100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached 4.2 TrustPilot
logo-home
Essay

High quality (my grade: 8) assignment II group project for Alliances, Mergers and Networks

Rating
-
Sold
4
Pages
36
Grade
8
Uploaded on
03-11-2016
Written in
2015/2016

Assignment II for the 2015/2016 AMN course (the report, no movie). The subject of the assignment is: 'The effect of legitimacy in the alliance partner selection process in ICT SMEs'. Although your subject may differ from the one in this assignment, it is nevertheless very useful for structure, language, sources, etc. Please do not literally copy text from this assignment, as it was uploaded in a database, and your assignment will be checked against this database.

Show more Read less
Institution
Course












Whoops! We can’t load your doc right now. Try again or contact support.

Written for

Institution
Study
Course

Document information

Uploaded on
November 3, 2016
Number of pages
36
Written in
2015/2016
Type
Essay
Professor(s)
Unknown
Grade
8

Subjects

Content preview

Alliances, Mergers & Networks
“The effect of legitimacy in the alliance partn er selection process in ICT SME s”




Kasper Forch 2568174
Jeroen Huberts 2568468
Tobias Sapuletej 2563667
Max Willems 2568047
Remco Zuijdervliet 2562435

December 17th 2015
Team 1

Dr. Tjemkes, B.V.

,2

,Table of Contents
1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 5
2. Theoretical Background ....................................................................................................................... 6
2.1 Literature review ............................................................................................................................ 6
2.1.1 Alliances in the ICT sector ....................................................................................................... 6
2.1.2 Small and Medium Enterprises ............................................................................................... 7
2.1.3 Alliance partner selection and legitimacy ............................................................................... 7
2.1.4 Alliance Partner Selection Process .......................................................................................... 7
2.1.5 Legitimacy ............................................................................................................................... 8
2.1.6 Influence of Legitimacy on Comprehensive Alliance Partner Selection Process .................... 9
2.2 Managerial Implications ............................................................................................................... 12
2.3 Movie Design Decisions ............................................................................................................... 13
2.3.1. The Storyboard ..................................................................................................................... 13
2.3.2 Shooting the Scenes .............................................................................................................. 13
2.3.3 Editing.................................................................................................................................... 13
3. Method ............................................................................................................................................... 14
3.1 Data Collection ............................................................................................................................. 14
3.2 Operational Definitions ................................................................................................................ 15
3.3 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 15
4. Results ................................................................................................................................................ 16
4.1 Case Company X ........................................................................................................................... 16
4.1.1 Commercial Director X .......................................................................................................... 16
4.1.2 Technical Director Company X .............................................................................................. 16
4.2 Case Company Y ........................................................................................................................... 17
4.2.1 Managing Director Company Y ............................................................................................. 17
4.2.2 Project Manager Company Y................................................................................................. 17
4.3 Cross Case Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 18
4.4 Results of Feedback Round .......................................................................................................... 20
4.4.1 Case 1: Sogeti B.V. ................................................................................................................. 20
4.4.2 Case 2: Polytrading B.V. ........................................................................................................ 20
4.4.3 Case 3: ................................................................................................................................... 20
4.4.4 Case 4: ................................................................................................................................... 20
5. Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................... 21
6. References .......................................................................................................................................... 22


3

,Appendix I CAPSP Description ................................................................................................................ 24
Appendix II Results ................................................................................................................................. 25
Appendix III Feedback Round Results .................................................................................................... 29
Appendix IV Storyboard ......................................................................................................................... 30
Appendix V Final Cut Pro X ..................................................................................................................... 33




4

, 1. Introduction
Alliances are the cornerstone of competitive advantage for many of today’s firms, and enable them
to achieve objectives that are otherwise hard to realize. In this research, an alliance is defined as a
voluntary, long-term, contractual relationship between two or more autonomous and independent
organizations, designed to achieve mutual and individual objectives. Firms thus enter alliances to
access valuable and complementary resources they do not already possess (Tjemkes, Vos & Burgers,
2012). Alliances are especially present in the Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
sector, since this sector is characterized by high interdependence between organizations. Therefore,
the focus of this paper is on ICT companies, sized from small to medium (SME), and how they achieve
objectives through alliances.

However, in order to reach these objectives, the issue arises of how to identify and select a suitable
partner that can help to realize objectives. Alliance failure often results when managers fail to
complete their decision-making tasks for crucial development stages such as alliance partner
selection (Tjemkes, Vos & Burgers, 2012). In order to do this successfully, the alliance partner
selection process (APSP) is introduced. Within literature, two different APSPs are found, and both of
these APSPs consist out of multiple steps that lead to the selection of the best fitting alliance partner
(Tjemkes, Vos, & Burgers, 2012; Holmberg & Cummings, 2009). We combine these two diverse
processes in order to develop a more complete, comprehensive alliance partner selection process
(CAPSP).

In the CAPSP, the SME’s alliance manager’s view can have a great impact on whether an alliance is
forged, whereas in large firms, a single person’s view is less important (Dickson & Weaver, 2011).
However, it is important that alliance partners are selected carefully because of threats of entering
an alliance are loss of firm-specific information, opportunistic behavior of the partner firm and the
risk of becoming dependent (Hamel, 1991; Lohrke, Kreiser & Weaver, 2006; Tjemkes, Vos & Burgers,
2012). Legitimacy may affect the view of an owner or manager in an ICT SME. Legitimacy can be
defined as “a generalized perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable,
proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and
definitions” (Suchman, 1995, p. 574).

Since legitimacy may affect the view of an owner or manager, the question arises to what degree it
will influence their choices in the CAPSP, since proper completion of this process may come with
advantages that increase the likelihood of alliance success. Existing literature shows that legitimacy
plays a role in multiple stages of the alliance development process. However, we argue that it is
especially important in the CAPSP, because legitimacy may determine whether a partner is selected.
In addition, we find that the literature does not yet provide a model of alliance partner selection in
which the effect of legitimacy is shown. Therefore, our objective is to bridge this gap and introduce a
model where the effect of legitimacy on the selection of an alliance partner is clear.

In order to do so, this paper starts with discussing existing literature. In the theoretical background,
we build and validate a conceptual model, discuss its managerial implications, and discuss the
decisions we make for making an instructional movie for managers to use in practice. Second, we
elaborate upon the methods adopted for this research. Third, we present results of the interviews.
We end this report with a conclusion. The research question leading us is as follows: “How does
legitimacy affect the alliance partner selection processes in IT SME’s?”.

5

Get to know the seller

Seller avatar
Reputation scores are based on the amount of documents a seller has sold for a fee and the reviews they have received for those documents. There are three levels: Bronze, Silver and Gold. The better the reputation, the more your can rely on the quality of the sellers work.
kasperforch Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Follow You need to be logged in order to follow users or courses
Sold
196
Member since
9 year
Number of followers
106
Documents
47
Last sold
1 month ago

3.7

47 reviews

5
10
4
24
3
6
2
2
1
5

Recently viewed by you

Why students choose Stuvia

Created by fellow students, verified by reviews

Quality you can trust: written by students who passed their tests and reviewed by others who've used these notes.

Didn't get what you expected? Choose another document

No worries! You can instantly pick a different document that better fits what you're looking for.

Pay as you like, start learning right away

No subscription, no commitments. Pay the way you're used to via credit card and download your PDF document instantly.

Student with book image

“Bought, downloaded, and aced it. It really can be that simple.”

Alisha Student

Frequently asked questions