The influence of managers' characteristics and perceptions in strategic alliance practice

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a linkage between strategic alliance practice and managerial cognitive base with a view to understanding alliance dynamics better. Findings Brings together two streams of management literature (cognitive base and strategic alliances) in order to provide an alternative to understanding strategic alliances. The analysis found that ever since the work of Hambrick and Mason, Upper echelon (UE) linking managerial characteristics to strategic choice have persistently overlooked strategic alliances as strategic options worth consideration. While on the other hand only a handful of strategic alliance researchers have paid lip‐service to the UE perspective. Design/methodology/approach After presenting a strategic alliance model, the paper reviews analysis of reasons for alliance formation, choice of partners, alliance structure and scope and alliance performance. Literature on managerial characteristics is also explored with a view to provide an approach to researching strategic alliances. Research limitations/implications The paper cannot claim to have evaluated all the literature on the subject. A claim regarding lack of linkages between the two streams of research is made only in the context of accessed publications. Practical implications The paper identifies opportunities for further research that links managerial cognitive base with diverse strategic alliance practices. Borrowing from the work of Carpenter et al. the paper further identify possibilities for further research that links top management teams characteristics to strategic alliance research which also has not been researched before. Originality/value The paper uses well‐established and researched management fields to identify gaps in the literature which could be further explored. To this end, the paper's originality and value is within identification of these gaps in the management literature.

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 — 69 citations exist upstream.

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