信息技术如何实现契约治理与关系治理的平衡——基于D公司供应链治理案例

运用纵向案例研究,通过过程模型来解析基于契约和关系二元治理平衡的形成路径,打开信息技术与契约和关系的二元治理平衡之间的"黑箱"。研究发现,促进长期跨组织协同的关键在于实现基于关系和契约的治理机制平衡;信息技术能够在跨组织治理过程中实现治理机制的动态叠加,在治理机制不断优化的过程中实现治理机制之间的平衡。这一研究进一步丰富了跨组织治理理论,对中国企业在互联网环境下的长期合作具有启发和指导意义。     

组合与单一治理对供应链信息系统价值创造的影响

针对供应链中契约与信任、权威与信任之间的治理作用是互补还是替代关系的争论,对不同治理机制选择与供应链信息系统价值创造的关系进行梳理,运用博弈分析方法探讨组合与单一治理机制选择对供应链信息系统价值创造的影响,通过25家企业的实地调查对博弈分析结论进行讨论.研究表明,当环境不确定性较高时,采用契约与信任、权威与信任组合治理比采用单一契约或权威治理对供应链信息系统价值创造的促进作用更大;当环境不确定性较低时,采用契约与信任、权威与信任组合治理比采用单一信任治理的促进作用更大;当环境不确定性处于中间状态时,难以确定上述组合与单一治理两者的优劣.     

市场竞争、横向监督与信贷契约治理——基于比较制度实验的研究

本文在信贷契约道德风险起源及其缓解机制探讨基础上,指出了横向监督机制对企业家道德风险行为的规制作用并分析了其原理。采用比较制度实验研究方法,构建了基于计算机局域网的三组并行的实验室实验,分析了三种信贷市场中横向监督机制的治理效率,对比研究了三种竞争状态下的市场绩效和收益分布。结果表明,买方竞争强化了横向监督机制的治理效能,卖方竞争削弱了横向监督机制的治理效能;对称市场的签约比率波动最大,卖方竞争市场的守约比率下降最快;买方竞争市场平均绩效最高且投资者占有了较大比例的交易剩余。本文的研究结论为市场竞争和横向监督交互下的信贷契约参与人激励相容提供了行为分析基础,也为完善转轨经济环境下的投资者权益保障机制设计提供了参考。     

竞合视角下高技术企业创新联盟稳定性研究

从竞合的理论视角出发,运用演化博弈理论,通过构建高技术企业创新联盟成员企业竞合关系的演化博弈模型,分析信任度、互补度、风险系数以及合作创新贴现因子等因素对创新联盟稳定性的影响,并运用Matlab对上述因素的影响进行了数值仿真。结果表明,较高的信任度和互补度可以提高联盟成员间的合作意愿,保障联盟的稳定运行;较高的合作创新贴现因子通过降低联盟成员未来收益的不确定性,增强了合作伙伴间进行长期合作的信心,维持了联盟的稳定运行;由于较高的风险系数增加了合作创新的风险成本,导致联盟成员间合作关系可能演变为竞争关系,从而阻碍了联盟的稳定发展。最后,根据演化博弈分析结果提出了相关建议。     

“竞合”如何影响创新绩效：中国制造业企业选择本土竞合与境外竞合的追踪研究

本文区分本土竞合与境外竞合,基于国家统计局2009年10月至2011年8月对全国40个城市制造业企业进行的问卷调查数据,并结合中国工业企业数据库数据和2009年及2018年专利数据构造出的时间断点追踪数据,重点研究了竞合对企业创新绩效提升的影响。实证研究发现:首先,总体来看,中国制造业企业的"竞合"战略有助于其提升创新绩效。具体来说,企业与本土竞争者的合作有助于其提升创新绩效,而与境外竞争者的合作对其创新绩效的提升无显著作用。其次,企业研发强度负向调节竞合战略与企业创新绩效之间的正向关系。研发强度对境外竞合战略与企业创新绩效间关系无显著调节作用,对本土竞合战略与企业创新绩效间关系有显著负向调节作用。再次,市场竞争对企业创新绩效有显著正向影响,但市场竞争程度高时境外竞合战略反而会降低企业创新绩效。最后,企业的境外非竞争性合作会削弱其竞合战略对创新绩效的影响。结合实证研究的基本结论,本文对中国制造业企业如何利用竞合战略促进创新提出了有针对性的政策建议。     

