We look at how emerging markets' institutional features affect ownership stake in cross-border acquisitions (CBAs) within Africa. Particularly, we show that the presence of shared colonial history between the home and host country and the extent of fractionalization distance and formal institutional distance influence the acquiring firm's decision regarding its ownership stake in the target. Moreover, we show that geographic distance between the home and host country, by augmenting uncertainty faced by acquiring firms, moderates the relationship between these institutional features and ownership stake. We test our hypotheses in a sample of 341 intra-Africa CBAs from 2001 to 2016. Generally, we find that greater ex ante uncertainty and ex post costs increase ownership stake. Specifically, greater geographic distance strengthens the positive relationship between shared colonial history and ownership stake and reverses the negative relationship between formal institutional distance and ownership stake. As for fractionalization distance, the relationship is more nuanced and needs to be further studied. We contribute to advance research on south-south CBAs in general, particularly within Africa, as well as to extend hostage theory in foreign market entry strategies in and from emerging markets.

Small firms are thought to encounter various difficulties implementing strategic alliances. Due to these problems, they may be less able to reap the benefits of alliance adaptation, and the changes that do occur in alliances may not coincide with a small firm's interests. The evidence we present on contractual renegotiations in alliances suggests that small firms are no more or less likely to adjust their alliances' contracts in general. However, small firms tend to bear inefficiencies of two kinds in their collaborations. First, they are less likely to adapt alliances in the presence of governance misalignments. Second, our sampled small firms were more prone to make transaction-specific investments, which can stimulate ex post hold-up in the form of contractual renegotiations.

Time has significant implications for the functioning of international strategic alliances. Drawing on a systematic review (1943–2022), we consolidate the literature around types of time (i.e., clock, event, cyclical, and life-cycle) and time facets (e.g., duration and speed) in international strategic alliances. This review's findings aid us in developing a temporal-relational framework that intends to advance the study of how partners’ similar as well as dissimilar perspectives about time can engender either friction or enrichment. This framework supports a research agenda that emphasizes subjective time to advance theory about international strategic alliances.

Existing academic literature has discussed contracts and relational governance as the key mechanisms that help alliance partners address problems of cooperation and coordination. However, when an alliance undergoes disruption, the nature and extent of such problems may change and therefore the value of these mechanisms may change. This study advances a dynamic perspective on alliance governance by examining the impact of disruption and subsequent adjustment on the value of alliance governance mechanisms. To this end, we longitudinally studied a revelatory case of a research and development alliance in the veterinary drug industry that experienced disruption triggered by an internal restructuring at one of the partner companies. We approached the evidence with a fine-grained typology that builds on two dimensions that underlie governance mechanisms: the means to enforce their ruling principles (contractual versus relational) and the level of codification of these principles (formal versus informal). Based on our findings, we (1) show the significance of this revised typology, which suggests that contractual governance is not necessarily formal and relational governance is not necessarily informal; (2) provide a more systematic discussion of the tradeoffs that the various mechanisms entail and how these are altered through disruption and adjustment dynamics; and (3) analyze how the interplay between different types of governance mechanisms evolves following disruption and adjustment. Overall, our study brings the concept of disruption to the dynamic perspective of alliance governance and highlights the contingent value of alliance governance mechanisms.

We conceptualize alliance adaptation as a bundle of governance-based change practices in ongoing alliances, including contractual alterations, ownership change, board change, monitoring mechanism change, and key personnel turnover. Leveraging a transaction cost perspective, we investigate how changing environmental conditions (i.e., demand uncertainty and technological uncertainty) and unpredictable partner actions (i.e., behavioral uncertainty) trigger ex post governance adaptations in alliances, and how these adaptations in turn affect alliance performance. Using data collected from 178 partner firms in China, we find that the partner firms will undertake more extensive alliance adaptations as demand uncertainty and behavioral uncertainty increase. However, while the extent of alliance adaptations increases as technological uncertainty increases, there is a threshold level of technological uncertainty beyond which the extent of alliance adaptations decreases. The results also suggest that although alliance adaptations enhance alliance performance, this positive impact may diminish after alliance adaptations reach a certain threshold level. Overall, we contribute to the alliance evolution literature by focusing on why partner firms undertake alliance adaptations and how they benefit from these ex post governance adaptations.

