Antecedents of SME alliance performance: a multilevel review

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to classify and analyze the impact of antecedents studied in the extant literature on two levels of SME alliance performance – alliance-level and firm-level. Design/methodology/approach Using online databases and the bibliography section of the selected articles, 45 peer-reviewed studies specifically analyzing the impact of antecedents on the performance of SME alliances at the two levels were studied to gain insights. Findings The study differentiates between the impact of antecedents on the two levels of SME alliance performance, alliance-level and firm-level, and finds that certain antecedents, such as absorptive capacity, corporate entrepreneurship, control, network dimensions, partner opportunism and partner reputation, have a peculiar impact on a single level while other antecedents such as trust, commitment and cooperation, have an influence on performance at both levels. Also, the impact of these antecedents is hypothesized to be weak or strong, depending upon the results obtained by the papers in the review. Research limitations/implications In a first-of-its-kind approach, the paper provides a conceptual insight into the differentiating impact of antecedents on SME alliance performance at both levels, as opposed to the unitary analysis approach used in the extant literature. The model provided by the study can be used by researchers to gain a systematic understanding of how alliance outcomes are affected. Practical implications While the extant literature remains largely ambiguous on the role of antecedents causing variance in SME alliance outcomes, this paper serves to bridge this gap and enhance the understanding of practitioners by systematically analyzing how specific antecedents affect SME alliance performance at both levels. Originality/value As opposed to the unitary approach used in the extant literature, which does not differentiate between the two levels of SME alliance performance, this paper arranges and categorizes these studies based on the level at which alliance performance has been analyzed. Furthermore, the paper identifies the impact of antecedents at each level, thereby providing pioneering insights on understanding SME alliance outcomes.

Performance impact of behavioural factors in alliances by SMEs: an empirical analysis

“…This study enhanced the literature on SME alliances along several dimensions, specifically in terms of the relationship between behavioural factors and alliance performance. Many prior studies on alliances have focused on either standalone alliance performance or an alliance's systemic contribution in the form of partner-level performance, but not both (Christofferson, 2013; Prabhudesai and Prasad, 2017, 2018a). Grounded in the belief that it is important to not only examine an alliance's performance on a standalone basis, but also whether the alliance is contributing to its parent's performance, we examined alliance performance from a holistic perspective by capturing the two distinct, yet complementary, phenomena.…”

“…Commitment has been identified to be an important factor in the alliance literature. But, as with many other behavioural variables, communication has not received as much research attention (Prabhudesai and Prasad, 2017). Our findings suggest that it is an important factor for alliance performance, and in fact mediates the influence of other behavioural factors such as trust on partner-level performance.…”

A Triad of Uppsala Internationalization of Emerging Markets Firms and Challenges: A Systematic Review

“…As previous studies (see, e.g., Caputo et al 2016;Francioni et al 2016;Meuser et al 2016;Prabhudesai and Prasad 2017;Gaur and Kumar 2018), SLR method and content analysis have been used. The SLR enables the synthesizes of the results of multiple primary studies related to each other by using strategies, thereby reducing biases and random errors (Gopalakrishnan and Ganeshkumar 2013).…”

Entrepreneurial collaboration for R&D alliance performance: a role of social capital configuration

“…A question then arises: how to resolve these coordination issues? Since these are susceptible to the social nature contextualizing the collaborative interactions among R&D partners, research has focused on relational traits characterizing the social nature and evinced that mutual trust appears effective to resolve the issues (Meier et al, 2016;Prabhudesai and Prasad, 2017). Prior studies also suggest other traits including network ties/stability, normative reciprocity, mutual commitment and shared value/vision that institutionalize the partners' postures aligned toward collective goals (Nishimura and Okamuro, 2018;Pinheiro et al, 2016;Torche and Valenzuela, 2011).…”

“…Research on R&D alliance argues that the system of conjoint research activities can offer entrepreneurial opportunities to solve technical problems in innovative ways, to proactively seek and reflect market demands in collective outputs and to have resource commitment for risky yet innovative projects for value cocreation (Franco and Hasse, 2013;Jiang et al, 2016;Prabhudesai and Prasad, 2017). These behaviors are encompassed by the concept of EO, a prominent construct explaining firm growth and performance in the literature on strategic management and entrepreneurship (Covin and Lumpkin, 2011).…”