基于关系契约的合作研发治理机制研究

契约机制的选择恰当与否直接关系到企业和科研机构合作研发成败及绩效的高低,本文运用关系契约理论,揭示了合作研发的契约特征及契约选择机理,认为在研发绩效不可验证的情况下,关系契约可以弥补正式契约的不足,进而提出了基于关系契约的治理机制概念模型,并指出了进一步研究的设想。     

关系治理、契约治理与农业产业生态系统演进

农业产业生态系统的建立与发展是促进中国农业产业化、现代化和带动乡村振兴的重要抓手，但鲜有文献关注治理机制对其发展演进的重要影响。本文基于社会生态系统（Social Ecological System,SES）分析框架，构建了农业产业生态系统理论框架，在此基础上建立行动主体跨期博弈模型，剖析了关系和契约治理机制在系统发展不同阶段治理绩效的相对变化及其对系统演进的影响，并基于国家级重点龙头企业开原胜利牧业主导下的农业产业生态系统进行了案例分析。理论结合案例分析表明：农业产业生态系统演进路径呈现关系治理不断减弱、契约治理不断增强的绩效特征；发展初期，关系治理对促进农业产业生态系统的合作化建立起到主要作用；发展中期，关系治理与契约治理优势互补、纵向嵌合形成协同治理效应，对促进产业化快速深入发展起到关键作用；发展成熟期，契约治理基于系统演进情境不断优化设计，拓展有限理性，对促进产业化稳固可持续发展起到主导作用。本文研究发现丰富了农业产业生态系统理论内涵，揭示了农业产业化发展进程中治理机制动态调适的优化规律，拓宽了产业化集体行动研究的理论边界。     

中国上市公司组合治理机制实证研究

一般地,按公司治理机制发挥作用的机理不同,可将其划分为基于公司治理结构的内部治理机制、基于市场的市场治理机制和基于社会环境的社会治理机制。公司绩效是这些治理机制共同作用的结果。本文首先选择设计了15个公司内部与外部治理机制的实证分析指标和1个公司绩效指标:接着以公司绩效为导向,运用数据挖掘技术对截止到2003年3月26日已发布2002年度报的305家沪市上市公司进行实证分析,得到了不同公司治理机制组合与公司绩效的对应关系,这为优化和设置公司治理机制组合、提高公司绩效提供借鉴。     

中国企业的开放式创新:制度环境、“竞合”关系与创新绩效

中国作为新兴经济体,企业技术创新能力相对薄弱,需要利用开放式创新模式突破组织边界来获取更丰富的外部知识来重塑自身的技术创造力以应对现今复杂多变的国际经济形势,也是中国经济向高质量发展阶段迈进的关键。考虑到中国企业开放式创新所面对的特殊制度环境、企业之间合作竞争的网络关系,本研究以1407家中国制造业企业为研究样本(2015~2017年间的创新调查),讨论开放式创新(广度和深度)对创新绩效的影响,以及"竞合"关系和制度环境在其中所起到的调节作用。研究结果显示:第一,开放式创新的广度对创新绩效的影响存在倒U型关系;第二,开放式创新的深度与创新绩效之间也存在倒U型关系;第三,合作关系有利于企业广泛利用外部知识资源,但要防范开放式深度的过度加深,形成路径依赖,有损于创新绩效;第四,竞争关系有损于企业有效广泛利用的外部知识来源,但有助于警醒企业不要过度加深与外部知识网络的合作;第五,竞争关系扭曲了合作关系对开放式创新深度与创新绩效间的影响;第六,正式制度激励企业扩大利用开放式创新的广度,但限制企业利用开放式创新的深度;第七,非正式制度激励企业加深开放式创新深度,但是对开放式创新广度没有影响。本文的研究结论,为中国企业适度使用开放式创新模式,正确合理地处理企业间的"竞合"网络关系以及利用正式和非正式制度环境提升企业创新绩效,提供有益的理论支持和政策建议。     

产学研联盟组合伙伴地理集中度如何影响企业创新绩效——中介效应与调节效应分析

企业与来自不同地区的高校、科研机构建立多个产学研联盟已经成为了中国当前的普遍现象。然而,现有研究对此现象缺乏足够关注,也未厘清产学研联盟组合伙伴地理分布特征与企业创新绩效之间的关系。基于此,本研究使用186家中国制造业上市公司2013-2017年的非平衡面板数据,探讨了产学研联盟组合伙伴地理集中度影响企业创新绩效的作用机制和情境条件。研究发现,产学研联盟组合伙伴地理集中度对企业创新绩效具有显著的负向影响,企业吸收能力在该关系中发挥了部分中介作用。此外,制度发展水平、市场竞争、环境不确定性均强化了产学研联盟组合伙伴地理集中度对企业创新绩效的负向作用。研究结论拓展了产学研联盟、联盟组合以及伙伴地理特征对企业创新绩效影响的相关研究,并为中国企业的产学研联盟组合实践提供了启示。     

