Abstract
This article addresses a dilemma in strategic alliance partner selection. Prior research has shown that traditionally prospective partners with higher or equal reputations are preferred. Yet, firms can have simultaneously high and low reputations, for different attributes. When key reputations are satisfactory, but others are inadequate, how does the higher-reputation focal firm decide on whether to ally? An exploratory multiple case study utilising managing directors (MDs) - the main decision makers - as unit of analysis, and an inferior environmental reputation, exposes a sequence of considerations. Implications for the focal firm's own environmental credibility are theoretically explored, leading to the proposition that higher-reputation firms can gain reputation from allying with lower-reputation partners. Hence, this study challenges assumptions on reputational consequences of allying with lower-reputation firms.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: 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.