搜索结果：alliance

The Working Alliance Inventory (WAI; Horvath & Greenberg, Citation1989) and the Working Alliance Inventory–Short (WAI-S; Tracey & Kokotovic, Citation1989) are widely used measures of alliance in therapy. This study evaluated the factor structure of the WAI and WAI-S with confirmatory factor analysis in two relatively large samples (Ns = 231 and 235). The hypothesized structures were not confirmed. An alternative 12-item WAI (WAI-SR), consistent with Bordin's (Citation1979) model of alliance, was developed in one sample and cross-validated in the other. The WAI-SR better differentiated Goal, Task, and Bond alliance dimensions and correlated well with other alliance measures. The Task dimension was particularly salient, as expected based on Bordin's original theory. Additional psychometric properties and item response theory analysis of the WAI-SR are presented. Zusammenfassung Eine Revision der Kurzform des Working Alliance Inventars (WAI-SR) Das Arbeitsbeziehungsinventar (Working Alliance Inventory, WAI; Horvath & Greenberg, 1989) und die Kurzform des Arbeitsbeziehungsinventars (Working Alliance Inventory-Short, WAI-S; Tracey & Kokotovic, 1989) sind häufig verwendete Masse der therapeutischen Allianz. Diese Studie hat die Faktorstruktur von WAI und WAI-S mit Hilfe von konfirmatorischer Faktoranalyse in zwei relativ großen Stichproben (n = 231 und 235) bewertet. Die hypothetisch angenommenen Strukturen ergaben sich dabei nicht. Eine alternatives 12-Item WAI (WAI-SR) in Übereinstimmung mit Bordins (1979) Annahmen zur Allianz, wurde in einer Stichprobe erprobt und in der anderen kreuzvalidiert. Das WAI-SR differenzierte besser Ziele, Aufgaben und therapeutische Bindungsdimension und korrelierte auch mit anderen Allianzmassen. Besonders deutlich war die Aufgabendimension, wie das auch nach Bordins ursprünglicher Theorie erwartet werden konnte. Es werden zusätzliche psychometrische Kennwerte und eine Analyse nach der Item-Response-Theorie vorgestellt. Résumé Développement et validation de la version courte révisée de l'inventaire de l'alliance de travail L'inventaire de l'alliance de travail (WAI; Horvath & Greenberg, 1989) et sa version courte (WAI-S; Tracey & Kokotovic, 1989) sont des mesures de l'alliance largement utilisées en thérapie. Cette étude évalue la structure factorielle de la WAI et de la WAI-S sur la base d'une analyse factorielle confirmatoire dans deux échantillons relativement grands (N = 231 et 235). La structure attendue n'est pas confirmée. Une version alternative à 12 items (WAI-SR), consistante avec le modèle de Bordin (1979) a été développée à partir d'un des échantillons et validée sur l'autre. Le WAI-SR différencie mieux les dimensions d'alliance but, tâche et lien et corrèle bien avec d'autres mesures d'alliance. La dimension tâche était particulièrement saillante, comme attendu selon la théorie originale de Bordin. Des propriétés psychométriques additionnelles et l'analyse de la réponse théorique aux items du WAI-SR sont présentées. Resumen Sviluppo e validazione di una versione abbreviata modificata del Questionario di funzionamento dell' alleanza (WAI–Working Alliance Inventory). Il Questionario di funzionamento dell' Alleanza (WAI; Horvath & Greenberg, 1989) e il Questionario di funzionamento dell' Alleanza _/abbreviatot (WAI_S; Tracey & Kokotovic, 1989) sono misure usate ampiamente sull'alleanza nella terapia. Questo studio ha valutato la struttura di fattore della WAI e della WAI_S con l'analisi fattoriale confermativa in due campioni (Ns_/231 e 235). Le strutture supposte non sono state confermate. Un' alternativa della WAI a 12 items (Wai-Sr), in accordo con il modello del'alleanza di Bordin (1979), è stato sviluppato in uno dei due campioni e incrociato e validato nell'altro. La Wai-Sr meglio differenziava l'obiettivo, il compito ed il vincolo e ben correlava con le altre misure dell'alleanza.La dimensione del compito risultava particolarmente saliente, come previsto nella teoria originale di Bordin. Sono presentate le proprietà, l'analisi psicometriche supplementari e di teoria della Wai-Sr. Resumo Desenvolvimento e validação da versão curta revista do Inventário da Aliança Terapêutica O Inventário da Aliança Terapêutica (WAI; Horvath & Greenberg, 1989) e a sua versão reduzida (WAI-S; Tracey & Kokotovic, 1989) são frequentemente utilizadas na avaliação da aliança em terapia. Este estudo avaliou a estrutura factorial do WAI e WAI-S, utilizando análise factorial confirmatória, em duas amostras (Ns_ 231 e 235). A estrutura hipotética não foi confirmada. Uma escala WAI alternativa de 12 itens (WAI-SR), consistente com o modelo de aliança de Bordin (1979), foi desenvolvida numa amostra e validada na outra. O WAI-SR diferenciou melhor as dimensões da aliança (Objectivos, Tarefas e Relação) e correlacionou-se bem com outras medidas da aliança A dimensão da Tarefa foi particularmente saliente, tal como esperado na teoria original de Bordin. Adicionalmente, são apresentadas propriedades psicométricas e análises de teoria de item resposta da WAI-SR Sommario Desarrollo y validación de una versión corta revisada del Inventario de Alianza de trabajo. El Inventario de Alianza de trabajo (Working Alliance Inventory, WAI, Horvath y Greenberg, 1989) y el Inventario de Alianza de trabajo- Breve (Working Alliance Inventory_Short, WAI-S; Tracey y Kokotovic, 1989) son medidas ampliamente usadas de alianza terapéutica. Este estudio evaluó el factor estructura de la WAI y WAI-S con un análisis factorial confirmatorio en dos muestras (Ns_231 y 235). Las estructuras hipotetizadas no fueron confirmadas. En una de las muestras se desarrolló y en la otra se validó en forma cruzada (cross-validated) un item 12 alternativo para la WAI (WAI-SR), consistente con el modelo de Bordin (1979) para la alianza. El WAI-SR diferenció mejor las dimensiones del Objetivo, la Tarea (Task) y la alianza vincular (Bond alliance) y se correlacionó bien con mediciones de otras alianzas. La dimensión Tarea (Task) fue particularmente relevante, como se esperaba según la teoría original de Bordin. Se presentan propiedades psicométricas adicionales y análisis teóricos de los items de respuesta del WAI-SR. This article is based in part on J. Arthur Gillaspy's doctoral dissertation completed with the supervision of Michael Duffy and Bruce Thompson, Texas A & M University. The authors thank Alex W. Barends for helpful comments, Adam Horvath for support and advice, and Catherine Hiltz for technical assistance. This work was supported in part by a generous anonymous donor. An earlier version of this article was presented at the 2004 meeting of the North American Society for Psychotherapy Research, Zion, Utah. Notes 1. The variance–covariance matrices for both samples are available on request. 2. The complete PCA pattern, structure, and component correlation matrices are available from the present authors upon request.

