Faems et al. (2008) "Toward an integrative perspective on alliance governance: Connecting contract design, trust dynamics, and contract application

20 important questions on Faems et al. (2008) "Toward an integrative perspective on alliance governance: Connecting contract design, trust dynamics, and contract application

What did they disentangle (losmaken)?

  1. How contracts with a similar degree but different nature of formalization (narrow versus broad) trigger different kinds of trust dynamics (negative versus positive) at both operational and managerial levels
  2. How trust dyanmics and contract application (rigid versus flexible) coevolve over time
  3. How relational dynamics in previous transactions influence the design of contracts in subsequent transactions

Which two different theoretical perspectives have yielded insight into effective and efficient governance?

  1. The first perspective focuses on the structural design of single transactions and emphasizes the importance of contracts, or agreements in writing between two or more parties, which are perceived as legally binding, as effective and efficient governance mechanism
  2. The second perspectve focuses on relational processes within ongoing interfirm relationships and emphasizes the importance of trust for safeguarding and coordinating alliances

How do the researchers define trust?

As a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based on positive expectations of the intentions or behavior of another
  • Higher grades + faster learning
  • Never study anything twice
  • 100% sure, 100% understanding
Discover Study Smart

On which assumption does the structural perspective rest? (focusing on individual alliance transactions and relying on transaction cost theory)

On the assumption that alliance partners tend to act opportunistically

Where does the relational perspective focus on?

On interfirm relationships as they evolve over time and over transactions

What assumption does this perspective contain? (relying on social exchange theory)

The assumption that alliance partners tend to behave in a trustworthy manner, especially when a history of successful collaboration is present

How does the structural perspective identify complex contracts, or “contracts with a large number of clauses that are specified in detail”?

As safeguarding devices that mitigate the perceived risk of opportunistic behavior

What do complex contracts create?

A predictable collaborative environment that mitigates exchange hazards and facilitates coordinated action

What does the relational perspective promote?

A more relational governance strategy in which partners rely on trust to address issues of safeguarding and coordination

What is the converging understanding where trust refers to?

To positive expectations regarding the other party in a risky situation

In which way is argued that trust is a multidimensional concept?

Trust is encompassing positive expectations about a partner's ability to perform according to an agreement as well as the party's intentions to do so

For which two reasons can trust be used as an alternative governance mechanism? (according to the relational perspective)

  1. Trust provides alliance partners with the assurance that knowledge and information will be used for the greater good. Understanding that trust refers to positive expectations regarding the other party in a risky situation
  2. Under conditions of trust, members of different partner organizations are likely to engage in extensive communication and information sharing on an informal basis

For what reasons are both structural and relational perspectives on alliance governance criticized?

The structural perspective is faulted for being a contextual and ahistorical, neglecting the social context within which alliance transactions are embedded. At the same time, those who promote a more relational perspective are often criticized for having too rosy a view of human nature. In particular, they are said to overemphasize issues like relational embeddedness, ignoring transaction-situated issues like opportunism and contractual hazards.

Why are there, according to the authors, inconsistent findings in previous research?

  1. First, existing research has exclusively focused on the degree of contractual formalization, or the number of clauses that are defined in a contract.
  2. Second, these previous studies have tended to focus attention on the initial design of contracts, while ignoring how such structural elements are applied during the alliances.
  3. Third, studies’ exclusive focus on relational processes at the managerial level. As alliance governance scholars have mainly relied on managers as core informants, they have tended to treat the operational level as a black box.

How to answer the first research question: How does the content of contracts influence trust dynamics at both operational and managerial levels in alliances?

Two different kinds of contractual interface structures are outlined, which are defined as collections of contractual statements that formalize monitoring, task division, and information flows within an alliance transaction

Whereby is a narrow contractual interface structure characterized?

By a mutually exclusive task division, an absence of obligations to exchange information, and monitoring mechanisms that are mainly performance-oriented

How is a broad contractual interface structure characterized?

By an overlapping task division, the presence of obligations to exchange information, and mechanisms that provide opportunities for not only performance but also behavior monitoring

How to address the second research question: How does the application of contracts coevolve with trust dynamics at both operational and managerial levels in alliances?

They first discuss how managerial goodwill trust dynamics influence the mode of contract application and then argue that different modes of contract application trigger different trust dynamics at both operational and managerial levels, resulting in negative or positive reinforcing cycles.

What did the data suggest about that positive goodwill trust dynamics do not reduce the importance of contracts in governing alliances?

That is rather allows for a shift from rigid to a more flexible mode of contract application

What do the authors show on the basis of their findings?

  1. They provide a process-oriented view of the relationship between contracts and trust
  2. Conceptualize goodwill trust as a condition that determines how contracts are applied
  3. Define the contracting process as an incremental learning process that is sensitive to changes in relative bargaining power
  4. Point to mutual interdependence and competence trust as crucial conditions for subsequent transactions

The question on the page originate from the summary of the following study material:

  • A unique study and practice tool
  • Never study anything twice again
  • Get the grades you hope for
  • 100% sure, 100% understanding
Remember faster, study better. Scientifically proven.
Trustpilot Logo