How do different types of interorganizational ties matter in technological exploration?

You-Shan Su, Wim Vanhaverbeke

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: Boundary-spanning exploration through establishing alliances is an effective strategy to explore technologies beyond local search in innovating firms. The purpose of this paper is to argue that it is useful to make a distinction in boundary-spanning exploration between what a firm learns from its alliance partners (explorative learning from partners (ELP)) and what it learns from other organisations (explorative learning from non-partners (ELN)). Design/methodology/approach: The authors contend that alliances play a role in both types of exploration. More specifically, the authors discern three types of alliances (inside ties, clique-spanning ties and outside ties) based on their role vis-à-vis existing alliance cliques. Clique members are highly embedded, and breaking out of the cliques through clique-spanning and outside alliances is crucial to improving explorative learning. Thereafter, the authors claim that clique-spanning ties and outside ties have a different effect on ELN and ELP. Findings: The empirical analysis of the “application specific integrated circuits” industry indicates that inside ties have negligible effects on both types of explorative learning. Clique-spanning ties have a positive effect on ELP, but not on ELN. The reverse is true for outside ties. The results show that research on explorative learning should devote greater attention to the various roles alliance partners and types of alliances play in advancing technological exploration. Originality/value: The literature only emphasises the learning from partners, focussing mainly on accessing their technology. In sum, alliance partners play different roles in exploration, and their network position influences the role they are able to play.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2148-2176
Number of pages29
JournalManagement Decision
Volume57
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019 Sep 12

Fingerprint

Alliances
Clique
Boundary spanning
Organization learning
Local search
Design methodology
Industry
Integrated circuits
Empirical analysis

Keywords

  • Boundary-spanning exploration
  • Clique-spanning ties
  • Conduits
  • Explorative learning from non-partners
  • Explorative learning from partners
  • Inside ties
  • Outside ties
  • Prisms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business, Management and Accounting(all)
  • Management Science and Operations Research

Cite this

How do different types of interorganizational ties matter in technological exploration? / Su, You-Shan; Vanhaverbeke, Wim.

In: Management Decision, Vol. 57, No. 8, 12.09.2019, p. 2148-2176.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a0bca228b4e24c908e81e747a8d60388,
title = "How do different types of interorganizational ties matter in technological exploration?",
abstract = "Purpose: Boundary-spanning exploration through establishing alliances is an effective strategy to explore technologies beyond local search in innovating firms. The purpose of this paper is to argue that it is useful to make a distinction in boundary-spanning exploration between what a firm learns from its alliance partners (explorative learning from partners (ELP)) and what it learns from other organisations (explorative learning from non-partners (ELN)). Design/methodology/approach: The authors contend that alliances play a role in both types of exploration. More specifically, the authors discern three types of alliances (inside ties, clique-spanning ties and outside ties) based on their role vis-{\`a}-vis existing alliance cliques. Clique members are highly embedded, and breaking out of the cliques through clique-spanning and outside alliances is crucial to improving explorative learning. Thereafter, the authors claim that clique-spanning ties and outside ties have a different effect on ELN and ELP. Findings: The empirical analysis of the “application specific integrated circuits” industry indicates that inside ties have negligible effects on both types of explorative learning. Clique-spanning ties have a positive effect on ELP, but not on ELN. The reverse is true for outside ties. The results show that research on explorative learning should devote greater attention to the various roles alliance partners and types of alliances play in advancing technological exploration. Originality/value: The literature only emphasises the learning from partners, focussing mainly on accessing their technology. In sum, alliance partners play different roles in exploration, and their network position influences the role they are able to play.",
keywords = "Boundary-spanning exploration, Clique-spanning ties, Conduits, Explorative learning from non-partners, Explorative learning from partners, Inside ties, Outside ties, Prisms",
author = "You-Shan Su and Wim Vanhaverbeke",
year = "2019",
month = "9",
day = "12",
doi = "10.1108/MD-06-2018-0713",
language = "English",
volume = "57",
pages = "2148--2176",
journal = "Management Decision",
issn = "0025-1747",
publisher = "Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How do different types of interorganizational ties matter in technological exploration?

AU - Su, You-Shan

AU - Vanhaverbeke, Wim

PY - 2019/9/12

Y1 - 2019/9/12

N2 - Purpose: Boundary-spanning exploration through establishing alliances is an effective strategy to explore technologies beyond local search in innovating firms. The purpose of this paper is to argue that it is useful to make a distinction in boundary-spanning exploration between what a firm learns from its alliance partners (explorative learning from partners (ELP)) and what it learns from other organisations (explorative learning from non-partners (ELN)). Design/methodology/approach: The authors contend that alliances play a role in both types of exploration. More specifically, the authors discern three types of alliances (inside ties, clique-spanning ties and outside ties) based on their role vis-à-vis existing alliance cliques. Clique members are highly embedded, and breaking out of the cliques through clique-spanning and outside alliances is crucial to improving explorative learning. Thereafter, the authors claim that clique-spanning ties and outside ties have a different effect on ELN and ELP. Findings: The empirical analysis of the “application specific integrated circuits” industry indicates that inside ties have negligible effects on both types of explorative learning. Clique-spanning ties have a positive effect on ELP, but not on ELN. The reverse is true for outside ties. The results show that research on explorative learning should devote greater attention to the various roles alliance partners and types of alliances play in advancing technological exploration. Originality/value: The literature only emphasises the learning from partners, focussing mainly on accessing their technology. In sum, alliance partners play different roles in exploration, and their network position influences the role they are able to play.

AB - Purpose: Boundary-spanning exploration through establishing alliances is an effective strategy to explore technologies beyond local search in innovating firms. The purpose of this paper is to argue that it is useful to make a distinction in boundary-spanning exploration between what a firm learns from its alliance partners (explorative learning from partners (ELP)) and what it learns from other organisations (explorative learning from non-partners (ELN)). Design/methodology/approach: The authors contend that alliances play a role in both types of exploration. More specifically, the authors discern three types of alliances (inside ties, clique-spanning ties and outside ties) based on their role vis-à-vis existing alliance cliques. Clique members are highly embedded, and breaking out of the cliques through clique-spanning and outside alliances is crucial to improving explorative learning. Thereafter, the authors claim that clique-spanning ties and outside ties have a different effect on ELN and ELP. Findings: The empirical analysis of the “application specific integrated circuits” industry indicates that inside ties have negligible effects on both types of explorative learning. Clique-spanning ties have a positive effect on ELP, but not on ELN. The reverse is true for outside ties. The results show that research on explorative learning should devote greater attention to the various roles alliance partners and types of alliances play in advancing technological exploration. Originality/value: The literature only emphasises the learning from partners, focussing mainly on accessing their technology. In sum, alliance partners play different roles in exploration, and their network position influences the role they are able to play.

KW - Boundary-spanning exploration

KW - Clique-spanning ties

KW - Conduits

KW - Explorative learning from non-partners

KW - Explorative learning from partners

KW - Inside ties

KW - Outside ties

KW - Prisms

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063890567&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85063890567&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1108/MD-06-2018-0713

DO - 10.1108/MD-06-2018-0713

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85063890567

VL - 57

SP - 2148

EP - 2176

JO - Management Decision

JF - Management Decision

SN - 0025-1747

IS - 8

ER -