Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Who Makes You Central?

Analyzing the Influence of International Alliance Experience on Network Centrality of Start-up Firms

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Management International Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

  • The importance of network centrality for the success of international start-ups has been frequently emphasized. Research so far has however been mute regarding the question of how firms can increase their network centrality. This paper applies a knowledge-based framework to analyze changes in the structural position of firms within their research network.

  • Analyzing longitudinal event history data for the complete German biotech population for 1995 till the end of 2006 our findings show that the prior international alliance history matters for the status within a firms network. Alliances with international partners as well as alliances with partners from a variety of countries enhance the subsequent movement towards a more central position in the research network. However, multi-partner alliances inhibit the subsequent movement towards a central position, pointing to challenges in managing a portfolio of simultaneous alliances.

  • The findings emphasize the necessity for a young firm to enlarge its experience with international alliances from a variety of countries but to concentrate its efforts with regards to the number of simultaneous partners.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1990). Innovation and small firms. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quaterly, 45(3), 425–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Laham, A., & Amburgey, T. L. (2005). Knowledge sourcing in foreign direct investments: An empirical examination of target profiles. Management International Review, 45(3), 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Laham, A., & Souitaris, V. (2008). Network embeddedness and new venture internationalization. Analyzing international linkages in the German biotech industry. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(5), 567–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almeida, P., Song, J., & Grant, R.M. (2002). Are firms superior to alliances and markets? An empirical test of cross-board alliances, Organization Science, 13(2), 147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alter, C., & Hage, J. (1993) Organizations working together. Newbury, PA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anand, B. T., & Khanna, T. (2000). Do firms learn how to create value? The case of alliance. Strategic Management Journal, (Special Issue March), 295–315.

  • Andersson, S., & Wictor, I. (2003). Innovative internationalisation in new firms: Born globals--the Swedish Case. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1(3), 249–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barkema, H. G., & Vermeulen, F. (1998). International expansion through start-up or acquisition: A learning perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 7–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettis, R. A., & Prahalad C. K. (1995). The dominant logic: Retrospective and extension. Strategic Management Journal, 16(1), 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blomstermo, A., Eriksson, K., & Deo Sharma, D. (2004a). Domestic activity and knowledge development in the internationalization process of firms. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 2(3), 239–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blomstermo, A., Eriksson, K., Lindstrand, A., & Deo Sharma, D. (2004b). The perceived usefulness of network experiential knowledge in the internationalizing firm. Journal of International Management, 10(3), 355–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonacich, P. (1987). Power and centrality: The family of measures. American Journal of Sociology, 92(5), 1170–1183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (2000). The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22, (edited by Robert I. Sutton and Barry M. Staw. Elsevier Science).

  • Casper, S. (2000). Institutional adaptiveness, technology policy, and the diffusion of new business models: The case of German biotechnology. Organization Studies, 21(5), 887–914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chetty, S., & Blankenburg-Holm, D. (2000). Internationalization of small to medium-sized manufacturing firms: A network approach. International Business Review, 9(1), 77–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chetty, S. K., & Wilson, H. I. M. (2003). Collaborating with competitors to acquire resources. International Business Review, 12(1), 61–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coombs, J. E., Mudambi, R., & Deeds, D .L. (2006). An examination of the investments in U.S. biotechnology firms by foreign and domestic partners. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 405–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBresson, C., & Amesse, F. (1991). Networks of innovators: A review and introduction to the issue. Research Policy, 20(5), 363–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeCarolis, D. M., & Deeds, D. L. (1999). The impact of stocks and flows of organizational knowledge on firm performance: An empirical investigation of the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 20(10), 953–969.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R., Silverberg, G., & Soete, L. (1988). Technical change and economic theory. London: Continuum International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erramilli, M. K. (1991). The experience factor in foreign market entry behaviour of service firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 22(3), 479–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, D. (2000). Inter-organizational knowledge outsourcing: What permits small Taiwanese firms to compete in the computer industry. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 17(2), 223–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, & Young. (Ed.). (1998). Aufbruchstimmung. Erster Deutscher Biotechnologie Report, 1998.

  • Ernst, & Young. (Ed.). (2000). Gründerzeit. Zweiter Deutscher Biotechnologie Report, 2000.

