The Effect of Information Technology–Enabled Flexibility on Formation and Market Value of Alliances

References

• Afuah A. How much do your co-opetitors' capabilities matter in the face of technological change? Strategic Management J. (2000) 21(3):387–404Crossref, Google Scholar
• Almeida P, Song J, Grant RM. Are firms superior to alliances and markets? An empirical test of cross-border knowledge building. Organ. Sci. (2002) 13(2):147–161Link, Google Scholar
• Anand BN, Khanna T. Do firms learn to create value? The case of alliances. Strategic Management J. (2000) 21(3):285–315Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson TW. Introduction to Multivariate Statistical Analysis (1984) 2nd ed.(John Wiley & Sons, New York) Google Scholar
• Babcock C. BearingPoint says SOA can be costly, hard to maintain. InformationWeek (2007) April 27). http://www.informationweek.com/bearingpoint-says-soa-can-be-costly-hard/199202015Google Scholar
• Baldwin CY, Clark KB. Design Rules: The Power of Modularity (2000) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barua A, Lee B. An economic analysis of the introduction of an electronic data interchange system. Inform. Systems Res. (1997) 8(4):398–422Link, Google Scholar
• Bharadwaj A, Bharadwaj S, Konsynski BR. Information technology effects on firm performance as measured by Tobin's q. Management Sci. (1999) 45(7):1008–1024Link, Google Scholar
• Black SE, Lynch LM. How to compete: The impact of workplace practices and information technology on productivity. Rev. Econom. Statist. (2001) 83(3):434–445Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brown WA, Laird RG, Gee C, Mitra T. SOA Governance: Achieving and Sustaining Business and IT Agility (2009) (IBM Press Pearson Plc, Boston) Google Scholar
• Brynjolfsson E, Hitt LM, Yang S. Intangible assets: Computers and organizational capital. Brookings Papers Econom. Activity (2002) 2002(1):137–199Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brynjolfsson E, Malone TW, Gurbaxani V, Kambil A. Does information technology lead to smaller firms? Management Sci. (1994) 40(12):1628–1644Link, Google Scholar
• Burgelman RA, McKinney W. Managing the strategic dynamics of acquisition integration: Lessons from HP and Compaq. California Management Rev. (2006) 48(3):6–27Crossref, Google Scholar
• Byrd TA, Turner DE. Measuring the flexibility of information technology infrastructure: Exploratory analysis of a construct. J. Management Inform. Systems (2000) 17(1):167–208Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chan SH, Kensinger JW, Keown AJ. Do strategic alliances create value? J. Financial Econom. (1997) 46(2):199–221Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chari MDR, Devaraj S, David P. The impact of information technology investments and diversification strategies on firm performance. Management Sci. (2008) 54(1):224–234Link, Google Scholar
• Chatterjee D, Segars AH, Watson RT. Realizing the promise of e-business: Developing and leveraging electronic partnering options. California Management Rev. (2006) 48(4):60–83Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cherbakov L, Galambos G, Harishankar R, Kalyana S, Rackham G. Impact of service orientation at the business level. IBM Systems J. (2005) 44(4):653–667Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cisco Systems Renault and Nissan: Forging a global alliance that is greater than the sum of its parts. (2008) . Report, Cisco Systems, San Jose, CA. Accessed March 10, 2008, http://blog.lib.umn.edu/devau002/mgmt6033001/2008/02/renault_and_nissan_forging_a_g.htmlGoogle Scholar
• Clark TH, Stoddard DB. Interorganizational business process redesign: Merging technological and process innovation. J. Management Inform. Systems (1996) 13(2):9–28Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clemons E, Reddi S, Row M. The impact of information technology on the organization of economic activity: The “move to the middle” hypothesis. J. Management Inform. Systems (1993) 9(2):9–28Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dewan S, Michael SS, Min CK. Firm characteristics and investments in information technology: Scale and scope effects. Inform. Systems Res. (1998) 9(3):219–232Link, Google Scholar
• Duncan NB. Capturing flexibility of information technology infrastructure: A study of resource characteristics and their measure. J. Management Inform. Systems (1995) 12(2):37–58Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dyer JH. Specialized supplier networks as a source of competitive advantage: Evidence from the auto industry. Strategic Management J. (1996) 17(4):271–292Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dyer JH. Effective interfirm collaboration: How firms minimize transaction costs and maximize transaction value. Strategic Management J. (1997) 18(7):535–556Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM, Martin JA. Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management J. (2000) 21(10–11):1105–1121Crossref, Google Scholar
