5.2. Post-hoc analysis
To further assess the robustness of the model, the PROCESS macro was used to analyse the two sub-dimensions of SDG performance, namely social innovation performance and eco-innovation performance.
Specifically, Regression Models 1 to 5 in Table 8 provided further support for H1 to H5 using social innovation performance as the dependent variable. Furthermore, analysing the conditional values under Mplus for low (-1 standard deviation), mean, and high (+1 standard deviation) values of strategic flexibility offered finer-grained insights into this interaction effect (Table 9 and Table 10).
[Insert Table 8, Table 9, and Table 10 here]
Similarly, Regression Models 1 to 5 in Table 11 further support H1 to H5 using eco-innovation performance as dependent variable. Moreover, analysing the conditional values under Mplus for low (-1 standard deviation), mean, and high (+1 standard deviation) values of strategic flexibility provided finer-grained insights into this interaction effect (Table 12 and Table 13).
[Insert Table 11, 12 and 13 here]
5.3. Robustness check
We also run the analysis to test the strategic flexibility as a potential mediator. The results of Table 14 show that the indirect effect of strategic flexibility is not significant (b = -0.00, p>0.05, Table 14). Hence, the strategic flexibility as a potential mediator is unlikely to occur and potential mediation-moderation does not exist in this study.
[Insert Table 14]
6. Discussion
Strategic alliances are crucial for sustainable development, yet managing these partnerships effectively to maximise their benefits presents a complex challenge. Scholars often debate the optimal management of strategic alliances to enhance their efficiency and contribution to SDGs (e.g., Al-Tabbaa et al., 2023; Bouncken et al., 2022; Bouncken et al., 2020; Foroudi et al., 2023; Vurro et al., 2024). This study investigates whether a firm's ability to manage alliances can aid its pursuit of SDGs, particularly through the lens of business model innovation. Our findings indicate that alliance management capabilities directly enhance performance towards SDG 8 and SDG 12, and this relationship is further mediated by business model innovation. Additionally, strategic flexibility plays a moderating role, influencing both the direct impact of alliance management capabilities on business model innovation and the mediated effect on SDG performance. This research contributes to the ongoing discussion, highlighted by Gillani et al. (2023), van Gestel et al. (2024) and Vurro et al. (2024), on how alliance management capabilities can foster sustainable development within dynamic environments (Arndt et al., 2022).
Theoretical contributions
Our study extends the relational view theory by revealing the pivotal role of alliance management capabilities in maintaining quality employment and catalysing resource efficiency to achieve SDGs (Martinez et al., 2019). We deepen the understanding of how inter-organisational collaboration can effectively contribute to sustainability transitions and enrich the discourse on the antecedents of SDG achievement as a competitive advantage within firms. This responds to the call by Jiang et al. (2021) for more nuance studies regarding the interplay between organisational strategies and sustainable outcomes. At this same time, this clarifies that resources acquired from partnerships can generate competitive advantages more effectively when they are well-managed and integrated. In line with the prior research which has established the importance of alliances in sustainability (Lozano, 2007; Quintana-García et al., 2021; Riegler et al., 2023; Schneider & Clauß, 2020; Williams & Blasberg, 2022), our study advances the relationship by empirically validating how alliance management capabilities enhance the efforts placing in alliances. This focus on internal capabilities shifts the narrative from simply examining the roles of external partners to a deeper exploration of how alliance management capabilities crucially influence the success of sustainability-oriented alliances. Moreover, we reveal that business model innovation serves as a critical mediator between alliance management capabilities and SDG performance, while strategic flexibility enhances the impact of these capabilities on business model innovation and, ultimately, on SDG performance. This underscores the dynamic interplay between strategic flexibility and business model innovation in aiding organisations to meet their sustainability goals, particularly SDGs 8 and 12. Our findings offer a more comprehensive model that incorporates internal organisational attributes into the broader narrative of sustainability transitions, filling a notable gap in the literature by melding strategic management theory with sustainability research. Consequently, this opens up a new interdisciplinary avenue for scholarly investigation that explores the synergies between internal capabilities and external collaborations in driving sustainability goals. Through this, our study provides valuable strategies for firms aiming to optimise alliances for sustainable growth and deepens insights into how relational rents are generated through strategic partnerships.