  • Ernst, & Young. (Ed.). (2002). Neue Chancen. Deutscher Biotechnologie Report, 2002.

  • Ernst, & Young. (Ed.). (2003). Zeit der Bewährung. Deutscher Biotechnologie Report, 2003.

  • Frank, R. H. (1985). Choosing the right pond: Human behavior and the quest for status. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, G., Zahra, S., & Robley W. D. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gnyawali, D. R., & Madhaven, R. (2001). Cooperative networks and competitive dynamics: A structural embeddedness perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 421–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grandori, A., & Soda, G. (1995). Inter-firm networks: Antecedents, mechanisms and forms. Organization Studies, 16(2), 184–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R. (1995). Social structure and alliance formation patterns: a longitudinal analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(4), 619–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R. (1999). Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 20(5), 397–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R., & Gargiulo, M. (1999). Where do interorganizational networks come from? American Journal of Sociology, 104(5), 1439–1493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R., & Higgins, M. C. (2003). Which ties matter when? The contingent effects of interorganizational partnerships on IPO success. Strategic Management Journal, 24(2), 127–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J. (2002). Inter-firm R&D partnerships: An overview of major trends and patterns since 1960. Reseach Policy, 31(4), 477–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J., & Schakenraad, J. (1994). The effect of strategic technology alliances on company performance. SMJ, 15(4), 291–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J., Link, A. N., & Vonortas, N. S. (2000). Research partnership. Research Policy, 29(4/5), 567–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subteams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M. T. (2002). Knowledge networks: Explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organization Science, 13(3), 232–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M. T., Nohria, N., & Tierney, T. (1999). What’s your strategy for managing knowledge? Harvard Business Review, 77(2), 106–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, R., & Cockburn, I. (1994). Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management Journal, 15(S1), 63–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and literatures. Organization Sciences, 2(Special Issue), 88–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iansiti, M., & Clark, K. B. (1994). Integration and dynamic capability: Evidence from product development in automobiles and mainframe computers. Industrial and Corporate Change, 3(3), 557–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johannisson, B., & Mönsted, M. (1997). Contextualizing entrepreneurial networking—the case of Scandinavia. International Studies of Management and Organization, 27(4), 297–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J.-E. (2003). Business relationship learning and commitment in the internationalization process. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 83–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(3), 383–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B. (2000). The network as knowledge: Generative rules and the emergence of structure. Strategic Management Journal, 21(Special Issue March), 405–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristensen, P. S., & Lund V. A. (2001). Importance of collaboration partners in product development. In A. Plunket , C. Voisin, & B. Bellon (Eds.), The dynamics of industrial collaboration. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 461–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Irwin: Homewood IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, K., Lange, D., & Gillis, L. (2005). Transactive memory systems, learning, and learning transfer. Organization Science, 16(6), 581–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liebeskind, J. P. (1996). Knowledge, strategy and the theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Special Issue Winter), 93–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebeskind, J., Wiersema, M., & Hansen, G. (1992). LBOs, corporate restructuring, and the incentive-intensity hypothesis, financial management. Financial Management Association, 21(1/Spring), 73–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liebeskind, J. P., Oliver, A., Zucker, L., & Brewer, M. (1996). Social networks, learning and flexibility: Sourcing scientific knowledge in new biotechnology firms. Organization Science, 7(4), 428–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, K. J., & Argyres, N. (2004). Learning to contract: Evidence from the personal computer industry. Organization Science, 15(4), 394–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mezias, S. J., & Glynn, M. A. (1993). The three faces of corporate renewal: Institution, revolution, and evolution. Strategic Management Journal, 14(2), 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mian, S. A. (1997). Assessing and managing the university technology business incubator: An integrative framework. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(4), 251–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Chen, M.-J. (1996). The simplicity of competitive repertoires: An empirical analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 17(6), 419–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murmann, J. P. (2003). The coevolution of industries and national institutions: Theory and evidence. Paper presented at the Annual Academy of Management Meeting, Seattle 2003.

