You are presenting a plan to start an International Strategic alliance in the industry of your choice (using real-life example or the imaginary alliance) in 4,000 words.

Discuss one of the following aspects, using cases and academic theories to support your argument:

1. Coopetition – partnering with direct competitors
2. Inter-partner conflict management
3. How important is cultural fit?
4. Harvesting knowledge
5. Performance metrics

GET THE FULL ANSWER HERE

Present recommendations to address potential issues. Illustrate your chosen answer by referring to several alliances

Details

Imagine, you are an alliance manager. You need to persuade your CEO that you are capable of running the alliance in respect of one of the five aspects (as listed above). You could say the first thing that comes to your mind, but that is not going to be very persuasive (e.g. you lose your job / fail assignment). Instead, you need to demonstrate your analytical thinking. You need to support your analysis with examples from other companies – what they did, where can you inspire, what you should avoid. You need to demonstrate your understanding of theories and concepts, so your CEO can be confident that you are aware of the best practices (so you are not reinventing wheel). Your analysis supported with theory, examples from practice, and understanding of your company (and industry) is the winning formula. Do not forget about appropriate academic referencing (since this is an academic assignment).

Choice of alliance

Choose and briefly present the alliance you are involved in. You can choose to be involved in:

• Alliance as presented in a case study (perhaps using a different case study than those presented in module learning guide could be more exciting)
• Other real life alliance (for example, you have heard about an alliance in news, you have seen an alliance in your previous work experience, …)
• Imaginary alliance (invent your own company and imagine the alliance with a real existing company)

Content

• Briefly present the alliance background
  • ‘Who do you work for?’ – Identify from whose perspective (company) you will analyse selected aspect
  • Keep it brief (cca. 400 words should be enough)
• Research Academic theory
  • Demonstrate your understanding of theory
  • Critically evaluate theory, do not simply repeat what one author said in one journal. Look at different sources / different views, think about it (critically analyse), and offer your understanding.
  • You are encouraged to create your own theoretical model. You still need to critically evaluate other theories and concepts. During your analysis you may arrive to the conclusion that no theory is working for you. Create your own model. Understanding theories is good, creation of knowledge is excellent (so might be your mark). Try it.
  • Do not forget to reference authors of those theories (sources). Reference only sources that you have read. Do not copy references from journals.
  • You must consider academic theories in order to pass
• Illustrate your chosen answer by referring to several alliances
  • Apply theories on examples from practice
  • Support your analysis – demonstrate what works, or does not work
  • Use case studies (you can refer to cases studied during the module or to other cases of similar depth). Academic case studies will not always offer the most up-to-date information, but will offer very good level of detail supported with academic theories.
  • You can supplement your research with up-to-date information obtained from news articles
  • You must present examples from practice in order to pass

Format and innovation

The individual assignment is equivalent of a 4,000 word report and accounts for 75% of the marks for the module.

Easiest format is report (strongly preferred to essay – headings and subheadings make reading easier, report format is what you are going to use in business). However, you are encouraged to innovate.

Use:

• mind maps
• process diagrams
• presentation (you can even record voice over)
• video
• combined format (e.g. video in a presentation)

You can use different formats as part of your report, or you can even replace the entire report with different form of submission. Whatever format you choose, it needs to be equivalent of 4,000 words and you always have to demonstrate analysis, theory, examples from practice, and provide referencing. If you choose to submit the entire report in a different format, there must be a rationale for it. For example, you cannot simply divide the text into PowerPoint slides. Using a different format should add value to your work. For example, it makes sense to take advantage of animations to visually display links between concepts, analysis, or examples.

We will offer modest uplift to your mark to reflect risk that you are taking. Please discuss your idea with your module tutor regarding the suitability of your innovation.

It must work as standalone resource. When the marker reads or watches your report, they should see all the information needed to be able to mark your assignment against the assessment criteria. So, you do not have to come explaining what you mean.