Second, our research accentuates the importance of business model adjustments to facilitate sustainability transition. While existing literature (Pedersen et al., 2018; Schneider & Clauß, 2020; Spieth et al., 2019) establishes the transformative role of business model innovation within organisations, our work goes further by empirically demonstrating its critical role in leveraging the opportunities that come from alliances. This is pivotal because business models are not static but dynamic frameworks that evolve over time and in response to varied externalities (Arndt, 2019). We show that business model innovation is not merely an optional but a crucial mechanism for maintaining quality employment and resource efficiency within firms. It serves as a conduit that helps firms not only adapt to but capitalize on the beneficial aspects of their alliances, thereby making a more effective and impactful stride toward achieving SDG 8 and SDG 12. We argue that business model innovation can act as the operational ‘glue’ that integrates the advantages of alliances into a firm’s sustainability strategy. This view significantly enhances our understanding of the operational intricacies involved in achieving a sustainable transition and offers a nuanced perspective that integrates external alliance opportunities with internal transformative strategies.
其次,我們的研究強調了商業模式調整對促進可持續發展轉型的重要性。雖然現有文獻(Pedersen et al., 2018;Schneider & Clauß,2020 年;Spieth et al., 2019)確立了商業模式創新在組織內的變革作用,我們的工作通過實證證明其在利用聯盟帶來的機會方面的關鍵作用而走得更遠。這一點至關重要,因為商業模式不是靜態的,而是動態的框架,它們會隨著時間的推移而發展,並回應不同的外部因素(Arndt,2019)。我們表明,商業模式創新不僅僅是一種可選,而是維持公司內部優質就業和資源效率的重要機制。它作為一個管道,説明公司不僅適應而且利用其聯盟的有益方面,從而朝著實現 SDG 8 和 SDG 12 邁出更有效和有影響力的一步。我們認為,商業模式創新可以充當運營「膠水」,將聯盟的優勢整合到公司的可持續發展戰略中。這一觀點顯著增強了我們對實現可持續轉型所涉及的運營複雜性的理解,並提供了一個微妙的視角,將外部聯盟機會與內部轉型戰略相結合。
Third, our study makes a significant contribution to the emerging discussion on collaborative business model innovation (Bouncken & Fredrich, 2016a; Spieth et al., 2021; Velu, 2015). While existing research confirms the benefits of external knowledge and partnerships in the process of business model innovation, our study advances this understanding by emphasizing the necessity of internal capabilities for managing these external relationships effectively. We empirically establish that merely having access to external knowledge is not enough; firms must possess the capabilities to manage their alliances to extract maximum value. This insight complements and extends the existing literature on the capabilities required for business model innovation (Clauss et al., 2021; Hock-Doepgen et al., 2020; Mezger, 2014; Teece, 2018) by introducing the notion of alliance management capability as a crucial factor. This integration suggests that future research in business model innovation needs to consider both external collaborative factors and internal management capabilities to provide a more nuanced understanding of how firms can leverage business model innovation for sustainable outcomes.