  • Nahapiet J., & Ghoshal S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and organizational advantage. Academy.Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2002). Dynamising National Innovation Systems. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oviatt, B. M., & McDougall, P .P. (1999). Accelerated internationalization: Why are new and small ventures internationalizing in greater numbers and with increasing speed? In R. Wright (Eds.), Global Strategic Management. Stamford, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, S. W., & Rao C. R. (1990). The role of experience in information use and decision making by marketing managers. Journal of Marketing Research, 27(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podolny, J. (1993). A status-based model of market competition. American Journal of Sociology, 98(4), 829–872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podolny, J. (1994). Market uncertainty and the social character of economic exchange. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 458–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podolny, J. M., & Stuart, T. E. (1995). A role-based ecology of technical change. American Journal of Sociology, 100(5), 1224–1260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., & Brantley, P. (1992). Competitive cooperation in biotechnology: Learning through networks? In N. Nohria, & R. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and organizations. Boston: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., White, D. R., Koput, K. W., & Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 110(4), 901–975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prashantam, S. (2005). Towards a knowledge-based conceptualization of internationalization. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 3(1), 37–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, R. S., Chandy, R. K., & Prabhu J. C. (2008). The fruits of legitimacy: Why some new ventures gain more from innovation than others. Journal of Marketing, 72(4), 58–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritter, T., & Gemünden, H. G. (2003). Network competence: Its impact on innovation success and its antecedents. Journal of Business Research, 56(9), 2003, pp. 745–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothaermel, F. T., & Deeds, D. L. (2006). Alliance type, alliance experience and alliance management capability in high technology ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 429–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowley, T. J., & Baum, J. A. C. (2002). The dynamics of network moves and network strategies. Paper presented at the Academy of Managemen Meeting, Denver CO August.

  • Sanchez, R., & Heene, A. (Eds.). (1997). Strategic learning and knowledge management. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shan, W. (1990). An empirical analysis of organizational strategies by entrepreneurial hightechnology firms. Strategic Management Journal, 11(2), 129–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shan, W., Walker, G., & Kogut, B. (1994). Interfirm cooperation and startup innovation in the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 15(5), 387–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shipilov, A. (2003). Should you bank on your network? Relational and positional embededdness in the making of financial capital. Working Paper, Joseph L. Rotman School of Management University of Toronto.

  • Soh, P. H., Mahmood, I. P., & Mitchell, W. (2004). Dynamic inducements in R&D investment: Market signals and network locations. Academy of Management Journal, 47(6), 907–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spender, J. C., & Grant, R. M. (1996). Knowledge and the firm: Overview. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Special Issue Winter), 5–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spender, J. C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Special Issue Winter), 45–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, T., & Podolny J. (1996). Local search and the evolution of technological capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S1), 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, T. E. (2000). Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates in high-technology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 21(8), 791–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, T. E., Hoang, H., & Hybels, R. C. (1999). Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 315–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K. (1997). Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market and organizational change. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for economic performance of organizations. American Sociological Review, 61(4), 674–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B. (1999) Social relations and networks in the making of financial capital. American Sociological Review, 64(4), 481–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B., & Lancaster, R. (2003). The role of relationships in interfirm knowledge transfer and learning, the case of corporate debt markets. Management Science, 49(4), 383–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Hippel, E. (1988). The sources of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, G., Kogut, B., & Shan, W. (1997). Social capital, structural holes and the formation of an industry network. Organization Science, 8(2),109–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wassermann, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis. Methods and applications. Cambridge: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong, P. K., & He, Z. L. (2003). Local embeddedness, global networking, and the innovation performance of firms. Paper presented at the Annual Academy of Management Meeting, Seattle.

  • Zahra, S., Matherne, B., & Carleton, J. M. (2003). Technological resource leveraging and the internationalization of new ventures. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1(2), 163–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S., & George, G. (2005). International entrepreneurship: The current status of the field and future research agenda. In M. Hitt, D. Ireland, M. Camp, & D. Sexton (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship. (S. 255–288). Oxford: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, L., Darby, M., & Brewer, M. (1998). Intellectual human capital and the birth of U.S. biotechnology enterprises. American Economic Review, 88(1), 290–306.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Management Area, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany

    Andreas Al-Laham (Chair for Strategic and International Management)

  2. Department of Strategic Management, Joseph L. Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    Terry L. Amburgey

Authors
  1. Andreas Al-Laham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Terry L. Amburgey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Al-Laham.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Al-Laham, A., Amburgey, T. Who Makes You Central?. Manag Int Rev 50, 297–323 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-010-0035-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-010-0035-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation