University of Texas at Dallas

School of Management

MAS6v03-001 Ph.D. Seminar in Advanced Strategic Management

Spring, 2009

Instructor: Professor Eric Tsang

Office: SOM 4.412
Phone: (972) 883-4386
Email: ewktsang@utdallas.edu
Office hours: By appointment
Teaching Assistant: Michelle Wu

Course Description
This is the second part of the two-part series of Ph.D. seminars in strategic management. While
the first part is devoted to examining various theoretical perspectives that have had a significant
impact on strategy research, this one focuses on some important topics. In addition, it discusses
some logical and philosophical issues that are relevant for strategy research. Such discussions
will also help you avoid making mistakes, especially glaring mistakes, in your arguments. Thus
the objectives of this part are: (1) to deepen your knowledge of strategy research and (2) to
improve your ability of formulating arguments.

Class Participation
In a typical lesson, for each of the required readings, a student will present a summary of of the
reading using PowerPoint slides. The student who plays the role of the facilitator does not have
to present but has to lead the discussion and ask questions. Active class participation is expected
from all students.

Research Project
You have to submit a proposal of your research paper to me and to the student who is going to
review your proposal on March 5. Each student has to write a two- to three-page review of a
fellow student’s propoal. There will be a discussion of the proposals on March 12, and a
presentation of the resulting papers on April 23 and April 30. You have to submit a hard copy of
your paper to me by 5pm on May 4. The paper can be conceptual or empirical consisting of
7,000 to 10,000 words inclusive of the abstract, figures, tables and references. The topic has to
be related to strategic management but is not limited to those covered in this course (parts 1 and
2). You may continue to work on a topic that you started in another doctoral seminar but there
should be very significant improvement over the previous project that you submitted to that
seminar.

Grading
Your grade will be based on the following two components:
Class participation 20%
Research paper 80%
Course Policy
Students are expected to follow the university’s guideline governing student conduct, especially
with respect to plagiarism. Students should also refrain from relaying any issues about the
quality of a research work or scholarship in general that are discussed in this class to anyone
within or outside the school as this may cause misunderstandings. Such issues are discussed
solely for the sake of illustrating effectiveness of research conduct and stimulating intellectual
contemplation.

Readings
There are two sets of readings, required and recommended. You have to read all the required
readings before coming to class and to present a summary of the reading that you are responsible
for. The order of required readings as listed indicates the order of presentation. The
recommended readings are good follow-ups that enrich your knowledge in the subject. Note that
both sets of readings aim at providing you a basic understanding of the topic and thus were often
published some time ago. If you want to go deeper after covering them, you need to search for
more updated publications.

The following six books on philosophy and logic will help you improve the rigor of argument.
Try to allocate time to read some of them during this semester.

Baggini, Julian and Peter S. Fosi. 2003. The philosopher’s toolkit: A compendium of
philosophical concepts and methods. Contrary to its title, this book was written for laymen rather
than philosophers, and provides a comprehenive introduction to the major concepts and methods
of constructing and challenging arguments. It covers many things, but not in an indepth manner.

Bunge, Mario. 1996. Finding philosophy in social science. This book, written by a theoretical
physicist turned philosopher, adopts a realist perspective and is a good introduction to
philosophy of social science. In addition to covering the general philosophical problems in social
science, it discusses some very basic methodological issues, such as the meaning of concept, law,
theory, causation, etc. The discussions are developed from scratch and so are understandable by
laymen.

Fisher, Alec. 2004. The logic of real arguments (2nd Ed.). This practical, introductory book
contains illustrations of how to analyze an argument based on extractions from some great
scholars’ works.

Lipton, Peter. 2004. Inference to the best explanation (2nd Ed.). This beautifully written book
discusses weighing evidence, testing hypotheses, and making inferences. Similar to Bunge
(1996), it requires little prior knowledge in the subject.

Miller, David (Ed.) 1983. A pocket Popper. This book is composed of extractions from the major
works of Karl Popper, who is said to be the greatest philosopher of the last century. Although
Popper is famous for his lucid writing style, some of the extractions in the book require some
prior knowledge of philosophy of science and philosophy in general. Among all the books
introduced here, this one is in the best position to exemplify the apotheosis of philosophical
arguments.

Russell, Bertrand. 1912. The problems of philosophy. This short book gives you a good idea of
how philosophers frame their arguments. Despite its introductory nature, you can see the
difference in terms of rigor between philosophical arguments and arguments you find in typical
management journals and books.

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu/) is very useful website that

provides free, comprehensive information about philosophy.

