The role of knowledge base homogeneity in learning from strategic alliances

Strategic alliances are important channels for interfirm learning, especially for small firms that are resource constrained. Of the several alliance attributes, technological distance between partners (measured as the distance between partners’ innovative outcomes) is shown to have a significant influence on the learning benefits from strategic alliances. Drawing upon the theory of recombination, our study argues that the influence of technological distance on learning is best understood by not only measuring the distance between innovative outcomes, but by also taking into consideration the knowledge elements underlying the innovative outcomes. We develop a concept of knowledge base homogeneity that captures the extent to which the innovative outcomes of partnering firms draw upon similar sets of knowledge elements. Using patent and alliance data from 201 small biotechnology firms during the period 1996–2010, we confirm that the technological distance has an inverted u-shaped relationship on interfirm learning. We further demonstrate that this u-shaped relationship is moderated by the knowledge base homogeneity between partners, such that benefits of technological distance are enhanced and the costs of technological distance are mitigated when the knowledge base homogeneity between alliance partners is high. The results have important implications for interfirm learning, especially in the context of small firms that are limited in their knowledge stocks.

[1]  Shih-Chieh Fang,et al.  Tracking R&D behavior: bibliometric analysis of drug patents in the Orange Book , 2011, Scientometrics.

[2]  Donald E. Hatfield,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF CORPORATE RESTRUCTURING ON AGGREGATE INDUSTRY SPECIALIZATION , 1996 .

[3]  I. Cockburn,et al.  Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery , 2003 .

[4]  Lori Rosenkopf,et al.  Overcoming Local Search Through Alliances and Mobility , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[5]  G. Ahuja.  Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes, and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study , 1998 .

[6]  B. Kogut,et al.  The Exploration of Technological Diversity and the Geographic Localization of Innovation , 1997 .

[7]  Lee Fleming,et al.  Special Issue on Design and Development: Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[8]  Toby E. Stuart.  Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates i , 2000 .

[9]  Toby E. Stuart,et al.  Interorganizational Endorsements and the Performance of Entrepreneurial Ventures , 1999 .

[10]  Andrew C. Inkpen,et al.  Knowledge Management Processes and International Joint Ventures , 1998 .

[11]  C. Phelps.  A Longitudinal Study of the Influence of Alliance Network Structure and Composition on Firm Exploratory Innovation , 2009 .

[12]  R. Gulati.  Does Familiarity Breed Trust? The Implications of Repeated Ties for Contractual Choice in Alliances , 1995 .

[13]  Shantanu Dutta,et al.  Benefiting From Alliance Portfolio Diversity , 2014 .

[14]  R. Gulati.  Social Structure and Alliance Formation Patterns: A Longitudinal Analysis , 1995 .

[15]  Kwanghui Lim.  The relationship between research and innovation in the semiconductor and pharmaceutical industries (1981-1997) , 2004 .

[16]  Inchae Park,et al.  Exploring potential R&D collaboration partners through patent analysis based on bibliographic coupling and latent semantic analysis , 2015, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[17]  Rachelle C. Sampson.  R&D Alliances and Firm Performance: The Impact of Technological Diversity and Alliance Organization on Innovation , 2007 .

[18]  F. Rothaermel,et al.  The Effect of General and Partner-Specific Alliance Experience on Joint R&D Project Performance , 2005 .

[19]  Salvatore Parise,et al.  Alliance portfolios: Designing and managing your network of business-partner relationships , 2003 .

[20]  Toby E. Stuart.  Network Positions and Propensities to Collaborate: An Investigation of Strategic Alliance Formation in a High-Technology Industry , 1998 .

[21]  Jaideep Anand,et al.  Non‐additivity in portfolios of exploration activities: a real options‐based analysis of equity alliances in biotechnology , 2004 .

[22]  Lori Rosenkopf,et al.  Startup size and the mechanisms of external learning: increasing opportunity and decreasing ability? , 2003 .