Referencing should follow the SHU Harvard. Refer to “Guide to referencing and citations” (libguides.shu.ac.uk/referencing). Additional help is available at library where you can book one-to-one support session. Sometimes students choose to impress with endless number of references that they copy from few journals articles. Do not do it. Yes, you need to demonstrate extensive research, but reference only sources that you have read (or make sure that you know how secondary referencing works). If we are not convinced about the true extend of your original research, we will have to send you to Academic Conduct Panel, or at the best significantly reduce your mark. Always use your own words. Replacing few words in a sentence with synonyms is plagiarism rather than paraphrasing. You can quote (copy sentence word by word), but quote only occasionally and do not forget to use quotations marks and recognise the source (reference).

Sessions plan

Session 1: Introduction to strategic alliances in international business

• Introduction to the module – structure, assignments, presentations
• Establish groups for group work
• Introduction to strategic alliances
  • Definitions of strategic alliances
  • Strategic alliances in international business
  • The rationale for cooperation
  • Motives for forming alliances
• Group activity (using a mini case study)

Introductory Case Study

PENG, Mike (2009). General motors and Daewoo: Married, divorced, and married again. In: Global strategy. 2nd ed., OH: South-Western, Mason, 212-213.

Your tutor will introduce the activity.

Preparatory reading

Tjemkes, Vos, Buergers (2012): Chapter 1

Child, Faulkner and Tallman (2005): Chapters 1 and 5

Session 2: Rationale for forming alliance

• What can you gain for cooperation?
• Why to ally?
• What is needed for companies to succeed?
• Theory – governance mode rationale
  • Resource-based view
  • Transaction cost theory
  • Market-power theory
  • Game theory

Group project – Apple and IBM – Group 1

Research on Apple and IBM – and their alliance. Present key information on both companies and their alliance.

• Who are they?
• Why did they ally?
• Does it make sense?

Focus especially on the logic behind alliance. You will be allocated a 10 minutes slot for the presentation. In another 10 minutes, your classmates will ask questions, engage in brief discussion, and offer you supportive feedback on your presentation.

Preparatory reading

Tjemkes, Vos, Buergers (2012): Chapter 2

Child, Faulkner and Tallman (2005): Chapters 2 and 3

Session 3: Formation of strategic alliances

• The formation process
• Choosing an alliance form

Group project – Case study: The drivers for collective horizontal coopetition – Group 2

Read the case study. Prepare a presentation on the rationale for forming strategic alliance. Using examples from case study critically analyse:

• What do authors mean by coopetition?
• Explain the rationales for forming the strategic alliance – Why they ally?
• Identify the specific local factors of success for coopetition
• Apply concepts presented in the previous session

You have approximately 20 minutes. Try to engage your classmates. This presentation is not assessed, so it is a good opportunity to experiment with creative delivery (such as creative visual aids).

Group project – Imaginary company: Rationale for cooperation – Group 3

• In your group, invent an imaginary company – one company – that does not exist
  • Invent the brand
  • Invent the product / service and choose a sector of activity
  • Think about the business environment in which the company operates
• Choose the partner company to ally with. This must be an existing company. The partner company must be located in a different country (so we can discuss International Strategic Alliance). Please make sure that you are able to collect sufficient breadth and depth of background data (in English)
  • Upload background data to Shuspace (module’s Blackboard site)

Please consider your choice wisely; this is going to be our imaginary case study for the rest of module. Creativity is encouraged, but choose something that the rest of us can work with (“outer magnetic coil in Ion thruster” may not be the best product, or try not choose anything possibly offensive).

Focus of your presentation is on the rationale for forming strategic alliance. In your presentation, you are expected to

• Briefly introduce both companies
• Provide brief background for the industry
• Think about the reasons  both companies may have to work together
• How transaction costs and resource based approach to alliances can help you to shape your analysis / philosophy? Any other theory to consider?
• What activities are you going to
  • Make (internalize)
  • Buy (arm’s length transactions)
  • Ally (hybrid model – alliances)

Preparatory reading:

Tjemkes, Vos, Buergers (2012): Chapter 5

Child, Faulkner and Tallman (2005): Chapters 6

Case study (in appendix): PILSIK, Choi, ROSANNA, Garcia and COLETTE, Friedrich (2010). The drivers for collective horizontal coopetition a case study of screwcap initiatives in the international wine industry. International journal of strategic business alliances, 1 (3), 271-290.

