- Oliver Schoen

In contrast to prior studies examining strategic alliances as a discrete governance structure (e.g., alliance versus M&A), we investigate their particular contractual features. A focus on the contractual provisions that firms employ in alliances also permits a more finegrained understanding of alliance design relative to broad taxonomies of collaborative agreements that are currently in use (e.g., equity versus non-equity arrangements). The analysis examines the dimensionality of the contractual complexity construct and investigates the determinants of firms’ adoption of various contractual provisions for their strategic alliances. We find two underlying dimensions of contractual complexity, based upon the enforcement and coordination roles that contractual provisions play. The evidence reveals that firms’ usage of particular contractual provisions is a function of the specificity of the investments firms make as well as whether the alliance’s duration is contractually pre-specified or open-ended. The findings also speak to the debate surrounding the role of prior ties and trust for alliance governance: repeat collaborators are not less likely to negotiate enforcement provisions; rather, firms that have collaborated with each other in the past are less likely to adopt contractual provisions that are informational in nature and are geared to the coordination of the alliance. Javier Estrada “Mean-semivariance behavior: Downside risk and capital asset pricing”, International Review of Economics and Finance, Vol. 16, 2007, pages 169-185. Abstract: For over 30 years academics and practitioners have been debating the merits of the CAPM. One of the characteristics of this model is that it measures risk by beta, which follows from an equilibrium in which investors display mean-variance behavior. In that framework, risk is assessed by the variance of returns, a questionable and restrictive measure of risk. The semivariance of returns is a more plausible measure of risk and can be used to generate an alternative behavioral hypothesis, mean-semivariance behavior; an alternative measure of risk for diversified investors, the downside beta; and an alternative pricing model based on this downside beta. The empirical evidence discussed in this article for the entire MSCI database of developed and emerging markets clearly supports the downside beta and the pricing model based on it over beta and the CAPM. Javier Estrada Mark Kritzman Sebastien Page “Countries versus industries in emerging markets: A normative portfolio approach”, The Journal of Investing, Vol. 15, No 4, Winter 2006, pages 19-28. Abstract: Should investors in emerging markets focus on diversifying across countries or diversifying across industries? This question, widely debated in developed markets, and particularly in Europe, has received little attention in emerging markets. Using a normative approach that disentangles the impact of investor behavior from the opportunities offered by capital markets, we find that country effects dominate industry effects. It follows from our results that, despite the increasing globalization of emerging markets, investors should focus their diversification efforts on countries rather than on industries. Should investors in emerging markets focus on diversifying across countries or diversifying across industries? This question, widely debated in developed markets, and particularly in Europe, has received little attention in emerging markets. Using a normative approach that disentangles the impact of investor behavior from the opportunities offered by capital markets, we find that country effects dominate industry effects. It follows from our results that, despite the increasing globalization of emerging markets, investors should focus their diversification efforts on countries rather than on industries. Johanna Mair Oliver Schoen “Social entrepreneurial business models in the context of developing economies: Page