英语论文网

which the partners in a strategic alliance need each other to achieve their goals. [5] However, over time the balanced interdependence changes to a power imbalance or dependence asymmetry. If one partner becomes dependent on the other, the independent partner could start acting opportunistic. [6] In the Emerson's study (1962) there is an example supporting this statement, which represents the relationship between a parent firm and smaller firms in a network. [7] However, from transaction cost point of view, researchers examine the inclination of a highly dependent partner to exit the alliance aiming to protect itself from opportunism. [8] There are different levels of dependence according to the value received from a partner and the existence of available alternative trading partners. The continuing use of power by one partner to take an advantage over the other partner could promote dysfunctional conflict and destroy trust in the relationship. [9] Hence, there is a negative relation between dependence and trust in the interorganizational relationship. [10] Other factors, which hamper the relations between partners, are the internal barriers like, for example, willingness to cooperate, attitude, culture and the organizational structure. All these elements and many more influence the way the interorganizational relationship is managed which is in most cases through a mixture of informal and formal administrative mechanisms. [11]

2.2 Dependence advantage

An important part of dependence is the dependence advantage. It is a consequence of the power of one partner over the other because of the dependence of the latter. The negative dependence of an actor means that it has the dependence advantage and is in a position of relative power, which makes him the more powerful actor in the relationship. If a partner has a dependence advantage, a dependence asymmetry comes to the front, which provokes an adversarial action. [12] If the manufacturer in a strategic alliance between him and a supplier possess a dependence advantage, he will use more adversarial tactics than before having the dependence advantage because he would have no fear that the supplier will retaliate. Consequently, the concept of value appropriation reads that the manufacturer will capture greater value in the relationship at the expense of the weak or, with other words, dependence-disadvantaged supplier. [13] As a result, the degree of a manufacturer's dependence advantage would increase its performance in exchange relationships with suppliers. Ranjay Gulati and Maxim Sytch (2007) give an example of the automotive industry, which shows that asymmetrically dependent suppliers are likely to be squeezed by manufacturers for higher profits in economically difficult times. [14]

2.3 Dependent and non-dependent actors

There are many factors, which increase the level of dependence between partners in a strategic alliance. Haide and John (2012) distinguish four means by which dependence is increased.