Given the increasing importance of alliances, scholars have devoted much attention to understand how governance mechanisms explain alliance outcomes. Drawing on a detailed longitudinal case study of a revelatory strategic alliance in the veterinary drug industry, we revisit existing typologies of alliance governance mechanisms as discussed in current literature. Our findings suggest the relevance to develop a new typology of governance mechanisms combining the formal vs. informal and the contractual vs. relational distinctions. This revised typology of alliance governance allows us to observe the specific conditions under which different combinations of governance mechanisms have beneficial or detrimental effects on alliance outcomes. We discuss the theoretical implications of our insights for research on alliance governance.

Context matters in the global strategy literature. We discuss how Africa, as a setting that received limited attention in the past, offers opportunity to challenge existing theory and develop new insights. The overall goal is to ask: What will the field of global strategic management look like once we have engaged with Africa in a similar manner as we have done with other emerging economies? We also introduce the papers published in this special issue and highlight directions for future research. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Strategic Management JournalVolume 37, Issue 13 p. E37-E44 Issue Information Alliance governance Jeffrey J. Reuer, Jeffrey J. Reuer jeffrey.reuer@colorado.edu (303) 735–6306 Leeds School of Business, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, 80309-0419Search for more papers by this authorAfrica Ariño, Africa Ariño afarino@iese.edu (34) 93-253-4200 University of Navarra, IESE Business School, Av. Pearson 21, 08034 Barcelona, SpainSearch for more papers by this authorLaura Poppo, Laura Poppo lpoppo@ku.edu (785) 864–1814 School of Business, University of Kansas, 1300 Sunnyside Avenue, Lawrence, KS, 66045-7601Search for more papers by this authorTodd Zenger, Todd Zenger todd.zenger@Eccles.Utah.edu (801) 585–3981 David Eccles School of Business, University of Utah, 1655 East Campus Center Drive, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112Search for more papers by this author Jeffrey J. Reuer, Jeffrey J. Reuer jeffrey.reuer@colorado.edu (303) 735–6306 Leeds School of Business, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, 80309-0419Search for more papers by this authorAfrica Ariño, Africa Ariño afarino@iese.edu (34) 93-253-4200 University of Navarra, IESE Business School, Av. Pearson 21, 08034 Barcelona, SpainSearch for more papers by this authorLaura Poppo, Laura Poppo lpoppo@ku.edu (785) 864–1814 School of Business, University of Kansas, 1300 Sunnyside Avenue, Lawrence, KS, 66045-7601Search for more papers by this authorTodd Zenger, Todd Zenger todd.zenger@Eccles.Utah.edu (801) 585–3981 David Eccles School of Business, University of Utah, 1655 East Campus Center Drive, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112Search for more papers by this author First published: 19 May 2016 https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2535Citations: 16AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume37, Issue13December 2016Pages E37-E44 RelatedInformation