第三,我們的研究對關於協作商業模式創新的 新興討論做出了重大貢獻(Bouncken & Fredrich,2016a; Spieth et al., 2021; Velu,2015 年)。雖然現有研究證實了外部知識和合作夥伴關係在商業模式創新過程中的好處,但我們的研究通過強調有效管理這些外部關係的內部能力的必要性來推進這種理解。我們憑實證確定,僅僅獲得外部知識是不夠的;公司必須具備 管理其聯盟以獲取最大價值的能力。這一見解補充和擴展了關於商業模式創新所需能力的現有文獻(Clauss et al., 2021;Hock-Doepgen et al., 2020;Mezger,2014 年;Teece,2018 年),通過將聯盟管理能力的概念作為一個關鍵因素引入。這種整合表明,未來的商業模式創新研究需要同時考慮外部協作因素和內部管理能力,以更細緻地理解公司如何利用商業模式創新實現可持續成果。
Last, our study advances the theoretical understanding of the role of strategic flexibility by demonstrating its moderating impact on the relationship between alliance management capability, business model innovation, and SDG performance. Traditional discussions have oscillated around whether strategic flexibility serves as an antecedent, a consequence, or a moderator in various contexts, including business model innovation. Our findings contribute to resolving this debate by providing empirical evidence that strategic flexibility acts as a significant moderating factor. Moreover, we enrich this debate by situating it within the context of SDG performance, an area where the role of strategic flexibility has been less explored. Building on the relational view (Dyer & Singh, 1998; Dyer, Singh, & Hesterly, 2018), our study posits that strategic flexibility can serve as an effective buffer mechanism in inter-organisational relationships. It does so by enabling firms to adjust their formal and informal knowledge-exchange mechanisms dynamically, which in turn allows them to maximize relational rents. These rents are crucial in that they provide a competitive edge in achieving better SDG performance. Our work suggests that strategic flexibility not only aids in internal capability development—such as alliance management capability—but also magnifies the returns from these capabilities by optimizing their application in varied contextual settings, in this case, SDG performance. Additionally, strategic flexibility enhances a firm’s ability to respond to volatile external conditions, such as market disruptions and/or regulatory changes, which are particularly pertinent when working towards SDGs that are impacted by a multitude of complex factors. Thus, in essence, strategic flexibility offers a dual advantage: it acts as a situational enhancer that maximizes the benefits derived from alliance management capability and business model innovation and serves as a resilience mechanism that helps firms navigate the complex and often volatile pathway to achieving SDGs.
最後,我們的研究通過證明戰略靈活性對聯盟管理能力、商業模式創新和SDG績效之間關係的調節影響,推進了對戰略靈活性作用的理論理解。傳統討論一直圍繞著戰略靈活性在各種情況下(包括商業模式創新)是前因、結果還是調節因素而搖擺不定。我們的研究結果通過提供經驗證據證明戰略靈活性是一個重要的調節因素,從而有助於解決這一爭論。此外,我們通過將 SDG 績效置於 SDG 績效的背景下來豐富這一辯論,而戰略靈活性的作用在該領域的作用尚未得到充分探索。建立在關係觀點之上(Dyer & Singh,1998;Dyer, Singh, & Hesterly, 2018),我們的研究假設戰略靈活性可以作為組織間關係中的有效緩衝機制。它通過使公司能夠動態地調整其正式和非正式的知識交流機制來實現這一點,這反過來又使它們能夠最大化關係租金。這些租金至關重要,因為它們為實現更好的可持續發展目標提供了競爭優勢。我們的研究表明,戰略靈活性不僅有助於內部能力發展(例如聯盟管理能力),還可以通過在各種背景下優化其應用(在本例中為 SDG 績效)來放大這些能力的回報。此外,戰略靈活性增強了公司應對波動的外部條件的能力,例如市場中斷和/或監管變化,這在努力實現受眾多複雜因素影響的可持續發展目標時尤為重要。 因此,從本質上講,戰略靈活性具有雙重優勢:它充當情境增強器,最大限度地利用聯盟管理能力和商業模式創新帶來的好處,並作為一種彈性機制,説明公司駕馭複雜且往往不穩定的實現可持續發展目標的道路。
Managerial Implication
The first is to invest in alliance management capability. Our findings underscore the importance of developing and leveraging alliance management capabilities for enhancing SDG performance. Firms should not just seek partnerships but invest in the internal resources and mechanisms required to manage these alliances effectively. This entails setting up dedicated teams or units responsible for alliance governance, conflict resolution, and knowledge exchange. It is not just about forming partnerships; it is about managing them in a way that aligns with sustainability objectives. Through effective alliance management, firms can maximise the relational rents and collaborative advantages that come from interorganisational cooperation, thereby directly enhancing their contributions to the SDGs.
The second is to prioritise business model innovation. Our research suggests that business model innovation serves as a vital mediator in the relationship between alliance management capability and SDG performance. Managers should, therefore, be proactive in adapting their business models to integrate sustainability objectives and leverage external inputs from alliances. This could involve the redesign of products or services, rethinking supply chains, or creating new customer engagement strategies that align with SDGs. It is about using the innovative capabilities of the organisation, honed through alliances, to deliver meaningful and sustainable impact. Investing in R&D and establishing cross-functional teams could be steps in facilitating this type of innovation.