Session 4: Conference on partner selection

• The importance of effective partner selection
• The attributes of an effective partner
• The 4Cs framework
• Strategic & Cultural fit
• Role of trust
• Role of strategic expediency

Student-led seminar – Partnering with the Unfamiliar: lessons from the case of Renault and Nissan – Group 1

Read the case study on the alliance between Renault and Nissan and respond to the following questions:

• Outline the way in which the alliance was conceived considering strategic and personal motives
• To what extent did the courting stage inform the companies about each other or about themselves?
• What were the main features of the different stages of the alliance?
• Explain why the companies were unlikely partners
• Relate to previous lectures on rationale for partner selection

Presentation and activity should engage the whole class in an open session. Group 1, please feel free to come in the classroom early, and set-up your student-led seminar, so we can begin promptly. After the break, we can begin the conference.

Group project – 4Cs Framework – Group 4

Explain, extend, and demonstrate with further research 4Cs Framework

Article: JOHN W., Medcof (1997). Why too many alliances end in divorce. Long range planning, 30 (5), 718-732.

Group project – What makes a good partner – Group 5

Explain, extend, and demonstrate with further research strategic and cultural fit. How important is trust? What do we mean by strategic expediency?

Article: BIERLY III, Paul E. and GALLAGHER, Scott (2007). Explaining alliance partner selection: Fit, trust and strategic expediency. Long range planning, 40 (2), 134-153.

Conference

There will be no formal lecture. Instead, you (all of you) will engage in a conference. Group 4 & 5 will open conference – i.e. they will take the position of key speakers. They will briefly, but critically present all relevant concepts. Time limit on presentation is 10 minutes.

All groups are allocated position that they will defend. Once both articles and concepts have been introduced, each group will briefly (2 to 4 minutes) present their point (no PowerPoint presentation). Remaining groups will ask them questions, ‘explain them how wrong they are’. Everybody should contribute to this intellectual fight, present points, answer questions, take whatever role, but contribute!

Group	Focus
1	Compatibility is the most important criteria when selecting a suitable partner
2	Capability is the most important criteria when selecting a suitable partner
3	Commitment is the most important criteria when selecting a suitable partner
4	Control is the most important criteria when selecting a suitable partner
5	Time is the most important criteria when selecting a suitable partner
6	Trust is the most important criteria when selecting a suitable partner
7	Strategic fit is the most important criteria when selecting a suitable partner

Preparatory reading:

Tjemkes, Vos, Buergers (2012): Chapter 3

Child, Faulkner and Tallman (2005): Chapter 6

Case study: KORINE, Harry, ASAKAWA, Kazuhiro and GOMEZ, Pierre–Yves (2002). Partnering with the unfamiliar: Lessons from the case of Renault and Nissan. Business strategy review, 13 (2), 41

Conference articles:

BIERLY III, Paul E. and GALLAGHER, Scott (2007). Explaining alliance partner selection: Fit, trust and strategic expediency. Long range planning, 40 (2), 134-153.

JOHN W., Medcof (1997). Why too many alliances end in divorce. Long range planning, 30 (5), 718-732.

Session 5: Guest speaker / Negotiation & Valuation

• Negotiation strategies
• Negotiation tactics
• Bargaining process
• Valuation

Guest speaker

A manager with experience in managing global strategic alliances will come and share his experience with the class. This is a unique opportunity, not only to hear about real life experience, but also to ask questions, and to go beyond textbooks and case studies.

Group 6

Come, listen, and ask questions. Remember to take notes as the following week’s activity will depend on it.

Preparatory reading:

Tjemkes, Vos, Buergers (2012): Chapter 4

Child, Faulkner and Tallman (2005): Chapter 7

Session 6: Choosing suitable partner in practice

Group project – Comment on guest speaker – Group 6

Your tasks consist of two parts:

1. Prepare and write a short text on the guest speaker’s talk– like an editorial (~200 words) in a business magazine. Send it to your tutor before the class (well in advance so copies can be made)
2. Presentation: Offer analysis / commentary, not just summary! Bring in theories, concepts, business news to support your analysis. You should relate the guest lecture with previous sessions.

We have about 15 minutes for this activity.

