External Sources of Innovative Capabilities: The Preferences for Strategic Alliances or Mergers and Acquisitions
Abstract
This paper explores the preferences that companies have as they use alternative (quasi) external sources of innovative competencies such as strategic technology alliances, mergers and acquisitions, or a mix of these. These alternatives are studied in the context of distinct industrial, technological and international settings during the first half of the 1990s. Different strategies followed by companies and the role played by routinized sets of preferences are also taken into consideration. The analysis demonstrates that these options are influenced by both different environmental conditions and firm specific circumstances, such as those related to protecting core businesses.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The principal benefits of networking identified in the literature include pooling complementary skills.
“pooling complementary skills (Eisenhardt and Schoonhoven, 1996;Hagedoorn and Duysters, 2002);”
From Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence (2004) · cites this paper as Hagedoorn and Duysters, 2002
Cites
Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology
Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393988 · Cited by 8,499 · see citing works
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Schoonhoven, C. B. (1996) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.7.2.136 · Cited by 2,672 · cited 3× · see citing works
“As far as questions about the industry (environment) versus company (strategy) effects are concerned, our study supports those approaches that stress the relevance of both company-specific and environmental factors (Eisenhardt and Schoonhoven, 1996).”
BackgroundResult
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence
Pittaway, L., Robertson, M., Munir, K., Denyer, D., & Neely, A. (2004) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1460-8545.2004.00101.x · Cited by 1,747 · see citing works
Enabling Open Innovation in Small and Medium Enterprises: A Dynamic Capabilities Approach
Grimaldi, M., Quinto, I., & Rippa, P. (2013) · Knowledge and Process Management · doi:10.1002/kpm.1423 · Cited by 128 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hagedoorn, J., & Duysters, G.
- Affiliations
- Maastricht University (NL)
- Venue
- Journal of Management Studies
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-03
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 167-188
- ISSN
- 0022-2380 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6486
- OpenAlex
- W2131267266
- Cited by
- 681
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 51 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 36 · 2012: 45
- FWCI
- 54.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Management Studies (publishedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion)
- TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Business Strategy and Innovation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › International Business and FDI
- Keywords
- innovation ability, strategic alliances, mergers and acquisitions, technology alliances, business strategy, environmental factors
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
