The Journal of Technology Transfer

, Volume 42, Issue 3, pp 635–653 | Cite as

Resource alignment, organizational distance, and knowledge transfer performance: the contingency role of alliance form

  • Yung-Chang Hsiao
  • Chung-Jen Chen
  • Bou-Wen Lin
  • Chia-I Kuo


The main objective of this study was to examine empirically the moderating effects of two forms of alliances—equity-based and contract-based—on knowledge transfer performance. Using a quantitative analytical approach, the theoretical model and hypotheses in this study were tested based on empirical data gathered from the top 5000 Taiwanese companies listed in the yearbook published by the China Credit Information Service, Inc. in 2006. Data obtained from 107 valid and complete survey questionnaires were analyzed using correlation coefficients and multiple linear regressions. The results revealed that resource similarity was more positively associated with knowledge transfer performance when the alliance form is equity-based, whereas resource utilization was more positively related to knowledge transfer performance when equity-based alliances were adopted. In addition, organizational distance was more negatively related to knowledge transfer performance for equity-based alliances than for contract-based alliances.


Resource alignment Organizational distance Alliance form Knowledge transfer 

JEL Classification



  1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interaction. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, T. J. (1977). Managing the flow of technology: Technology transfer and the dissemination of technological information within the R&D organization. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  3. Aral, S., & Weill, P. (2007). IT assets, organizational capabilities, and firm performance: how resource allocations and organizational differences explain performance variation. Organization Science, 18(5), 763–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Strategic alliance: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Argyres, N. (1996). Evidence on the role of firm capabilities in vertical integration decisions. Strategic Management Journal, 17(2), 129–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Atuahene-Gima, K., & Li, H. (2004). Strategic decision comprehensiveness and new product development outcomes in new technology ventures. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 583–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bierly, P. E., III, & Daly, P. S. (2007). Alternative knowledge strategies, competitive environment, and organizational performance in small manufacturing firms. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 31(4), 493–516.Google Scholar
  8. Birkinshaw, J., Nobel, R., & Ridderstråle, J. (2002). Knowledge as a contingency variable: do the characteristics of knowledge predict organization structure? Organization Science, 13(3), 274–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burns, T. E., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The management of innovation. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  10. Cambra-Fierro, J., Florin, J., Perez, L., & Whitelock, J. (2011). Inter-firm market orientation as antecedent of knowledge transfer, innovation and value creation in networks. Management Decision, 49(3), 444–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chakrabarti, A., Singh, K., & Mahmood, I. (2007). Diversification and performance: Evidence from East Asian firms. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2), 101–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen, M. (1996). Competitor analysis and interfirm rivalry: Toward a theoretical integration. Academy of Management Review, 21, 100–134.Google Scholar
  13. Chen, C.-J. (2004). The effects of knowledge attribute, alliance characteristics, and absorptive capacity on knowledge transfer performance. R&D Management, 34(3), 311–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen, H.-M., & Chen, T.-J. (2003). Governance structures in strategic alliances: Transaction cost versus resource-based perspective. Journal of World Business, 38(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Coase, R. H. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4(16), 386–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Colombo, M. (2003). Alliance form: A test of the contractual and competence perspectives. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 1209–1229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Conner, K. R. (1991). A historical comparison of resource-based theory and five schools of thought within industrial organization economics: do we have a new theory of the firm? Journal of Management, 17(1), 121–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Culpan, R. (2009). A fresh look at strategic alliances: Research issues and future directions. International Journal of Strategic Business Alliances, 1(1), 4–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cummings, J. L., & Teng, B.-S. (2003). Transferring R&D knowledge: the key factors affecting knowledge transfer success. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 20(1), 39–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Das, T. K., & Teng, B. S. (2000a). A resource-based theory of strategic alliances. Journal of Management, 26(1), 31–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Das, T. K., & Teng, B. S. (2000b). Instabilities of strategic alliances: An internal tensions perspective. Organization Science, 11, 71–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Das, T. K., & Teng, B. S. (2003). Partner analysis and alliance performance. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 19, 279–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Doty, D. H., Glick, W. H., & Huber, G. P. (1993). Fit, equifinality, and organizational effectiveness: A test of two configurational theories. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1196–1250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Duysters, 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. European Management Review, 9(3), 139–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Easterby-Smith, M., Crossan, M., & Nicolini, D. (2000). Organizational learning: Debates past, present and future. Journal of Management Studies, 37, 783–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Easterby-Smith, M., Lyles, M. A., & Tsang, E. W. K. (2008). Inter-organizational knowledge transfer: Current themes and future prospects. Journal of Management Studies, 45(4), 677–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fang, E. (2011). The effect of strategic alliance knowledge complementarity on new product innovativeness in China. Organization Science, 22(1), 158–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. George, G., Zahra, S. A., & Wood, D. R., Jr. (2002). The effects of business–university alliances on innovative output and financial performance: a study of publicly traded biotechnology companies. