IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibf/ijmmre/v7y2014i2p1-14.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technological Exploration And Market Exploitation In Interfirm Alliances

Author

Listed:
  • Varghese P. George

Abstract

This paper empirically examines the dichotomous contribution for innovation, for technological exploration and market exploitation, from alliances. Using a sample from US economy-wide alliances of US Public companies and employing cross-tabulation of various classifications of alliances and parent firms, the related phenomena are investigated. Results show that alliances are predominantly undertaken by technology-intensive companies and their frequency has a direct association with the parental technological intensity. However, technological explorative purposes do not dominate in the complete sample of alliances. Many firms, whether technologically intensive or not, enter into alliances also for market exploitative purposes. This contingent phenomenon shows that alliances offer a very important additional role that is not all technology centered, but that is also deeply market centered.

Suggested Citation

  • Varghese P. George, 2014. "Technological Exploration And Market Exploitation In Interfirm Alliances," International Journal of Management and Marketing Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 7(2), pages 1-14.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibf:ijmmre:v:7:y:2014:i:2:p:1-14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.theibfr2.com/RePEc/ibf/ijmmre/ijmmr-v7n2-2014/IJMMR-V7N2-2014-1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Gilsing, Victor & Nooteboom, Bart, 2006. "Exploration and exploitation in innovation systems: The case of pharmaceutical biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-23, February.
    3. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    4. Seung Ho Park & Michael V. Russo, 1996. "When Competition Eclipses Cooperation: An Event History Analysis of Joint Venture Failure," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(6), pages 875-890, June.
    5. Sarah Kaplan & Rebecca Henderson, 2005. "Inertia and Incentives: Bridging Organizational Economics and Organizational Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 509-521, October.
    6. Lockett, Andy & Murray, Gordon & Wright, Mike, 2002. "Do UK venture capitalists still have a bias against investment in new technology firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 1009-1030, August.
    7. Constantine Andriopoulos & Marianne W. Lewis, 2009. "Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 696-717, August.
    8. Basberg, Bjorn L., 1987. "Patents and the measurement of technological change: A survey of the literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2-4), pages 131-141, August.
    9. Johannes M. Pennings & Farid Harianto, 1992. "Technological Networking and Innovation Implementation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 356-382, August.
    10. Rothwell, R. & Freeman, C. & Horlsey, A. & Jervis, V. T. P. & Robertson, A. B. & Townsend, J., 1974. "SAPPHO updated - project SAPPHO phase II," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 258-291, November.
    11. Zeki Simsek, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Towards a Multilevel Understanding," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 597-624, June.
    12. Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw & Gilbert Probst & Michael L. Tushman, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 685-695, August.
    13. Bo Bernhard Nielsen & Sabina Nielsen, 2009. "Learning and Innovation in International Strategic Alliances: An Empirical Test of the Role of Trust and Tacitness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(6), pages 1031-1056, September.
    14. Frank T. Rothaermel & David L. Deeds, 2004. "Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: a system of new product development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 201-221, March.
    15. Frank T. Rothaermel & Maria Tereza Alexandre, 2009. "Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 759-780, August.
    16. Rebecca Henderson & Sarah Kaplan, 2005. "Inertia and Incentives: Bridging Organizational Economics and Organizational Theory," NBER Working Papers 11849, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Belderbos, Rene & Faems, Dries & Leten, Bart & Van Looy, Bart, 2009. "Technological activities and their impact on the financial performance of the firm: Exploitation and exploration within and between firms," MERIT Working Papers 2009-067, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    2. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    3. David B. Audretsch & Maribel Guerrero, 2023. "Is ambidexterity the missing link between entrepreneurship, management, and innovation?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 1891-1918, December.
    4. Massimo Colombo & Liliana Doganova & Evila Piva & Diego D’Adda & Philippe Mustar, 2015. "Hybrid alliances and radical innovation: the performance implications of integrating exploration and exploitation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 696-722, August.
    5. François Constant & Richard Calvi & Thomas Johnsen, 2020. "Managing tensions between exploitative and exploratory innovation through purchasing function ambidexterity Managing tensions between exploitative and exploratory innovation through purchasing functio," Post-Print hal-02891790, HAL.
    6. Armin Anzenbacher & Marcus Wagner, 2020. "The role of exploration and exploitation for innovation success: effects of business models on organizational ambidexterity in the semiconductor industry," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 571-594, June.
    7. Montserrat Boronat-Navarro & Alexandra García-Joerger, 2019. "Ambidexterity, Alliances and Environmental Management System Adoption in Spanish Hotels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-16, October.
    8. Olga Kassotaki, 2022. "Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    9. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    10. Hu, Jing & Wang, Yilin & Liu, Shengnan & Song, Mingshun, 2023. "Mechanism of latecomer enterprises’ technological catch-up in technical standards alliances – An ambidextrous innovation perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    11. Partanen, Jukka & Kohtamäki, Marko & Patel, Pankaj C. & Parida, Vinit, 2020. "Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    12. Manuel Guisado-González & Jennifer González-Blanco & José Luis Coca-Pérez, 2019. "Exploration, exploitation, and firm age in alliance portfolios," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(4), pages 387-406, December.
    13. Choo Yeon Kim & Myung Sub Lim & Jae Wook Yoo, 2019. "Ambidexterity in External Knowledge Search Strategies and Innovation Performance: Mediating Role of Balanced Innovation and Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-23, September.
    14. Michael Yao-Ping Peng & Zhaohua Zhang & Hsin-Yi Yen & Shu-Mi Yang, 2019. "Dynamic Capabilities and Firm Performance in the High-Tech Industry: Quadratic and Moderating Effects under Differing Ambidexterity Levels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-15, September.
    15. Al-Atwi, Amer Ali & Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Khan, Zaheer, 2021. "Micro-foundations of organizational design and sustainability: The mediating role of learning ambidexterity," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(1).
    16. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    17. Úbeda-García, Mercedes & Claver-Cortés, Enrique & Marco-Lajara, Bartolomé & Zaragoza-Sáez, Patrocinio, 2020. "Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 363-372.
    18. Michael Yao-Ping Peng & Ku-Ho Lin & Dennis Liute Peng & Peihua Chen, 2019. "Linking Organizational Ambidexterity and Performance: The Drivers of Sustainability in High-Tech Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-17, July.
    19. Xing Wan & Javier Cenamor & Geoffrey Parker & Marshall Van Alstyne, 2017. "Unraveling Platform Strategies: A Review from an Organizational Ambidexterity Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    20. Michael Yao-Ping Peng & Ku-Ho Lin, 2019. "Impact of Ambidexterity and Environmental Dynamism on Dynamic Capability Development Trade-Offs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Exploration; Exploitation; Innovation; Ambidexterity; Alliances; Technological Intensity;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation
    • L24 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Contracting Out; Joint Ventures
    • M10 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - General
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibf:ijmmre:v:7:y:2014:i:2:p:1-14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Mercedes Jalbert (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.