Abstract This paper addresses two key questions: (1) what factors influence firms' ability to build alliance capability and enjoy greater alliance success, where firm‐level alliance success is measured in two ways: (a) abnormal stock market gains following alliance announcements and (b) managerial assessments of long term alliance performance; and (2) are the two alternate ways of assessing alliance success correlated? We find that firms with greater alliance experience and, more importantly, those that create a dedicated alliance function (with the intent of strategically coordinating alliance activity and capturing/disseminating alliance‐related knowledge) realize greater success with alliances. More specifically, firms with a dedicated alliance function achieve greater abnormal stock market gains (average of 1.35%) and report that 63 percent of alliances are successful whereas firms without an alliance function achieve much lower stock market gains (average of 0.18%) and only a 50 percent long‐term success rate. We also find a positive correlation between stock market‐based measures of alliance success and alliance success measured through managerial assessments. In addition to providing insights into the development of alliance capability among firms, this paper is one of the first to provide empirical support for the efficient markets argument by demonstrating that the initial stock market response to a key event positively correlates to the long‐term performance and value of the event. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Why do firms form strategic alliances? The traditional theoretical answer has been transaction cost explanations. Yet, these explanations which center on transaction characteristics, static efficiency, and routine situations do not capture the strategic and social factors which propel many firms into alliance formation. In this study, however, we combine these alternative social and strategic explanations for alliance formation. Consistent with these explanations, we find that alliances form when firms are in vulnerable strategic positions either because they are competing in emergent or highly competitive industries or because they are attempting pioneering technical strategies. We also find that alliances form when firms are in strong social positions such that they are led by large, experienced, and well-connected top management teams. The underlying logic of alliance formation is, thus, strategic needs and social opportunities. We develop these findings by extending the resource-based view of the firm to alliance formation and then examining the resulting hypotheses using product development alliances. The study is longitudinal and focuses on entrepreneurial semiconductor firms. Overall, strategic and social explanations of organizational phenomena as well as industry, firm, and top management team factors emerge as central in the paper. This suggests that these factors are relevant for predicting alliance formation, especially in high-velocity industries such as semiconductors. We conclude that failure to include social and strategic explanations creates an impoverished view of alliance formation.

