Impact of multilevel strategic alliances on innovation and firm performance

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to explore the configuration of network ties that would have a positive impact on performance outcomes and test the presumed impact of multilevel strategic alliances on innovation and firm performance in a specific industry. Design/methodology/approach This study comprises part of a larger project on the network relations of yacht-building firms operating in Turkey. Data of the study was collected through face-to-face interviews and questionnaires with 143 yacht-building firms operating in major yacht-building regions of the country. Findings The findings of the study indicated the presence of meaningful relationship between total number of (strong) network relations perceived as strategic alliance and overall innovation performance. The generally presumed positive relationship between innovation performance and firm performance was supported. The type of innovation performance that was found to be related to the total number of network ties perceived as strategic alliance at national and global levels was product innovation performance. Practical implications A possible contribution of this study for industry members would be the implications of the finding that indicates positive impact of strategic alliances with different actors of the industry. Originality/value This study contributes to the exploration of network configurations that have a positive impact on innovation and firm performance, by dealing with the impact of the size, strength and geographical level of network relations in one single study. The yacht-building industry as the empirical setting represents a specific category of industry that rests on customized individual or small-batch manufacturing requiring considerable interaction with customers and suppliers. Because no study exists on this topic, findings can inspire similar industries.

Entrepreneurial competencies, entrepreneurial orientation, entrepreneurial network, government business support and SMEs performance. The moderating role of the external environment

“…Therefore, previous studies have established the importance of GBS in improving the performance of SMEs (Atalay et al , 2017; Nesheim et al , 2017; Sheng et al , 2013; Zhang et al , 2017). GBS can be in different forms or categories.…”

Systematic literature review on innovation capabilities in clusters

“…No. Authors Approaches Allen et al (2016) Social network; knowledge sharing; geographic proximity Altenburg et al (2008) Innovation systems Álvarez et al (2009) Transaction costs; competitiveness Antolin-Lopez et al (2015) Interorganizational cooperation Atalay et al (2017) knowledge management; cluster and social network theory Best (2015) Darwin's evolutionary principles Boly et al (2014) Dynamic capabilities Britton (2004) Knowledge management; absorptive capacity Brown and Duguid (2002) Social network 10 Cantner et al (2010) Regional Innovation Systems; social network; knowledge exchange; collaboration Capello (1999) Collective learning; knowledge transfer Cappellin (2003) Knowledge management Cavalheiro et al (2017) Industrial clusters Chandrashekar and Subrahmanya (2017) Industrial district; Industrial cluster; Innovation performance Chandrashekar and Hillemane (2018) Absorptive capacity Christopherson and Clark (2007) Co-location; innovation Claver-Cortés, Marco-Lajara, and García-Lillo (2017) Dynamic capabilities; absorptive capacity Cooke (2001) Regional innovation systems Crespo, Suire, and Vicente (2014) Networks theories Dagnino et al (2015) Interorganizational network Dalcin et al (2017) Resource-based view (RBV) Dangelico, Garavelli, and Petruzzelli (2010) Agglomerations; knowledge transfer De Bruijn (2004) Clustering of firms De Marchi and Grandinetti (2016) Regional Innovation Systems Díez-Vial and Fern andez-Olmos (2015) Knowledge spillovers Elche et al (2018) Innovation and inter-organizational relationships; Firm innovation Exp osito-Langa, Tom as- Miquel, Bratucu, and Barbulescu (2018) Cluster knowledge network; clustered firm's innovation Feldman (2014) Entrepreneurship Fleming, King, and Juda (2007) Collaboration networks Fontes and Sousa (2016) Social and knowledge network; economic geography; entrepreneurship Ganesan et al (2005) Organizational learning; knowledge management…”

“…Collaboration among cluster-based companies allows accessing new or complementary resources and capabilities (Atalay, Dirlik, & Sarvan, 2017; Kalsaas, 2013; Ucler, 2017), incentives to exchange information and high-level networking (Lei & Huang, 2014), which can lead to competitive advantages. These companies also collaborate for a number of reasons, including the development of innovation (O’Dwyer, O’Malley, Murphy, & McNally, 2015).…”

Team-member exchange and innovative work behaviour

“…It is defined as the “intentional generation, promotion, and realization of new ideas within a work role, workgroup, or organization” (Janssen and Van Yperen, 2004). It includes creativity related behaviours and implementation-oriented behaviours which focus on implementing change and improving processes (De Jong and Den Hartog, 2010; Atalay et al , 2017).…”