliance learning capability on firm performance

“…Overall, this study supports the importance of having a dedicated function for the development of alliance learning capability (Kale et al , 2002). This function is commissioned to secure that explicit and tacit knowledge arising from inter-organizational relationships can be disseminated within the company, used in future collaborations to improve performance and reduce alliance failure (Russo and Vurro, 2019). Early developments in knowledge management suggest the importance of the socialization, externalization, combination and internalization processes to create new knowledge (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995).…”

“…Afterward on, alliance learning capability eases the process of interacting with others that have different knowledge bases (Gilsing and Nooteboom, 2006; Kogut, 2000). Thus, co-exploration benefits from high levels of alliance learning capability to transfer knowledge that is mainly tacit, reducing the downside effects of the excessive use of experiential learning (Russo and Vurro, 2019). Hence, high levels of alliance learning capability facilitate co-exploration to complement internal efforts of exploration and thus contribute to the effect of exploration on firm performance.…”

Performance implications of organizational and interorganizational ambidexterity

“…That is, whether firms have collaborated with their partners before or not, or about the diversity of the knowledge bases of their partners (i.e., new, or old). Future studies should test moderating variables that help to improve the interaction between organizational and interorganizational ambidexterity in the short-and long-term such as absorptive capacity (Acevedo & Díaz-Molina, 2019;Patel, Terjesen, & Li, 2012), alliance capabilities (Kim et al, 2019;Russo and Vurro, 2019;Solís-Molina et al, 2022), and control mechanisms among others (Solís-Molina et al, 2020;Sun and Lo, 2014).…”

Ambidexterity in the context ofSMEalliances: Does sustainability have a role?

“…The outcome of this exploration is gaining new knowledge by exploring a prototype that can be tested and developed further. This means that the process of exploration, leading to the codification of new knowledge, is commonly used to link alliances with performance (Baum, Calabrese, & Silverman, 2000; Russo & Vurro, 2018). According to Rothaermel and Deeds (2004), once the knowledge gained through exploration is embodied the firm's attention turns to the exploitation processes.…”