Lesson Schedule (subject to change)

A brief overview of the lesson schedule is:

1. (Jan 15): Examples of errors in argument
2. (Jan 22): How does distance matter?
3. (Jan 29): Organizational routines
4. (Feb 5): Organizational learning
5. (Feb 12): Absorptive capacity
6. (Feb 19): Social capital
7. (Feb 26): Strategic alliances
8. (Mar 5): Organizational learning and strategic alliances
9. (Mar 12): Discussion of research proposals
10. (Mar 26): Incommensurability of theories
11. (Apr 2): Is the resource-based view tautological?
12. (Apr 9): The concept of competitive advantage
13. (Apr 23): Presentation of research papers
14. (Apr 30): Presentation of research papers

Lesson 1 (Jan 15)

Introduction and administrative matters
Examples of errors in argument

Required readings
Shugan, S. M. 2007. It’s the findings, stupid, not the assumptions. Marketing Science, 26(4):
449-459.

Tsang, E. W. K. 2006. Behavioral assumptions and theory development: The case of transaction
cost economics. Strategic Management Journal, 27(11): 999-1011.

Recommended readings
Friedman, M. 1953. The methodology of positive economics, Essays in positive economics: 3-
43. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Hindriks, F. 2008. False models as explanatory engines. Philosophy of the Social Sciences,
38(3): 334-360.

Lesson 2 (Jan 22)

How does distance matter? (This is an extension of the topic of institutional distance discussed in
Professor Sung-Hyun Lee’s Seminar in International Business, Fall 2007.)

Required readings
Ghemawat, P. 2001. Distance still matters. Harvard Business Review, 79(8): 137-147.

Shenkar, O. 2001. Cultural distance revisited: Towards a more rigorous conceptualization and
measurement of cultural differences. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(3): 519-535.

Nachum, L., & Zaheer, S. 2005. The persistence of distance? The impact of technology on MNE
motivations for foreign investment. Strategic Management Journal, 26(8): 747-767.

Tsang, E. W. K., & Yip, P. S. L. 2007. Economic distance and the survival of foreign direct
investments. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5): 1156-1168.

Recommended readings
Barkema, H. G., Bell, J. H., & Pennings, J. M. 1996. Foreign entry, cultural barriers, and
learning. Strategic Management Journal, 17(2): 151-166.

Barkema, H. G., & Vermeulen, F. 1997. What differences in the cultural backgrounds of partners
are detrimental for international joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 28(4):
845-864.

Goodall, K., & Roberts, J. 2003. Repairing managerial knowledge-ability over distance.
Organization Studies, 24(7): 1153-1175.

Harzing, A.-W. 2004. The role of culture in entry-mode studies: From neglect to myopia?
Advances in International Management, 15: 75-127.

Shenkar, O., Luo, Y., & Yeheskel, O. 2008. From “distance” to “friction”: Substituting
metaphors and redirecting intercultural research. Academy of Management Review, 33(4): 905-
923.

Lesson 3 (Jan 29)

Organizational routines

Required readings
Gersick, C. J. G., & Hackman, J. R. 1990. Habitual routines in task-performing groups.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47(1): 65-97.

Becker, M. C. 2004. Organizational routines: A review of the literature. Industrial and Corporate
Change, 13(4): 643-677.
Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. 2003. Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source
of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1): 94-118.

Feldman, M. S. 2000. Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization

Science, 11(6): 611-629.

Recommended readings
Becker, M. C. 2005. The concept of routines: Some clarifications. Cambridge Journal of
Economics, 29(2): 249-262.

D'Adderio, L. 2008. The performativity of routines: Theorising the influence of artefacts and
distributed agencies on routines dynamics. Research Policy, 37(5): 769-789.

Narduzzo, A., Rocco, E., & Warglien, M. 2000. Talking about routines in the field: The
emergence of organizational capabilities in a new cellular phone network company. In G. Dosi &
R. R. Nelson & S. G. Winter (Eds.), The nature and dynamics of organizational capabilities: 27-
50. New York: Oxford University Press.

Pentland, B. T., & Rueter, H. H. 1994. Organizational routines as grammars of action.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3): 484-510.

Lesson 4 (Feb 5)
Organizational learning

Required readings
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. 1988. Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14: 319-
340.

Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. 1999. An organizational learning framework: From
intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 24(3): 522-537.

Tsang, E. W. K. 1997. Organizational learning and the learning organization: A dichotomy

between descriptive and prescriptive research. Human Relations, 50(1): 73-89.

Vera, D., & Crossan, M. 2003. Organizational learning and knowledge management: Toward an
integrative framework. In M. Easterby-Smith & M. A. Lyles (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of
organizational learning and knowledge management: 122-141. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Recommended readings
Argyris, C. 1976. Single-loop and double-loop models in research on decision making.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(3): 363-375.

Hedberg, B. 1981. How organizations learn and unlearn. In P. C. Nystrom & W. H. Starbuck
(Eds.), Handbook of organizational design, Vol. 1: 3-27. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Huber, G. P. 1991. Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures.
Organization Science, 2(1): 88-115.

