References

ecr-journal

Экономическая наука современной России

Economics of Contemporary Russia

1609-14422618-8996

Regional Public Organization for Assistance to the Development of Institutions of the Department of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences

10.33293/1609-1442-2019-4(87)-39-52

ecr-journal-432

Research Article

АКТУАЛЬНЫЕ ПРОБЛЕМЫ ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКОЙ ТЕОРИИ

ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF ECONOMICS

Роль доверительных отношений в конкурентных инновационно-ориентированных стратегических альянсах

Trust , Knowledge Similarity and Cooperation in Coopetitive Strategic Alliances

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2720-5319

Ляско

Александр Кимович

Lyasko

Alexander K.

alexlascaux@yahoo.com

Российская академия народного хозяйства и государственной службы при Президенте РФ, МоскваРоссияRussian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, MoscowRussian Federation

2019

27122019

043952

2020

Ляско А.К.

Lyasko A.K.

Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://www.ecr-journal.ru/jour/article/view/432

Кооперационные отношения между конкурирующими фирмами, образующими между собой стратегические альянсы, т.е. долгосрочные и взаимовыгодные партнерские соглашения с целью освоения новых технологий, рынков и продуктовых категорий предполагают активную передачу и усвоение новых знаний и компетенций каждым партнером. Это позволяет фирмам – участницам альянса совместно разрабатывать инновационные технологические решения и повышать свою рыночную конкурентоспособность. Тем не менее конкурентные взаимодействия между партнерами могут помешать реализации заявленных в альянсе кооперационных целей. Данная работа исследует влияние доверительных отношений между партнерами в условиях конкурентного соприкосновения фирм в рыночной среде и сходства начального знания, находящегося в распоряжении каждого партнера, на эффективность кооперации. В работе выдвинут ряд гипотез, связывающих между собой основные параметры, которые характеризуют межфирменные доверительные отношения, сходство знания, находящегося в распоряжении каждого из участников альянса, а также уровень трансакционных затрат, связанных с передачей знания в структуре альянса.

Cooperative relationships between rival firms, which engage in interfirm strategic alliances, assume active transfer, reception and recombination of competencies and co-production of novel knowledge. These processes facilitate joint technological development and improve the participating firms’ competitiveness. Nevertheless, competitive interactions between the partners can impede the achievement of the alliance’s cooperative objectives. This paper investigates the impact of trusting attitudes developed between the partners on the effectiveness of interfirm collaboration under conditions of competitive rivalry in the broader industrial environment and similarity of initial knowledge at the partners’ disposal. It offers a number of hypotheses, which determine the interrelationships between the levels of interfirm trust, transaction costs associated with transferring knowledge and the successful attainment of alliance goals. The paper pays specific attention to the effects arising from the commonality of knowledge possessed by cooperating rivals. It also analyzes the influence of particular types of coopetitive strategic alliances on the success of collaborative arrangements under the conditions of knowledge commonality among the partners.

знаниятрансакционные издержкиконкуренциякооперациядовериестратегические альянсы

knowledgetransaction costscompetitioncooperationtruststrategic alliances

Работа выполнена при финансовой поддержке Российского фонда фундаментальных исследований (проект № 19-010-00317 «Эволюция кооперативных взаимодействий между конкурирующими организациями»).

This work was financially supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (project No. 19- 010-00317 “Evolution of cooperative interactions between competing organizations”).

References1

Голиченко О. Г. Государственная политика и провалы национальной инновационной системы // Вопросы экономики. 2017. № 2. С. 97–108.

Albort-Morant G., Leal-Millán A., Cepeda-Carrion G., Henseler J. (2018). Developing green innovation performance by fostering of organizational knowledge and competitive relations. Review of Managerial Science, vol. 12, pp. 499–517.

Дементьев В. Е . Доверие – фактор функционирования и развития современной рыночной экономики // Российский экономический журнал. 2004. № 8. С. 46–65.

Arrow K. (1974). The Limits of Organization. New York: W. W. Norton.

Егорова Н. Е ., Королева Е . А. Методики оценки уровня доверия экономических субъектов: классификационная схема и сравнительный анализ // Вестник ЦЭМИ РАН . 2018. Вып. 2 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://cemi.jes.su/s111111110000039-5-1.

Bellon B., Niosi J. (2001). Institutionalist theories and inter-firm alliances: The transaction cost, competence and evolutionary debate revisited. Current Sociology, vol. 49 (4), pp. 67–84.

Ляско А. К. Проблема стабильности в неформальных системах денежного трансфера: нормы доверия или институты контроля? // Вопросы экономики. 2017. № 3. С. 120–130.

Bengtsson M., Eriksson J., Wincent J. (2010). Co-opetition dynamics – An outline for further inquiry. Competitiveness Review, vol. 20, pp. 194–214.