The third is to nurture strategic flexibility. Strategic flexibility emerges as a key moderating factor that can enhance the effectiveness of both alliance management capability and business model innovation in contributing to SDG performance. Managers should view strategic flexibility not merely as a contingency plan but as an inherent organisational capability. This means embedding flexibility into decision-making processes, organisational culture, and even contractual terms in alliances. In a rapidly changing world beset with challenges ranging from market volatility to regulatory shifts, strategic flexibility enables firms to pivot quickly, adapting both their internal strategies and external alliances to meet emerging sustainability goals. By doing so, firms can optimize their alliance portfolios and adapt their business models in response to evolving sustainability challenges, thus maximizing their SDG performance.
Furthermore, in the light of the strengthening effect of strategic flexibility on the relationship between business model innovation and SDG performance, we advise that strategic flexibility is one key enabling condition for the effect of business model innovation on SDG performance. Business model innovation is in and of itself a contributing factor to a firm’s competitive advantage. At the same time, the pursuit of SDG performance demands the firm to be innovative in its business model so that the firm can fully capitalize on its innovative business model, apart from economic rents. Strategic flexibility plays a key role in helping the firm achieve SDG performance for long-term sustainability, in addition to short-term financial gains, given the firm’s innovative business model.
Notwithstanding the above key takeaways and noteworthy contributions, this study remains limited in several ways. First, this study is limited to evidence from large firms in Taiwan and thus future research should seek alternative evidence from small firms and other developing and developed countries to either reaffirm or refute the findings herein this study. Second, this study only considered alliance management capability, business model innovation, and strategic flexibility as a macro construct and thus future research can explore the specific dimensions of these constructs (e.g., the reactive versus proactive and the offensive versus defensive manifestations of strategic flexibility; Brozovic, 2018) to provide finer-grained insights that would extend the richness of the findings herein this study.
References
Abdelkafi, N., & Täuscher, K. (2016). Business models for sustainability from a system dynamics perspective. Organization & Environment, 29(1), 74-96.
Al Lawati, H., & Hussainey, K. (2022). Does sustainable development goals disclosure affect corporate financial performance? Sustainability, 14(13), 7815.
Amit, R., & Zott, C. J. S. E. J. (2015). Crafting business architecture: The antecedents of business model design. 9(4), 331-350.
Anand, B. N., & Khanna, T. 2000. Do firms learn to create value? The case of alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 295-315
Arndt, F. (2019). Dynamic capabilities: A retrospective, state-of-the-art and future research agenda. Journal of Management & Organization, 1-4.
Arndt, F., Galvin, P., Jansen, R. J. G., Lucas, G. J. M. & Su, P. (2022). Dynamic capabilities: New ideas, microfoundations, and criticism. Journal of Management & Organization, 28, 423-428.
Ahsan, M., Adomako, S., Donbesuur, F., & Mole, K. F. (2023). Entrepreneurial passion and product innovation intensity in new ventures: mediating effects of exploration and exploitation activities. British Journal of Management, 34(2), 849-872.
Bock, A. J., Opsahl, T., George, G., & Gann, D. M. (2012). The effects of culture and structure on strategic flexibility during business model innovation. Journal of Management Studies, 49(2), 279-305.
Bocken, N. M. P., Short, S. W., Rana, P., & Evans, S. (2014). A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 42-56.
Bolton, R., & Hannon, M. (2016). Governing sustainability transitions through business model innovation: Towards a systems understanding. Research Policy, 45(9), 1731-1742.
Bouncken, R. B., & Fredrich, V. (2016). Business model innovation in alliances: Successful configurations. Journal of Business Research, 69(9), 3584-3590.
Bouncken, R. B. Fredrich, V. & Gudergan, S. (2022). Alliance management and innovation under uncertainty. Journal of Management & Organization, 28, 549- 563.
Bouncken, R. B. Fredrich, V., Kraus, S. & Ritala, P. (2020). Innovation alliances: Balancing value creation dynamics, competitive intensity and market overlap. Journal of Business Research, 112, 240-247.
