Industrial Organization, the Resource-Based View, and the Relational View are some classical, well-established, and widely accepted theories in the strategic management domain regarding the understanding, explanation, and prediction of competitive advantage of firms and above-average firm performance. Recent evidence of economic geography and regional economics added to this stream of research new perspectives like cluster theory and microeconomic competitiveness. Despite the high enthusiasm with which companies and policymakers embraced the new advancements, there is some contradictory evidence regarding the positive effect of local conditions on firm performance. Thus, in this paper, we aim to empirically test some aspects of a modern regional development theory, proposed mainly by Michael Porter and collaborators, and the impact of these aspects on firm performance. External determinants considered at three levels of analysis (local economy, local clusters, and industry) will be investigated in relation to firm performance. We will analyze empirical data through detailed correlational analyses and by building multilinear regression models. After the statistical analysis of the answers provided directly by 67 medium and large manufacturing companies operating in Romania, we will provide empirical support for some external determinants, while for other determinants, we will show that the data rejected the proposed associations. The main conclusion derived from this study is that different combinations of external determinants, considered at all three levels of analysis, have a positive and significant effect on different measures of firm performance. The findings in our paper are important for both regional economics and the strategic management literature, suggesting the importance of creating local or urban conditions depending on the type of performance that the firms in the local economy are underperforming.

In this paper we aimed to find an answer to the question: is control still important for modern organization in order to favor achievement of superior performances? We have tried to find answer to this question through an empirical investigation in the field of strategic alliances. Thus, we have analyzed the relationship between alliance monitorization and control and various measures of alliance performances. Based on a statistical analysis of data provided by 46 best performers medium and large companies operating in Romania, we found that control is still important for superior performances, whether productivity (e.g. revenues growth) or innovation related performances (e.g. new product development). We used multiple multilinear regressions and found positive associations between alliance monitorization and control, structural control factors and productivity, respectively innovation related performances. Surprisingly, we found that control process factors are not associated with superior innovation performances and for productivity related performances there is only a low intensity association. In terms of explanatory potential of regression models, in five models out of six, the control factors significantly explained why some companies extracted higher value from their portfolio of strategic alliances, as compared to companies extracting more modest value. The various measures of alliance performances (revenues growth, competitive position, customer satisfaction, operations improvement, product improvement, new product development) were also separately investigated.

In this paper, we aim to find answer to a single question: what are the characteristics of firms with superior use of alliance learning practices? Consequently, we aim to discover the characteristics of firms which are more preoccupied to learn from their strategic alliances. We investigate this research question through a statistical analysis of the answers provided by 46 best performing medium and large-sized companies operating in Romania. By means of several multilinear regressions and an analysis of variance, we found that the companies with superior use of alliance learning practices – thus, more preoccupied to learn – are more proactive, build an alliance culture favouring the use of alliances, develop relational attributes in their alliances (e.g., trust), respectively monitor and control their alliance activity to a higher degree. Contrary to expectations, the companies with superior use of alliance learning practices do not collaborate to a higher degree horizontally, with their competitors and complementors. In terms of the dispersion of companies depending on their use of alliance learning practices, to a high degree (34.1%), the differences between companies can be explained by the proposed set of characteristics developed in this paper. Our findings contribute to the existent literature in the field of alliances, bringing empirical evidence on the characteristics that companies need to develop to better learn from their strategic alliances. In addition, executives of medium and large-sized companies find in this paper valuable information regarding the nurturing of alliance knowledge acquisition and transfer from their strategic allies and partners.