The resource-based view of the firm has not been systematically applied to strategic alliances. By examining the role of firm resources in strategic alliances, we attempt, in this paper, to put forward a general resource-based theory of strategic alliances, synthesizing the various findings in the literature on alliances from a resource-based view. The proposed theory covers four major aspects of strategic alliances: ra-tionale, formation, structural preferences, and performance. The re-source-based view suggests that the rationale for alliances is the value-creation potential of firm resources that are pooled together. We note that certain resource characteristics, such as imperfect mobility, imita-bility, and substitutability, promise accentuated value-creation, and thus facilitate alliance formation. We discuss how the resource profiles of partner firms would determine their structural preferences in terms of four major categories of alliances: equity joint ventures, minority equity alliances, bilateral contract-based alliances, and unilateral contract-

ABSTRACT The emerging knowledge‐based view of the firm offers new insight into the causes and management of interfirm alliances. However, the development of an effective knowledge‐based theory of alliance formation has been inhibited by a simplistic view of alliances as vehicles for organizational learning in which strategic alliances have presumed to be motivated by firms’ desire to acquire knowledge from one another. We argue that the primary advantage of alliances over both firms and markets is in accessing rather than acquiring knowledge. Building upon the distinction between the knowledge generation (‘exploration’) and knowledge application (‘exploitation’), we show that alliances contribute to the efficiency in the application of knowledge; first, by improving the efficiency with which knowledge is integrated into the production of complex goods and services, and second, by increasing the efficiency with which knowledge is utilized. These static efficiency advantages of alliances are enhanced where there is uncertainty over future knowledge requirements and where new products offer early‐mover advantages. Compared with alternative learning‐based approaches to alliance formation, our proposed knowledge‐accessing theory of alliances offers the advantages of greater theoretical rigour and consistency with general trends in alliance activity and corporate strategy.

This paper introduces a social network perspective to the study of strategic alliances. It extends prior research, which has primarily considered alliances as dyadic exchanges and paid less attention to the fact that key precursors, processes, and outcomes associated with alliances can be defined and shaped in important ways by the social networks within which most firms are embedded. It identifies five key issues for the study of alliances: (1) the formation of alliances, (2) the choice of governance structure, (3) the dynamic evolution of alliances, (4) the performance of alliances, and (5) the performance consequences for firms entering alliances. For each of these issues, this paper outlines some of the current research and debates at the firm and dyad level and then discusses some of the new and important insights that result from introducing a network perspective. It highlights current network research on alliances and suggests an agenda for future research.© 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This paper proposes an alternative logic of alliances to the capability aggregation model where both allies receive security from an alliance. In this alternative logic, one partner receives autonomy benefits, and the other, security benefits from the alliance. The former type of alliances are called symmetric and the latter asymmetric. The paper develops both logics from a model of alliance choices in the face of trade-offs between autonomy and security and provides a precise definition of those two concepts. It then derives a series of critical tests that show the trade-off model is superior to the capability aggregation model. First, asymmetric alliances will be easier to form and last longer than symmetric alliances. Second, regardless of the type of alliance, the greater the change in its members' individual capabilities, the more likely it will be broken. Third, second-rank major powers will be more likely to form asymmetric alliances as their capabilities increase. All the hypotheses are supported by a statistical examination of military alliances formed between 1815 and 1965. The implications of the argument for several topics in international relations theory are drawn out.

We examine how the learning, along several dimensions (environment, task, process, skills, goals), that takes place in strategic alliances between firms mediates between the initial conditions and the outcomes of these alliances. Through a longitudinal case study of two projects in one alliance, replicated and extended in another four projects in two alliances, a framework was developed to analyze the evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances. Successful alliance projects were highly evolutionary and went through a sequence of interactive cycles of learning, reevaluation and readjustment. Failing projects, conversely, were highly inertial, with little learning, or divergent learning between cognitive understanding and behavioral adjustment, or frustrated expectations. Although strategic alliances may be a special case of organizational learning, we believe analyzing the evolution of strategic alliances helps transcend too simple depictions of inertia and adaptation, in particular by suggesting that initial conditions may lead to a stable ‘imprinting’ of fixed processes that make alliances highly inertial or to generative and evolutionary processes that make them highly adaptive, depending on how they are set.