Bouncken, R. B., Fredrich, V. & Gudergan, S. (2022). Alliance management and innovation under uncertainty. Journal of Management & Organization, 28, 540-563.
Bradley, S. W., Kim, P. H., Klein, P. G., McMullen, J. S., & Wennberg, K. (2021). Policy for innovative entrepreneurship: Institutions, interventions, and societal challenges. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 15(2), 167-184.
Breugst, N., A. Domurath, H. Patzelt and A. Klaukien (2012). Perceptions of entrepreneurial passion and employees’ commitment to entrepreneurial ventures’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36, pp. 171–192.
Brozovic, D. (2018). Strategic flexibility: A review of the literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(1), 3-31.
Buckley, P. J., Glaister, K. W., Klijn, E., & Tan, H. (2009). Knowledge accession and knowledge acquisition in strategic alliances: The impact of supplementary and complementary dimensions. British Journal of Management, 20(4), 598-609.
Casadesus-Masanell, R., & Ricart, J. E. (2010). From strategy to business models and onto tactics. Long Range Planning, 43(2), 195-215.
Casadesus-Masanell, R., & Ricart, J. E. (2010).從戰略到商業模式,再到戰術。長期規劃,43(2),195-215。
Chams, N. & Garcia-Blandon, J. (2019). On the importance of sustainable human resource management for the adoption of sustainable development goals. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 141, 109-122.
Claudy, M. C., Peterson, M., & Pagell, M. (2016). The roles of sustainability orientation and market knowledge competence in new product development success. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33(S1), 72-85.
Clauss, T., Abebe, M., Tangpong, C., & Hock, M. (2021). Strategic agility, business model innovation, and firm performance: An empirical investigation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 68(3), 767-784.
Clauss, T., & Bouncken, R. B. (2019). Social power as an antecedence of governance in buyer-supplier alliances. Industrial Marketing Management, 77, 75-89.
Clauss, T., Breier, M., Kraus, S., Durst, S., & Mahto, R. V. (2022). Temporary business model innovation–SMEs’ innovation response to the Covid‐19 crisis. R&D Management, 52(2), 294-312.
Clauss, T., & Kesting, T. (2017). How businesses should govern knowledge-intensive collaborations with universities: An empirical investigation of university professors. Industrial Marketing Management, 62, 185-198.
Clauss, T., & Tangpong, C. (2018). In search for impregnable exchange relationships with buyers: Exploratory insights for suppliers. Industrial Marketing Management, 75, 1-16.
Cozzolino, A., Verona, G., & Rothaermel, F. T. (2018). Unpacking the disruption process: New technology, business models, and incumbent adaptation. Journal of Management Studies, 55(7), 1166-1202.
de Ruyter, K., Keeling, D. I., Plangger, K., Montecchi, M., Scott, M. L., & Dahl, D. W. (2022). Reimagining marketing strategy: Driving the debate on grand challenges. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 50(1), 13-21.
Diwan, H., & Amarayil Sreeraman, B. (2023). From financial reporting to ESG reporting: A bibliometric analysis of the evolution in corporate sustainability disclosures. Environment, Development and Sustainability.
Doz, Y. L., & Kosonen, M. (2010). Embedding strategic agility: A leadership agenda for accelerating business model renewal. Long Range Planning, 43(2-3), 370-382.
Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and source of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660-679.
Dyer, J. H., Singh, H., & Hesterly, W. S. (2018). The relational view revisited: A dynamic perspective on value creation and value capture. Strategic Management Journal, 39(12), 3140-3162.
Emma, G.-M., & Jennifer, M.-F. (2021). Is SDG reporting substantial or symbolic? An examination of controversial and environmentally sensitive industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 298, 126781.
Erten, B., Oral, B. & Yakut, M. Z. (2022). The role of virtual and augmented reality in occupational health and safety training of employees in PV power systems and evaluation with a sustainable perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 379, 134499.