Managing Multiple Facets of Risk in New Product Alliances*

The trend of forming alliances to develop new products continues; however, many of these new product alliances fail. As such we explore how key risk types intrinsic in new product alliances, performance, relational, and knowledge appropriation risks, influence alliance success. Further, we theorize that different alliance governance mechanisms can reduce the negative impact of risks on alliance success. To disentangle possible heterogeneous factors across firms that may affect the interplay of risk assessments and the use of governance mechanisms, we employ latent class regression analysis on survey data collected from 128 new product alliance firms and find support for a two‐regime solution. Longer alliance relationships and lower technological turbulence are factors for some firms (regime one), while the opposite are factors for other firms (regime two). These two regimes show different patterns in the interplay of risk assessments and governance for alliance success. Our theory and results support viewing risk as a multiple‐factor concept and by understanding the different impacts of the risk types in new product alliances and how governance mechanisms mitigate such effects, we aid managers' decision making regarding the balance of contractual versus normative governance in new product alliances. Understanding the heterogeneous factors inherent in these complex relationships enables managers to understand the conditions in which various governance mechanisms promote new product alliance success.     

Influence of alliance portfolio diversity on innovation performance: the role of internal capabilities of value creation

In this study, we suggest a new perspective on the linkage between alliance portfolio diversity and innovation performance based on a contingency approach. Using a longitudinal data set on alliance portfolios and patents of 182 firms in the U.S. manufacturing industries, we examined that alliance portfolio diversity has a U-shaped relationship with firm-level innovation. Internal value creation capabilities in terms of routine and ability are found to moderate the relationship between alliance portfolio diversity and innovation performance: organizational search routine strengthens the relationship of alliance portfolio diversity and innovation performance while technological capabilities weaken and flip the relationship.

     

Coopetition Strategy – When is it Successful? Empirical Evidence on Innovation and Market Performance

Coopetition (collaboration between competing firms) has been viewed as a potentially beneficial but also a risky relationship for a firm. Earlier literature provides inconclusive evidence in terms of the effects of a firm's coopetition strategy on innovation and market performance, suggesting both positive and negative implications. Some of this variation could be attributed to the fact that coopetition is successful only in certain types of business environment. In order to take the research further, this study examines the effect of a coopetition strategy on the firm's innovation and market performance, focusing on the moderating effects of market uncertainty, network externalities and competitive intensity. The results from a cross‐industry survey of 209 Finnish firms provide novel evidence on the conditions under which coopetition is successful and when it is not.     

Do trust and distrust in coopetition matter to performance?

It is widely acknowledged that firms intensely engage in coopetition (i.e., simultaneous cooperation and competition) and obtain unique benefits from such relationships. However, limited knowledge exists about how and when coopetition intensity leads to superior performance. Building on the theoretical work documenting that both trust and distrust are critical for enhancing performance in interfirm relationships, we address the aforementioned gap by looking into the distinct yet beneficial roles of trust and distrust in coopetition. More specifically, we argue that whereas trust likely serves as an intervening mechanism through which coopetition intensity enhances relationship performance, distrust positively influences the association between coopetition intensity and relationship performance. We test our hypotheses on a sample of 225 Swedish firms engaged in coopetition, and provide empirical evidence that trust and distrust play distinct yet important roles in achieving superior performance from coopetition.     

Casting a Wide Net for Innovation: Mediating Effect of R&D Human and Social Capital to Unlock the Value from Alliance Portfolio Diversity

This paper examines the performance effects associated with different alliance portfolio configurations in terms of geographical location and partner type. Based on these distinctions, the authors hypothesize that more diverse alliance portfolios enable firms to gain and exploit innovation opportunities. Additionally, the mediating effects of R&D human and social capital on the R&D alliance portfolio diversity–innovation performance relationship are explored. The authors reason that the absorptive capacity of R&D intellectual capital determines a firm's potential gains from highly diverse alliance portfolios. From panel data of manufacturing firms in Spain for the period 2008–2013, the results confirm the inverted U‐shaped relationship between alliance portfolio diversity and firm innovation performance, implying that both insufficient and excessive alliance portfolio diversity may be detrimental to firm innovativeness. Additionally, R&D human and social capital partially mediates the R&D alliance diversity–innovation performance relationship, emphasizing the importance of internal capabilities to leverage the benefits of highly diverse alliance portfolios. These findings add a dynamic dimension to the conceptualization of alliance portfolios and how firms create value by balancing explorative and exploitative alliances.     

