How Do Plural-Sourcing Firms Make and Buy? The Impact of Supplier Portfolio Design

References

• Adelman MA (1949) The large firm and its suppliers. Rev. Econom. Statist. 3(2):113–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alonso-Borrego C, Arellano M (1999) Symmetrically normalized instrumental-variable estimation using panel data. J. Bus. Econom. Statist. 17(1):36–49.Google Scholar
• Aral S, Bakos Y, Brynjolfsson E (2012) I.T., repeated contracts and the number of suppliers. Working paper, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Arellano M, Bond S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev. Econom. Stud. 58(2):277–297.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arellano M, Bover O (1995) Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. J. Econometrics 68(1):29–51.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argyres NS, Liebskind JP (1999) Contractual commitments, bargaining power, and governance inseparability: Incorporating history into transaction cost theory. Acad. Management Rev. 24(1):49–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argyres NS, Zenger TR (2012) Capabilities, transaction costs, and firm boundaries. Organ. Sci. 23(6):1643–1657.Link, Google Scholar
• Axelrod R (1984) The Evolution of Cooperation (Basic Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Azoulay P (2004) Capturing knowledge within and across firm boundaries: Evidence from clinical development. Amer. Econom. Rev. 94(5):1591–1612.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bagley CE (2008) Winning legally: The value of legal astuteness. Acad. Management Rev. 33(2):378–390.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baker G, Gibbons R, Murphy KJ (2002) Relational contracts and the theory of the firm. Quart. J. Econom. 117(1):39–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baldwin CY (2008) Where do transactions come from? Modularity, transactions, and the boundaries of the firm. Indust. Corporate Change 17(1):155–195.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blundell R, Bond S (1998) Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. J. Econometrics 87(1):115–143.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bode C, Wagner SM, Petersen KJ, Ellram LM (2011) Understanding responses to supply chain disruptions: Insights from information processing and resource dependence perspectives. Acad. Management J. 54(4):833–856.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bradach JL (1997) Using the plural governance form in the management of restraurant chains. Admin. Sci. Quart. 42(2):276–303.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carson SJ, Madhok A, Wu T (2006) Uncertainty, opportunism, and governance: The effects of volatiility and ambiguity on formal and relational contracting. Acad. Management J. 49(5): 1058–1077.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cassiman B, Veugelers R (2006) In search of complementarity in innovation strategy: Internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Management Sci. 52(1):68–82.Link, Google Scholar
• Chatain O (2010) Value creation, competition, and performance in buyer-supplier relationships. Strategic Management J. 32(1):76–102.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chatain O, Zemsky P (2007) Horizontal scope of the firm: Organizational trade-offs vs. buyer-supplier relationships. Management Sci. 53(4):550–565.Link, Google Scholar
• Craighead CW, Blackhurst J, Rungtusanatham MJ, Handfield RB (2007) The severity of supply chain disruptions: Design characteristics and mitigation capabilities. Decision Sci. 38(1):131–156.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dutta S, Bergen M, Heide JB, John G (1995) Understanding dual distribution: The case of reps and house accounts. J. Law, Econom. Organ. 11(1):189–204.Google Scholar
• Dyer JH (1997) Effective interim collaboration: How firms minimize transaction costs and maximise transaction value. Strategic Management J. 18(7):535–556.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Evers M (2011) Make or buy in the age of free-agent lawyer. American Bar Association (October 26), http://www.abajournal.com/legalrebels/article/in-house_lawyers_make_or_buy.Google Scholar
• Garcia-Vega M (2006) Does technological diversification promote innovation? An empirical analysis for European firms. Res. Policy 35(2):230–246.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibbons R, Henderson R (2012) Relational contracts and organizational capabilities. Organ. Sci. 23(5):1350–1364.Link, Google Scholar
• Green S (2012) In-house lawyers increasingly in dual legal/business roles. Corporate Counsel 9.Google Scholar
