Tag Archives: make-ally-buy choices

[10]. How Do US Firms Grow? New Evidence from a Growth Decomposition

Jagadeesh Sivadasan, Natarajan Balasubramanian, Ravi Dharwadkar and Charlotte Ren. Accepted by Strategic Management Journal. 2024.

Research Summary. Although firms grow using many modes, studies typically examine individual modes, usually transactional. This impedes our understanding of the relative importance of growth modes, correlations amongst them, and their associations with competition and firm performance. To shed light on these aspects, we decompose employment growth in all U.S. firms (2004–2013) into seven modes. We find that organic modes such as opening or closing plants contribute more than transactional modes such as acquisitions and sell-offs, and that growth modes exhibit age-size differences and are generally positively correlated within firms. Trade competition in manufacturing increased closures and decreased acquisitions but had no effect on new units. Transactional growth positively correlates with future survival, unlike organic growth. Together, these findings expand our understanding of firm growth and compel us to view it as a composite of multiple modes.

[9]. Alliance Performance and Subsequent Make-or-Ally Choices: Evidence from the Aircraft Manufacturing Industry

Charlotte Ren, Louis Mulotte, Pierre Dussauge and Jay Anand. Strategic Management Journal, 2022, 43(11): 2382-2413. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3410.

Research Summary. We examine how the performance of a firm’s prior alliances influences its propensity to persist with the alliance mode or switch to independent operations in the context of new product introductions (NPIs). Drawing on the behavioral theory of the firm (BTOF), we argue that a firm’s alliance performance has a U-shaped effect on its likelihood of undertaking the subsequent NPI independently and that competitive intensity strengthens this U-shaped relationship. We also predict that firms with above-aspiration alliance performance are more likely to achieve breakthrough performance in the subsequent NPI if they switch to independence than if they continue to ally. Data on NPIs in the global aircraft manufacturing industry (1944–2000) support our hypotheses. Our study extends the alliance literature and contributes to research on how firm performance influences subsequent strategic choices.

Managerial Summary. The dilemma of whether to continue or exit an alliance or relationship is a common one for individuals, countries, and firms. Our study examines firms’ strategic decision to switch to independent operations after having partnered with other firms. Using the aircraft product development context, we show that firms that make such a change in their strategy are the ones that performed either much better or much worse than what they expected. Firms with alliance performance close to their expectations tend to persist with their current strategy. Of the firms that change their strategy, the high performers benefit much more from changing their strategy than low performers. We provide insights regarding when it is preferable for managers to continue to ally or to switch to independence, especially in launching new products.

Click here for the paper: Ren.Mulotte.Dussauge.Anand_2022 SMJ.

[6]. Should I stay or should I go now? Integrating the learning and selection views on firms’ successive make-or-ally decisions for product innovation

Louis Mulotte, Charlotte Ren, Pierre Dussauge and Jay Anand. In F. Contractor and J. Reuer (Eds). Frontiers of Strategic Alliance Research. Cambridge University Press. 2019 (pp. 423-436).

Abstract. Previous literature on inter-firm collaborations has documented how firms can learn from their partners with experience and eventually develop adequate capabilities to go it alone. On the other hand, some literature also suggests that firms are less likely to switch from previously successful strategies, so firms with successful collaborative experience may persist with further collaborations. We identify these strands of literature as the “learning” and “selection” views, and develop propositions on the implications of the two alternative views. We conduct preliminary tests of our propositions using data on new product introductions in the aircraft industry. Our theoretical and empirical analyses help in integrating of these seemingly opposing views and allow for the development of theoretical and managerial implications.

[5]. Does experience imply learning?

Jay Anand, Louis Mulotte and Charlotte Ren. Strategic Management Journal. 2016, 37(7): 1395-1412. 

Abstract. Strategic management research traditionally uses experiential learning arguments to explain the existence of a positive relationship between repetition of an activity and superior performance. We propose an alternative interpretation of this relationship in the context of discrete corporate development activities, which are generally self-selected on the basis of superior performance expectations. We argue that firms are likely to choose to repeat successful activities, thereby accumulating high experience with them. To demonstrate this ‘self-selection’ effect, we examine the performance of 437 aircraft projects launched through three introduction modes. We show that the positive performance effect of the firm’s experience with the focal mode vanishes after accounting for experience endogeneity. We suggest that in a general case, experience with corporate development activities may be tinged with both learning as well as selection effects. Therefore, omitting experience endogeneity may lead researchers to draw incorrect conclusions from an “empirically observed” positive experience-performance relationship.

Click here for the paper: Anand-Mulotte-Ren_2016 SMJ

[4]. Disentangling the Performance Effects of Efficiency and Bargaining Power in Horizontal Growth Strategies: An Empirical Investigation in the Global Retail Industry

Valerie Moatti, Charlotte Ren, Jay Anand and Pierre Dussauge. Strategic Management Journal. 2015, 36(5): 745-757.

Abstract. M&A and organic growth are two common strategies for firms to achieve horizontal growth. In this study, we disentangle two distinct sources of firm performance corresponding to different theoretical perspectives on firm size: firms’ bargaining power with respect to suppliers and customers, and operating efficiency arising from scale economies. We conceptually argue and empirically show that relatively, M&A enhance bargaining power while organic growth enhances operating efficiency. We also find that M&A’s disadvantage on operating efficiency persists over time. In order to disaggregate these effects, we use accounting rather than financial or managerial data and test our predictions in the global retail industry over a 20 year period. We examine implications of these results for sustainability of size-based competitive advantages.

Click here for the paper: Moatti-Ren-Anand-Dussauge 2015SMJ