Abstract

Firms pursuing technological alliances to gain competitive advantages have become a ubiquitous phenomenon in today’s business environment. This article examines which technological alliance portfolio configuration is better for focal firm performance using a portfolio rather than a dyadic perspective. To assess technological alliance portfolio effects on Korean pharmaceutical and biotechnology firms, we adopted three explanatory variables—number of alliances, number of partners, and spanning structural holes. The growth rate of revenue and the growth rate of profit are used as dependent variables. We identify two characteristics of technological alliance portfolios from the two-step generalized method of moments estimates. First, we find that between two firms with the same number of alliances, the firm with the larger number of partners would have a better performance. This result is unlike those in previous studies because it distinguishes between the number of alliances and number of partners based on the network theory. Second, we find that spanning structural holes affects firm performance rather like a double-edge sword—it positively affects the growth rate of profit but negatively affects the growth rate of revenue of firms. In short, spanning structural holes is simultaneously beneficial for firm profitability and unfavorable for firm growth. This result differs from those of earlier studies because it shows that a firm spanning structural holes among alliance partners produces either a positive or a negative effect, suggesting that a firm should vary its strategy depending on whether it prioritizes profitability or growth.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call