The alliance continues to be one of the most investigated variables related to success in psychotherapy irrespective of theoretical orientation. We define and illustrate the alliance (also conceptualized as therapeutic alliance, helping alliance, or working alliance) and then present a meta-analysis of 295 independent studies that covered more than 30,000 patients (published between 1978 and 2017) for face-to-face and Internet-based psychotherapy. The relation of the alliance and treatment outcome was investigated using a three-level meta-analysis with random-effects restricted maximum-likelihood estimators. The overall alliance-outcome association for face-to-face psychotherapy was r = .278 (95% confidence intervals [.256, .299], p < .0001; equivalent of d = .579). There was heterogeneity among the effect sizes, and 2% of the 295 effect sizes indicated negative correlations. The correlation for Internet-based psychotherapy was approximately the same (viz., r = .275, k = 23). These results confirm the robustness of the positive relation between the alliance and outcome. This relation remains consistent across assessor perspectives, alliance and outcome measures, treatment approaches, patient characteristics, and countries. The article concludes with causality considerations, research limitations, diversity considerations, and therapeutic practices. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

The instabilities of strategic alliances have been examined in the literature through a number of theoretical approaches. Alliance instabilities refer to major changes or dissolutions of alliances that are unplanned from the perspective of one or more partners. Although the literature identifies certain characteristics of strategic alliances that may lead to their unplanned dissolution, the extent of our understanding of this subject appears to be fragmented and incomplete. In this article we propose a comprehensive framework for adequately understanding alliance instabilities based on the notion of internal tensions. We suggest that strategic alliances are sites in which conflicting forces develop and which can be viewed as being constituted by three key pairs of competing forces—namely, cooperation versus competition, rigidity versus flexibility, and short-term versus long-term orientation. This tensions framework helps us in explaining the intrinsic vulnerability of alliances in terms of a wide range of internal contradictions and enables us to examine, in an integrated manner, the incidence, dynamics, and eventual dissipation of the inherent instabilities. We discuss the interrelationships among the different internal tensions and their impacts on different types of strategic alliances. We also examine the termination of alliances through mergers/acquisitions and dissolution. Finally, we suggest ways to empirically test the various ideas and propositions developed here and indicate directions for further research.

To identify underlying patterns in the alliance literature, an empirical review of the many existing studies that relate alliance to outcome was conducted. After an exhaustive literature review, the data from 79 studies (58 published, 21 unpublished) were aggregated using meta-analytic procedures. The results of the meta-analysis indicate that the overall relation of therapeutic alliance with outcome is moderate, but consistent, regardless of many of the variables that have been posited to influence this relationship. For patient, therapist, and observer ratings, the various alliance scales have adequate reliability. Across most alliance scales, there seems to be no difference in the ability of raters to predict outcome. Moreover, the relation of alliance and outcome does not appear to be influenced by other moderator variables, such as the type of outcome measure used in the study, the type of outcome rater, the time of alliance assessment, the type of alliance rater, the type of treatment provided, or the publication status of the study.

