No abstract

and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution , reselling , loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Research Summary: Firms with resources that make them attractive allies are also desirable partners for competitors so that competition among partners is embedded in alliance portfolios. We develop a framework in which competition within a portfolio creates benefits for a focal firm but threatens partners, increasing the hazard of alliance termination. We then propose four mechanisms for managing the threat of competition to partners reflecting aspects of portfolio configuration: alliance governance, social cohesion, social structure of competition, and partner similarity. We test our framework using a sample of 204 biopharmaceutical firms with alliance portfolios comprising 1,621 alliances between 1990 and 2000. The study addresses the interplay of competition and cooperation in alliance portfolios, and more generally, key aspects of value chain integration strategy. Managerial Summary: Alliance portfolios comprise a focal firm's set of direct partners, some of which compete with each other because of overlapping resources, capabilities, and strategies. The threat of actual or perceived competition from other partners may cause some firms to terminate their alliance with the focal firm. We develop a framework comprising four mechanisms related to alliance portfolios—alliance governance, social cohesion, social structure of competition, and partner similarity—that allows focal firms to attenuate the hazard of termination of their alliances. We find support for our framework in a study of 204 biopharmaceutical firms with alliance portfolios comprising 1,621 alliances between 1990 and 2000. We improve understanding of how firms can manage competition and cooperation within their alliance portfolios.