Interpartner sensemaking in strategic alliances

Abstract

Abstract Purpose – This paper aims to propose a framework for understanding interpartner sensemaking in cross‐national strategic alliances, and to discuss how to manage the problems arising from the cultural differences and internal tensions that are inherent in such alliances. Design/methodology/approach – The paper starts from the notion that interpartner sensemaking of the complexities of strategic alliances has important implications for the evolution of cross‐national alliances. The two fundamental interpretive frames that relate to sensemaking are described, that of sensemaking of chaos and that of sensemaking in chaos, and the paper examines how an appreciation of these interpretive frames enables one to better manage cultural differences and internal tensions that inevitably arise in cross‐national alliances. Findings – The framework makes clear that the two types of interpartner sensemaking ("sensemaking of chaos" and "sensemaking in chaos") need to be appreciated as interpretive frames that are present among the alliance managers to effectively interact and influence partner firms. Research limitations/implications – As interpartner sensemaking occurs at all stages of alliance evolution, future research may seek to assess the impact of conflicting interpretive schemes: in the stages of formation, operation, and outcome; concerning issues of appropriation and coordination; and in learning processes. Practical implications – Briefly, the two types of interpartner sensemaking call for different strategies for managing alliances. Alliance partners embedded in different national cultures rely on interpretive schemes to make sense of the conflicts, contradictions, and internal tensions that emerge in strategic alliances. Originality/value – The paper responds to the need of managers with alliance responsibilities for a framework to help identify and exploit the most effective ways of accounting for the role of interpartner sensemaking in alliances for productive interactions and performance.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 91 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.