1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0048-7333(98)00035-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Partnerships in transition economies: international strategic technology alliances in Russia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Hamilton and Biggart (1988) and Sakakibara and Dodgson (2003) demonstrate that the complex interaction of country-specific legal regulation, economic policies, and existing intercompany networks has different effects on the formation of interfirm partnerships and business groups in a number of Asian countries (Japan, Korea, and Taiwan). Similar aspects are important for understanding partnerships with companies from Russia and other former communist countries (Hagedoorn & Sedaitis, 1998). Therefore, one can expect country specificity in the embeddedness of partnerships to affect the propensity to form future partnerships.…”
Section: Environmental Embeddednessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hamilton and Biggart (1988) and Sakakibara and Dodgson (2003) demonstrate that the complex interaction of country-specific legal regulation, economic policies, and existing intercompany networks has different effects on the formation of interfirm partnerships and business groups in a number of Asian countries (Japan, Korea, and Taiwan). Similar aspects are important for understanding partnerships with companies from Russia and other former communist countries (Hagedoorn & Sedaitis, 1998). Therefore, one can expect country specificity in the embeddedness of partnerships to affect the propensity to form future partnerships.…”
Section: Environmental Embeddednessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The increasing importance of organizations acquiring external technologies has instilled research into this area recently. The growing number of alliances formed across countries indicates organizations' significant efforts to enhance their technological capabilities (Hagedoorn & Sedaitis, 1998;Norman, 2004). However, studies of alliances with high-technology organizations have predominantly been conducted in developed nations, mainly in the US (Hagedoorn, Carayannis, & Alexander, 2001;Norman, 2004;Soh & Roberts, 2005;Rothaermel & Deeds, 2006;Ybarra & Turk, 2009).…”
Section: The Role Of Strategic Technology Alliances In Manufacturing mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, studies of alliances with high-technology organizations have predominantly been conducted in developed nations, mainly in the US (Hagedoorn, Carayannis, & Alexander, 2001;Norman, 2004;Soh & Roberts, 2005;Rothaermel & Deeds, 2006;Ybarra & Turk, 2009). Other studies on STAs have looked at Finland (Vilkamo & Keil, 2003), Italy (Colombo, Grilli, & Piva, 2006), Greece (Pateli, 2009), and Russia (Hagedoorn & Sedaitis 1998). More recently, researchers have started to focus on Taiwan (Ju et al, 2005;Tsai & Wang, 2009) and China (Chen & Wang 2009).…”
Section: The Role Of Strategic Technology Alliances In Manufacturing mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Overall, although prior research has provided profound insights into the issue of alliance formation and emergence in terms of alliance formation patterns (Gulati, 1995a), new alliance formation (Gulati & Westphal, 1999), partner selection (Chung, Singh, & Lee, 2000), and formats of alliance formation (Hagedoorn & Sedaitis, 1998;Steensma, Marino, Weaver, & Dickson, 2000), the dyad-based analysis provide limited explanations to the formation of a system consisting of multiple alliances that surround and influence a focal firm simultaneously.…”
Section: Emergence and Formation Of Alliancesmentioning
confidence: 99%