Student-led seminar – Partner selection for strategic alliances: case study insights from the maritime industry – Group 2

• What can we learn about partner selection from the cases in the maritime industry? Are those lessons applicable outside the maritime industry?
• What criteria seem to be important in the maritime industry? Are those relevant in other industries?
• Discuss this case using theories and concepts on partner selection as presented in previous sessions

Student-led seminar – Ben & Jerry – Group 3

• Present a clear explanation of the industry’s conditions
• Should Ben and Jerry’s commit to entering the Japanese market the following summer?
• If Ben and Jerry’s were to enter the Japanese market the following summer, should it do so with Mr Yamada or with Seven-Eleven? Why?
• Your decision should be supported by theories or concepts presented on partner selection (you may consider using grids, matrixes, …)

Preparatory reading:

Case studies:

SOLESVIK, Marina Z. and WESTHEAD, Paul (2010). Partner selection for strategic alliances: Case study insights from the maritime industry. Industrial management & data systems, 110 (6), 841-860.

HAGEN, James M. (2006). Ben & Jerry’s – Japan. In: SCHAAN, Jean-Louis and KELLY, Micheál J. (eds.). Cases in alliance management: Building successful alliances. Thousand Oaks, Calif. ; London, Sage, 104-120.

Session 7: Management of strategic alliances

• Challenges faced in alliance management
• Key tasks in alliance management
• Relational governance theory
• Conflict management
• Trust
• Alliance structure & control mechanism

Group project – Imaginary company: Partner selection & organisation of alliance – Group 7

• What might be the partners’ point of view?
• Trust – How important is it?
• How would you approach a potential partner – advice on negotiation (consider cultural issues)
• Draw a timeline (highlight key moments in life of alliance from the beginning to …)
• Choose and justify a structure for the alliance

Student-led seminar – Majestica Hotel in Shanghai – Group 4

• Consider the issues which require resolution between Majestica and CPS.
• As Majestica, where, if anywhere, would you make concessions?
• As CPS, if Majestica refuses to make concessions, will you walk away?
• Consider the specific conditions in which this alliance takes place (industry, localisation, etc.)
• What can we learn from this case study about alliance negotiation and formation process?
• Relate with theories and concepts presented in previous sessions

Preparatory reading:

Tjemkes, Vos, Buergers (2012): Chapter 6

Child, Faulkner and Tallman (2005): Chapter 10

Case study: LU, Janet and BEAMISH, Paul W. (2006). Majestica hotel in Shanghai. In: SCHAAN, Jean-Louis and KELLY, Micheál J. (eds.).Cases in alliance management: Building successful alliances. Thousand Oaks, Calif. ; London, Sage, 217-229.

Session 8: Cross-cultural management in strategic alliances

• Defining culture
• National differences in management
• International HRM practices
• Cross-cultural aspects on appraisal systems
• Achieving cultural integration

Student-led seminar – Managing dynamics through robust alliance governance structures: The case of KLM and Northwest Airlines – Group 5

• Identify and highlight the specific features of this alliance.
• What lessons can we learn from case study of KLM and Northwest Airlines?
• How does this case compare to the existing literature on alliance structure?

Preparatory reading:

Tjemkes, Vos, Buergers (2012): Chapter 12

Child, Faulkner and Tallman (2005): Chapter 15

Case studies:

DE MAN, Ard-Pieter, ROIJAKKERS, Nadine and DE GRAAUW, Henk (2010). Managing dynamics through robust alliance governance structures: The case of KLM and Northwest Airlines. European management journal, 28 (3), 171-181.

Session 9 – Learning

• Knowledge and learning
• The importance of intra-organisational learning
• Collaborative and competitive learning in strategic alliances
• Barriers to learning in strategic alliances
• The management of learning in strategic alliances

Briefing on Individual Assignment

Student-led seminar – Black & Decker-Eastern Hemisphere – Group 6

• Consider IHRM practices and relate to the case study
• Consider the main cross-cultural issues presented in the case study
• Relate to your own experience and readings about cross-cultural management
• What policy guidelines would you offer to MNCs on the question of whether to introduce “international” HRM practices into their affiliates in emerging economies?
• What would be your recommendations in managing strategic teams in strategic alliances?

