Why Strategic Alliances Fail Introduction The lack of success the majority of global alliances experience illustrates how difficult it is to merge different organizational cultures that are predicated on completely different perceptions of opportunity, risk and growth. The fundamental differences in perception and prioritization of opportunity, risk and the perception of time itself are based on cultural variations at the national and regional level. With organizational cultures being often based on national and regional differences, creating strategic alliances that are resilient in the face of increasing global economic turbulence is daunting. Assessing and Mitigating Cultural Conflict Lack of cultural congruency is clearly the leading cause of strategic alliance failure. The lack of congruence on cultural dimensions leads to a breakdown in trust across each of the organizations involved in the strategic alliance, with communication often the first causality (Leisen, Lilly, Winsor, 2002). At the most fundamental level, each participant or partner in a global strategic alliance has widely varying expectations and assumptions, perceptions of risk, opportunities, threats and expectations of long-term growth. The variances between cultures can often be explained by the differences in the dimensions of each culture. One of the more useful constructs or frameworks used for analyzing these differences is the Hofstede Model of Cultural Dimensions (Hofstede, 1983). This
The modern business culture must, by necessity, be fluid if it is to succeed globally. There is interaction between employees, between stakeholders, and between global environments. In fact, this environment is formed through multiple interactions between the strengths, weaknesses and opportunities presented through the organization's unique culture. Since truly the one constant in business is change, it is how we adapt to such changes; as individuals and part of groups, that helps manifest behaviors as he culture evolves. Indeed, many believe that one of the templates that make up this fluidity is the concept, even more popular in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, of mergers and acquisitions (Horibe, 2001).
Strategic alliance is an agreement between two or more organizations to cooperate in a detailed business activity, so that each get benefited from the strengths of one an other, and gains competitive advantage. The formation of strategic alliances has been seen as a comeback to globalization and increasing doubt and difficulty in the business environment. Strategic alliances occupy the sharing of knowledge and expertise between partners as well as the reduction of risk and costs in areas such as relationships with suppliers and the development of new products and technologies. strategic alliance is sometimes equated with a joint venture, but an alliance may involve competitors, and generally has a shorter life span. Strategic partnership is a closely related concept. This article analyzes definition of strategic alliance, its benefits, types, process of formation, and provides a few cases studies of strategic alliances. This paper tries to synthesize the scope and role of marketing functions in the determination of effectiveness of strategic alliances. Several propositions from a marketing perspective about the analysis of alliance process are formulated. On the basis of the propositions, a framework is developed for future research
According to our textbook, global sourcing is the practice of purchasing goods and services from the around the world wherever it is least costly (Pg 82). A strategic alliance is a partnership between two entities in which they both share their
For any international organization, understanding cultural differences is very significant in the global context. The article analyzes the role and impact of the cultural perspective when dealing with conflict in the global context. “What seems like a perfectly reasonable approach in one culture may seem ridiculous, disrespectful, inefficient, or unfair to managers from other cultures. Japanese and German managers may be uneasy with conflict resolution preferences that differ from their own.” (Adams, p.110.) The understanding that organizational and global cultures vary results in the connected research supported in several businesses in diverse fields.
This paper contributes to the global strategy literature by outlining the four debates that we believe to be frontier issues with which the field will engage in the years to come. Its purpose is to review four current debates taking place in the field of global strategic management and international business. The review provides in-depth coverage of the four major global strategic management debates, comprising: (1) cultural vs institutional distance; (2) global vs regional geographic diversification; (3) convergence vs divergence in corporate governance, and (4)
the success of the joint venture depends upon the compatibility of the partners and this compatibility involves culture as well. Culpan (2002) suggests that each partner in the joint venture brings its own culture and if these cultures are not
"Culture is more often a source of conflict than of synergy. Cultural differences are nuisance at best and often a disaster." - Dr. Geert Hofstede
Another value that is very important in Chinese culture is trust. Trust lies at the heart of successful long-term intercultural business relationships. Therefore, Oldtown employee must be prepared in gaining the Chinese Manager in China trust to deal with business. In China, the cross-cultural business relationships, trust plays an indispensable role since partners from different cultures don’t always have the same values or assumptions about how business works. When trust is developed, partners can navigate difficult issues over time by fostering a candid exchange of ideas, issues and agendas. Developing trust can significantly reduce what Westerners often complain of in their dealings with Chinese counterparts: unpredictable behavior and a lack of transparency. As a Chinese executive at Google put it, “In China, your success depends on how well a person trusts you.”
. Geert Hofstede (1980) describes culture as, ‘a source of conflict rather than synergy. Cultural differences are a nuisance at best and often a disaster’. Justin Paul (2011) also supports this view stating that, human beings tend to have an instinct ‘deep inside’ that all human beings are the same. Therefore, if one goes into another country and makes decisions based on how one operates in one’s home country-‘the chances are that he or she will make some very bad decisions’ (Paul 2011). Hence, different types of factors need to be understood to ensure that you and the business are readily available to adapt to any change in culture or environment, this will be shown by a number of examples involving companies that have successfully set up business and others that have failed significantly all due to the lack of understanding of CCM.
With the unstoppable trend of globalisation, it becomes extremely significant for international businesses to have a thorough understanding of different cultures. Hofstede (1980, pp. 21-23) defines culture as ‘the collective programming of the mind distinguishing the members of one group or category of people from another’. This essay examines Hofstede’s cultural framework and suggests that Hofstede’s cultural framework is an outstanding and authoritative tool to analyze culture differences. In this essay, cultural frameworks will be discussed firstly, following by a discussion of my cultural scores and background. Finally, recommendations on cross-cultural management between China and Australia will be provided.
First, cultural difference can pose great problems in communication and collaboration in a joint venture. In this case, an attempt to attract a strategic investor had failed primarily because of lack of cultural sensitivity by the U.S.
Geert Hofstede is an influential Dutch researcher in the fields of organizational studies and more concretely organizational culture, also cultural economics and management. He is a well-known pioneer in his research of cross-cultural groups and organizations and played a major role in developing a systematic framework for assessing and differentiating national cultures and organizational cultures. His studies demonstrated that there are national and regional cultural groups that influence behavior of societies and organizations.
For the international business, the connection between culture and competitive advantage is important for two reasons. First, the connection suggests which countries are likely to produce the most viable competitors. Second, the connection between culture and competitive advantage has important implications for the choice of countries in which to locate production facilities and do business.
INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT: CULTURE, STRATEGY, AND BEHAVIOR, EIGHTH EDITION Published by McGraw-Hill, a business unit of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1221 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10020. Copyright © 2012 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Previous editions © 2009, 2006, and 2003. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written consent of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., including, but not limited
According to the works of Chaney & Martin (2011) and Harris & Moran (2000), they agree that international management skills are in need for the increasing scope of international trades and investments. A large number of multinational companies have expanded their businesses through both developed and developing countries. Some of the business invest directly and others are partnership arrangements and strategic alliances with domestic operations. Their studies show that independent entrepreneurs and small businesses have started investing and competing in the world marketplace. Thus, to acquire corporations’ objectives, there is exceedingly a necessity for the development of strategic framework for cross-cultural management and communication in the current competitive global market. Chaney & Martin (2011) also noted that, cultural awareness and cultural differences are strongly important to the multinational corporations’ success. A good understanding of the culture where business is implemented can make international managers productive and effective.