It is worth noting some limitations of this research. The data of this research were limited to one industry for examining the effects of learning in a homogeneous network context. This limits the generalizability of the findings. Furthermore, this research only begins to explore why firms learn in a business network context in the first instance and its perceived impact on a firm’s relationship value. Inevitably, from a practical viewpoint, the use of perceptual data to test the hypotheses was
necessitated primarily due to the complexity of learning phenomena in connected networks of relationships, though it has been widely documented that managers’ perceptions shape behaviour and are critical for choice of relationships in strategy making (e.g., Venkatraman and Ramanujam, 1986, 1987; Lefebvre, 1997; Spanos and Lioukas, 2001).
Finally, some research questions remain unanswered. In particular, the specific relationship governance mechanisms for knowledge externalization and
internalization in a business network context deserve future research attention. This has important implications for the firm’s learning capabilities and mobilization of network capabilities. For example, if learning to acquire knowledge and utilize network capabilities is dynamic and socially constructed through interactions in a shared network context, there is a need to understand how to manage complex chain of resource interdependencies in order to mobilize collective capabilities embedded in a network context. Given creation of new knowledge out of existing knowledge can only be accumulated through learning-by-doing (Nonaka et al., 2000), examining the link between dynamics of relationships in a network context and learning strategies through interactions can be a fruitful research area.
Table 1: Correlation Matrix 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1. Resource interdependency 1.00 2. Resource fit .21 1.00 3. Relationship connections .49 .07 1.00 4. Learning capability .04 -.05 .15 1.00 5. Relationship value .20 .16 -.03 .41 1.00 6. Resource coordination -.24 .31 -.18 .12 .03 1.00 7. No. of connected relationships .02 .07 -.14 .14 .17 .05 1.00
Table 2: Multi-Item Scales Measures and items
Resource interdependency α = .81
(3 items, 7-item Likert Scale, ``Strongly Disagree – Strongly Agree’’) Our resources are closely linked to other firms in the network.
Our relationships with firms in the network are essential to our business operation. Some of our resources are closely connected to firms in the network.
Resource fitα = .78
(3 items, 7-item Likert Scale, ``Strongly Disagree – Strongly Agree’’) Our experience and skills are closely related to connected relationships. Our important business relationships are related to our target product markets. A large proportion of our resources match our existing business relationship needs.
Relationship connectionsα = .85
(3 items, 7-item Likert Scale, ``Strongly Disagree – Strongly Agree’’)
Our directly connected relationships are characterized by intense interactions between individuals and firms.
Our important business relationships provide multiple resources in business interactions.
A large proportion of our business activities are supported by closely linked network relationships.
Learning capabilityα = .92
(4 items, 7-item Likert Scale, ``Strongly Disagree – Strongly Agree’’) We thought learning would increase our efficiency.
We expected learning to reduce our costs associated with managing relationships in the network.
We thought learning would streamline our business with other business partners in the network.
We believed that learning would reduce the cost associated with transacting business with our exchange partners.
Relationship value α = .96
(4 items, 7-item Likert Scale, ``Strongly Disagree – Strongly Agree’’)
A large proportion of our volume of business comes from relationships in the network.
We form relationships with other firms in the network to gain non-monetary revenues such as competence, market position and social rewards.
A large number of our business contracts are the result of our business relationships with firms in the network.
The profitability of our relationships to a large extent is influenced by other firms in our business networks.
Five-factor measurement model X2 (51) = 83.61 (p = .015)
Table 3: Estimated Model – Dependent Variable: Relationship Value
Independent Variables Unstandardized Coefficient T- Value
Constant 8.79 12.10** Resource interdependency .14 2.38*** Resource fit .18 2.17** Relationship connections .16 2.13*** Resource interdependency X relationship connections .06 2.64** Learning capability .35 3.21* Learning capability X resource fit .018 3.48** Resource coordination .28 2.45*** No. of relationships .39 2.67* Adjusted R2 = .31 F-ratio = 7.03*** * p < .10 ** p < .05 *** p < .01
References
Alchian, A.A. and Demsetz, H. (1972) Production, information costs and economic organisation. The American Economic Review, 62, 777-95.
