The influence of desire for control on monitoring decisions and performance outcomes in strategic alliances

Strategic alliances are fraught with risks, such as the uncontrolled disclosure of core knowledge via opportunistic learning. The usefulness of monitoring in policing opportunism notwithstanding, a contrasting view is that monitoring mechanisms can themselves manifest the dark side of strategic alliances. The present study argues that a novel dark personality trait—the focal firm's desire for control—may influence key decisions pertaining to how to monitor strategic alliances, which in turn can negatively impact performance outcomes. Our conceptual model was developed and tested, based on a survey of 404 strategic alliances. The results demonstrate that a focal firm's desire for control is positively associated with process monitoring as well as output monitoring. The firm's use of process monitoring to oversee the counterpart drives its performance outcomes only if there is a low level of information exchange between the alliance partners; as such, information exchange norms substitute for process monitoring. By contrast, the focal firm's use of outcome monitoring is negatively linked to performance unless complemented by a high level of information exchange. Key implications for alliance management and future research are derived from the findings

Machiavellianism in alliance partnerships

Against a backdrop of limited research focusing on dark-side characteristics in alliances, the authors argue that Machiavellianism in the alliance influences strategies pertaining to learning new knowledge and using power to achieve better performance effectiveness. They develop a model using theories-in-use procedures and drawing from both Machiavellian intelligence and achievement goal perspectives, which they test in a quasi-longitudinal study of 199 marketing alliances. The results suggest that Machiavellianism relates negatively to collaborative learning and positively to learning anxiety and use of power. The findings also indicate that collaborative learning enhances performance while learning anxiety and use of power result in underperformance. Collaborative learning, learning anxiety, and use of power fully mediate Machiavellianism’s impact on performance. Finally, Machiavellianism’s relationships with collaborative learning and learning anxiety are moderated positively and negatively, respectively, by partners’ collaborative history. This evidence provides managers with a more in-depth understanding about the nature, functioning, and performance relevance of Machiavellianism in alliance partnerships

How does relationship management infrastructure influence performance?

The contribution of Relationship Management Infrastructure (RMI) to positional advantage, customer, market and financial performance was tested in major, organisational customer relationships through structural equation modelling. The results support a direct, significant contribution of RMI to positional advantage, however the anticipated direct contribution of RMI to financial performance resulting from efficient and productive relationship infrastructure was not supported. The contribution of RMI to the variance in customer, market and financial performance was indirect. Explanations of these findings are proposed