Response strategy to environment context factors using a lean and agile approach: Implications for firm performance

Based on the environment-strategy performance perspective and dynamic capabilities framework, we develop a theoretical model and hypotheses specifying how supply chain collaboration as a response to environment context factors – competitive intensity, supply uncertainty, technological turbulence and market turbulence, using a lean and agile strategy may influence firm performance. We test the model using partial least square structural equation modelling on data collected from a field survey with responses from 152 manufacturing firms representing a variety of industries. Empirical findings generally support the relationship between collaboration and firm performance using a lean and agile strategy. Also, for firms in industries that face environments characterised by high supply uncertainty and competitive intensity with, technological turbulence, the study finds evidence of a direct relationship between these environmental factors and supply chain collaboration. The findings provide an initial strategic response framework for appropriately aligning a lean and agile supply chain strategy through collaboration with environment context factors to achieve firm performance improvements.     

Effective cooperation modes based on cultural and market similarities in interfirm relationships

This study explores appropriate cooperation modes based on cultural and market similarities and suggests two alliance cooperation modes: 1) contractual cooperation and 2) relational cooperation. We collected secondary data from diverse sources, including the SDC Platinum, Compustat, and CRSP databases. We examined 349 alliances in high-tech industries from 2001 to 2009. We used an event study methodology to measure abnormal stock returns associated with the announcement of an alliance because it provides a forward-looking metric of expected performance. The results show that equity sharing enhances the positive effects of cultural distance on a focal firm's returns while repeated partnership exacerbates the negative effects of product market similarities on a focal firm's returns. This research contributes to alliance literature, providing explanation for choosing an appropriate cooperation mode considering both transaction cost economics (TCE) and a resource-based view (RBV). This study suggests that the effect of a contractual or relational cooperation mode depends on the competitive or cooperating role of similarity. Additionally, our study tries to provide guidelines for managers in selecting an appropriate cooperation mode depending on the relationship characteristics of the two companies.     

International coopetition for innovation: Are the benefits worth the challenges?

International coopetition has rarely been studied in relation to innovation. Further exploration of effects of international coopetition, i.e. the pursuit of simultaneous cooperation and competition, on a firm’s innovation performance is especially important as such a relationship is challenging with a high propensity to fail. This observation formed the point of departure for this study, which aims to increase the understanding of the effects of international coopetition on firm innovativeness and how these effects are conditioned on the magnitude of the organizational adjustments a firm introduces. We use an unbalanced panel of 9839 firms that participated in four waves of the Swedish Community Innovation Survey between 2008 and 2014 as our empirical base. We illustrate that firms that cooperate with competitors internationally are more likely to exhibit higher propensity to introduce radical innovations, yet this effect is conditioned upon the magnitude of organizational adjustments. Overall, our study contributes to the understanding of the implications of international coopetition and what a firm needs to benefit from it.     

Technological alliance portfolio configuration and firm performance

Firms pursuing technological alliances to gain competitive advantages have become a ubiquitous phenomenon in today’s business environment. This article examines which technological alliance portfolio configuration is better for focal firm performance using a portfolio rather than a dyadic perspective. To assess technological alliance portfolio effects on Korean pharmaceutical and biotechnology firms, we adopted three explanatory variables—number of alliances, number of partners, and spanning structural holes. The growth rate of revenue and the growth rate of profit are used as dependent variables. We identify two characteristics of technological alliance portfolios from the two-step generalized method of moments estimates. First, we find that between two firms with the same number of alliances, the firm with the larger number of partners would have a better performance. This result is unlike those in previous studies because it distinguishes between the number of alliances and number of partners based on the network theory. Second, we find that spanning structural holes affects firm performance rather like a double-edge sword—it positively affects the growth rate of profit but negatively affects the growth rate of revenue of firms. In short, spanning structural holes is simultaneously beneficial for firm profitability and unfavorable for firm growth. This result differs from those of earlier studies because it shows that a firm spanning structural holes among alliance partners produces either a positive or a negative effect, suggesting that a firm should vary its strategy depending on whether it prioritizes profitability or growth.