Academy of Management DiscoveriesVol. 2, No. 2 From the EditorPublishing Qualitative Research in Academy of Management DiscoveriesAfrica Arino, Curtis LeBaron and Frances J. MillikenAfrica ArinoIESE Business School, University of Navarra, Curtis LeBaronMarriott School of Management, Brigham Young University and Frances J. MillikenStern School of Business, New York UniversityPublished Online:9 May 2016https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2016.0034AboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsDownload CitationsAdd to favoritesTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail View articleREFERENCESBamberger P., & Ang S. 2016. The quantitative discovery. Academy of Management Discoveries, 2: 1–6.Link , Google ScholarBarley S. R. 2015. Why the internet makes buying a car less loathsome: How technologies change role relations. Academy of Management Discoveries, 1: 5–35.Link , Google ScholarGioia D. A., Carley K. G., & Hamilton A. L. 2012. Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16: 15–31. Google ScholarHatch M. J., Schultz M., & Skov M.-A. 2015. Organizational identity and culture in the context of managed change: Transformation in the Carlsberg Group, 2009-2013. Academy of Management Discoveries, 1: 58–90.Link , Google ScholarLangley A., & Abdallah C. 2011. Templates and turns in qualitative studies of strategy and management. Research Methodology in Strategy and Management, 6: 201–235. Google ScholarLocke K. 2011. Field research practice in management and organization studies: Reclaiming its tradition of discovery. The Academy of Management Annals, 5: 613–652.Link , Google ScholarMiles M. B., & Huberman A. M. 1994. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Google ScholarMintzberg H. 1979. An emerging strategy of "direct" research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24: 582–589. Google ScholarPike K. 1966. Etic and emic standpoints for the description of behavior. In A. G. Smith (Ed.), Communication and culture: Readings in the codes of human interaction, 152–163. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Google ScholarPratt M. G. 2008. Fitting oval pegs into round holes: Tensions in evaluating and publishing qualitative research in top-tier North American journals. Organizational Research Methods, 11: 481–509. Google ScholarPratt M. G. 2009. For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 52: 856–862.Link , Google ScholarRockmann K. W., & Pratt M. G. 2015. Contagious offsite work and the lonely office: The unintended consequences of distributed work. Academy of Management Discoveries, 1: 150–164.Link , Google ScholarVan Maanen J. 1979. The fact of fiction in organizational ethnography. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24: 539–550. Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byWho Adopts an Error Management Orientation? Discovering the Role of HumilityChristoph Seckler, Sebastian Fischer and Kathrin Rosing14 December 2021 | Academy of Management Discoveries, Vol. 7, No. 4"It's not all Puppies and Sunshine": Veterinary Workers' Emotional Comfort Zones and Companion Animal EuthanasiaDavid R. Hannah and Kirsten Robertson16 March 2021 | Academy of Management Discoveries, Vol. 7, No. 1Small Numbers, Big Concerns: Practices and Organizational Arrangements in Rare Disease Drug RepurposingBurcu Kucukkeles, Shiko M. Ben-Menahem and Georg von Krogh29 December 2019 | Academy of Management Discoveries, Vol. 5, No. 4Supersized Tensions and Slim Responses? The Discursive Construction of Strategic Tensions Around Social IssuesJonatan Pinkse, Tobias Hahn and Frank Figge14 October 2019 | Academy of Management Discoveries, Vol. 5, No. 3Economic Contingencies of Authoritarian and Humble Leadership. Commentary on "When Authoritarian Leaders Outperform Transformational Leaders" by Xu HuangHubertus H. Theissen and Maximilian H. Theissen14 October 2019 | Academy of Management Discoveries, Vol. 5, No. 3Qualitative Discovery: Empirical Exploration at AMDMarlys K. Christianson and Gail Whiteman21 December 2018 | Academy of Management Discoveries, Vol. 4, No. 4Rethinking the Sharing Economy: The Nature and Organization of Sharing in the 2015 Refugee CrisisMartin Kornberger, Stephan Leixnering, Renate E. Meyer and Markus A. Höllerer4 October 2018 | Academy of Management Discoveries, Vol. 4, No. 3Sharing and Shaping: A Cross-Country Comparison of How Sharing Economy Firms Shape Their Institutional Environment to Gain LegitimacyBilgehan Uzunca, J. P. Coen Rigtering and Pinar Ozcan4 October 2018 | Academy of Management Discoveries, Vol. 4, No. 3How Organizations Strategically Govern Online Communities: Lessons from the Sharing EconomyGeorg Reischauer and Johanna Mair4 October 2018 | Academy of Management Discoveries, Vol. 4, No. 3How Observers Assess Women Who Cry in Professional Work ContextsKimberly D. Elsbach and Beth A. Bechky25 June 2018 | Academy of Management Discoveries, Vol. 4, No. 2Decision Diversion in Diverse Teams: Findings from Inside a Corporate BoardroomSarah Harvey, Steven C. Currall and Tove Helland Hammer6 January 2017 | Academy of Management Discoveries, Vol. 3, No. 4Workplace Courage: Review, Synthesis, and Future Agenda for a Complex ConstructJames R. Detert and Evan A. Bruno15 March 2017 | Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 11, No. 2 Vol. 2, No. 2 Permissions Metrics in the past 12 months History Published online 9 May 2016 Published in print 1 June 2016 Information© Academy of Management DiscoveriesDownload PDF

