A contingency view of alliance management capabilities for innovation in the biotech industry

  1. Carmen Cabello-Medina 1
  2. Antonio Carmona-Lavado 1
  3. Gloria Cuevas Rodríguez 1
  1. 1 Universidad Pablo de Olavide

    Universidad Pablo de Olavide

    Sevilla, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02z749649

Business Research Quarterly

ISSN: 2340-9444

Year of publication: 2020

Volume: 23

Issue: 1

Type: Article

DOI: 10.1177/2340944420901050 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Business Research Quarterly


Cited by

  • Scopus Cited by: 3 (30-09-2023)
  • Dialnet Metrics Cited by: 1 (01-10-2023)
  • Web of Science Cited by: 4 (19-09-2023)
  • Dimensions Cited by: 2 (13-04-2023)

JCR (Journal Impact Factor)

  • Year 2020
  • Journal Impact Factor: 5.475
  • Journal Impact Factor without self cites: 5.075
  • Article influence score: 1.051
  • Best Quartile: Q2
  • Area: BUSINESS Quartile: Q2 Rank in area: 50/153 (Ranking edition: SSCI)
  • Area: MANAGEMENT Quartile: Q2 Rank in area: 71/226 (Ranking edition: SSCI)

SCImago Journal Rank

  • Year 2020
  • SJR Journal Impact: 0.995
  • Best Quartile: Q1
  • Area: Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous) Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 42/412
  • Area: Business and International Management Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 76/483
  • Area: Strategy and Management Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 89/559
  • Area: Economics and Econometrics Quartile: Q2 Rank in area: 174/743

Índice Dialnet de Revistas

  • Year 2020
  • Journal Impact: 4.240
  • Field: ECONOMÍA Quartile: C1 Rank in field: 1/170


  • Social Sciences: A

Scopus CiteScore

  • Year 2020
  • CiteScore of the Journal : 5.5
  • Area: Economics and Econometrics Percentile: 90
  • Area: Business, Management and Accounting (all) Percentile: 89
  • Area: Business and International Management Percentile: 87
  • Area: Strategy and Management Percentile: 86

Journal Citation Indicator (JCI)

  • Year 2020
  • Journal Citation Indicator (JCI): 1.12
  • Best Quartile: Q1
  • Area: BUSINESS Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 68/285
  • Area: MANAGEMENT Quartile: Q2 Rank in area: 109/384


(Data updated as of 13-04-2023)
  • Total citations: 2
  • Recent citations: 2
  • Field Citation Ratio (FCR): 1.21


In this research, we analyze the influence of two alliance management capabilities, coordination and interorganizational learning, on the performance of alliances for innovation. By adopting a contingency view, we explore whether the effectiveness of these capabilities depends on certain features of the alliance portfolio configuration (partner and geographic diversity). Based on a sample of Spanish companies belonging to the five leading biotech clusters, our results demonstrate that alliance management capabilities are not equally effective across different contexts. Alliance coordination capabilities become more effective when partner diversity is low and geographic diversity is high. By contrast, interorganizational learning capabilities have a positive effect on alliance portfolio performance when partner diversity is high and geographic diversity is low. These results also have useful implications for managers involved in alliances for innovation, who can direct the organizational efforts towards the most effective alliance capabilities, depending on the features of their alliance portfolio

Funding information

The authors acknowledge the Spanish Minister of Economy and Competitiveness (Project ECO2016-78882-R).