Preparatory reading:

Tjemkes, Vos, Buergers (2012): Chapter 10

Child, Faulkner and Tallman (2005): Chapter 13

Case study: MORRISON, Allen and BLACK, Stewart (1998). Black & Decker-Eastern Hemisphere and the ADP Initiative. The University of Western Ontario.

Session 10 – Alliance Performance and Evolution

• Assessing alliance performance
• Patterns of alliance evolution: phases & outcomes
• Necessary conditions for alliance evolution

Student-led seminar – Knowledge transfer and international joint ventures: The case of NUMMI and General Motors – Group 7

Based on the case studies in this article

• Assess the impact of knowledge management on the IJV learning process and performance
• Relate to previous theories, concepts, and examples related to Learning in Strategic Alliances
• Suggest how knowledge should be managed in international joint ventures to ensure value creation for the parent companies

Preparatory reading:

Tjemkes, Vos, Buergers (2012): Chapter 7, 8

Child, Faulkner and Tallman (2005): Chapters 17 and 18

Case study: INKPEN, Andrew C. (2008). Knowledge transfer and international joint ventures: The case of NUMMI and General Motors. Strategic management journal, 29 (4), 447-453.

Session 11: Virtual Organisation

• What is Virtual Organisation?
• Challenges and advantages of virtual organisations
• The role of technology

We will move to PC lab, where we will experience virtual work, using on-line software.

Preparatory reading:

Child, Faulkner and Tallman (2005): Chapters 9

Learning pack

Session 1: Introduction to strategic alliances

PENG, Mike (2009). General motors and Daewoo: Married, divorced, and married again. In: Global strategy. 2nd ed., OH: South-Western, Mason, 212-213.

Session 3: Formation of strategic alliances

PILSIK, Choi, ROSANNA, Garcia and COLETTE, Friedrich (2010). The drivers for collective horizontal coopetition a case study of screwcap initiatives in the international wine industry. International journal of strategic business alliances, 1 (3), 271-290.

Session 4: Conference on partner selection

Case study: KORINE, Harry, ASAKAWA, Kazuhiro and GOMEZ, Pierre–Yves (2002). Partnering with the unfamiliar: Lessons from the case of Renault and Nissan. Business strategy review, 13 (2), 41

Conference articles:

BIERLY III, Paul E. and GALLAGHER, Scott (2007). Explaining alliance partner selection: Fit, trust and strategic expediency. Long range planning, 40 (2), 134-153.

JOHN W., Medcof (1997). Why too many alliances end in divorce. Long range planning, 30 (5), 718-732.

Session 6: Choosing suitable partner in practice

SOLESVIK, Marina Z. and WESTHEAD, Paul (2010). Partner selection for strategic alliances: Case study insights from the maritime industry. Industrial management & data systems, 110 (6), 841-860.

HAGEN, James M. (2006). Ben & Jerry’s – Japan. In: SCHAAN, Jean-Louis and KELLY, Micheál J. (eds.). Cases in alliance management: Building successful alliances. Thousand Oaks, Calif. ; London, Sage, 104-120.

Session 7: Management of strategic alliances

LU, Janet and BEAMISH, Paul W. (2006). Majestica hotel in Shanghai. In: SCHAAN, Jean-Louis and KELLY, Micheál J. (eds.).Cases in alliance management: Building successful alliances. Thousand Oaks, Calif. ; London, Sage, 217-229.

Session 8: Cross-cultural management in strategic alliances

DE MAN, Ard-Pieter, ROIJAKKERS, Nadine and DE GRAAUW, Henk (2010). Managing dynamics through robust alliance governance structures: The case of KLM and Northwest Airlines. European management journal, 28 (3), 171-181.

Session 9 – Learning

MORRISON, Allen and BLACK, Stewart (1998). Black & Decker-Eastern Hemisphere and the ADP Initiative. The University of Western Ontario.

Session 10 – Alliance Performance and Evolution

INKPEN, Andrew C. (2008). Knowledge transfer and international joint ventures: The case of NUMMI and General Motors. Strategic management journal, 29 (4), 447-453.