This study focuses on the role of intrinsic speed capabilities, which refer to the ability to execute investment projects faster than competitors, in the attractiveness and selection of alliance partners. We predict that intrinsically faster firms have a higher likelihood of being selected as alliance partners due to the potential of accelerating the realization of future revenue streams of an alliance project as well as of preempting slower competitors. We also expect that intrinsic speed capabilities substitute for deficiencies in alliance experience and firm innovativeness. Using data on construction projects in the global Liquefied Natural Gas industry, we find empirical support for our theoretical expectations. Our results suggest that firm speed plays an important role in alliance partner selection and has the potential to facilitate the generation of future growth options for firms due to greater partner attractiveness in the market for alliance partners.
AhujaG (2000) The duality of collaboration: Inducements and opportunities in the formation of interfirm linkages. Strategic Management Journal21(3): 317–343.
2.
AhujaGPolidoroFJrMitchellW (2009) Structural homophily or social asymmetry? The formation of alliances by poorly embedded firms. Strategic Management Journal30(9): 941–958.
3.
BarneyJB (1986) Strategic factor markets: Expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management Science32: 1231–1241.
4.
BarneyJB (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management17(1): 99–120.
5.
BarneyJB (1999) How a firm’s capabilities affect boundary decisions. Sloan Management Review40(3): 137–145.
6.
BleekeJErnstD (1991) The way to win in cross-border alliances. Harvard Business Review69(6): 127–135.
7.
CapronLMitchellW (2012) Build, Borrow, or Buy: Solving the Growth Dilemma. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
8.
ChandraV (2006) Fundamentals of Natural Gas: An International Perspective. Tulsa, OK: PennWell Corporation.
9.
ChungSSinghHLeeK (2000) Complementarity, status similarity and social capital as drivers of alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal21(1): 1–22.
10.
CohenWMNelsonREWalshJP (2000) Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not). NBER Working Paper 7552. Cambridge, MA: NBER.
11.
DekkerHCVan den AbbeeleA (2010) Organizational learning and interfirm control: The effects of partner search and prior exchange experiences. Organization Science21(6): 1233–1250.
12.
DierickxICoolK (1989) Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science35(12): 1504–1511.
13.
DiestreLRajagopalanN (2012) Are all “sharks” dangerous? new biotechnology ventures and partner selection in R&D alliances. Strategic Management Journal33(10): 1115–1134.
14.
DowellGHartSYeungB (2000) Do corporate global environmental standards create or destroy market value?Management Science46(8): 1059–1074.
DyerJHSinghH (1998) The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. The Academy of Management Review23(4): 660–679.
17.
DyerJHSinghHHesterlyWS (2018) The relational view revisited: A dynamic perspective on value creation and value capture. Strategic Management Journal39(12): 3140–3162.
18.
DykesBJHughes-MorganMKolevKD, et al. (2018) Organizational speed as a dynamic capability: Toward a holistic perspective. Strategic Organization17(2): 266–278.
19.
EisenhardtKMMartinJA (2000) Dynamic capabilities: What are they?Strategic Management Journal21(10–11): 1105–1121.
20.
FirthD (1993) Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika80(1): 27–38.
21.
Garcia-PontCNohriaN (2002) Local versus global mimetism: The dynamics of alliance formation in the automobile industry. Strategic Management Journal23(4): 307–321.
22.
GeringerJM (1991) Strategic determinants of partner selection criteria in international joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies22(1): 41–62.
23.
GimenoJ (2004) Competition within and between networks: The contingent effect of competitive embeddedness on alliance formation. The Academy of Management Journal47(6): 820–842.
24.
GrantRMBaden-FullerC (2004) A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances. Journal of Management Studies41(1): 61–84.
25.
GravesSB (1989) The time-cost tradeoff in research and development: A review. Engineering Costs and Production Economics16: 1–9.
26.
GulatiR (1995) Social structure and alliance formation patterns: A longitudinal analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly40(4): 619–652.
27.
GulatiRGargiuloM (1999) Where do interorganizational networks come from?American Journal of Sociology104(5): 1439–1493.
28.
GulatiRSinghH (1998) The architecture of cooperation: Managing coordination costs and appropriation concerns in strategic alliances. Administrative Science Quarterly43(4): 781–814.
