Ibm Lenovo Alliance
Strategic Alliance —Case Study of Lenovo and IBM
By
Lili Jiang
Dissertation submitted to the University of Nottingham Business School, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in International Business
September 2007
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor Bernard Leca for his support and very help advices throughout this research. Then I would like to thank my family for giving me this opportunity to study abroad, and always believing in me and caring about me. And also, I am enormously grateful to the people work in Lenovo who were willing to participate in the electronic interview, without this, I cannot get the precious primary data to support my research. Last but not least, I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to all my good friends, especially to Yanqi and Jingren, for their help and encouragement during this period.
1
ABSTRACT
Strategic alliance gains high popularity in recent decades and has become an increasingly favorable choice for the company that intends to attain a competitive edge over other rivals so as to make a stand in the global market. Facing with the rapid globalization trend and dramatic economic development, it is almost impossible for any companies to develop individually, just as Doz and Hamel (1998) argue that in this new world, networks, coalitions, alliances, and strategic partnerships are not an option but a necessity for companies to achieve competitive success.
Till now, several economists and strategists have examined the strategic alliance in a deep and extensive way, establishing a solid theoretical foundation for later research. These various theories and principles identify motivations to the formation of alliances, how to make the alliance work, classifying the benefits brought with successful alliances, and etc. However, as stated by these authors that the failure rate of strategic alliance is quite high
By
Lili Jiang
Dissertation submitted to the University of Nottingham Business School, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in International Business
September 2007
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor Bernard Leca for his support and very help advices throughout this research. Then I would like to thank my family for giving me this opportunity to study abroad, and always believing in me and caring about me. And also, I am enormously grateful to the people work in Lenovo who were willing to participate in the electronic interview, without this, I cannot get the precious primary data to support my research. Last but not least, I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to all my good friends, especially to Yanqi and Jingren, for their help and encouragement during this period.
1
ABSTRACT
Strategic alliance gains high popularity in recent decades and has become an increasingly favorable choice for the company that intends to attain a competitive edge over other rivals so as to make a stand in the global market. Facing with the rapid globalization trend and dramatic economic development, it is almost impossible for any companies to develop individually, just as Doz and Hamel (1998) argue that in this new world, networks, coalitions, alliances, and strategic partnerships are not an option but a necessity for companies to achieve competitive success.
Till now, several economists and strategists have examined the strategic alliance in a deep and extensive way, establishing a solid theoretical foundation for later research. These various theories and principles identify motivations to the formation of alliances, how to make the alliance work, classifying the benefits brought with successful alliances, and etc. However, as stated by these authors that the failure rate of strategic alliance is quite high
References: 12 Developed from the relatively simple classification of the alliance’s forms, there comes up five forms of complex alliances by Anslinger and Jenk (2004), namely invasive, multi-function, multi-project, coopetition and networks form (see Table 2) Source: Anslinger and Jenk, 2004, p.20 13