• Erl T. SOA Principles of Service Design (2007) (Prentice Hall, Boston) Google Scholar
• Ethiraj SK, Levinthal D. Modularity and innovation in complex systems. Management Sci. (2004) 50(2):159–173Link, Google Scholar
• Galunic DC, Rodan S. Resource recombinations in the firm: Knowledge structures and the potential for Schumpeterian innovation. Strategic Management J. (1998) 19(12):1193–1201Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gomes-Casseres B. Outsource processes, don't abandon them. CIO Magazine (2005) October 1). http://www.cio.com/article/print/12556Google Scholar
• Gosain S, Malhotra A, El Sawy OA. Coordinating for flexibility in e-business supply chains. J. Management Inform. Systems (2005) 21(3):7–45Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greene WH. Econometric Analysis (2003) 5th ed.(Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ) Google Scholar
• Gulati R. Alliances and networks. Strategic Management J. (1998) 19(4):293–317Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gulati R. Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management J. (1999) 20(5):397–420Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gulati R, Singh H. The architecture of cooperation: Managing coordination costs and appropriation concerns in strategic alliances. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1998) 43(4):781–814Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hagel J, Brown JS. Your next IT strategy. Harvard Bus. Rev. (2001) 79(10):105–113Google Scholar
• Hasselbring W. Information system integration. Communications of the ACM (2000) 43(6):32–38Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson RM, Clark KB. Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Strategic Management J. (1990) 35(1):9–30Google Scholar
• Hitt LM. Information technology and firm boundaries: Evidence from panel data. Inform. Systems Res. (1999) 10(2):134–149Link, Google Scholar
• Hou K, Robinson DT. Industry concentration and average stock returns. J. Finance (2006) 61(4):1927–1956Crossref, Google Scholar
• Inkpen AC. Knowledge transfer and international joint ventures: The case of Nummi and General Motors. Strategic Management J. (2008) 29(4):447–453Crossref, Google Scholar
• Inkpen AC, Currall SC. The coevolution of trust, control, and learning in joint ventures. Organ. Sci. (2004) 15(5):586–599Link, Google Scholar
• Jarvis CB, Mackenzie SB, Podsakoff PM. A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. J. Consumer Res. (2003) 30(2):199–218Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kale P, Dyer JH, Singh H. Alliance capability, stock market response, and long-term alliance success: The role of the alliance function. Strategic Management J. (2002) 23(8):747–767Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim SM, Mahoney JT. Mutual commitment to support exchange: Relation-specific IT system as a substitute for managerial hierarchy. Strategic Management J. (2006) 27(5):401–423Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lavie D. Alliance portfolios and firm performance: A study of value creation and appropriation in the U.S. software industry. Strategic Management J. (2007) 28(12):1187–1212Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malhotra A, Gosain S, El Sawy OA. Absorptive capacity configurations in supply chains: Gearing for partner-enabled market knowledge creation. MIS Quart. (2005) 29(1):145–187Crossref, Google Scholar
• McAfee A. Will web services really transform collaboration? MIT Sloan Management Rev. (2005) 46(2):78–84Google Scholar
• Mega International Evolving companies may control their information system. (2004) . Report, Mega International, Raynham, MA. Accessed August 9, 2012, http://www.cxo.eu.com/article/Evolving-companies-may-control-their-information-system/Google Scholar
• Mithas S, Jones JL. Do auction parameters affect buyer surplus in e-auctions for procurement? Production Oper. Management (2007) 16(4):455–470Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mithas S, Krishnan MS. From association to causation via a potential outcomes approach. Inform. Systems Res. (2009) 20(2):295–313Link, Google Scholar
• Mithas S, Whitaker J. Is the world flat or spiky? Information intensity, skills, and global service disaggregation. Inform. Systems Res. (2007) 18(3):237–259Link, Google Scholar
• Mithas S, Jones JL, Mitchell W. Buyer intention to use Internet-enabled reverse auctions: The role of asset specificity, product specialization, and non-contractibility. MIS Quart. (2008) 32(4):705–724Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mithas S, Tafti A, Bardhan I, Goh JM. Information technology and firm profitability: Mechanisms and empirical evidence. MIS Quart. (2012) 36(1):205–224Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moore SA. A foundation for flexible automated electronic communication. Inform. Systems Res. (2001) 12(1):34–62Link, Google Scholar
• Nag R, Hambrick DC, Chen MJ. What is strategic management, really? Inductive derivation of a consensus definition of the field. Strategic Management J. (2007) 28(9):935–955Crossref, Google Scholar
