West, J (2014) Collaborative patterns and power imbalance in strategic alliance networks. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(6): 4014010, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Firms are connected with other firms through a variety of economic relationships that can be viewed as a form of social network. Resource-dependency theory (RDT) suggests that formal joint ventures among firms occur as a result of resource procurement, perceived strategic interdependence, expansion opportunities, legitimacy, and risk mitigation. A key unexplored element of RDT is the collaborative structure among firms with technical capabilities subordinate to their alliance partners and whether such structures are able to leverage sufficient market power to influence the industry sector within which they exist. Using the network characteristics of alliance partners in a technology- and capital-intensive industry sector, this work empirically examines the aggregate market power of so-called generalist firms. Collaborative patterns in the resources and mining sector and their impact on firm performance and resource quality are investigated using social network analysis. It is found that firms engaged in strategic alliances outperform firms operating independently; however, beyond a certain number of alliance partners, their performance declines. It was also found that, in aggregate, generalist nontechnical alliance partners can exercise significant market power in dense alliance networks, despite possessing almost no technical industry experience.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | alliances; joint ventures; mining; network analysis; organizational issues; power imbalance; resource dependency theory |
| Index terms: | organizational issue, interdependence, mining, firm performance, aggregate, strategic alliance, network analysis, exercise, resource-dependency theory, joint venture, risk mitigation, legitimacy, social network, social network analysis, industry sector |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, health behaviours and lifestyles, materials science, business, financial analysis, industry analysis, sociology, geotechnical engineering, partnership management, organizational analysis, financial risk, business analysis, research methods |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Cost Management, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here