Suchergebnisse

The existing literature on the spatial mobility of firms completely neglects the existence of inter-organizational relations (IORs). This is striking since there is a strong theoretical argument in the literature that firms with a high level of embeddedness in (localized) IORs are very unlikely to relocate. Therefore, the following research question is posed: "To what extent is the level of embeddedness of firms in (localized) innovative inter-organizational relationships of influence on their propensity to relocate?"
Based on data from the automation service sector, an ordered logit model is estimated. The results of this analysis show that embeddedness plays an important role as a determinant of the spatial behavior of firms. More specifically, there is a strong spatial lock-in effect of having a high degree centrality.

Joris Knoben illustrates that the number of firm relocations has grown steadily and considerably over the last decade and, at the same time, relationships between organizations have become more important to firm performance. It is often argued that these relationships require geographical stability, and so the author explores how these two seemingly contradictory observations can be reconciled. Insights from economic geography and organization science are utilized to develop a multidisciplinary firm-level perspective on the causes and consequences of firm relocation. Subsequently, this framework is tested empirically. The results show that incorporating the level of embeddedness as well as the spatial mobility of firms into a single framework leads to significantly better explanations of both the spatial behavior of firms as well as of the outcomes of this behavior. All-in-all, the findings indicate that there is a tradeoff between spatial mobility and inter-organizational stability. This multidisciplinary perspective on the relations between organizational networks, spatial firm mobility, and firm performance will be of great interest to a range of scholars, including organization scientists, regional scientists and economic geographers and, managers of relocating companies as well as consultants in this field

Asalient but rarely explicitly studied characteristic of interfirm relationships is that they can intentionally be formed for finite periods of time. What determines firms' intertemporal choices between different alliance time horizons? Shadow of the future theorists suggest that when an alliance has an explicitly set short-term time frame, there is an increased risk that partners may behave opportunistically. This does not readily explain the high incidence of time-bound alliances being formed. Reconciling insights from the shadow of the future perspective with nascent research on the flexibility of temporary organizations, and shifting the focus from the level of individual transactions to that of strategic alliance portfolios, we argue that firms may be willing to accept a higher risk of opportunism when there are offsetting gains in strategic flexibility in managing their strategic alliance portfolio. Consequently, we hypothesize that environmental factors that increase the need for strategic flexibility—namely, dynamism and complexity in the environment—are likely to increase the relative share of time-bound alliances in strategic alliance portfolios. Our analysis of longitudinal data on the intertemporal alliance choices of a large sample of small and medium-sized enterprises provides support for this argument. Our findings fill an important gap in theory about time horizons in interfirm relationships and temporary organizations and show the importance of separating planned terminations from duration-based performance measures.

Objective of the study: Given the benefits of external collaborations in technology-intensive industries, we explore how firms adapt their portfolios of external collaborations to internal uncertainties. Using the behavioral theory of the firm, this study examines how firms adapt based on innovation performance feedback.
Methodology/approach: We built a panel dataset from three sources. Patent data came from The National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) paper (Kogan, Papanikolaou, Seru, & Stoffman, 2017), which used extensive name-matching tools to link USPTO patents to firms. External collaborations data were collected from the SDC Platinum Joint Ventures and Alliances database, focusing on R&D agreements. Financial data were sourced from Compustat. After processing, the dataset included nearly 900 publicly listed firms from 12 high-tech industries (1990-2010). We tested our hypotheses using two probit models, each predicting a different dependent variable.
Originality/Relevance: We shift the focus from the traditional dyad perspective, which centers on individual partnerships, to how firms adjust their entire portfolios of external collaborations in response to their internal dynamics, like innovation performance feedback. While real options and transaction cost theories emphasize the need to maximize efficiency in individual partnerships, we explore how firms adapt their broader set of external collaborations to changing internal conditions.
Main results: We find that firms performing above innovation aspirations are more likely to form equity alliances (i.e., joint ventures). However, the magnitude of this effect greatly differs between mature and young firms. Young firms are about four times more likely than their mature counterparts to form equity alliances when they significantly surpass their innovation targets.
Theoretical/methodological contributions: Our study contributes to the research on alliance portfolio adaptation by showing that, beyond external factors like technological change and market uncertainty, firms also adjust their portfolios of external collaborations in response to internal factors, specifically innovation performance feedback. Moreover, our findings also demonstrate that firms' responses to innovation performance relative to aspirations vary based on their lifecycle stage.
Social /management contributions: Our study also has several implications for managers. First, managers of well-performing firms should view exceeding innovation aspirations as a signal to pursue collaborations to scale new technologies and knowledge. Their performance gives them a stronger negotiating position for forming joint ventures, allowing them to secure more favorable terms. Additionally, they should, in this case, seek partnerships to share risks associated with cutting-edge innovation projects rather than solely investing in internal innovation prospects. For young firms, which tend to respond more aggressively when outperforming their innovation aspirations, managers should adopt bold partnership strategies. In contrast, managers in mature firms should focus their resources on internal development, mergers and acquisitions, or partnerships that help maintain the autonomy of these firms.

This study examines how firm-level resources interact with regional institutional quality to explain innovation in East Africa. We hypothesize that the institutional environment within which the firm operates moderates the effect of firm-level resources on innovative output. We examine the moderating role of institutions with regards to the transformation of firm-level resources including internal research and development, human capital and managerial experience into innovative output using firm-level data from the World Bank Enterprise Survey and the Innovation Follow-up Survey for three countries in East Africa including Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. We test our hypotheses using a clustered robust standard errors logistic model. We find that the effects of firm-level resources vary depending on the institutional environment and that regional institutional quality positively moderates the effects of the firm-level resources.

A growing body of network studies argues that firms purposefully act based on the network structure and their relative position in it. In this paper, we assess the validity of one of the core assumptions underpinning these arguments: that managers have accurate information about the structure of the network in which their organizations are embedded. We extend theory on interorganizational networks by developing novel hypotheses regarding the antecedents of differences in this network information accuracy between organizations. We test these hypotheses by drawing on a unique data set of two whole networks in the healthcare industry in the Netherlands in which both the "objective" network structure and the organizational perceptions of that structure are assessed. The empirical analyses revealed considerable differences among organizations in terms of the accuracy of their network information, especially with regard to accuracy about different parts of the network. A key finding is that the network position of the focal and the assessed organizations is essential for explaining information accuracy differentials. From these findings, we discuss which network strategies are viable strategic options for which organizations and derive implications for future network theory and research. The e-companion is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1180 .