• Greene W (2004) Fixed effects and bias due to the incidental parameters problem in the tobit model. Econometric Rev. 23(2):125–147.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gulati R (1995) Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Acad. Management J. 38(1):85–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gulati R, Nickerson JA (2008) Interorganizational trust, governance choice, and exchange performance. Organ. Sci. 19(5):688–708.Link, Google Scholar
• Hall B (2005) A note on the bias in the Herfindahl-type measures based on count data. Revue d’Economie industrielle Année 110(1):149–156.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M (2002) The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M, eds. Patents, Citations, and Innovation (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), 403–460.Google Scholar
• Harrigan KR (1986) Matching vertical integration strategies to competitive conditions. Strategic Management J. 7(6):535–555.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hart O, Moore J (1990) Property rights and the nature of the firm. J. Political Econom. 98(6):1119–1158.Crossref, Google Scholar
• He D, Nickerson JA (2006) Why do firms make and buy? Efficiency, appropriability and competition in the trucking industry. Strategic Organ. 4(1):43–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heide JB (2003) Plural governance in industrial purchasing. J. Marketing 67(4):18–29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heide JB, Kumar A, Wathne KH (2014) Concurrent sourcing, governance mechanisms, and performance outcomes in industrial value chains. Strategic Management J. 35(8):1164–1185.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hellmann T, Puri M (2002) Venture capital and the professionalization of start-up firms: Empirical evidence. J. Finance 57(1):169–197.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoetker G (2005) How much you know versus how well I know you: Selecting a supplier for a technically innovative component. Strategic Management J. 26(1):75–96.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Inkpen AC, Beamish PW (1997) Knowledge, bargaining power, and the instability nof international joint ventures. Acad. Management Rev. 22(1):177–202.Google Scholar
• Jacobides MG, Billinger S (2006) Designing the boundaries of the firm: From “make, buy, or ally” to the dynamic benefits of vertical architecture. Organ. Sci. 17(2):249–261.Link, Google Scholar
• Jacobides MG, Hitt LM (2005) Losing sight of the forest for the trees? Productive capabilities and gains from trade as drivers of vertical scope. Strategic Management J. 26(13):1209–1227.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jaffe AB (1986) Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: Evidence from firms’ patents, profits, and market value. Amer. Econom. Rev. 76(5):984–1001.Google Scholar
• Kale P, Singh H, Perlmutter H (2000) Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: Building relational capital. Strategic Management J. 21(3):217–237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krzeminska A, Hoetker G, Mellewigt T (2013) Reconceptualizing plural sourcing. Strategic Management J. 34(13):1614–1627.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kurer P (2015) Legal and Compliance Risk (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK)Google Scholar
• Langlois RN (1992) Transaction-cost economics in real time. Indust. Corporate Change 1(1):99–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Langlois RN (2006) The secret life of mundane transaction costs. Organ. Stud. 27(9):1389–1410.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li F (2008) Annual report readability, current earnings, and earnings persistence. J. Accounting Econom. 45(2–3):221–247.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lia GC, Laib R, D’Amour A, Doolind DM, Sun Y, Torvik VI, Yu AZ, Fleming L (2014) Disambiguation and co-authorship networks of the U.S. patent inventor database (1975–2010). Res. Policy 43(6):941–955.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lippman SA, Rumelt RP (2003) A bargaining perspective on resource advantage. Strategic Management J. 24(11):1069–1086.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Loughran TIM, McDonald B (2011) When is a liability not a liability? Textual analysis, dictionaries, and 10-Ks. J. Finance 66(1):35–65.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Macaulay S (1963) Non-contractual relations in business: A preliminary study. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 28(1):55–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Macneil IR (1974) The many futures of contracts. Southern California Law Rev. 47(3):691–816.Google Scholar