Bibliographic References

  • Al-Laham, A., Amburgey, T.L., Bates, K., 2008. The dynamics of research alliances: examining the effect of alliance experience and partner characteristics on the speed of alliance entry in the biotech industry. Br. J. Manag. 19, 243–264.
  • Al-Laham, A., Amburgey, T.L., Baden-Fuller, C., 2010. Who is my partner and how do we dance? Technological collaboration and patenting speed in US biotechnology. Br. J. Manag. 21, 789–807.
  • Anand, B.N., Khanna, T., 2000. Do firms learn how to create value? The case of strategic alliances. Strateg. Manag. J. 21, 295–315.
  • Antolin-Lopez, R., Martinez-del-Rio, J., Cespedes-Lorente, J.J., Perez-Valls, M., 2015. The choice of suitable cooperation partners for product innovation: differences between new ventures and established companies. Eur. Manag. J. 33, 472–484.
  • Ardito, L., Natalicchio, A., Petruzzelli, A.M., Garavelli, A.C., 2018. Organizing for continuous technology acquisition: the role of R&D geographic dispersion. R&D Manag. 48 (2), 165–176.
  • Arikan, A., 2009. Interfirm knowledge exchanges and the knowledge creation capability of clusters. Acad. Manag. Rev. 34, 658–676.
  • Asebio, 2017. Informe Asociación Española de Bioempresas 2017. Asociación Española de Bioempresas.
  • Asebio, 2018. Spanish Biotech Industry: Main Success Stories. Spanish Bioindustry Association.
  • Baum, J.A., Calabrese, T., Silverman, B.S., 2000. Don’t go it alone: alliance network composition and startups’ performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strateg. Manag. J. 21, 267–294.
  • Belderbos, R., Carree, M., Lokshin, B., Fernandez-Sastre, J., 2015. Inter-temporal patterns of R&D collaboration and innovative performance. J. Technol. Transf. 40, 123–137.
  • Bell, G.G., Zaheer, A., 2007. Geography, networks, and knowledge flow. Organ. Sci. 18, 955–972.
  • Boschma, R.A., 2005. Proximity an innovation: a critical assessment. Reg. Stud. 39, 61–74.
  • Burns, T., Stalker, G.M., 1961. The Management of Innovation. Tavistock, London.
  • Capaldo, A., Messeni Petruzzelli, A., 2015. Origins of knowledge and innovation in R&D alliances: a contingency approach. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 27 (4), 461–483.
  • Carmona-Lavado, A., Cuevas-Rodríguez, G., Cabello-Medina, M., 2013. Service innovativeness and innovation success in technology-based knowledge-intensive business services: an intellectual capital approach. Ind. Innov. 20, 133–156.
  • Chandler, A., 1962. Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of Industrial Enterprise. MIOT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G., Aiken, L.S., 2003. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 3rd edition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, NJ.
  • Cohen, W., Levinthal, D., 1990. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Adm. Sci. Q. 35, 128–152.
  • Colombo, M., 2003. Alliance form: a test of the contractual and competence perspectives. Strateg. Manag. J. 24, 1209–1229.
  • Cheng, C.C.J., Huizingh, E.K.R.E., 2014. When is open innovation beneficial? The role of strategic orientation. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 31, 1235–1253.
  • Cui, A.S., O’Connor, G., 2012. Alliance portfolio resource diversity and firm innovation. J. Mark. 76, 24–43.
  • DeMan, Ard-P., 2005. Alliance capability: a comparison of the alliance strength of European and American companies. Eur. Manag. J. 23, 315–323.
  • Dooley, L., Kenny, B., Cronin, M., 2016. Interorganizational innovation across geographic and cognitive boundaries: does firm size matter? R&D Manag. 46, 227–243.
  • Draulans, J., DeMan, Ard-P., Volberda, H.W., 2003. Building alliance capability: management techniques for superior alliance performance. Long Range Plan. 36, 151–166.
  • Duysters, G., Lokshin, B., 2011. Determinants of alliance portfolio complexity and its effects on innovative performance of companies. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 28 (4), 570–585.
  • Duyster, G., Heimeriks, K.H., Lokshin, B., Meijer, E., Sabidussi, A., 2012. Do firms learn to manage alliance portfolio diversity? The diversity–performance relationship and the moderating effects of experience and capability. Eur. Manag. Rev. 9, 139–152.
  • Dyer, J., Singh, H., 1998. The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Acad. Manag. Rev. 23, 660–680.