[23]  W. Powell,et al.  Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology. , 1996 .

[24]  Walter W. Powell,et al.  Knowledge Networks as Channels and Conduits: The Effects of Spillovers in the Boston Biotechnology Community , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[25]  T. Khanna,et al.  Do Firms Learn to Create Value? The Case of Alliances , 2000 .

[26]  David H. Hsu,et al.  The Antecedents and Innovation Consequences of Organizational Knowledge Brokering Capability , 2007 .

[27]  A. Zaheer,et al.  Asymmetric Learning Capabilities and Stock Market Returns , 2015 .

[28]  Pier Paolo Saviotti,et al.  Knowledge characteristics and the dynamics of technological alliances in pharmaceuticals: empirical evidence from Europe, US and Japan , 2014 .

[29]  Bart Nooteboom,et al.  Network Embeddedness and the Exploration of Novel Technologies: Technological Distance, Betweenness Centrality and Density , 2006 .

[30]  Bernard L. Simonin.  The Importance of Collaborative Know-How: An Empirical Test of the Learning Organization , 1997 .

[31]  Sai Yayavaram,et al.  Decomposability in Knowledge Structures and Its Impact on the Usefulness of Inventions and Knowledge-base Malleability , 2008 .

[32]  Geert Duysters,et al.  *Alliance Capability as a Mediator between Experience and Alliance Performance: An Empirical Investigation into the Alliance Capability Development Process , 2005 .

[33]  F. Kodama,et al.  Technological diversity of persistent innovators in Japan: Two case studies of large Japanese firms , 2004 .

[34]  A. Nerkar,et al.  Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry , 2001 .

[35]  Joel A. C. Baum,et al.  Don't go it alone: alliance network composition and startups' performance in Canadian biotechnology , 2000 .

[36]  S. Gopalakrishnan,et al.  Tapping Deep Pockets: The Role of Resources and Social Capital on Financial Capital Acquisition by Biotechnology Firms in Biotechpharma Alliances , 2008 .

[37]  Steven B. Andrews,et al.  Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition , 1995, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[38]  D. Mowery,et al.  Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer , 1996 .

[39]  R. Katila,et al.  Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study , 2001 .

[40]  S. Albers,et al.  Crisis Construction and Organizational Learning: Capability Building in Catching-Up at Hyundai Motor , 1998 .

[41]  Markku V. J. Maula,et al.  The Temporal Effects of Relative and Firm-Level Absorptive Capacity on Interorganizational Learning , 2012 .

[42]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Fortune favors the prepared firm , 1994 .

[43]  Ron Sanchez,et al.  Modular Architectures in the Marketing Process , 1999 .

[44]  Jason P. Davis,et al.  Rotating Leadership and Collaborative Innovation , 2011 .

[45]  Ove Granstrand,et al.  Towards a theory of the technology-based firm 1 Paper originally presented at the workshop on `Techn , 1998 .

[46]  Peter J. Lane,et al.  Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning , 1998 .

[47]  David L. Deeds,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation Alliances in Biotechnology: A System of New Product Development , 2004 .

[48]  J. H. Dyer,et al.  Creating and managing a high‐performance knowledge‐sharing network: the Toyota case , 2000 .

[49]  A. Jaffe.  Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms&Apos; Patents, Profits and Market Value , 1986 .

[50]  Dean M. Behrens,et al.  Redundant governance structures: an analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries , 2000 .

[51]  A. Gambardella.  Competitive advantages from in-house scientific research: The US pharmaceutical industry in the 1980s * , 1992 .

[52]  Y. Doz,et al.  Alliance Advantage: The Art of Creating Value Through Partnering , 1998 .

[53]  M. Trajtenberg.  A Penny for Your Quotes : Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations , 1990 .

[54]  R. Gulati.  Network location and learning: the influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation , 1999 .