Filho, W. L., Barbir, J., Ozuyar, P. G., Nunez, E., Diaz-Sarachaga, J. M., Guillaume, B., Anholon, R., Rampasso, I. S., Swart, J., Velazquez, L. & Ng, T. F. (2022). Assessing provisions and requirements for the sustainable production of plastics: Towards achieving SDG 12 from the consumer’s perspective. Sustainability, 14, 16542.
Foss, N. J., & Saebi, T. (2017). Fifteen years of research on business model innovation: How far have we come, and where should we go? Journal of Management, 43(1), 200-227.
George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A., & Tihanyi, L. (2016). Understanding and tackling societal grand challenges through management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6), 1880-1895.
Ghisetti, C., Marzucchi, A., & Montresor, S. (2015). The open eco-innovation mode. An empirical investigation of eleven European countries. Research Policy, 44(5), 1080–1093
González-Benito, J., & González-Benito, Ó. (2006). A review of determinant factors of environmental proactivity. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(2), 87-102.
Grewal, R., & Tansuhaj, P. (2001). Building organizational capabilities for managing economic crisis: The role of market orientation and strategic flexibility. Journal of Marketing, 65(2), 67-80.
Gutierrez, L., Montiel, I., Surroca, J. A., & Tribo, J. A. (2022). Rainbow wash or rainbow revolution? Dynamic stakeholder engagement for SDG-driven responsible innovation. Journal of Business Ethics, 180(4), 1113-1136.
Heide, J. B., & Miner, A. S. (1992). The shadow of the future: Effects of anticipated interaction and frequency of contact on buyer-seller cooperation. The Academy of Management Journal, 35(2), 265-291.
Herrero, M., Thornton, P. K., Mason-D’Croz, D., Palmer, J., Bodirsky, B. L., Pradhan, P., Barrett, C. B., Benton, T. G., Hall, A., & Pikaar, I. (2021). Articulating the effect of food systems innovation on the Sustainable Development Goals. The Lancet Planetary Health, 5(1), e50-e62.
Hock-Doepgen, M., Clauss, T., Kraus, S., & Cheng, C.-F. (2020). Knowledge management capabilities and organizational risk-taking for business model innovation in SMEs. Journal of Business Research, 130, 683-697.
Hoetker, G., & Mellewigt, T. (2009). Choice and performance of governance mechanisms: Matching alliance governance to asset type. Strategic Management Journal, 30(10), 1025-1044.
Huang, T. Y., Souitaris, V., & Barsade, S. G. (2019). Which matters more? Group fear versus hope in entrepreneurial escalation of commitment. Strategic Management Journal, 40(11), 1852-1881.
Inigo, E. A., Ritala, P., & Albareda, L. (2020). Networking for sustainability: Alliance capabilities and sustainability-oriented innovation. Industrial Marketing Management, 89, 550-565.
Kamalaldin, A., Linde, L., Sjödin, D., & Parida, V. (2020). Transforming provider-customer relationships in digital servitization: A relational view on digitalization. Industrial Marketing Management, 89, 306-325.
Karimi, J., & Walter, Z. (2016). Corporate entrepreneurship, disruptive business model innovation adoption, and its performance: The case of the newspaper industry. Long Range Planning, 49(3), 342-360.
Kauppila, O.-P. (2015). Alliance management capability and firm performance: Using resource-based theory to look inside the process black box. Long Range Planning, 48(3), 151-167.
Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 461– 477.
Lim, W. M. (2022). The sustainability pyramid: A hierarchical approach to greater sustainability and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals with implications for marketing theory, practice, and public policy. Australasian Marketing Journal, 30(2), 142-150.
Lim, W. M. (2023). Transformative marketing in the new normal: A novel practice-scholarly integrative review of business-to-business marketing mix challenges, opportunities, and solutions. Journal of Business Research, 160, 113638.
Lim, W. M., Ciasullo, M. V., Douglas, A., & Kumar, S. (2022). Environmental social governance (ESG) and total quality management (TQM): A multi-study meta-systematic review. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence.
Lozano, R. (2007). Collaboration as a pathway for sustainability. Sustainable Development, 15(6), 370-381.
Ludeke-Freund, F., & Dembek, K. (2017). Sustainable business model research and practice: Emerging field or passing fancy? Journal of Cleaner Production, 168, 1668-1678.