  • Dyer, J.H., Hatch, N.W., 2006. Relation-specific capabilities and barriers to knowledge transfers: creating advantage through network relationships. Strateg. Manag. J. 27, 701–719.
  • Dyer, J.H., Nobeoka, K., 2000. Creating and managing a highperformance knowledge-sharing network: the Toyota case. Strateg. Manag. J. 21, 345–367.
  • Ettlie, J.E., Rosenthal, S.R., 2011. Service versus manufacturing innovation. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 28, 285–299.
  • García-Muiña, F.E., González-Sánchez, R., 2017. Absorptive routines and international patent performance. Bus. Res. Q. 20, 96–111.
  • Gay, B., 2005. Innovation and network structural dynamics: study of the alliance network of a major sector of the biotechnology industry. Res. Policy 34, 1457–1475.
  • Gimenez-Fernandez, E.M., Sandulli, F.D., 2017. Modes of inbound knowledge flows: are cooperation and outsourcing really complementary? Ind. Innov. 24, 795–816.
  • Goerzen, A., 2005. Managing alliance networks: emerging practices of multinational corporations. Acad. Manag. Exec. 19, 94–107.
  • Goerzen, A., 2007. Alliance networks and firm performance: the impact of repeated partnerships. Strateg. Manag. J. 28, 487–509.
  • Goerzen, A., Beamish, P.W., 2005. The effect of alliance network diversity on multinational enterprise performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 26, 333–354.
  • Gomes, E., Barnes, B.R., Mahmood, T., 2016. A 22 year review of strategic alliance research in the leading management journals. Int. Bus. Rev. 25 (1), 15–27.
  • Guardo, M.C., Harrigan, K.R., 2012. Mapping research on strategic alliances and innovation: a co-citation analysis. J. Technol. Transf. 37, 789–811.
  • Gujarati, D.N., 2003. Basic Econometrics, 4th edition. McGraw Hill, Boston.
  • Hair Jr., J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., Black, W.C., 1998. Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th edition. Prentice Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.
  • Hamel, G., 1991. Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances. Strateg. Manag. J. 12 (Summer Special Issue), 83–103.
  • Heiman, B., Nickerson, J.A., 2004. Empirical evidence regarding the tension between knowledge sharing and knowledge expro-priation in collaborations. Manag. Decis. Econ. 25, 401–420.
  • Heimeriks, K., Duysters, G., 2007. Alliance capability as a mediator between experience and alliance performance: an empirical investigation into the alliance capability development process. J. Manag. Stud. 44, 25–49.
  • Heimeriks, K., Duysters, G., Vanhaverbeke, W.M., 2007. Learning mechanisms and differential performance in alliance portfolios. Strateg. Organ. 5, 373–408.
  • Heimeriks, K.H., Klijn, E., Reuer, J., 2009. Building capabilities for alliance portfolios. Long Range Plan. 42, 96–114.
  • Helfat, C.E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M., Singh, H., Teece, D., Winter, S., 2007. Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. Blackwell, London.
  • Hinzmann, S., Cantner, U., Graf, H., 2018. The role of geographical proximity for project performance: evidence from the German Leading-Edge Cluster Competition. J. Technol. Transf., http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961–017–9600–1 (in press).
  • Hsiao, Y.-C., Chen, C., Lin, B., Kuo, C., 2017. Resource alignment, organizational distance, and knowledge transfer performance: the contingency role of alliance form. J. Technol. Transf. 42, 635–653.
  • Hoffmann, W., 2005. How to manage a portfolio of alliances. Long Range Plan. 38, 121–143.
  • Inkpen, A., Crossan, M., 1995. Believing is seeing—joint ventures and organization learning. J. Manag. Stud. 32, 595–618.
  • Iturrioz, C., Aragón, C., Narvaiza, L., 2015. How to foster shared innovation within SMEs’ networks: social capital and the role of intermediaries. Eur. Manag. J. 33, 104–115.
  • Jiang, R., Tao, T., Santoro, M., 2010. Alliance portfolio diversity and firm performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 31, 1136–1144.
  • Ju, T.L., Chen, S.-H., Li, C.-Y., Lee, T.-S., 2005. A strategic contingency model for technology alliance. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 105, 623–644.
