Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the types of justice that affect knowledge acquisition and opportunism in strategic alliances and how these justice mechanisms function.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from both top-level and operating-level boundary spanners in 295 strategic alliances in China (a total of 590 boundary spanners). A structural equation model (SEM) with bias-corrected bootstrap method was used to test the hypotheses.FindingsThe results show that although both procedural justice and distributive justice are important in deterring opportunism, procedural justice is more effective at enhancing knowledge acquisition than distributive justice is. The results also demonstrate that boundary spanners' helping behaviors are more effective at fostering knowledge acquisition, whereas boundary spanners' voice behaviors have more impact on mitigating opportunism. In addition, boundary spanners' citizenship behaviors partially mediate the relationship between justice and interfirm-level performance.Originality/valueThis study adds a boundary-spanning lens to justice literature by uncovering the missing link between justice and alliance outcomes.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