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(6), 577–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Grant, R., & Baden-Fuller, C. (2004). A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances. Journal of Management Studies, 41(1), 61–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gulati, R. (1995). Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 85–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hair, J. F., Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. C., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  33. Hamel, G., Doz, Y. L., & Prahalad, C. K. (1989). Collaborate with your competitors and win. Harvard Business Review, 67(1), 133–139.Google Scholar
  34. Harryson, S., Kliknaite, S., & Dudkowski, R. (2008). Making innovative use of academic knowledge to enhance corporate technology innovation impact. International Journal of Technology Management, 41, 109–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Henderson, R., & Cockburn, I. (1994). Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 63–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Henderson, R., & Mitchell, W. (1997). The interactions of organizational and competitive influences on strategy and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 18(s 1), 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hotho, S., & Champion, K. (2011). Small businesses in the new creative industries: Innovation as a people management challenge. Management Decision, 49(1), 29–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jaccard, J., & Turrisi, R. (2003). Interaction effects in multiple regression (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jiang, R. J., Tao, Q. T., & Santoro, M. D. (2010). Alliance portfolio diversity and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 31(10), 1136–1144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Johnson, J. L., Cullen, J. B., Sakano, T., & Takenouchi, H. (1996). Setting the stage for trust and strategic integration in Japanese-US cooperative alliances. Journal of International Business Studies, 27, 981–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Khamseh, H. M., & Jolly, D. R. (2008). Knowledge transfer in alliances: Determinant factors. Journal of Knowledge Management, 12(1), 37–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kogut, B. (1988). Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. Strategic Management Journal, 9(4), 319–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capacities and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3, 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kostova, T., & Roth, K. (2002). Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: Institutional and relational effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 215–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 461–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lane, P., Salk, J. E., & Lyles, M. A. (2001). Absorptive capacity, learning, and performance in international joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 1139–1161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lawrence, P., & Lorsch, J. (1967). Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Boston: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  48. Lee, J., Lee, J., & Lee, H. (2003). Exploration and exploitation in the presence of network externalities. Management Science, 49(4), 553–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Leonard-Barton, D. (1995). Wellsprings of knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  50. Lin, B.-W. (2003). Technology transfer as technological learning: a source of competitive advantage for firms with limited R&D resources. R&D Management, 33, 327–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lin, B.-W., Chen, C.-J., & Wu, H.-L. (2006). Patent portfolio diversity, technology strategy and firm value. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 53(1), 17–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lin, J. L., Fang, S.-C., Fang, S.-R., & Tsai, F.-S. (2009a). Network embeddedness and technology transfer performance in R&D consortia in Taiwan. Technovation, 29(11), 763–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lin, Z., Yang, H. B., & Arya, B. (2009b). Alliance partners and firm performance: Resource complimentarily and status association. Strategic Management Journal, 30(9), 921–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lunnan, R., & Haugland, S. A. (2008). Predicting and measuring alliance performance: A multidimensional analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 29(5), 545–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Luo, Y., Shenkar, O., & Nyaw, M.-K. (2001). A dual parent perspective on control and performance in international joint ventures: Lessons from a developing economy. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(1), 41–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Malik, T. H., & Zhao, Y. Z. (2013). Cultural distance and its implication for the duration of the international alliance in a high technology sector. International Business Review, 22(4), 699–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2, 71–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mason, K., & Leek, S. (2008). Learning to build a supply network: An exploration of dynamic business models. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 759–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Minbaeva, D., Pedersenl, T., Bjorkman, I., Fey, C. F., & Park, H. J. (2003). MNC knowledge transfer, subsidiary absorptive capacity, and HRM. Journal of International Business Studies, 34, 586–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 77–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Nadkarni, S., & Narayanan, V. (2007). Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: the moderating role of industry clock speed. Strategic Management Journal, 28(3), 243–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review, 82(4), 74–83.Google Scholar
  63. Oxley, J. E. (1997). Appropriability hazards and governance in strategic alliances: A transaction cost approach. Journal of Law Economics and Organization, 13(2), 387–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Park, B. I. (2011). Knowledge transfer capacity of multinational enterprises and technology acquisition in international joint ventures. International Business Review, 20, 75–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Pennings, J. M. (1975). The relevance of the structural-contingency model for organizational effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20, 393–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Pérez-Nordtvedt, L., Kedia, B. L., Datta, D. K., & Rasheed, A. A. (2008). Effectiveness and efficiency of cross-border knowledge transfer: An empirical examination. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 699–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pisano, G. (1988). Innovation through market hierarchies and joint ventures: Technology, strategy and collaborative arrangements in the biotechnology industry. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  68. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavior research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Poppo, L., & Zenger, T. (2002). Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements? Strategic Management Journal, 23(8), 707–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Pothukuchi, V., Damanpour, F., Choi, J., Chen, C. C., & Park, S. H. (2002). National and organizational culture differences and international joint venture performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(2), 243–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Rhodes, J., Hung, R., Lok, P., Lien, B. Y.-H., & Wu, C.-M. (2008). Factors influencing organizational knowledge transfer: implication for corporate performance. Journal of knowledge Management, 12(3), 84–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Richards, M., & De Carolis, D. M. (2003). Joint venture research and development activity: an analysis of the international biotechnology industry. Journal of International Management, 9(1), 33–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Rothaermel, F. T., & Deeds, D. L. (2004). Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: A system of new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 201–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sampson, R. C. (2004). Organizational choice in R&D alliances: Knowledge-based and transaction cost perspectives. Managerial and Decision Economics, 25(6–7), 421–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Sampson, R. C. (2007). R&D alliances and firm performance: the impact of technological diversity and alliance organization on innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 364–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Schilke, O. (2014). On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: the nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism. Strategic Management Journal, 35(2), 179–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Simonin, B. L. (1999). Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 595–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sitkin, S. M., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Schroeder, R. G. (1994). Distinguishing control from learning in total quality management: A contingency perspective. Academy of Management Review, 19(3), 537–564.Google Scholar
  80. Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Tallman, S., & Li, J. (1996). The effects of international diversity and product diversity on the performance of multinational firms. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 179–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Teng, B. S., & Das, T. K. (2008). Governance structure choice in strategic alliances - The roles of alliance objectives, alliance management experience, and international partners. Management Decision, 46(5–6), 725–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Teo, T. S. H., & Bhattacherjee, A. (2014). Knowledge transfer and utilization in IT outsourcing partnerships: A preliminary model of antecedents and outcomes. Information & Management, 51(2), 177–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 996–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. van de Vrande, V., Vanhaverbeke, W., & Duysters, G. (2011). Technology In-Sourcing and the Creation of Pioneering Technologies. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(6), 974–987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Venkatraman, N. (1989). The concept of fit in strategy research: toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 423–444.Google Scholar
  87. Wang, H., & Chen, W.-R. (2010). Is firm-specific innovation associated with greater value appropriation? The roles of environmental dynamism and technological diversity. Research Policy, 39(1), 141–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Weigelt, C. (2009). The impact of outsourcing new technologies on integrative capabilities and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 595–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. White, S. (2005). Cooperation costs, governance choice and alliance evolution. Journal of Management Studies, 42(7), 1383–1412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Williamson, O. E. (1994). Visible and invisible governance. The American Economic Review: 323–326.Google Scholar
  91. Wu, F., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2006). Organizational learning, commitment, and joint value creation in interfirm relationships. Journal of Business Research, 59, 81–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Zhan, W., & Luo, Y. (2008). Performance implications of capability exploitation and upgrading in international joint ventures. Management International Review, 48, 227–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Zoogah, D. B., Vora, D., Richard, O., & Peng, M. W. (2011). Strategic alliance team diversity, coordination, and effectiveness. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(3), 510–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yung-Chang Hsiao
    • 1
  • Chung-Jen Chen
    • 2
  • Bou-Wen Lin
    • 3
  • Chia-I Kuo
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Business and Management, College of ManagementNational University of TainanTainanTaiwan, ROC
  2. 2.Graduate Institute of Business Administration, College of ManagementNational Taiwan UniversityTaipeiTaiwan, ROC
  3. 3.Institute of Technology ManagementNational Tsing Hua UniversityHsin ChuTaiwan, ROC

Personalised recommendations