Anand, B.N. and Khanna, T. (2000) Do firms learn to create value? the case of alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 295-315.
Anderson, J.C. and Narus, J.A. (1984) A model of the distributor’s perspective of distributor-manufacturer working relationships. Journal of Marketing, 48, 62-74.
Anderson, J.C., Jain, D.C. and Chintagunta, P.K. (1993) Customer value assessment in business markets: a state-of-the-practice study. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 1, 3-29.
Anderson, J.C., Håkansson, H. and Johanson, J. (1994) Dyadic business relationships within a business network context. Journal of Marketing,58, October, 1-15.
Anderson, J.C. and Narus, J.A. (1999) Business market management: understanding, creating and delivering value, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Argyris, C. and Schön, D. (1978) Organizational learning, Addison-Wesley, Reading,
MA.
Axelsson, B. and Easton, G. (eds.) (1992) Industrial networks: a new view of reality,
Routledge, London.
Barney, J. (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management,17, 99-120.
Bångens, L. and Araujo, L. (2002) The structures and processes of learning: a case study. Journal of Business Research, 55, 571-581.
Beamish, P.W. and Banks, J.C. (1987) Equity joint ventures and the theory of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 18(2), 1-16.
Bentler, P.M. (1990) Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238-246.
Biggadike, R. (1979) Corporate diversification: entry strategy and performance,
Harvard University Press, Harvard, MA.
Bollen, K.A. (1989) A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models. Sociological Methods and Research, 17, February, 303-316.
Campbell, D.T. (1955) The informant in quantitative research. American Journal of Sociology, 60, January, 339-342.
Cannon, J.P. and Perreault, W.D. Jr. (1999) Buyer-seller relationships in business markets. Journal of Marketing Research, 36, November, 439-460.
Chang, S.J. (1996) An evolutionary perspective on diversification and corporate restructuring. Strategic Management Journal, 17(8), 587-611.
Child, J. and Kieser, A. (1981) Development of organizations over time. In: Nystrom, P.C. and Starbuck, W.H. (eds.) Handbook of Organizational Design, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, 28-64.
Choi, C.J. and Lee, S.H. (1997) A knowledge-based view of cooperative
interorganizational relationships. In: Beamish, P. and Killings, J. (eds.) Cooperative strategies, European perspectives, New Lexington Press, San Francisco, CA, 33-58.
Cohen, W.M. and Levinthal, D.A. (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152.
Corno, F., Reinmoeller, P. and Nonaka, I. (1999) Knowledge creation within industrial systems. Journal of Management and Governance, 3, 379-394.
Cook, K.S. (1977) Exchange and power in networks of interorganisational relations.
Sociological Quarterly, 8, 62-82.
Cook, K.S. and Emerson R.M. (1978) Power, equity and commitment in exchange networks. American Sociological Review,43, 721-739.
Daft, R.L. and Lengel, R.H. (1986) Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554-571.
Eng, T.Y. (2004a) Does customer portfolio analysis relate to customer performance? An empirical analysis of alternative strategic perspective. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 19(1), February, 49-67.
Eng, T.Y. (2004b) Implications of the Internet for knowledge creation and
dissemination in clusters of high-technology firms. European Management Journal,
22(1), February, 87-98.
Farjoun, M. (1994) Beyond industry boundaries: human expertise, diversification and related industry group. Organization Science, 5, 185-199.
Flint, D.J., Woodruff, R.B. and Gardial, S.F. (1997) Customer value change in industrial marketing relationships. Industrial Marketing Management, 26, 163-175.
Forbis, J.L. and Mehta, N.T. (1981) Value-based strategies for industrial products.
Business Horizons, 24, 32-42.
Ford, D., Berthon, P., Brown, S., Gadde, L-E, Håkansson, H., Naude, P., Ritter, T. and Snehota, I. (2002) The business marketing course: managing in complex networks, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, London.