29.
GulatiRWohlgezogenFZhelyazkovP (2012) The two facets of collaboration: Cooperation and coordination in strategic alliances. Academy of Management Annals6(1): 531–583.
30.
HallenBL (2008) The causes and consequences of the initial network positions of new organizations: From whom do entrepreneurs receive investments?Administrative Science Quarterly53(4): 685–718.
31.
HamelGDozYLPrahaladCK (1989) Collaborate with your competitors—And win. Harvard Business Review67(1): 133–139.
32.
HawkAPacheco-de-AlmeidaG (2018) Time compression (dis)economies: An empirical analysis. Strategic Management Journal39(9): 2489–2516.
33.
HawkAPacheco-de-AlmeidaGYeungB (2013) Fast-mover advantages: Speed capabilities and entry into the emerging submarket of Atlantic Basin LNG. Strategic Management Journal34(13): 1531–1550.
34.
HeimeriksKHDuystersG (2007) Alliance capability as a mediator between experience and alliance performance: An empirical investigation into the alliance capability development process. Journal of Management Studies44(1): 25–49.
35.
HeimeriksKHBinghamCBLaamanenT (2015) Unveiling the temporally contingent role of codification in alliance success. Strategic Management Journal36(3): 462–473.
36.
HelfatCE (1994) Firm-specificity in corporate applied R&D. Organization Science5(2): 173–184.
37.
HelfatCE (1997) Know-how and asset complementarity and dynamic capability accumulation: The case of R&D. Strategic Management Journal18(5): 339–360.
38.
HelfatCEFinkelsteinSMitchellW, et al. (2007) Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
39.
HittMAAhlstromDDacinMT, et al. (2004) The institutional effects on strategic alliance partner selection in transition economies: China vs. Russia. Organization Science15(2): 173–185.
40.
HittMADacinMTLevitasE, et al. (2000) Partner selection in emerging and developed market contexts: Resource-based and organizational learning perspectives. The Academy of Management Journal43(3): 449–467.
41.
HoangHRothaermelFT (2005) The effect of general and partner-specific alliance experience on joint R&D project performance. The Academy of Management Journal48(2): 332–345.
42.
HoetkerG (2005) How much you know versus how well I know you: Selecting a supplier for a technically innovative component. Strategic Management Journal26(1): 75–96.
43.
HoetkerG (2007) The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: Critical issues. Strategic Management Journal28(4): 331–343.
44.
KalePDyerJHSinghH (2002) Alliance capability, stock market response, and long-term alliance success: The role of the alliance function. Strategic Management Journal23(8): 747–767.
45.
KoevaP (2000) The facts about time-to-build. IMF Working Paper. Washington, DC: IMF.
46.
LavieD (2006) The competitive advantage of interconnected firms: An extension of the resource-based view. The Academy of Management Review31(3): 638–658.
47.
LiDEdenLHittMA, et al. (2008) Friends, acquaintances, or strangers? Partner selection in R&D alliances. The Academy of Management Journal51(2): 315–334.
48.
LiSXRowleyTJ (2002) Inertia and evaluation mechanisms in interorganizational partner selection: Syndicate formation among U.S. investment banks. The Academy of Management Journal45(6): 1104–1119.
LiebermanMBMontgomeryDB (1998) First-mover (dis)advantages: Retrospective and link with the resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal19(12): 1111–1125.
51.
LuoY (1997) Partner selection and venturing success: The case of joint ventures with firms in the People’s Republic of China. Organization Science8(6): 648–662.
52.
MadhavanRPrescottJE (1995) Market value impact of joint ventures: The effect of industry information-processing load. The Academy of Management Journal38(3): 900–915.
53.
MakinoSChanCMIsobeT, et al. (2007) Intended and unintended termination of international joint ventures28(11): 1113–1132.
54.
MataFJFuerstWLBarneyJB (1995) Information technology and sustained competitive advantage: A resource-based analysis. MIS Quarterly19(4): 487–505.
55.
MindrutaDMoeenMAgarwalR (2016) A two-sided matching approach for partner selection and assessing complementarities in partners’ attributes in inter-firm alliances. Strategic Management Journal37(1): 206–231.
