Living in two worlds: Exploring the origins and consequences of the dual social structure of interorganizational relationships

This dissertation reports the results of two studies. The first study analyzes the implications of a firm's position in a dual structure that encompasses both collaborative and conflictual relationships. It asks the question of what constitutes a structurally congruent position in a dual social structure, wherein a firm's position is aligned across the networks of collaborative and conflictual ties to enable an increased flow of benefits to the firm. In addressing this question, this study contrasts the research traditions of cohesion and resource mobilization with that of exposure to novelty. It relies on data from fieldwork and on a longitudinal analysis of networks of interorganizational partnerships and patent infringement disputes for 405 firms in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals over 1998-2006. Results show that firms having collaborators and adversaries collocated in the same industries grow at a faster rate, but produce more narrow and circumscribed innovations; and firms that have them spread across different industries grow at a slower rate but produce more general or basic innovations.;The second study investigates the origins of conflictual relationships, relating the patterns of spatial distribution of principals and mediating agents to the principals' propensity to initiate conflictual interactions. Spatial propinquity is hypothesized to determine the nature of social relationships between the principal's and the mediating agent's employees, subsequently affecting the mediating agent's involvement in identification of opportunities for conflictual interactions by the principal. Propinquity is also predicted to decrease principal's communication and transportation costs while maintaining a professional relationship with the mediating agent, hence proving a more positive economic outlook of entering into and sustaining conflictual ties. The context of this study is the patterns of spatial distribution of 405 U.S. firms in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals (the principals) and 57 leading intellectual property litigation firms (the mediating agents). It relates these patterns to the involvement in patent infringement disputes by the biopharmaceutical firms in 1998-2006. Results suggest that, for a litigious firm, both proximity to and the concentration of proximate IP law firms increase the number of lawsuits the firm files and the number of litigation days the firm has in a given year.