Ford, D. and McDowell, R. (1999) Managing business relationships by analyzing the effects and value of different actions. Industrial Marketing Management, 28, 429-442.
Foss, N.J. (1999) Networks, capabilities, and competitive advantage. Scandinavian Journal of Management,15, 1-15.
Fudenberg, D. and Tirole, J. (1984) Learning-by-doing and market performance. Bell Journal of Economics,14(2), 522-530.
Galbraith, J.R. (1977) Organization Design, Addison-Wesley, Reading MA.
Garvin, D.A. (1993) Building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review, 71,
July/August, 78-91.
Gladstein, D.L. (1984) Groups in context: a model of task group effectiveness.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, December, 499-517.
Ghemawat, P. and Spence, A.M. (1985) Learning curve spillovers and market performance. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 100(5), 839-852.
Gupta, A.K. and Govindarajan, V. (2000) Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal,21(4), 473-496.
Grant, R.M. and Baden-Fuller, C. (1995) A knowledge-based theory of inter-firm collaboration. Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, 17-21.
Grant, R.M. (1996) Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments:
organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 375-
387.
Grewal, R., Comer, J.M. and Mehta, R. (2001) An investigation into the antecedents of organisational participation in business-to-business electronic markets. Journal of Marketing, 65(3), July, 17-33.
Gyyawali, D.R. and Madhavan, R. (2001) Cooperative networks and competitive dynamics: a structural embeddedness perspective. Academy of Management Review,
26(3), 431-445.
Håkansson H. (1993) Networks as a mechanism to develop resources. In: Beiji P, Groenewegen J, Nuys O. (eds.) Networking in Dutch industries, Garant, Leven-
Apeldorn.
Håkansson, H. and Snehota, I. (eds.) (1995) Developing relationships in business networks, Routledge, London.
Håkansson, H., Havila, V. and Pedersen, A-C. (1999) Learning in networks.
Industrial Marketing Management, 28(5), 443-452.
Håkansson, H. and Waluszewski, A. (2002) Path dependence: restricting or facilitating technical development. Journal of Business Research, 55, 561-570.
Hamel, G. (1991) Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 83-103.
Hansen, L.P. (1982) Large sample properties of generalized method of moments estimators. Econometrica, 50, July, 1029-1054.
Hayek, F.A. (1945) The use of knowledge in society. American Economic Review, 35,
519-530.
Hogan, J.E. (2001) Expected relationship value: a construct, a methodology for measurement and a modeling technique. Industrial Marketing Management, 30, 339-
351.
Holm, D.B., Eriksson, K. and Johanson, J. (1999) Creating value through mutual commitment to business network relationships. Strategic Management Journal, 20,
467-486.
Hunt, S.D. and Morgan, R.M. (1995) The comparative advantage theory of competition. Journal of Marketing, 59, 1-15.
Jaccard, J., Turrisi, Robert, and Wan, C.K. (1990) Interaction effects in multiple regression, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
Jackson, B. (1985) Winning and keeping industrial customers, Lexington Books,
Lexington, KY.
Johanson, J. and Vahlne, J.-E. (1977) The internalization process of the firm: a model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies,8(1), 23-32.
Johnson, M.D. and Selnes, F. (2004) Customer portfolio management: toward a dynamic theory of exchange relationships. Journal of Marketing, 68(2), 1-17.
Jöreskog, K.G. and Sörbom, D. (1989) LISREL 7, A guide to the program and applications, second edition, SPSS Inc. Chicago.
Kakihara, M. and Sørensen, C. (2002) Exploring knowledge emergence: from chaos to organizational knowledge. Journal of Global Information Technology
Management, 5, 12-26
Kogut, B. (2000) The network as knowledge: generative rules and the emergence of structure. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 405-425.
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(2), 383-397.
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1993) Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24(4),
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1996) What firms do? coordination, identity and learning.
Organization Science, 7, 502-518.
Krapfel, R.E., Salmond, D., and Spekman, R. (1991) A strategic approach to managing buyer-seller relationships. European Journal of Marketing, 25, 22-37.
