Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates i

By Toby E. Stuart. 2000

1,997 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f6b29da11295af567b9c8d09faafbb8ca2d4520e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Signals across multiple networks: : how venture capital and alliance networks affect interorganizational collaboration. (2013, background): “In high-tech industries, being innovative is a critical determinant of a new venture’s quality and future prospects (e.g., DeCarolis & Deeds, 1999; Hagedoorn & Cloodt, 2003; Sorenson & Stuart, 2001; Stuart, 2000).”
Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures (2005, background): “…patents as a rough proxy of the size and age of the venture because of the typically high correlations between the number of patents and the size and the age of the firm (e.g. Hall & Ziedonis, 2001; Sorensen & Stuart, 2000) The use of patent data has received critique that has to be acknowledged.”
External Technology Sourcing Through Alliances or Acquisitions: An Analysis of the Application-Specific Integrated Circuits Industry (2002, background): “In studying interorganizational alliances between semiconductor producers as a means of access to technology and know-how, Stuart (2000) found that an analysis including a wide variety of alliances led to similar findings as an analysis concentrating only on certain types of alliances.”
Home-Country Networks and Foreign Expansion (2016, positive): “Social status may increase the firm’s legitimacy and desirability as an investment partner and subsequently enhance its access to local resources (Podolny, 1994; Stuart, 2000; Stuart et al., 1999).”
Network Structure, Collaborative Context, and Individual Creativity (2019, background): “Within this broad field of study, a prominent perspective suggests that network ties stimulate innovative behaviors by facilitating access to others’ ideas and knowledge (Ahuja 2000, Baum et al. 2000, Hagedoorn 2002, Stuart 2000, Borgatti and Halgin 2011).”
Networks, Propinquity, and Innovation in Knowledge-intensive Industries (2009, methodology): “Patents are a commonly used measure of the innovative intensity of firms and industries (Jaffe, 1989; Ahuja, 2000; Stuart, 2000).”
Disentangling the effects of organizational capabilities, innovation and firm size on SME sales growth (2013, positive): “, social support and increased legitimacy) resources (Nicolaou and Birley 2003; Thether and Tajar 2008; Stuart 2000).”
Exploring the Locus of Invention: The Dynamics of Network Communities and Firms' Invention Productivity (2014, methodology): “Patent applications provide an externally validated measure of invention (Griliches, 1990), and are extensively used in the studies of firms' invention productivity in technologyintensive sectors (e.g., Ahuja, 2000; Fleming, King, & Juda, 2007; Gomes-Casseres et al., 2006; Stuart, 2000).”
Walking the tight rope of coopetition: Impact of competition and cooperation intensities and balance on firm innovation performance (2014, background): “The semiconductor industry provides an ideal setting for testing the hypotheses as the industry is characterized by a prevalence of alliances and patenting within the industry (Srivastava & Gnyawali, 2011; Stuart, 2000).”
Alliance Portfolios and Firm Performance: A Study of Value Creation and Appropriation in the U.S. Software Industry (2007, positive): “For example, Stuart (2000) imputed 5-year duration for all alliances using a linear depreciating weighting for alliances with an earlier date of formation.”
Attracting cross-border venture capital: the role of a local investor (2008, background): “In our key propositions, we argue that the existence of a high-quality local investor will provide significant endorsement benefits (cf., Podolny, 1993, 1994; Stuart, 2000; Stuart, Hoang, & Hybels, 1999) for the venture, improving the cross-border investment readiness of the venture (its degree of m”