This paper presents a dynamic, firm-level study of the role of network resources in determining alliance formation. Such resources inhere not so much within the firm but reside in the interfirm networks in which firms are placed. Data from extensive fieldwork show that by influencing the extent to which firms have access to information about potential partners, such resources are an important catalyst for new alliances, especially because alliances entail considerable hazards. This study also assesses the importance of firms' capabilities with alliance formation and material resources as determinants of their alliance decisions. I test this dynamic framework and its hypotheses about the role of time-varying network resources and firm capabilities with comprehensive longitudinal multi-industry data on the formation of strategic alliances by a panel of firms between 1970 and 1989. The results confirm field observations that accumulated network resources arising from firm participation in the network of accumulated prior alliances are influential in firms' decisions to enter into new alliances. This study highlights the importance of network resources that firms derive from their embeddedness in networks for explaining their strategic behavior. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This paper investigates the relationship between intercorporate technology alliances and firm performance. It argues that alliances are access relationships, and therefore that the advantages which a focal firm derives from a portfolio of strategic coalitions depend upon the resource profiles of its alliance partners. In particular, large firms and those that possess leading-edge technological resources are posited to be the most valuable associates. The paper also argues that alliances are both pathways for the exchange of resources and signals that convey social status and recognition. Particularly when one of the firms in an alliance is a young or small organization or, more generally, an organization of equivocal quality, alliances can act as endorsements: they build public confidence in the value of an organization's products and services and thereby facilitate the firm's efforts to attract customers and other corporate partners. The findings from models of sales growth and innovation rates in a large sample of semiconductor producers confirm that organizations with large and innovative alliance partners perform better than otherwise comparable firms that lack such partners. Consistent with the status-transfer arguments, the findings also demonstrate that young and small firms benefit more from large and innovative strategic alliance partners than do old and large organizations. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Strategic alliances are an important source of resources, learning, and thereby competitive advantage. Few firms have all of the resources needed to compete effectively in the current dynamic landscape. Thus, firms seek access to the necessary resources through alliances. We examine the management of strategic alliances using the theoretical frames of transactions cost, social network theory and the resource-based view. Alliances must be effectively managed for their benefits to be realized. Effective alliance management begins with selecting the right partner. Furthermore, alliances must be managed to build social capital and knowledge. To maximize cooperation among the partners, a trust-based relationship must be developed. Therefore, we conclude that managing alliances is crucial for firms to gain competitive advantage and create value with strategic alliances.

This article reports on a research synthesis of the relation between alliance and the outcomes of individual psychotherapy. Included were over 200 research reports based on 190 independent data sources, covering more than 14,000 treatments. Research involving 5 or more adult participants receiving genuine (as opposed to analogue) treatments, where the author(s) referred to one of the independent variables as "alliance," "therapeutic alliance," "helping alliance," or "working alliance" were the inclusion criteria. All analyses were done using the assumptions of a random model. The overall aggregate relation between the alliance and treatment outcome (adjusted for sample size and non independence of outcome measures) was r = .275 (k = 190); the 95% confidence interval for this value was .25-.30. The statistical probability associated with the aggregated relation between alliance and outcome is p < .0001. The data collected for this meta-analysis were quite variable (heterogeneous). Potential variables such as assessment perspectives (client, therapist, observer), publication source, types of assessment methods and time of assessment were explored.

Abstract We link the exploration–exploitation framework of organizational learning to a technology venture's strategic alliances and argue that the causal relationship between the venture's alliances and its new product development depends on the type of the alliance. In particular, we propose a product development path beginning with exploration alliances predicting products in development, which in turn predict exploitation alliances, and that concludes with exploitation alliances leading to products on the market. Moreover, we argue that this integrated product development path is moderated negatively by firm size. As a technology venture grows, it tends to withdraw from this product development path to discover, develop, and commercialize promising projects through vertical integration. We test our model on a sample of 325 biotechnology firms that entered 2565 alliances over a 25‐year period. We find broad support for the hypothesized product development system and the moderating effect of firm size. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.

This paper proposes a co-evolutionary theory of strategic alliances. The paper proposes a framework which views strategic alliances in the context of the adaptation choices of a firm. Strategic alliances, in this view, are embedded in a firm's strategic portfolio, and co-evolve with the firm's strategy, the institutional, organizational and competitive environment, and with management intent for the alliance. Specifically, we argue that alliance intent may be described, at any time, as having either exploitation or exploration objectives. We further discuss how the morphology of an alliance—absorptive capacity, control, and identification—may be isomorphic with its intent, and, in the aggregate, drive the evolution of the population of alliances.

Exploring the factors that explain the choice of governance structures in interfirm alliances, this study challenges the use of a singular emphasis on transaction costs. Such an approach erroneously treats each transaction as independent and ignores the role of interfirm trust that emerges from repeated alliances between the same partners. Comprehensive multiindustry data on alliances made between 1970 and 1989 support the importance of such trust. Although support emerged for the transaction cost claim that alliances that encompass shared research and development are likely to be equity based, there is also strong evidence that repeated alliances between two partners are less likely than other alliances to be organized using equity.

In this paper, I examine the impact of partner technological diversity and alliance organizational form on firm innovative performance. Using a sample of 463 R&D alliances in the telecommunications equipment industry, I find that alliances contribute far more to firm innovation when technological diversity is moderate, rather than low or high. Although this relationship holds irrespective of alliance organization, I find that hierarchical organization, such as an equity joint venture, improves firm benefits from alliances with high levels of technological diversity. Thus, alliance organizational form likely influences partner ability and incentives to share information, which affects performance.