Environmental dynamics and collaboration: Case studies of U.S.–Russian aerospace joint ventures

Daniels, John D.; Perez, Reinaldo

doi:10.1016/j.hitech.2006.11.005

Cited by 9 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An example of intensified environmental conditions is that competing partners are more likely to behave opportunistically when they collaborate in the exploitation phase of a technology (Belderbos et al . ; Yami and Nemeh ), because knowledge is more codified and explicit in this phase and therefore more easily appropriated (Daniels and Perez ; Li et al . ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 2 has shown that several articles in our review analyse IORs in high-tech and biotech industries, and thus empirical contexts characterized by technological innovations. An example of intensified environmental conditions is that competing partners are more likely to behave opportunistically when they collaborate in the exploitation phase of a technology (Belderbos et al 2014;Yami and Nemeh 2014), because knowledge is more codified and explicit in this phase and therefore more easily appropriated (Daniels and Perez 2007;Li et al 2008). Moreover, when knowledge configuration is easier to codify, salient tensions are likely to emerge (Allred and Swan 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Embracing the Paradox of Interorganizational Value Co‐creation–Value Capture: A Literature Review towards Paradox Resolution

Niesten

Stefan

2019

Int J Management Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reviews literature on paradoxical tensions between value co‐creation and capture in interorganizational relationships (IORs). The purpose of this review is to make a re‐evaluation of the literature by engaging a paradox theory lens, thereby identifying factors that render tensions salient and factors that lead to virtuous or vicious cycles. This review of 143 articles reveals factors that make tensions salient: these relate to plurality (e.g. coopetition), scarcity (e.g. lack of experience with IORs), change (e.g. changes in collaboration scope) or combinations thereof (e.g. IORs in weak appropriability regimes). Results also uncover factors that resolve paradoxical tensions of value co‐creation and capture, thus spurring virtuous cycles (e.g. carefully mixing trust and contracts), as well as factors that promote vicious cycles, owing to the emphasis on either value co‐creation or capture (e.g. myopia of learning). This review further reveals a new category of factors that may stimulate either virtuous or vicious cycles, depending on the extent to which they are enforced. This finding expands the value co‐creation–capture paradox resolution and brings to light new dynamics in the paradox framework of dynamic equilibrium. This study thus contributes by: (1) reassessing the existing literature and applying paradox theory to the well‐known hazard of value co‐creation and capture; (2) highlighting factors that amplify paradoxical tensions related to this hazard; and (3) outlining factors that help solve the paradox by embracing its contradictory poles and factors that hinder paradox resolution by emphasizing either value co‐creation or appropriation.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Embracing the Paradox of Interorganizational Value Co‐creation–Value Capture: A Literature Review towards Paradox Resolution

Niesten

Stefan

2019

Int J Management Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When the Space Shuttle program was shut down in 2011, the United States and other Western countries began paying for Russia to transport their astronauts to-and-from the ISS on Soyuz spacecraft (Newton & Griffin, 2011). The same motivation-keeping Russian scientists employed at homeunderlay the United States' decision to use Russian-made RD-180 engines for its Atlas rockets, which entered into service in 2002 (Daniels & Perez, 2007).…”

Section: Byersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Last but not least, Russia has cooperated with Western companies in the commercial market for satellite launches. International Launch Services, which sells launches to geostationary orbit on Proton rockets, began in 1995 as a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Centre (Daniels & Perez, 2007). Although the Russian state-owned company acquired Lockheed Martin's stake in 2008, International Launch Services remains incorporated and headquartered in the United States.…”

Section: Byersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cold, dark, and dangerous: international cooperation in the arctic and space

Byers

2019

Polar Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article compares Russian–Western cooperation in the Arctic and Space, with a focus on why cooperation continued after the 2014 annexation of Crimea. On the basis of this comparative approach, continued cooperation is linked to the following factors: (1) the Arctic and Space are remote and extreme environments; (2) they are militarised but not substantially weaponised; (3) they both suffer from ‘tragedies of the commons’; (4) Arctic and Space-faring states engage in risk management through international law-making; (5) Arctic and Space relations rely on consensus decision-making; (6) Arctic and Space relations rely on soft law; (7) Arctic states and Space-faring states interact within a situation of ‘complex interdependence’; (8) Russia and the United States are resisting greater Chinese involvement in these regions. The article concludes with the following contribution to international relations theory: The more that states need to cooperate in a particular region or issue-area, and the more they become accustomed to doing so, the more resilient that cooperation will become to tensions and breakdowns in other regions and issue-areas. This phenomenon can be termed ‘complex and resilient interdependence’, to signify that complex independence is more than a description. It can, sometimes, affect the course of state-to-state relations.

show abstract

“…Empiricism Table 1 shows that our sample of 19 research articles encompasses seven empirical-quantitative publications (Banai et al, 1999;Fey, 1996;Fey & Beamish, 2000, 2001Katsioloudes & Isichenko, 2007;Nigh et al, 1990;Szymanski, 1998) as well as twelve empirical-qualitative publications (Ariño, Abramov, Skorobogatykh, Rykounina, & Vilà, 1997;Ayios, 2003;Bzhilianskaya, 1997;Cattaneo, 1992;Daniels & Perez, 2007;Fey, 1995aFey, , 1995bFey & Beamish, 1999;Kobernyuk, Stiles, & Ellson, 2013;Nigh & Smith, 1989;Rosten, 1991;Teslenko, 1999). Rather surprising, not more than four publications (21 %) unfold information regarding the application and operationalization of independent, dependent and control variables (Fey, 1996;Fey & Beamish, 2000, 2001Katsioloudes & Isichenko, 2007).…”

Section: Rigor Of Investigations Into Key Success Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Literature-Based Analysis and Comparative Assessment of Key Success Factors for Managing Russian-Foreign IJVs

Schneider

Nippa

2013

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental dynamics and collaboration: Case studies of U.S.–Russian aerospace joint ventures

Cited by 9 publications

References 25 publications

Embracing the Paradox of Interorganizational Value Co‐creation–Value Capture: A Literature Review towards Paradox Resolution

Embracing the Paradox of Interorganizational Value Co‐creation–Value Capture: A Literature Review towards Paradox Resolution

Cold, dark, and dangerous: international cooperation in the arctic and space

A Literature-Based Analysis and Comparative Assessment of Key Success Factors for Managing Russian-Foreign IJVs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About