  • Kale, P., Dyer, J.H., Singh, H., 2002. Alliance capability, stock market response and long-term alliance success: the role of the alliance function. Strateg. Manag. J. 23, 747–767.
  • Kale, P., Singh, H., 2007. Building firm capabilities through learning: the role of the alliance learning process in alliance capability and firm-level alliance success. Strateg. Manag. J. 28, 981–1000.
  • Khandwalla, P., 1973. Viable and effective organizational designs of firms. Acad. Manag. J. 16 (3), 481–495.
  • Khanna, T., Gulati, R., Nohria, N., 1998. The dynamics of learning alliances: competition, cooperation and relative scope. Strateg. Manag. J. 19, 193–210.
  • Kock, A., Gemünden, H.G., Salomo, S., Schultz, C., 2011.The mixed blessings of technological innovativeness for the commercial success of new products. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 28, 28–43.
  • Kohtamäki, M., Rabetino, R., Möller, K., 2018. Alliance capabilities: a review and research agenda. Ind. Mark. Manag. 68, 188–201.
  • Koka, B.R., Prescott, J.E., 2002. Strategic alliances as social capital: a multidimensional view. Strateg. Manag. J. 23, 795–816.
  • Lakpetch, P., Lorsuwannarat, T., 2012. Knowledge transfer effectiveness of university-industry alliances. Int. J. Organ. Anal. 20, 128–186.
  • Laursen, K., Salter, A., 2006. Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms. Strateg. Manag. J. 27, 131–150.
  • Lawrence, P., Lorsch, J., 1967. Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration. Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, Boston.
  • Luo, X., Deng, L., 2009. Do birds of a feather flock higher? The effects of partner similarity on innovation in strategic alliances in knowledge-intensive industries. J. Manag. Stud. 46, 1005–1030.
  • Marino, L., Strandholm, K., Steensma, H.K., Weaver, K.M., 2002. Harnessing complexity: the moderating effect of national culture on entrepreneurial orientation and strategic alliance portfolio complexity. Entrep. Theory Pract. 26, 145–161.
  • Martínez-Noya, A., Narula, R., 2018. What more can we learn from R&D alliances? A review and research agenda. Bus. Res. Q., http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2018.04.001 (forthcoming).
  • Mason, K., Leek, S., 2008. Learning to build a supply network: an exploration of dynamic business models. J. Manag. Stud. 45, 775–799.
  • Marhold, K., Kim, M.J., Kang, J., 2017. The effects of alliance port-folio diversity on innovation performance: a study of partner and alliance characteristics in the bio-pharmaceutical industry. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 21 (1), 1–24.
  • Nadler, D., Tushman, M., 1997. Competing by Design. Oxford University Press, New York
  • Nieto, M.J., Santamaría, Ll., 2017. The importance of diverse collaborative networks for the novelty of product innovation. Technovation 27, 367–377.
  • Nunnally, J.C., Bernstein, I.H., 1994. Psychometric Theory, 3rd edition. McGraw-Hill, New York.
  • Oerlemans, L., Knoben, J., 2010. Configurations of knowledge transfer relations: an empirically based taxonomy and its determinants. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 27, 33–51.
  • Oerlemans, L., Knoben, J., Pretorius, M.W., 2013. Alliance portfolio diversity, radical and incremental innovation: the moderating role of technology management. Technovation 33, 234–246.
  • Owen-Smith, J., Powell, W., 2004. Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: the effects of spillovers in the Boston Biotechnology Community. Organ. Sci. 15, 5–21.
  • Paradkar, A., Knight, J., Hansen, P., 2015. Innovation in startups: ideas filling the void or ideas devoid of resources and capabilities? Technovation 41/42, 1–10.
  • Parise, S., Casher, A., 2003. Alliance portfolios: designing and managing your network of business-partner relationships. Acad. Manag. Exec. 17, 25–39.
  • Pennings, J., 1992. Structural contingency theory: a reappraisal. In: Staw, B.M., Cummings, I.I. (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 267–309.
  • Podsakoff, P.M., Organ, D.W., 1986. Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. J. Manag. 12, 531–544.
  • Pollard, D., 2001. Learning in international joint ventures. In: Tayeb, M.H., Contractor, F.J. (Eds.), International Business Partnerships: Issues and Concerns. Palgrave, Hampshire.
  • Pouder, R., St John, C.H., 1996. Hot spots and blind spots: geographical clusters of firms and innovation. Acad. Manag. Rev. 21, 1192–1225.
