Role of search for domain knowledge and architectural knowledge in alliance partner selection

Abstract

Research Summary: The literature on technological alliances emphasizes that search for knowledge drives alliance formation. However, in conceptualizing technological knowledge, prior work on alliances has not made a distinction between domain knowledge—knowledge that firms possess in distinct technological domains—and architectural knowledge—knowledge that firms possess about how to combine elements from different technological domains. We argue that firms seek partners that are similar in domain knowledge to deepen their knowledge, and partners that are dissimilar in architectural knowledge to broaden their knowledge. Our results indicate that the likelihood of alliance formation increases when two firms are similar in domain knowledge and dissimilar in architectural knowledge. Further, our results show that these effects are positively moderated by the degree of decomposability of a firm's knowledge base. Managerial Summary: In dynamic environments, companies need to continually deepen and broaden their technological knowledge, and they often look for alliance partners who can provide them that knowledge. For knowledge deepening, companies are more likely to form alliances with those companies that have expertise in similar technological fields. For knowledge broadening, they are more likely to form alliances with those companies that have expertise in the same technological fields, but have different recipes for combining knowledge from those fields. Furthermore, a company with a modular knowledge base is more likely to seek a partner that has expertise in similar technological fields or whose recipes for combining knowledge from different technological fields are different from the recipes it has.

The Influencing Factors of the Technology Standard Alliance Collaborative Innovation of Emerging Industry

“…However, it is clear that the similarities and differences between knowledge, technology, capacity, resources and organizational and cultural characteristics between alliance members should be considered and balanced comprehensively. With patent network evolution, alliance partners have to devote themselves to technology standard development and promotion as well as resource sharing and knowledge collaboration with alliance members [39,40]. Knowledge sharing, learning and transfer in alliance are beneficial to reducing technology standard innovation cost especially the risk from technology uncertainty and market uncertainty, improving alliance innovation performance [41].…”

Evaluation of Enterprise Learning Performance in the Process of Cooperation Innovation Using Heronian Mean Operator

“…According to the content and evolution characteristics of interorganizational learning, the evolution content of interorganizational learning is the process of clarification, sharing, and internalization of relevant knowledge into another organization based on the perspective of system view. From different perspectives, scholars put forward many factors that affect the effectiveness of inter-organizational learning [40][41][42][43][44]. Zhu et al [40] proposed that there are four main factors affecting the effectiveness of interorganizational learning, namely, culture, structure, technology, and absorptive capacity.…”

“…Zhang et al [41] thought that the factors affecting the success of alliance learning can be divided into three categories: the availability of alliance knowledge, the effectiveness of knowledge acquisition, and the learning connection based on the availability of alliance knowledge and the effectiveness of knowledge acquisition. Yayavaram et al [42] thought that the key elements of organizational learning are interaction between partners, high learning goals, trust, and long-term goal orientation. The degrees of trust between organizations, learning intention, partner's knowledge attribute, and organizational learning ability have great influence on knowledge transfer and interorganizational learning [43].…”

“…These studies found that learning objectives, tasks, environments, and knowledge sharing about skills and processes are key process factors in interorganizational learning. However, knowledge exists in the specific organizational path of partnership enterprises, which has the characteristics of tacit and embedded [40][41][42]. Therefore, it is necessary to set reasonable learning objectives and arrange appropriate learning tasks and activities under appropriate circumstances, so as to complete the transfer and accumulation of knowledge.…”

The Effects of Knowledge Assets and Path Dependence in Innovations on Firm Value in the Korean Semiconductor Industry

“…Thus, uncertainties in processes and outcomes increase innovation costs. On the other hand, such uncertainty can be reduced if a firm uses path dependence in innovation, using its own knowledge rather than others' new technology [17][18][19]. Continued development of related technologies based on existing technologies also represents the sustainable growth potential of the firm [20].…”