Kusunoki, K., Nonaka, I. And Nagata, A. (1998) Organizational capabilities in product development of Japanese firms: a conceptual framework and empirical findings. Organization Science, 9, 699-718.
Lall, S. (1992) Technological capabilities and industrialization. World Development,
20(2), 165-186.
Lall, S. (1993) Understanding technology development. Development Change, 24(4),
719-753.
Larson, A. (1992) Network dyads in entrepreneurial settings: a study of the
governance of exchange relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 761-774.
Lefebvre, L., Marson, R. and Lefebvre, E. (1997) The influence of prism in SMEs: the power of CEOs’ perceptions on technology policy and its organizational impacts.
Management Science, 43, 856-878.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992) Core capabilities and core rigidities: a paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 111-125.
Lieberman, M. (1984) The learning curve and pricing in the chemical processing industries. Rand Journal of Economics, 15(2), 213-228.
Loasby, B.J. (1998) The organization of capabilities. Journal of Economics Behaviour and Organization,35, 139-160.
McKee, D. (1992) An organizational learning approach to product innovation.
Journal of Product Innovation Management,9, 232-245.
McLoughlin, D. and Horan, C. (2002) Markets-as-networks: notes on a unique understanding. Journal of Business Research, 55, 535-543.
Nelson, R.R. and Winter, S.G. (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change,
Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Newman, R.G. (1988) Single-source qualification. Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 24, 10-16.
Nonaka, I. And Takeuchi, H. (1995) The knowledge-creating company, Oxford
University Press, New York.
Nonaka, I. And Konno, N. (1998) The concept of ``ba’’: building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40-54.
Nonaka, I., Toyama, R. and Nagata, A. (2000) A firm as a knowledge-creating entity: a new perspective on the theory of the firm. Industrial and Corporate Change, 9(1),
1-20.
Nooteboom, B. (1992) Towards a dynamic theory of transactions. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 6, 281-299.
Piore, M. and Sabel, C. (1984) The second industrial divide: possibilities for prosperity, Basic Books, New York.
Polanyi, M. (1966) The tacit dimension, Anchor Day Books, New York.
Porter, M.E. (1980) Competitive strategy: creating and sustaining superior performance, The Free Press, New York
Powell, W.W. (1990) Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization. In: Staw, B.M. and Cummings, L.L. (eds) Research in organizational behaviour. JAI
Press, Greenwich, CT, 12, 295-336.
Powell, W.W. and Smith-Doerr, L. (1994) Networks and economic life. In: Smelser, N.J. and Swedberg, R. (eds.) The handbook of economic sociology. University Press,
Princeton NJ, 368-401.
Prahalad, C.K. and Hamel, G. (1990) The core competencies of the corporation.
Harvard Business Review, 68, 79-91.
Schendel, D. (1996) Editor’s introduction to the 1996 winter special issue: knowledge and the firm. Strategic Management Journal, Winter Special Issue, 17, 1-4.
Selnes, F. and Sallis, J. (2003) Promoting relationship learning. Journal of Marketing,
67(3), 80-95.
Senge, P.M. (1990) The fifth discipline. Doubleday, New York.
Senker, J. and Faulkner, W. (1996) Networks, tacit knowledge and innovation. In: Coombs, R. Richards, A., Saviotti, P. and Walsh, V. (eds.) Technological
Collaboration, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, U.K., 76-97.
Shrivastava, P. (1983) A typology of organizational learning systems. Journal of Management Studies, 20, 7-28.
Simonin, B.L. (1999) Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 595-623.
Spanos, Y.E. and Lioukas, S. (2001) An examination into the causal logic of rent generation: contrasting Porter’s competitive strategy framework and the resource- based perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 907-934.
Spence, A.M. (1981) The learning curve and competition. Bell Journal of Economics,
Sorenson, O. (2003) Interdependence and adaptability: organizational learning and the long-term effect of integration. Management Science, 49(4), 446-463.
Stacey, R.D. (2000) The emergence of knowledge in organizations. Emergence, 2(4),
23-39.