Partner selection is a key aspect for the success of International Joint Ventures (IJVs). However, the role played by managers in the partner selection process is under-researched, and we contribute filling this gap. Using field-experimental techniques, we examine how managers differ in their evaluations of potential IJV partners. In particular, we show that those evaluations vary depending on managers’ personal characteristics that affect how they face uncertainty and risk. In particular, we show that managers with longer work experience evaluate IJV partners more positively than less experienced managers due to their better capabilities at dealing with uncertain scenarios; and that older managers evaluate IJV partners more negatively because of their higher risk aversion. Consistent with these findings, we also show that, the more uncertain and risky is the potential IJV, the stronger are the relationships between managers’ work experience and age, and their evaluations of potential IJV partners. Finally, our study also shows that managers with longer tenure in the firm are less sensitive to their personal costs when they make strategic decisions for the firm, due to their stronger identification with the organizational goals.

Academy of Management DiscoveriesVol. 2, No. 2 From the EditorAcademy of Management Discoveries Paper CommentariesAndrew H. Van de Ven, Soon Ang, Africa Arino, Peter Bamberger, Curtis LeBaron, Chet Miller and Frances MillikenAndrew H. Van de VenUniversity of Minnesota, Soon AngNanyang Technological University, Singapore, Africa ArinoUniversity of Navarra, IESE, Spain, Peter BambergerTel Aviv University, Israel, Curtis LeBaronBrigham Young University, Chet MillerUniversity of Houston and Frances MillikenNew York UniversityPublished Online:9 May 2016https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2016.0036AboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsDownload CitationsAdd to favoritesTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail View article"Academy of Management Discoveries Paper Commentaries." Academy of Management Discoveries, 2(2), p. 114FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Vol. 2, No. 2 Permissions Metrics in the past 12 months History Published online 9 May 2016 Published in print 1 June 2016 Information© Academy of Management DiscoveriesDownload PDF

The aim of this study is to systematically analyze how characteristics of collaborative interactions between alliance partners - commitment, disagreements, and transparency of information exchange - mediate the effect of alliance social structure on learning. Partners' ability to interact effectively, i.e. to enact effective alliance process, depends both on their actions in situ and on characteristics of their social context. At interorganizational level two characteristics of social structure have been the most frequently studied - cultural distance and mutual experience. Partner firms rely on interorganizational collaborations to create new knowledge - related both to an alliance's task and to collaborative process itself - out of knowledge held by each of them individually. Partners differ in their perspectives on alliance-related issues, and this may impair learning. These differences are caused by variations in partners' personal and organizational values that are routed in their respective cultural contexts, among other reasons. The survival of an alliance and the ability of partners to reach their goals depend on their ability to build shared understanding on a variety of important questions related to the alliance's purposes, and how to achieve them. This shared understanding is built as the alliance process unfolds, and it relies on interpersonal interactions. Current research on alliance learning determinants is broad but fragmented. Researchers focused extensively on characteristics of a single partner and of the alliance task, and dedicated less attention to the role of alliance social structure. Knowledge creation and learning in an organization happens through social practice. Social structural characteristics of a dyad form the immediate social context which influences the way partners interpret each other's actions, and how they interact. Therefore, it is important to understand (1) how a dyad's social structure affects the partners' ability to enact constructive collaborative interactions as the alliance process unfolds, and (2) how interpersonal process factors mediate the influence of alliance social structure on learning. Given the fragmented nature of research on social structural determinants of alliance learning as well as the sometimes conflicting results of empirical studies on this question, we employ meta-analytic techniques to empirically assess how alliance social structure and characteristics of collaborative interactions between partners are related, and how they influence alliance learning. To articulate these relationships we build on social exchange and institutional perspectives. Results of our analysis contribute to research on alliance learning, alliance capability, and relational governance.