What is the view of Gary Hamel, Yves Doz, and C.K. Prahalad (‘Collaborate with your competitors – and win’, 1989, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 7.1) on cooperation?
Cooperation is the best mechanism for preventing the hollowing out of competitors
Competition is collaboration in a different form
Cooperation has no limits; it has no limits to where trust can go
Competition in the environment is paramount, and cooperation is merely an opportunistic move, in the overall competitive game.
According to Hamel, Doz, and Prahalad (‘Collaborate with your competitors – and win’, 1989, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 7.1), what is the main difference between Western and Eastern approaches to cooperation?
Eastern companies enter alliances with Western companies in order to enter protected markets, whereas Western companies enter alliances with Eastern companies to obtain market specific information
Western companies often enter alliances to avoid costs, whereas Eastern companies enter alliances to enhance their capabilities
Eastern companies often enter alliances to avoid costs, whereas Western companies enter alliances to enhance their capabilities
Western companies enter alliances with Eastern companies in order to enter protected markets, where as Eastern companies enter alliances with Western companies to obtain market specific information.
According to Hamel, Doz, and Prahalad (‘Collaborate with your competitors – and win’, 1989, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 7.1), there are three conditions where mutual gain can occur for partners in an alliance. Which of the following is NOT one of those conditions?
Each partner believes it can learn from the other, whilst protecting its proprietary skills
The size and power of both partners is modest, compared to the industry leader
Both partners work on the principal that contracts, not trust, should govern the relationship
The partners competitive goals diverge, but their strategic goals converge.
Which lessons should Hamel, Doz, and Prahalad (‘Collaborate with your competitors – and win’, 1989, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 7.1) have learnt from their research?
Ambiguity, in alliance agreements, is always used to constrain access to the partners’ skills and technologies
The challenge for Western companies is to become better learners
Collaboration inevitably leads to surrender
Management should become obsessed with the ownership structure of the alliance.
According to Hamel, Doz, and Prahalad (‘Collaborate with your competitors – and win’, 1989, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 7.1), what should be the ultimate goal for a company, when joining in an alliance?
To emerge from the alliance more competitive than when it entered it
To develop dependent relationships with other partners
To acquire and internalize new technology and skills of the other partner
To develop sophisticated outsourcing arrangements.
According to Hamel, Doz, and Prahalad (‘Collaborate with your competitors – and win’, 1989, in De Wit & Meyer, 2010, Reading 7.1), the partners who use alliances to close a specific skills gap, and achieve a short-term gain, may find themselves in a dependency spiral. What is the meaning of this term?
When both partners are equally intent on short-term goals and on internalizing the other’s skills, distrust and conflict can spoil the alliance
The partner who contributes fewer and fewer distinctive skills. to keep the other partner interested. must reveal more and more of its internal operations
To regain competitiveness quickly and with minimum effort, in a local market, the overseas partners (usually Western companies) are becoming more and more dependent on their local (Asian) partners
If a partner’s contribution is easily interpreted and easily absorbed, that company must take steps to limit transparency. However, in this way it can circumscribe the other partner’s opportunities to learn and put it in a dependency spiral.