Suchman, L. (1987) Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, L.E. (1990) Firm capabilities, resources and the concept of strategy: four paradigms of strategic management. CCC Working Paper,
No. 90-98.
Tomassini, M. (1991) L’apprendimento organizzativo, Kybernetes, 42 Gennaio-
Febbraio.
Thompson, J.D. (1967) Organizations in action, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Tushman, M.L. and Nadler, D.A. (1978) Information processing as an integrating concept in organization design. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 613-624.
Van Maanen, J. and Schein, E.H. (1979) Toward a theory of organizational
socialization. In: Staw, B.M. (ed.) Research in organizational behaviour, 1. JAI Press,
Greenwich, CT, 209-264.
Von Hippel, E. (1994) Sticky information and the locus of problem solving: implications for innovation. Management Science, 40(4), 429-439.
Venkatraman, N. and Ramanujam, V. (1986) Measurement of business performance in strategy research: a comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review,
11, 801-814.
Venkatraman, N. and Ramanujam, V. (1987) Measurement of business economic performance: an examination of method convergence. Journal of Management, 13,
132-142.
Wernerfelt, B. (1984) A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-181.
White, H. (1983) Asymptotic theory of econometrics, The Academic Press, Orlando,
FL.
Wilson, D.T. and Jantrania, S. (1994) Understanding the value of a relationship. Asia- Australia Marketing Journal,2, 55-66.
Wilson, D.T. (1995) An integrated model of buyer-seller relationships. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23, 335-345.
Wind, Y. (1990) Getting a read on market-defined value. Journal of Pricing Management, 1, 5-14.
Woodruff, R.B. and Gardial, S.F. (1996) Know your customer: new approaches to customer value and satisfaction. Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge, MA.
Zander, U. and Kogut, B. (1995) Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities. Organization Science, 6(1), 76-92.
Executive summary and implications for managers and executives
The interactions of firms in business networks support learning through the exchange of information and resources. Analyzing the learning effects of adaptation and
coordination of connected network relationships on the relationship value of a firm can help firms learn from business partners and take advantage of network capabilities in a business network context.
The network perspective
Consistent with the view of networks as a way of understanding the generalized connectedness that prevails through relationships, a business network context is enacted by selective ties and relationships between autonomous actors. A business network context provides a shared context that facilitates learning in the exchange, use, development and access to organizational resources. Since firms do not develop capabilities in isolation, the relationship value of a firm connected to networks of relationships depends on interdependent resources controlled by each other through interfirm relationships.
The knowledge-based theory
The knowledge-based theory stresses the importance of human interactions in a shared space such as a business network context where the processes of learning and knowledge creation take place. The relational setting of a business network includes tacit network capabilities that are difficult-to-imitate, and hence learning in and through relationships has become the key for developing sustainable competitive advantage.
Research findings
A survey of 215 connected business relationships at nine medium-sized high-
technology companies in the southeast of England shows that learning in and through relationships as a result of interactions and resource interdependencies in networks of relationships has a positive effect on a firm’s relationship value. The effects of learning on relationship value relate positively with the extent of perceived resource interdependencies. Resource fit between firms in networks of relationships helps firms make sense of knowledge acquired in a business network context.
The research suggests that a firm’s learning capability is supported by interactions and knowledge base of a shared network context. Prior experience and established routines embedded in a shared network context serve as the platform for knowledge creation, which have a positive influence on relationship value. Co-
evolution in business relationships enables firms in a specific network context to build up incremental knowledge. The results also show that the more intense the
development and use of resources, the more opportunities for learning from counterparts.
The overall results suggest that the effects of learning on relationship value through using, accessing, adapting, combining, coordinating and developing resources in the evolution of a business network can have a positive impact on relationship value.
Managerial implications
The study provides insights into the importance of strategic commitments and decisions pertaining to the allocation of scarce organizational resources to certain relationships for the purposes of accessing, acquiring and developing tacit knowledge
in a business network context. This is in line with the incremental nature of learning and knowledge accumulation that a firm’s internal capacity is related to both prior