Федорова Е . А., Барихина Ю. А. О ценка горизонтальных и вертикальных спилловер-эффектов от прямых иностранных инвестиций в России // Вопросы экономики. 2015. № 3. C. 46–60.

Bogers M. (2011). The open innovation paradox: knowledge sharing and protection in R&D collaborations. European Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 14, pp. 93–117.

Albort-Morant G., Leal-Millán A., Cepeda-Carrion G., Henseler J. Developing green innovation performance by fostering of organizational knowledge and coopetitive relations // Review of Managerial Science. 2018. Vol. 12. Р. 499–517.

Bouncken R. B., Kraus S. (2013). Innovation in knowledge-intensive industries: The double-edged sword of coopetition. Journal of Business Research, vol. 66, pp. 2060–2070.

Arrow K. The limits of organization. N.Y.: W. W. Norton, 1974.

Cassiman B., Di Guardo M. C., Valentini G. (2009). Organizing R&D projects to profit from innovation: Insights from co-opetition. Long Range Planning, vol. 42, pp. 216–233.

Bellon B., Niosi J. Institutionalist theories and inter-firm alliances: The transaction cost, competence and evolutionary debate revisited // Current Sociology. 2001. Vol. 49 (4). Р. 67–84.

Chiesa V., Manzini R. (1998). Organizing for Technological Collaborations: A Managerial Perspective. R&D Management, vol. 28, pp. 199–212.

Bengtsson M., Eriksson J., Wincent J. Co-opetition dynamics – An outline for further inquiry // Competitiveness Review. 2010. Vol. 20. Р. 194–214.

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

Bogers M. The open innovation paradox: Knowledge sharing and protection in R&D collaborations // European Journal of Innovation Management. 2011. Vol. 14. Р. 93–117.

Cozzolino A., Rothaermel F. T. (2018). Discontinuities, competition, and cooperation: Coopetitive dynamics between incumbents and entrants. Strategic Management Journal, vol. 39, pp. 3053–3085.

Bouncken R. B., Kraus S. Innovation in knowledgeintensive industries: The double-edged sword of coopetition // Journal of Business Research. 2013. Vol. 66. Р. 2060–2070.

Cullen J. B., Johnson J. L., Sakano T. (2000). Success through commitment and trust: The soft side of strategic alliance management. Journal of World Business, vol. 35, pp. 223–240.

Cassiman B., Di Guardo M. C., Valentini G. Organizing R&D projects to profit from innovation: Insights from co-opetition // Long Range Planning. 2009. Vol. 42. Р. 216–233.

Das T. K., Teng B.-S. (2000). Instabilities of strategic alliances: An internal tensions perspective. Organization Science, vol. 11, pp. 77–101.

Chiesa V., Manzini R. Organizing for technological collaborations: A managerial perspective // R&D Management. 1998. Vol. 28. Р. 199–212.

De Jong G., Klein Woolthuis, R.J.A. (2009). The content and role of formal contracts in high-tech alliances. Innovation: Management Policy and Practice, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 44–59.

Cohen W. M., Levinthal D. A. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation // Administrative Science Quarterly. 1990. Vol. 35. Р. 128–152.

Dementyev V. (2004). Trust – the Factor of Modern Market Economy Functioning and Development. Russian Economic Journal, no. 8, pp. 46–65 (in Russian).

Cozzolino A., Rothaermel F. T. Discontinuities, competition, and cooperation: Coopetitive dynamics between incumbents and entrants // Strategic Management Journal. 2018. Vol. 39. Р. 3053–3085.

De Laat P. (1997). Research and development alliances: Ensuring trust by mutual commitments. M. Ebers (Ed.), The Formation of Inter-Organizational Networks. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 146–173.

Cullen J. B., Johnson J. L., Sakano T. Success through commitment and trust: The soft side of strategic alliance management // Journal of World Business. 2000. Vol. 35. Р. 223–240.

Duysters G., Kok G., Vaandrager M. (1999). Crafting successful strategic technology partnerships. R&D Management, vol. 29, pp. 343–351.

Das T. K., Teng B.-S. Instabilities of strategic alliances: An internal tensions perspective // Organization Science. 2000a. Vol. 11. Р. 77–101.

Duysters G., Lemmens C. (2003). Alliance group formation: Enabling and constraining effects of embeddedness and social capital in strategic technology alliance networks. International Studies of Management and Organization, vol. 33 (2), pp. 49–68.

De Jong G., Klein Woolthuis R.J.A. The content and role of formal contracts in high-tech alliances // Innovation: Management Policy and Practice. 2009. Vol. 11. № 1. Р. 44–59.

Dyer J.H., Chu, W. (2003). The role of trustworthiness in reducing transaction costs and improving performance: Empirical evidence from the United States Japan and Korea. Organization Science, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 57–68.