Kim, D. H. 1993. The link between individual and organizational learning. Sloan Management
Review, 35(1): 37-50.

Miner, A. S., & Mezias, S. J. 1996. Ugly duckling no more: Pasts and futures of organizational
learning research. Organization Science, 7(1): 88-99.

Tsang, E. W. K., & Zahra, S. 2008. Organizational unlearning. Human Relations, 61(10): 1435-
1462.

Lesson 5 (Feb 12)

Absorptive capacity

Required readings
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and
innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1): 128-152.

Zahra, S. A., & George, G. 2002. Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and
extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2): 185-203.

Lane, P. J., Koka, B. R., & Pathak, S. 2006. The reification of absorptive capacity: A critical
review and rejuvenation of the construct. Academy of Management Review, 31(4): 833-863.

Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. 1998. Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning.
Strategic Management Journal, 19(5): 461-477.

Recommended readings
Bergh, D. D., & Lim, E. N.-K. 2008. Learning how to restructure: Absorptive capacity and
improvisational views of restructuring actions and performance. Strategic Management Journal,
29(6): 593-616.

Lane, P. J., Salk, J. E., & Lyles, M. A. 2001. Absorptive capacity, learning, and performance in
international joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 22(12): 1139-1161.

Minbaeva, D., Pedersen, T., Björkman, I., Fey, C. F., & Park, H. J. 2003. MNC knowledge
transfer, subsidiary absorptive capacity, and HRM. Journal of International Business Studies,
34(6): 586-599.

Tsai, W. 2001. Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position

and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management
Journal, 44(5): 996-1004.

Lesson 6 (Feb 19)

Social capital
Required readings
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. 1998. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational
advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2): 242-266.

Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S.-W. 2002. Social capital: Prospect for a new concept. Academy of
Management Review, 27(1): 17-40.

Inkpen, A. C., & Tsang, E. W. K. 2005. Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer.
Academy of Management Review, 30(1): 146-165.

Khatri, N., Tsang, E. W. K., & Begley, T. M. 2006. Cronyism: A cross-cultural analysis. Journal
of International Business Studies, 37(1): 61-75.

Recommended readings
Coleman, J. S. 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of
Sociology, 94(Supplement): S95-S120.

Koka, B. R., & Prescott, J. E. 2002. Strategic alliances and social capital: A multidimensional
view. Strategic Management Journal, 23(9): 795-816.

Kostova, T., & Roth, K. 2003. Social capital in multinational corporations and a micro-macro
model of its formation. Academy of Management Review, 28(2): 297-317.

Moran, P. 2005. Structural vs. relational embeddedness: Social capital and managerial
performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(12): 1129-1151.

Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., & Sapienza, H. J. 2001. Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and
knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic Management Journal,
22(6/7): 587-613.

Lesson 7 (Feb 26)

Strategic alliances (This is an extension of the topic “Alliances: a tour of the field” discussed in
Professor Jane Salk’s Seminar in International Management, Fall 2008.)

Required readings
Borys, B., & Jemison, D. B. 1989. Hybrid arrangements as strategic alliances: Theoretical issues
in organizational combinations. Academy of Management Review, 14(2): 234-249.

Kogut, B. 1988. Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. Strategic Management
Journal, 9(4): 319-332.

Tsang, E. W. K. 2000. Transaction cost and resource-based explanations of joint ventures: A

comparison and synthesis. Organization Studies, 21(1): 215-242.
Parkhe, A. 1993. Strategic alliance structuring: A game theoretic and transaction cost
examination of interfirm cooperation. Academy of Management Journal, 36(4): 794-829.

Recommended readings
Dacin, T., Oliver, C., & Roy, J.-P. 2007. The legitimacy of strategic alliances: An institutional
perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2): 169-187.

Das, T. K., & Teng, B.-S. 2002. Alliance constellations: A social exchange perspective.
Academy of Management Review, 27(3): 445-456.

Grant, R. M., & Baden-Fuller, C. 2004. A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances.
Journal of Management Studies, 41(1): 61-84.

Gulati, R. 1995. Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual
choice in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1): 85-112.

Zollo, M., Reuer, J. J., & Singh, H. 2002. Interorganizational routines and performance in
strategic alliances. Organization Science, 13(6): 701-713.

Lesson 8 (Mar 5)
Organizational learning and strategic alliances
Submission of research paper proposals

Required readings
Inkpen, A. C., & Tsang, E. W. K. 2007. Learning and strategic alliances. Academy of
Management Annals, 1: 479-511.

Hamel, G. 1991. Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international
strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 12(Summer Special Issue): 83-103.

Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. 1996. Strategic alliances and interfirm
knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue): 77-91.

Tsang, E. W. K. 2002. Acquiring knowledge by foreign partners from international joint ventures
in a transition economy: Learning-by-doing and learning myopia. Strategic Management Journal,
23(9): 835-854.