Mezger, F. (2014). Toward a capability‐based conceptualization of business model innovation: insights from an explorative study. R&D Management, 44(5), 429-449.
Ministry of Economic Affairs (2023). Ministry of Economic Affairs, Annual report, Taipei, Taiwan.
Montiel, I., Cuervo-Cazurra, A., Park, J., Antolín-López, R., & Husted, B. W. (2021). Implementing the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals in international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 52(5), 999-1030.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2017). Mplus: Statistical analysis with latent variables: User's guide (8th ed.). Muthén & Muthén.
Oo, P. P., T. H. Allison, S. Sahaym and S. Juasrikul (2019). ‘User entrepreneurs’ multiple identities and crowdfunding performance: effects through product innovativeness, perceived passion, and need similarity’, Journal of Business Venturing, 34, art. 105895.
Park, N. K., Mezias, J. M., & Song, J. (2004). A resource-based view of strategic alliances and firm value in the electronic marketplace. Journal of Management, 30(1), 7-27.
Pedersen, E. R. G., Gwozdz, W., & Hvass, K. K. (2018). Exploring the relationship between business model innovation, corporate sustainability, and organisational values within the fashion industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 149(2), 267-284.
Pereira, V., Temouri, Y., Wood, G., Bamel, U., & Budhwar, P. (2023). How do grand challenges determine, drive and influence the innovation efforts of for-profit firms? A multidimensional analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management.
Pieroni, M. P., McAloone, T. C., & Pigosso, D. C. (2019). Business model innovation for circular economy and sustainability: A review of approaches. Journal of Cleaner Production, 215, 198-216.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
Quintana-García, C., Benavides-Chicón, C. G., & Marchante-Lara, M. (2021). Does a green supply chain improve corporate reputation? Empirical evidence from European manufacturing sectors. Industrial Marketing Management, 92, 344-353.
Rai, S. M., Brown, B. D. & Ruwanpura, k. N. (2019). SDG 8: Decent work and economic growth - A gendered analysis. World Development, 113, 368-380.
Reuer, J., & Zollo, M. (2000). Managing governance adaptations in strategic alliances. European Management Journal, 18(2), 164-172.
Riegler, M., Burton, A. M., Scholz, M., & de Melo, K. (2023). Why companies team up for sustainable development: Antecedents of company engagement in business partnerships for sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment.
Rothaermel, F. T., & Deeds, D. L. (2006). Alliance type, alliance experience and alliance management capability in high-technology ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 429-460.
Sáez-Martínez, F. J., Díaz-García, C., & Gonzalez-Moreno, A. (2016). Firm technological trajectory as a driver of eco-innovation in young small and medium-sized enterprises. Journal of Cleaner Production, 138, 28–37.
Sanchez, R. (1995). Strategic flexibility in product competition. Strategic Management Journal, 16(S1), 136-159.
Sarkar, M. B., Echambadi, R., & Harrison, J. S. (2001). Alliance entrepreneurship and firm market performance. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6‐7), 701-711.
Schilke, O., & Goerzen, A. (2010). Alliance management capability: An investigation of the construct and its measurement. Journal of Management, 36(5), 1192-1219.
Schneider, S., & Clauß, T. (2020). Business models for sustainability: Choices and consequences. Organization & Environment, 33(3), 384-407.
Schneider, S., & Spieth, P. (2014). Business model innovation and strategic flexibility: Insights from an experimental research design. International Journal of Innovation Management, 18(6), 1440009.
Schreiner, M., Kale, P., & Corsten, D. (2009). What is alliance management capability and how does it impact alliance outcomes and success? Strategic Management Journal, 30(13), 1395-1419.
Selig, J. P., & Preacher, K. J. (2008, June). Monte Carlo method for assessing mediation: An interactive tool for creating confidence intervals for indirect effects [Computer software]. Available from http://quantpsy.org/.
Snihur, Y., & Wiklund, J. (2019). Searching for innovation: Product, process, and business model innovations and search behavior in established firms. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 305-325.
Spieth, P., Laudien, S. M., & Meissner, S. (2021). Business model innovation in strategic alliances: A multi-layer perspective. R&D Management, 51(1), 24-39.