[55]  Kevin W. Boyack,et al.  Mapping the backbone of science , 2004, Scientometrics.

[56]  Bart Nooteboom,et al.  Empirical Tests of Optimal Cognitive Distance , 2004 .

[57]  Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli,et al.  The impact of technological relatedness, prior ties, and geographical distance on university-industry collaborations: A joint-patent analysis , 2011 .

[58]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[59]  Harbir Singh,et al.  Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: building relational capital , 2000 .

[60]  D. Mowery,et al.  Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: implications for the resource-based view of the firm , 1998 .

[61]  David L. Deeds,et al.  Strategic alliances and the rate of new product development: An empirical study of entrepreneurial biotechnology firms , 1996 .

[62]  C. V. Beers,et al.  R&D Cooperation, Partner Diversity, and Innovation Performance: An Empirical Analysis† , 2014 .

[63]  Jeffrey H. Dyer,et al.  Alliance capability, stock market response, and long‐term alliance success: the role of the alliance function , 2002 .

[64]  Bart Nooteboom,et al.  Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity , 2007 .

[65]  Annapoornima M. Subramanian,et al.  When birds of a feather don’t flock together: Different scientists and the roles they play in biotech R&D alliances , 2013 .

[66]  Yoo-Jin Han,et al.  Analysis of essential patent portfolios via bibliometric mapping: an illustration of leading firms in the 4G era , 2015, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[67]  J. Hagedoorn.  Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Nterorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences , 1993 .

[68]  Yosuke Okada,et al.  R&D portfolios and pharmaceutical licensing , 2014 .

[69]  Jeffrey H. Dyer,et al.  The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage , 1998 .

[70]  B. Kogut.  Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives , 1988 .

[71]  B Kogut.  Theoretical and empirical perspectives , 1988 .

[72]  W. Powell,et al.  Networks, Propinquity, and Innovation in Knowledge-intensive Industries , 2009 .

[73]  M. M. Kessler.  Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers , 1963 .

[74]  Bronwyn H Hall,et al.  Market value and patent citations , 2005 .

[75]  Bart Nooteboom,et al.  Inter-firm alliances: Analysis and design , 1999 .

[76]  Toby E. Stuart,et al.  Local search and the evolution of technological capabilities , 2007 .

[77]  Wei-Ru Chen,et al.  Changes in firm knowledge couplings and firm innovation performance: : The moderating role of technological complexity , 2015 .

[78]  Maxim Sytch,et al.  Friends and Foes: The Dynamics of Dual Social Structures , 2014 .

[79]  Andrew C. Inkpen.  Learning Through Joint Ventures: A Framework Of Knowledge Acquisition , 2000 .

[80]  W. H. Hoffmann.  Strategies for managing a portfolio of alliances , 2007 .

[81]  Mark A. Lemley,et al.  Do Applicant Patent Citations Matter? , 2012 .

[82]  B. Kogut,et al.  Interfirm cooperation and startup innovation in the biotechnology industry , 1994 .

[83]  A. M. Subramanian,et al.  When do firms benefit from university–industry R&D collaborations? The implications of firm R&D focus on scientific research and technological recombination , 2014 .

[84]  A. Pritchard,et al.  Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics , 1969 .

[85]  Y. Doz.  The evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances: Initial conditions or learning processes? , 2007 .

[86]  Eric T. Anderson,et al.  The Scope of Alliances , 1998 .

[87]  Adam B. Jaffe,et al.  Characterizing the “technological position” of firms, with application to quantifying technological opportunity and research spillovers☆ , 1989 .

[88]  G. Hamel.  Competition for competence and interpartner learning within international strategic alliances , 1991 .

[89]  Benjamin Gomes-Casseres.  Group versus group: How alliance networks compete , 1994 .

[90]  G. Dosi.  Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change , 1982 .

[91]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[92]  John E. Prescott,et al.  Designing alliance networks: the influence of network position, environmental change, and strategy on firm performance , 2008 .