The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Alliance Structure and the Scope of Knowledge Transfer: Evidence from U.S.-Japan Agreements
Abstract
Prior research suggests that equity joint ventures (JVs) are particularly effective vehicles for accessing complex technology. Different schools of thought have emphasized different reasons why joint ventures might support greater knowledge transfer than “bare” license agreements: incentive alignment, organizational embeddedness, and enhanced administrative controls. We probe and refine these theoretical perspectives, drawing out implications of the different theories for the extent and speed of alliance-related knowledge transfer, as well as for knowledge “leakage” in areas not directly related to alliance activities. Using a proprietary data set derived from regulatory filings with the Japanese government we test these implications in our empirical analysis of U.S.-Japan agreements. The picture that emerges from the analysis is one of particularly intense but contained knowledge transfer in equity joint ventures, relative to bare license agreements: knowledge transfers directly related to the alliance activity are enhanced in the JV, and the speed of integration into the Japanese firm's subsequent innovations also increases. In marked contrast, leakage of unrelated technology is significantly reduced. These findings suggest that administrative structures that reduce technology leakage are a key feature of the equity joint venture, a result that is inconsistent with a “pure” knowledge-based perspective on alliances.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.383 · Cited by 12,939
Are Firms Superior to Alliances and Markets? An Empirical Test of Cross-Border Knowledge Building
Almeida, P., Song, J., & Grant, R. M. (2002) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.13.2.147.534 · Cited by 442
Cited by
The Two Facets of Collaboration: Cooperation and Coordination in Strategic Alliances
Gulati, R., Wohlgezogen, F., & Zhelyazkov, P. (2012) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2012.691646 · Cited by 768
The dynamics and evolution of knowledge transfer in international master franchise agreements
Brookes, M. (2014) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.07.005 · Cited by 48
Metadata
- Authors
- Oxley, J., & Wada, T.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2009-04
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 635-649
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2134050384
- Cited by
- 190
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 33.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Alliance Structure and the Scope of Knowledge Transfer: Evidence from U.S.-Japan Agreements. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.1080.0968
- The paper
- Oxley, J., & Wada, T. (2009). Alliance Structure and the Scope of Knowledge Transfer: Evidence from U.S.-Japan Agreements. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1080.0968
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.