  • Powell, W., Koput, K.W., Smith-Doerr, L., 1996. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Adm. Sci. Q. 41, 116–145.
  • Pucci, T., Brumana, M., Minola, T., Zanni, L., 2018. Social capital and innovation in a life science cluster: the role of proximity and family involvement. J. Technol. Transf., http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961–017–9591-y (in press).
  • Rosenkopf, L., Almeida, P., 2003. Overcoming local search through alliances and mobility. Manag. Sci. 49 (6), 751–766.
  • Rothaermel, F., Deeds, D., 2006. Alliance type, alliance experience and alliance management capability in high-technology ventures. J. Bus. Ventur. 21, 429–460.
  • Sampson, R.C., 2007. R&D alliances and firm performance: the impact of technological diversity and alliance organization on innovation. Acad. Manag. J. 50, 364–386.
  • Sarkar, M.B., Aulakh, P.S., Madhok, A., 2009. Process capabilities and value generation in alliance portfolios. Organ. Sci. 20, 583–600.
  • Sarpong, O., Teirlinck, P., 2018. The influence of functional and geographical diversity in collaboration on product innovation performance in SMEs. J. Technol. Transf., http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961–017–9582-z (in press).
  • Schilke, O., Goerzen, A., 2010. Alliance management capability: an investigation of the construct and its measurement. J. Manag. 36, 1192–1219.
  • Schreiner, M., Kale, P., Corsten, D., 2009. What really is alliance management capability and how does it impact alliance outcomes and success? Strateg. Manag. J. 30, 1395–1419.
  • Shin, K., Kim, S.J., Park, G., 2016. How does the partner type in R&D alliances impact technological innovation performance? A study on the Korean biotechnology industry. Asia Pac. J. Manag. 33, 141–164.
  • Singh, J., 2005. Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns. Manag. Sci. 51, 756–770.
  • Sluyts, K., Matthyssens, P., Martens, R., Streukens, S., 2011. Building capabilities to manage strategic alliances. Ind. Mark. Manag. 40, 875–886.
  • Sørensen, J.B., Stuart, T.E., 2000. Aging, obsolescence and organizational innovation. Adm. Sci. Q. 45, 81–112.
  • Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., Shuen, A., 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg. Manag. J. 18, 509–533.
  • Terjesen, S., Patel, P., Covin, J., 2011. Alliance diversity, environmental context and the value of manufacturing capabilities among new high technology ventures. J. Oper. Manag. 29, 105–115.
  • Thorgren, S., Wincent, J., Örtqvist, D., 2009. Designing interorganizational networks for innovation: an empirical examination of network configuration, formation and governance. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 26, 148–166.
  • Van den Bosch, F.A.J., Volberda, H.W., De Boer, M., 1999. Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment: organizational form and combinative capabilities. Organ. Sci. 10, 551–568.
  • Vlaisavljevic, V., (Doctoral dissertation) 2015. Enabling Innovation at the Level of Firms, Alliances and Cluster: A Study of Spanish Biotech Industry. Pablo de Olavide University, Spain.
  • Wang, Y., Rajagopalan, N., 2015. Alliance capability: review and research agenda. J. Manag. 41, 236–260.
  • Wassmer, U., 2010. Alliance portfolios: a review and research agenda. J. Manag. 36, 141–171.
  • Whittington, K.B., Owen-Smith, J., Powell, W.W., 2009. Networks, propinquity, and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries. Adm. Sci. Q. 54, 90–122.
  • Wincent, J., Anokhin, S., Örtqvist, D., 2010. Does network board capital matter? A study of innovative performance in strategic SME networks. J. Bus. Res. 63, 265–275.
  • Woodward, J., 1965. Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice. Oxford University Press, London.
  • Wuyts, S., Dutta, S., Stremersch, S., 2004. Portfolios of interfirm agreements in technology-intensive markets: consequences for innovation and profitability. J. Mark. 68, 88–100.
  • Zaheer, A., George, V., 2004. Reach out or reach within? Performance implications of alliances and location in biotechnology. Manag. Decis. Econ. 25, 437–452.
  • Zollo, M., Reuer, J.J., Singh, H., 2002. Interorganizational routines and performance in strategic alliances. Organ. Sci. 13, 701–713.