• Mayer KJ (2006) Spillovers and governance: An analysis of knowledge and reputational spillovers in information technology. Acad. Management J. 49(1):69–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mayer KJ, Argyres NS (2004) Learning to contract: Evidence from the personal computer industry. Organ. Sci. 15(4):394–410.Link, Google Scholar
• Mayer KJ, Somaya D, Williamson IO (2012) Firm-specific, industry-specific, and occupational human capital and the sourcing of knowledge work. Organ. Sci. 23(5):1311–1329.Link, Google Scholar
• Moeen M, Somaya D, Mahoney JT (2013) Supply portfolio concentration in outsourced knowledge-based services. Organ. Sci. 24(1):262–279.Link, Google Scholar
• Nelson RR (1991) Why do firms differ, and how does it matter? Strategic Management J. 12(S2):61–74.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nickell S (1981) Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica 49(6):1417–1426.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parmigiani A (2007) Why do firms both make and buy? An investigation of concurrent sourcing. Strategic Management J. 28(3): 285–311.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pfeffer J, Salancik G (1978) The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective (Harper & Row, New York).Google Scholar
• Poppo L, Zhou KZ, Ryu S (2008) Alternative origins to interorganizational trust: An interdependence perspective on the shadow of the past and the shadow of the future. Organ. Sci. 19(1):39–55.Link, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Gulati R, Bhattacharya S (2013) How much to make and how much to buy? An analysis of optimal plural sourcing strategies. Strategic Management J. 34(10):1145–1161.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Regan MC, Heegan PT (2010) Supply chains and porous boundaries: The disaggregation of legal services. Fordham Law Rev. 78(5):2137–2191.Google Scholar
• Reitzig M, Puranam P (2009) Value appropriation as an organizational capability: The case of IP protection through patents. Strategic Management J. 30(7):765–789.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roodman D (2009) How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. Stata J. 9(1):86–136.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothaermel FT, Hitt MA, Jobe LA (2006) Balancing vertical integration and strategic outsourcing: Effects on product portfolio, product success, and firm performance. Strategic Management J. 27(11):1033–1056.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sako M (1992) Prices, Quality and Trust (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sako M (2011) General coinsel with power? Insight Series No. 7: Novak Druce Centre for Professional Service Firms (University of Oxford, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Sako M (2013) Professionals between market and hierarchy: A comparative political economy perspective. Socio-Econom. Rev. 11(1):185–212.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sako M, Helper S (1998) Determinants of trust in supplier relations: Evidence from the automotive industry in Japan and the United States. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 34(3):387–417.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwarcz SL (2007) Explaining the value of transactional lawyering. Stanford J. Law, Bus. Finance 12(2):486–535.Google Scholar
• Smith L (2001) Inside Outside: How Businesses Buy Legal Services (ALM, New York).Google Scholar
• Somaya D, Williamson IO, Zhang X (2007) Combining patent law expertise with R&D for patenting performance. Organ. Sci. 18(6):922–937.Link, Google Scholar
• Susskind R (2008) The End of Lawyers? Rethinking the Nature of Legal Services (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Trajtenberg M, Henderson R, Jaffe A (1997) University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Econom. Innovation New Tech. 5(1):19–50.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Uzzi B (1997) Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Admin. Sci. Quart. 42(1):35–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vanneste BS, Puranam P (2010) Repeated interactions and contractual detail: Identifying the learning effect. Organ. Sci. 21(1):186–201.Link, Google Scholar
• Veasey EN, Guglielmo CTD (2012) Indispensable Counsel: The Chief Legal Officer in the New Reality (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Vogelsang TJ (2012) Heteroskedasticity, autocorrelation, and spatial correlation robust inference in linear panel models with fixed-effects. J. Econometrics 166(2):303–319.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson OE (1985) The Economic Institutions of Capitalism ( Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Zaheer A, Venkatraman N (1995) Relational governance as an interorganizational strategy: An empirical test of the role of trust in economic exchange. Strategic Management J. 16(5):373–392.Crossref, Google Scholar