56.
MitsuhashiHGreveHR (2009) A matching theory of alliance formation and organizational success: Complementarity and compatibility. The Academy of Management Journal52(5): 975–995.
57.
MorckRYeungB (1991) Why investors value multinationality. The Journal of Business64(2): 165–187.
58.
MorckRYeungB (1992) Internalization: An event study test. Journal of International Economics33(1–2): 41–56.
59.
MoweryDCOxleyJESilvermanBS (1998) Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: Implications for the resource-based view of the firm. Research Policy27(5): 507–523.
60.
OhmaeK (1989) The global logic of strategic alliances. Harvard Business Review67(2): 143–154.
61.
Pacheco-de-AlmeidaGHawkAYeungB (2015) The right speed and its value. Strategic Management Journal36(2): 159–176.
62.
Pacheco-de-AlmeidaGHendersonJECoolKO (2008) Resolving the commitment versus flexibility trade-off: The role of resource accumulation lags. The Academy of Management Journal51(3): 517–536.
63.
PodolnyJM (1994) Market uncertainty and the social character of economic exchange. Administrative Science Quarterly39(3): 458–483.
64.
ReuerJJDevarakondaR (2017) Partner selection in R&D collaborations: Effects of affiliations with venture capitalists. Organization Science28(3): 574–595.
65.
ReuerJJLahiriN (2014) Searching for alliance partners: Effects of geographic distance on the formation of R&D collaborations. Organization Science25(1): 283–298.
66.
RosenkopfLPadulaG (2008) Investigating the microstructure of network evolution: Alliance formation in the mobile communications industry. Organization Science19(5): 669–687.
67.
RosenkopfLMetiuAGeorgeVP (2001) From the bottom up? Technical committee activity and alliance formation. Administrative Science Quarterly46(4): 748–772.
68.
RothaermelFT (2002) Technological discontinuities and interfirm cooperation: What determines a startup’s attractiveness as alliance partner?IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management49(4): 388–397.
69.
RothaermelFTBoekerW (2008) Old technology meets new technology: Complementarities, similarities, and alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal29(1): 47–77.
70.
SalomonRMartinX (2008) Learning, knowledge transfer, and technology implementation performance: A study of time-to-build in the global semiconductor industry. Management Science54(7): 1266–1280.
71.
ShahRHSwaminathanV (2008) Factors influencing partner selection in strategic alliances: The moderating role of alliance context. Strategic Management Journal29(5): 471–494.
72.
SmithPGReinertsenDG (1998) Developing Products in Half the Time. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
73.
SorensonOStuartT (2001) Syndication networks and the spatial distribution of venture capital investments. American Journal of Sociology106(6): 1546–1588.
74.
SorensonOStuartTE (2008) Bringing the context back in: Settings and the search for syndicate partners in venture capital investment networks. Administrative Science Quarterly53(2): 266–294.
75.
StalkG (1988) Time—The next source of competitive advantage. Harvard Business Review66(4): 41–51.
76.
StalkGHoutTM (1990) Competing against Time. New York: The Free Press.
77.
SternIDukerichJMZajacE (2014) Unmixed signals: How reputation and status affect alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal35(4): 512–531.
78.
StuartTE (1998) Network positions and propensities to collaborate: An investigation of strategic alliance formation in a high-technology industry. Administrative Science Quarterly43(3): 668–698.
79.
TallmanSBShenkarO (1994) A managerial decision model of international cooperative venture formation. Journal of International Business Studies25(1): 91–113.
ThompsonJD (1967) Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
82.
TusianiMDShearerG (2007) LNG: A Nontechnical Guide. Tulsa, OK: PennWell Corporation.
83.
WernerfeltB (1984) A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal5(2): 171–180.
84.
WollersheimJHeimeriksKH (2016) Dynamic capabilities and their characteristic qualities: Insights from a lab experiment. Organization Science27(2): 233–248.
85.
YayavaramSSrivastavaMKSarkarM (2018) Role of search for domain knowledge and architectural knowledge in alliance partner selection. Strategic Management Journal39(8): 2277–2302.
86.
ZelnerBA (2009) Using simulation to interpret results from logit, probit, and other nonlinear models. Strategic Management Journal30(12): 1335–1348.