De Laat P. Research and development alliances: Ensuring trust by mutual commitments // M. Ebers (ed.). The Formation of Inter-Organizational Networks. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. Р. 146–173.

Egorova N., Koroleva E. (2018). Methods for trust assessment of economic entities: Classification scheme and comparative analysis // Herald of CEMI. Issue 2 [Electronic resource]. Access for registered users. DOI: 10.33276/S0000039-5-1. URL: https://cemi.jes.su/s111111110000039-5-1 (in Russian).

Duysters G., Kok G., Vaandrager M. Crafting successful strategic technology partnerships // R&D Management. 1999. Vol. 29. Р. 343–351.

Fedorova E., Barikhina Y. (2015). Assessing horizontal and vertical spillover effects from foreign direct investment in Russia. Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 3, pp. 46–60 (in Russian).

Duysters G., Lemmens C. Alliance group formation: Enabling and constraining effects of embeddedness and social capital in strategic technology alliance networks // International Studies of Management and Organization. 2003. Vol. 33 (2). Р. 49–68.

Fernandez A.-S., Le Roy F., Gnyawali D. R. (2014). Sources and management of tension in co-opetition case evidence from telecommunications satellites manufacturing in Europe. Industrial Marketing Management, vol. 43, pp. 222–235.

Dyer J.H., Chu W. The role of trustworthiness in reducing transaction costs and improving performance: Empirical evidence from the United States Japan and Korea // Organization Science. 2003. Vol. 14. № 1. Р. 57–68.

Fukuyama F. (1995). Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. New York: Free Press.

Fernandez A.- S., Le Roy F., Gnyawali D. R. Sources and management of tension in co-opetition case evidence from telecommunications satellites manufacturing in Europe // Industrial Marketing Management. 2014. Vol. 43. Р. 222–235.

Gnyawali D. R., Park B. J. (2011). Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with competitors for technological innovation. Research Policy, vol. 40, pp. 650–663.

Fukuyama F. Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. N.Y.: Free Press, 1995.

Golichenko O. (2017). Public policy and national innovation system failures. Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 2, pp. 97–108 (in Russian).

Gnyawali D. R., Park B. J. Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with competitors for technological innovation // Research Policy. 2011. Vol. 40. Р. 650–663.

Inkpen A. (1998). Learning, knowledge acquisition, and strategic alliances. European Management Journal, vol. 16, pp. 223–229.

Inkpen A. Learning, knowledge acquisition, and strategic alliances // European Management Journal. 1998. Vol. 16. Р. 223–229.

Inkpen A. C. (2000). Learning through joint ventures: A framework of knowledge acquisition. Journal of Management Studies, vol. 37, pp. 1019–1043.

Inkpen A. C. Learning through joint ventures: A framework of knowledge acquisition // Journal of Management Studies. 2000. Vol. 37. Р. 1019–1043.

Inkpen A. C., Tsang E. W.K. (2005). Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of Management Review, vol. 30, pp. 146–165.

Inkpen A. C., Tsang E. W.K. Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer // Academy of Management Review. 2005. Vol. 30. Р. 146–165.

Kale P., Singh H., Perlmutter H. (2000). Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: Building relational capital. Strategic Management Journal, vol. 21, pp. 217–237.

Kale P., Singh H., Perlmutter H. Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: Building relational capital // Strategic Management Journal. 2000. Vol. 21. Р. 217–237.

Lam A. (2000). Tacit knowledge, organizational learning and societal institutions: An integrated framework. Organization Studies, vol. 21, pp. 487–513.

Lam A. Tacit knowledge, organizational learning and societal institutions: An integrated framework // Organization Studies. 2000. Vol. 21. Р. 487–513.

Lane P. J., Koka B. R., Pathak S. (2006). The reification of absorptive capacity: A critical review and rejuvenation of the construct. Academy of Management Review, vol. 31, pp. 833–863.

Lane P. J., Koka B. R., Pathak S. The reification of absorptive capacity: A critical review and rejuvenation of the construct // Academy of Management Review. 2006. Vol. 31. Р. 833–863.

Lyasko A. (2017). Stability in the informal value transfer systems: norms of trust or institutions of control? Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 3, pp. 120–130 (in Russian).

Lei D., Slocum Jr J.W., Pitts R. A. Building cooperative advantage: Managing strategic alliances to promote organizational learning // Journal of World Business. 1997. Vol. 32. Р. 203–223.

Lei D., Slocum Jr J. W., Pitts R. A. (1997). Building cooperative advantage: Managing strategic alliances to promote organizational learning. Journal of World Business, vol. 32, pp. 203–223.

Li D., Eden L., Hitt M. A., Ireland R. D. Friends, acquaintances, or strangers? Partner selection in R&D alliances // Academy of Management Journal. 2008. Vol. 51. Р. 315–334.