Spieth, P., Schneider, S., Clauß, T., & Eichenberg, D. (2019). Value drivers of social businesses: A business model perspective. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 427-444.
Spieth, P., & Schuchert, S. (2018). Business model innovation alliances: How to open business models for cooperation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 22(04), 1850042.
Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43(2), 172-194.
Teece, D. J. (2012). Dynamic capabilities: Routines versus entrepreneurial action. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1395-1401.
Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40– 49.
Usunier, J.-C. (1998). International and cross-cultural management research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Van Der Waal, J. W., Thijssens, T., & Maas, K. (2021). The innovative contribution of multinational enterprises to the Sustainable Development Goals. Journal of Cleaner Production, 285, 125319.
van Kleef, J. A. G., & Roome, N. J. (2007). Developing capabilities and competence for sustainable business management as innovation: A research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(1), 38-51.
Velu, C. (2015). Business model innovation and third-party alliance on the survival of new firms. Technovation, 35, 1-11.
Von Delft, S., Kortmann, S., Gelhard, C., & Pisani, N. (2019). Leveraging global sources of knowledge for business model innovation. Long Range Planning, 52(5), 101848.
Williams, A., & Blasberg, L. A. (2022). SDG platforms as strategic innovation through partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 180(4), 1041-1057.
Zahoor, N., Al-Tabbaa, O., & Khan, Z. (2023). R&D alliances and SMEs post-entry internationalization speed: The impact of alliance management capability and co-innovation ambidexterity. Global Strategy Journal, 13(2), 315-348.
Zott, C., & Amit, R. (2007). Business model design and the performance of entrepreneurial firms. Organization Science, 18(2), 181-199.
Zott, C., & Amit, R. (2010). Business model design: An activity system perspective. Long Range Planning, 43(2), 216-226.
Al-Tabbaa, O., Nasr, A., Zahoor, N., & De Silva, M. (2023). Socio-emotional wealth preservation and alliance success in family firms: The role of political instability and alliance management capability. British Journal of Management, 34, 915–941. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12626
Barrales-Molina, V., Bustinza, Ó. F., & Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez, L. J. (2013). Explaining the causes and effects of dynamic capabilities generation: A multiple-indicator multiple-cause modelling approach. British Journal of Management, 24, 571–591. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2012.00829.x
Becker-Ritterspach, F., Geppert, M., Lange, K., & Saka-Helmhout, A. (2015). Changing business models and employee representation in the airline industry: A comparison of British Airways and Deutsche Lufthansa. British Journal of Management, 26, 388–407. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12096
Garcia Martinez, M., Sanchez Garcia, M., & Zouaghi, F. (2019). Casting a wide net for innovation: Mediating effect of R&D human and social capital to unlock the value from alliance portfolio diversity. British Journal of Management, 30, 769–790. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12310
Gupta, S., Wang, Y., & Czinkota, M. (2021). Reshoring and sustainable development goals. British Journal of Management, 32, E6–E9. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12500
Herhausen, D., Brozović, D., Morgan, R. E., & Volberda, H. W. (2021). Re-examining strategic flexibility: A meta-analysis of its antecedents, consequences, and contingencies. British Journal of Management, 32, 435–455. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12413
Jiang, F., Jiang, X., Sheng, S., & Wang, G. (2021). A moderated mediation model linking entrepreneurial orientation to strategic alliance performance. British Journal of Management, 32, 1338–1358. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12428
Patzelt, H., zu Knyphausen-Aufseß, D., & Nikol, P. (2008). Top management teams, business models, and performance of biotechnology ventures: An upper echelon perspective. British Journal of Management, 19, 205–221. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2007.00552.x
Vlaisavljevic, V., Cabello-Medina, C., & Pérez-Luño, A. (2016). Coping with diversity in alliances for innovation: The role of relational social capital and knowledge codifiability. British Journal of Management, 27, 304–322. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12155
Van Gestel, N., Ferlie, E., & Grotenbreg, S. (2024). A public value strategy for sustainable development goals: Transforming an existing organization? British Journal of Management, 35, 839–853. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12742