When Do Strategic Alliances Create Shareholder Value?

Chan, Su Han; Kensinger, John W.; Keown, Arthur J.; Martin, John D.

doi:10.1111/j.1745-6622.1999.tb00517.x

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For each event window, the cumulative abnormal returns for the firms participating in technology alliances are significant and larger than those participating in marketing alliances. Similar results have also been reported by Chan et al (1999) and Koh and Venkataraman (1991).…”

Section: Technological Versus Marketing Alliances: Why and How Are They Different?supporting

confidence: 91%

“…There is empirical evidence consistent with the above argument. Shareholders of firms entering into different types of alliances enjoy varying levels of benefits (Das et al , 1998; Chan et al , 1999). For example, Das et al (1998), show that although announcement of strategic alliances by firms are viewed, on average, as good news by the investors, 49 firms participating in technology alliances had positive and statistically significant abnormal returns in all the event windows, the average abnormal return being 1.63 percent for a three‐day event window.…”

Section: Technological Versus Marketing Alliances: Why and How Are They Different?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Strategic alliances: a valuable way to manage intellectual capital?

Das

Sen

Sengupta

2003

Journal of Intellectual Capital

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Considers two forms of strategic alliances, technological and marketing, and examines how these alliances foster formation and maintenance of intellectual capital. Empirical evidence suggests that on average, strategic alliances do create value for shareholders that is consistent with the creation of intellectual capital. Between the two, technological alliances are potentially more beneficial than marketing alliances, and more likely to create intellectual capital. Empirical evidence is consistent with the notion that the gains from alliances are not shared equally by all the partners. When intellectual capital is created by the smaller or financially weaker partner, the return may be appropriately captured by the owner of such capital through strategic alliances. However, if the intellectual capital is created by the larger or financially stronger firm which moves first in an alliance relationship, the return on this intellectual capital may be subject to opportunistic exploitation by the late moving partner.

show abstract

Section: Technological Versus Marketing Alliances: Why and How Are They Different?supporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Technological Versus Marketing Alliances: Why and How Are They Different?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic alliances: a valuable way to manage intellectual capital?

Das

Sen

Sengupta

2003

Journal of Intellectual Capital

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some other empirical research focused on particular strategic alliances to test the relationship between strategic alliance announcements and firm performance. For example, Chan and his colleagues (1999) also examined 345 technical and marketing alliances and concluded that the overall average abnormal return is around 0.64%, while the high-technology firms can gain more benefit, amounting to 1.12%, and the overall average abnormal return benefit by technical horizontal alliances and marketing non-horizontal alliances can be even higher, up to 3.5% and 1.45%, respectively [28]. Swaminathan and Moorman (2009) only picked up 230 marketing alliances and found that marketing alliance announcements can create an average abnormal return value of 1.4% [10].…”

Section: Strategic Alliances and Firm Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Vertical vs. Horizontal: How Strategic Alliance Type Influence Firm Performance?

Dong

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Strategic alliances have become a key focus in the management and marketing literature. However, much of the previous research in this area has focused on the antecedents and accounting effects of strategic alliances. There is an opportunity to more closely examine how alliance types might influence the public equity markets. As a result, this study summarizes the literature for the theoretical foundation of strategic alliances to increase the understanding of the two main types of strategic alliances, that is industry scope (vertical vs. horizontal alliances) and size scope (asymmetric vs. symmetric alliances). Then, this study proposes a conceptual framework to examine the main and relative effects between different types of strategic alliances and firm performance. Using the Bloomberg Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) database from 1 January 2010 to 1 January 2016, we find that vertical symmetric alliances gain more abnormal returns than others. Finally, implications and limitations are also discussed.

show abstract

“…Chan, Kensinger and Keown (1997) found that stock prices responded positively to the formation of alliances and partnering firms displayed better operating performance than their industry peers over a five-year period. The value of alliances is especially plain to see when the partnerships involve the exchange of technological assets and skills (Chan, Kensinger, Keown and Martin, 1999;Hagedoorn and Schakenraad, 1990). Moreover, in high-technology industries, enterprises leverage alliances to enhance their competitiveness.…”

Section: Theoretical Perspectives On Alliancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Partnering for Perfection

Dai

Kauffman²

2005

Advances in the Economics of Information Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New technological innovations have made it possible for new intermediaries to create value in business processes that involve the procurement of manufacturing and services supplies. Associated with these innovations is the emergence of business-to-business (B2B) electronic markets. These act as digital intermediaries that aim to reduce the transaction costs and mitigate the risks inherent in procurement. They improve buyers' capabilities to search for attractive prices, and also serve to increase the liquidity of sellers' products. In this chapter, the authors explore the evolution of B2B e-market firms in terms of the strategies they employ to "perfect" their value propositions and business processes for the firms. This is a critical aspect of their attractiveness as business partners for the buyers and sellers that participate in their electronic marketplaces. The key theoretical perspectives of this work are adapted from economics and strategic management. They enable the authors to construct a "partnering for perfection" theory of strategic alliances in e-procurement markets. This perspective is captured in a series of inquiries about "why" and "when" B2B e-markets are observed to form alliances. The authors carry out an innovative econometric analysis that delivers empirical results to show the efficacy of the theory in interpreting real world events. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the implications of this work in academic and managerial terms. and the 2002 Workshop on Information Systems and Economics for providing useful input on related research. Rob Kauffman thanks the MIS Research Center for partial support. ______________________________________________________________________________ the competition in the young market for e-procurement services, squeezing the marginal players.Most of these firms took advantage of the willingness of venture capitalists to provide financing, but, all too soon, this rapid growth would lead to tightening financial constraints and the recognition by the venture capitalists that they had been badly fooled by the "hype." Moreover, innovative technologies and applications, such as Web services, have continued to flow into the market, giving the later entrants opportunities to jump ahead with cheaper, better and more effective new technologies.A third source of challenges that B2B e-market firms faced came from the network effects that characterize the Internet and Web technologies underlying online marketplaces. One critical feature of B2B e-market firms is their ability to utilize the Internet and Web to create communication networks that can connect buyers and suppliers. In other words, what a B2B emarket firm offers can be viewed as a "network product." As can be observed in other markets for network products, the growth of B2B e-markets is subject to network effects that bring about more risks for these new enterprises (Shapiro and Varian, 1999). In the presence of network effects, the first challenge to a B2B e-market is to build up a critical mass of buyers...

show abstract

When Do Strategic Alliances Create Shareholder Value?

Cited by 8 publications

References 10 publications

Strategic alliances: a valuable way to manage intellectual capital?

Strategic alliances: a valuable way to manage intellectual capital?

Vertical vs. Horizontal: How Strategic Alliance Type Influence Firm Performance?

Partnering for Perfection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About