Recommended readings
Doz, Y. L. 1996. The evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances: Initial conditions or learning
processes? Strategic Management Journal, 17(Summer Special Issue): 55-83.

Kale, P., Singh, H., & Perlmutter, H. 2000. Learning and protection of proprietary assets in
strategic alliances: Building relational capital. Strategic Management Journal, 21(Special Issue):
217-237.
Khanna, T., Gulati, R., & Nohria, N. 1998. The dynamics of learning alliances: Competition,
cooperation, and relative scope. Strategic Management Journal, 19(3): 193-210.

Muthusamy, S. K., & White, M. A. 2005. Learning and knowledge transfer in strategic alliances:
A social exchange view. Organization Studies, 26(3): 415-441.

Simonin, B. L. 1999. Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances.
Strategic Management Journal, 20(7): 595-623.

Lesson 9 (Mar 12)

Discussion of research proposals

Mar 19, Spring break

Lesson 10 (Mar 26)

Incommensurability of theories

Required readings
McKinley, W., & Mone, M. A. 1998. The re-construction of organization studies: Wrestling with
incommensurability. Organization, 5(2): 169-189.

Donaldson, L. 1998. The myth of paradigm incommensurability in management studies:

Comments by an integrationist. Organization, 5(2): 267-272.

Amihud, Y., & Lev, B. 1999. Does corporate ownership structure affect its strategy towards
diversification? Strategic Management Journal, 20(11): 1063-1069.

Denis, D. J., Denis, D. K., & Sarin, A. 1999. Agency theory and the influence of equity ownership
structure on corporate diversification strategies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(11): 1071-
1076.

Lane, P. J., Cannella, A. A., & Lubatkin, M. H. 1999. Ownership structure and corporate strategy:
One question viewed from two different worlds. Strategic Management Journal, 20(11): 1077-
1086.

Recommended readings
Jackson, N., & Carter, P. 1991. In defense of paradigm incommensurability. Organization
Studies, 12(1): 109-127.

Scherer, A. G. & Steinmann, H. 1999. Some remarks on the problem of incommensurability in

organization studies. Organization Studies, 20(3): 519-544.

Weaver, G. R., & Gioia, D. A. 1994. Paradigms lost: Incommensurability vs structurationist

inquiry. Organization Studies, 15(4): 565-590.

Lesson 11 (Apr 2)
Is the resource-based view tautological?

Required readings
Priem, R. L., & Butler, J. E. 2001. Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic
management research? Academy of Management Review, 26(1): 22-40.

Barney, J. B. 2001. Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management
research? Yes. Academy of Management Review, 26(1): 41-56.

Priem, R. L., & Butler, J. E. 2001. Tautology in the resource-based view and the implications of
externally determined resource value: Further comments. Academy of Management Review,
26(1): 57-66.

Lesson 12 (Apr 9)
The concept of competitive advantage

Required readings
Powell, T. C. 2001. Competitive advantage: Local and philosophical considerations. Strategic
Management Journal, 22(9): 875-888.

Arend, R. J. 2003. Revisiting the logical and research considerations of competitive advantage.
Strategic Management Journal, 24(3): 279-284.

Powell, T. C. 2003. Strategy without ontology. Strategic Management Journal, 24(3): 285-291.

Recommended readings
Durand, R. 2002. Competitive advantages exist: A critique of Powell. Strategic Management
Journal, 23(9): 867-872.

Osigweh, C. A. B. 1989. Concept fallibility in organizational science. Academy of Management

Review, 14(4): 579-594.

Powell, T. C. 2002. The philosophy of strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 23(9): 873-880.

Apr 16, Preparation for research paper presentation, no class

Lesson 13 (Apr 23)

Presentation of research papers

Lesson 14 (Apr 30)

Presentation of research papers
Peng
What is strategy? How do we do strategy research?
How do firms grow? A behavioral theory of the firm
How does industry matter? An industry-based view
How to leverage capabilities? A resource-based view I
Do capabilities really matter? A resource-based view II
What is the nature of the firm? A transaction cost answer I
How do transaction costs shape behavior? A transaction cost answer II
How do institutions matter? An institution-based view I
How do institutions affect strategy? An institution-based view II
How do agents such as managers mess things up? Agency theory
How to advance strategy research globally? A substantive view and a process perspective

Salk
The agendas and identity of IB and IM
Epistemological and methodological issues that confront the IM scholar
Crafting contribution
Theorizing the MNC
The MNC as context for learning and knowledge management
Managing and communicating across cultures
Alliance: A tour of the field

Lee
Institutional differences and institutional change
Industry and competition
Internalization/transaction cost economics
Resouce-based view
Real options and flexibility
Political connection and government
Diversification
Export
International entrepreneurship
Institutional distance