Li D., Eden L., Hitt M. A., Ireland R. D. (2008). Friends, acquaintances, or strangers? Partner selection in R&D alliances. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 51, pp. 315–334.

Luo Y. A coopetition perspective on global competition // Journal of World Business. 2007. Vol. 42. Р. 129–144.

Luo Y. (2007). A coopetition perspective on global competition. Journal of World Business, vol. 42, pp. 129–144.

Mowery D. C., Oxley J. E., Silverman B. S. Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer // Strategic Management Journal. Winter Special Issue. 1996. Vol. 17. Р. 77–91.

Mowery D. C., Oxley J. E., Silverman B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, Winter Special Issue, vol. 17, pp. 77–91.

Muthusamy S. K., White M. A. Learning and knowledge transfer in strategic alliances: A social exchange view // Organization Studies. 2005. Vol. 26. Р. 415–441.

Muthusamy S. K., White M. A. (2005). Learning and knowledge transfer in strategic alliances: A social exchange view. Organization Studies, Vol. 26, pp. 415–441.

Nooteboom B. Trust: Forms, Foundations, Functions, Failures and Figures. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2002.

Nooteboom B. (2002). Trust: Forms, Foundations, Functions, Failures and Figures. Cheltenham: Edward

Nooteboom B., Van Haverbeke W., Duysters G., Gilsing V., van den Oord A. Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity // Research Policy. 2007. Vol. 36. Р. 1016–1034.

Elgar.

Padula G., Dagnino G. B. Untangling the rise of coopetition: The intrusion of competition in a cooperative game structure // International Studies of Management and Organization. 2007. Vol. 37 (2). Р. 32–52.

Nooteboom B., Van Haverbeke W., Duysters G., Gilsing V., van den Oord A. (2007). Optimal cognitive

Park B. J., Srivastava M. K., Gnyawali D. R. Walking the tight rope of co-opetition: Impact of competition and cooperation intensities and balance on firm innovation performance // Industrial Marketing Management. 2014. Vol. 43. Р. 210–221.

distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, vol. 36, pp. 1016–1034.

Raza-Ullah T., Bengtsson M., Kock S. The cooperation paradox and tension in coopetition at multiple levels // Industrial Marketing Management. 2014. Vol. 43. Р. 189–198.

Padula G., Dagnino G. B. (2007). Untangling the rise of coopetition: The intrusion of competition in a cooperative game structure. International Studies of Management and Organization, vol. 37 (2), pp. 32–52.

Ritala P. Is cooperation different from cooperation? The impact of market rivalry on value creation in alliances // International Journal of Intellectual Property Management. 2009. Vol. 3. Р. 39–55.

Park B. J., Srivastava M. K., Gnyawali D. R. (2014). Walking the tight rope of coopetition: Impact of competition and cooperation intensities and balance on firm innovation performance. Industrial Marketing Management, vol. 43, pp. 210–221.

Ritala P. Сooperation strategy – When is it successful? Empirical evidence on innovation and market performance // British Journal of Management. 2012. Vol. 23. Р. 307–324.

Raza-Ullah T., Bengtsson M., Kock S. (2014). The coopetition paradox and tension in coopetition at multiple levels. Industrial Marketing Management, vol. 43, pp. 189–198.

Ritala P., Golnam A., Wegmann A. Cooperation-based business models: The case of Amazon.com // Industrial Marketing Management. 2014. Vol. 43. Р. 236–249.

Ritala P. (2009). Is coopetition different from cooperation? The impact of market rivalry on value creation in alliances. International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, vol. 3, pp. 39–55.

Salvetat D., Géraudel M., d’Armagnac S. Inter-organizational knowledge management in a coopetitive context in the aeronautic and space industry // Knowledge Management Research and Practice. 2013. Vol. 11. Р. 265–277.

Ritala P. (2012). Coopetition strategy – When is it successful? Empirical evidence on innovation and

Wu J. Cooperation with competitors and product innovation: Moderating effects of technological capability and alliances with universities // Industrial Marketing Management. 2014. Vol. 43. Р. 199–209.

market performance. British Journal of Management, vol. 23, pp. 307–324.

Zaheer A., McEvily B., Perrone V. Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance // Organization Science. 1998. Vol. 9. № 2. Р. 123–141.

Ritala P., Golnam A., Wegmann A. (2014). Coopetitionbased business models: The case of Amazon.com. Industrial Marketing Management, vol. 43, pp. 236–249.

Salvetat D., Géraudel M., d’Armagnac S. (2013). Interorganizational knowledge management in a coopetitive context in the aeronautic and space industry. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, vol. 11, pp. 265–277.

Wu J. (2014). Cooperation with competitors and product innovation: Moderating effects of technological capability and alliances with universities. Industrial Marketing Management, vol. 43, pp. 199–209.

Zaheer A., McEvily B., Perrone V. (1998). Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization Science, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 123–141.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.