• Natis YV, Schulte RW. Introduction to service-oriented architecture. (2003) . Research note SPA-19-5971, Gartner, Stamford, CTGoogle Scholar
• Nijman T, Verbeek M. Nonresponse in panel data: The impact on estimates of a life cycle consumption function. J. Appl. Econometrics (1992) 7(3):243–257Crossref, Google Scholar
• Orton JD, Weick KE. Loosely coupled systems: A reconceptualization. Acad. Management Rev. (1990) 15(2):203–223Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oxley JE. Appropriability hazards and governance in strategic alliances: A transaction cost approach. J. Law, Econom. Organ. (1997) 13(2):387–409Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pavlou P, El Sawy O. From IT leveraging competence to competitive advantage in turbulent environments: The case of new product development. Inform. Systems Res. (2006) 17(3):198–227Link, Google Scholar
• Prahalad CK, Krishnan MS. The New Age of Innovation: Driving Cocreated Value Through Global Networks (2008) (McGraw-Hill, New York) Google Scholar
• Rai A, Patnayakuni R, Patnayakuni N. Technology investment and business performance. Commun. ACM (1997) 40(7):89–97Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rai A, Patnayakuni R, Seth N. Firm performance impacts of digitally enabled supply chain integration capabilities. MIS Quart. (2006) 30(2):225–246Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ray G, Wu D, Konana P. Competitive environment and the relationship between IT and vertical integration. Inform. Systems Res. (2009) 20(4):585–603Link, Google Scholar
• Robins J, Wiersema M. A resource-based approach to the multibusiness firm: Empirical analysis of portfolio interrelationships and corporate financial performance. Strategic Management J. (1995) 16(4):277–299Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sahaym A, Steensma HK, Schilling MA. The influence of information technology on the use of loosely coupled organizational forms: An industry-level analysis. Organ. Sci. (2007) 18(5):865–880Link, Google Scholar
• Sambamurthy V, Bharadwaj A, Grover V. Shaping agility through digital options: Reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS Quart. (2003) 27(2):237–263Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sanchez R, Mahoney JT. Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organization design. Strategic Management J. (1996) 17(1):63–76Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schilling MA. Understanding the alliance data. Strategic Management J. (2009) 30(3):233–260Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schilling MA, Phelps CC. Interfirm collaboration networks: The impact of large-scale network structure on firm innovation. Management Sci. (2007) 53(7):1113–1126Link, Google Scholar
• Srinivasan K, Kekre S, Mukhopadhyay T. Impact of electronic data interchange technology on JIT shipments. Management Sci. (1994) 40(10):1291–1304Link, Google Scholar
• Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management J. (1997) 18(7):509–533Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tetlock PC, Saar-Tsechansky M, Macskassy S. More than words: Quantifying language to measure firms' fundamentals. J. Finance (2008) 63(3):1437–1467Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkatraman N. IT-enabled business transformation: From automation to business scope redefinition. Sloan Management Rev. (1994) 35(2):73–87Google Scholar
• Waring GF. Industry difference in the persistence of firm-specific returns. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1996) 86(5):1253–1265Google Scholar
• Williamson OE. The economics of organization: The transaction cost approach. Amer. J. Sociol. (1981) 87(3):548–577Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson OE. Credible commitments: Using hostages to support exchange. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1983) 73(4):519–540Google Scholar
• Wooldridge JM. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data (2002) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Wooldridge JM. Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem in dynamic, nonlinear panel data models with unobserved heterogeneity. J. Appl. Econometrics (2005) 20(1):39–54Crossref, Google Scholar
• Young-Ybarra C, Wiersema M. Strategic flexibility in information technology alliances: The influence of transaction cost economics and social exchange theory. Organ. Sci. (1999) 10(4):439–459Link, Google Scholar
• Zaheer A, Venkatraman N. Determinants of electronic integration in the insurance industry: An empirical test. Management Sci. (1994) 40(5):549–566Link, Google Scholar
• Zhu K, Kraemer KL, Gurbaxani V, Xin Xu S. Migration to open-standard interorganizational systems: Network effects, switching costs, and path dependency. MIS Quart. (2006) 30(Special Issue):515–539Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zollo M, Reuer JJ, Singh H. Interorganizational routines and performance in strategic alliances. Organ. Sci. (2002) 13(6):701–713Link, Google Scholar