Strategic partnership in Hotel Industry: A study on the performance of franchise partnership

model of TTDC Hotels

Mr. A. Saravanan,

Assistant Professor, Department of Tourism and Travel Management,

Government Arts College (Autonomous), Coimbatore - 18, Tamilnadu, India.

e-mail: a.sara87@gmail.com, Mob: 098431 91181.

Dr. Y. Venkata Rao

Associate Professor,Department of Tourism studies,

School of Management,Pondicherry UniversityPondicherry - 14, India.

e-mail: venkat.dts@pondiuni.edu.in Mob: 094426 49409.

Abstract

In a recent worldwide survey of firms from various industries

reported that 81 percent of companies having strategic business

plan in one or another way. Furthermore, executives reported a

higher level of business result with strategic business model is

comparatively higher than the other management tools. The

increasing popularity of strategic alliances in business in

recent times attributed to accelerating changes in industries and

facilitates to overcome global competitions. Firms that engage in

strategic planning tend to have higher performance than those do

not, business promoters and developers find strategic partnership

method as one of the useful tools for the rapid business

development. With the observance of all factors, the main

objective of this research paper is to explore the current trends

in small scale and budget category hotels’ strategic partnership

model; with special emphasis, the study identifies major factors

that may create impacts on the performance of accommodation

sector of Tamilnadu Tourism Development Corporation (TTDC); A

Unit of Department of Tourism, Government of Tamilnadu. Firstly,

the study observes the current competitive pressures facing by

the chain of Hotels run by TTDC in detail with the help of

official reports and secondary data, then, the empirical work

involved the development of questionnaires which were used for

primary data collection. The study sample consisted of official

authorities, managers & staff at different levels from selected

hotels of TTDC located in major tourism destinations of

Tamilnadu. There follows an investigation and evaluation of a

range of potential strategic alliance partners for the small

hotel firm, assessing their ability to address the identified

competitive pressures. Data interpretation reveals, Entering new

markets and adjusts to change of market; Building of effective

service delivery systems; Gaining access to new technology; Cost

sharing, minimizing costs and pooling of resources; Innovation,

knowledge sharing and embedded skills are resulted as a major

motivational indicators and Occupancy rates; Business volume;

Profit / Loss; Service quality; Customer satisfaction are

resulted as a better performance indicators. Additionally, the

findings also revealed the most important aspect in the adoption

of marketing strategic alliances invariably increases the service

quality and higher customer satisfaction followed by improving

overall performance of the Hotels. The results also give another

strong indication that the strategic alliance is playing a

crucial role in the small and budget category hotels. Finally,

the rationale for adopting the possible and suitable strategic

partnership model suggested for profitable and sustainable hotel

business.

Key words: Strategic partnership; Franchise partnership; TTDC

Hotels; Competitiveness.

1. Introduction

In the contemporary business environment organizations are tend

to increase the deal with a wide range of social, financial,

political, regulatory and cultural challenges (Coulson - Thomas,

1997), the impact of which, among other factors, is the demand

for greater efficiency, better quality and lower costs (Urden,

2002). Hence, quality management has emerged not only as the most

significant and enduring strategy in ensuring the very survival

of organizations, but also a fundamental route to business

excellence (Wang and Ahmed, 2001). Strategic alliances are more

than simple instrumental means for achieving collective goals

directly benefiting the collaborators. Strategic alliances are

becoming one of the main tools to improve and maintain the level

of competitiveness, especially when the size of business prevents

them from undertaking many projects on their own (Lowensberg,

2010). Strategic alliances are a logical and timely response to

intense and rapid changes in economic activity, technology, and

globalization (Doz and Hamel, 1999), since they infuse existing

hierarchical structures with the flexibility and adaptability

needed to cope with a highly complex and rapidly changing

environment. Particularly when it comes to technological

innovation, strategic alliances tend to be an appropriate

strategic response to the growing demands that firms face for

innovative products and services.

The terms strategic alliance and partnership agreement are used,

and these terms denote several forms of cooperative working

modes. Both these terms are, based on Mahoney et al. (2001),

defined as: “Business arrangements where two or more firms choose

to cooperate for their mutual benefit” (p. 501). Firms have

always been collaborating in order to cope with the demands of

the market (Poulymenakou and Prasopoulou, 2004). Common forms of

marketing alliances focus on customer service, promotion and

distribution (Das et al., 2003). The specific forms of

cooperation include shared brand names, advertising or promotion,

shared distribution channels, sales force and sales offices,

sharing of marketing and service networks and cross selling of

products (Porter, 1985). Such alliances, particularly the one

with a distributor or a complementary product manufacturer, can

give firms entry into new geographical markets or customer

segments thereby increasing product demand (Adler, 1966). Other

benefits of marketing alliances include possible lowering of the

fixed costs of the partners through sharing of common marketing

activities (Porter, 1985).

The use of contractual agreements represents a possible entry

form, and Nielsen (2003) states that firms often form alliances

due to the many potential benefits for the firms involved, or as

a way to compensate for a lack of resources or knowledge. There

has been a sharp increase in the number of alliances formed since

the 1980s, particularly among high-tech firms (Krubasik and

Lautenschlager, 1993). Ohmae (1989, p. 143) states:

“Globalization mandates alliances, makes them absolutely

essential to strategy.” Firms have a number of internal resources

that may give the firm a competitive advantage, but a range of

well chosen and well developed relationships may also strengthen

the competitive edge, as described by Glaister (1996). Most of

the available literature and research on strategic alliances as

an entry strategy focuses on joint ventures from the perspective

of large, multinational companies. As expressed by Varis et al.

(2005), there is limited knowledge about how the firms may use

partnership agreements as an effective strategy in markets in

general, and: “In particular, partner selection and the reasons

why a firm allies with a certain partner have received limited

attention” Obviously, a firm is not able to pick and choose

whichever partner it wants; there will be a process of

interaction and negotiation in order to reach an agreement and be

accepted by a potential partner. When it is comes to public

sector hotels, there will be many political and bureaucracy

interventions in strategic alliances and partnership selection

model. This process is not the focus of this study, whose main

focus is an investigation of current business position and

performance of franchised TTDC hotels.

According to the World Tourism Organization (WTO), the global

tourism market will triple in size by 2020. Tourism benefits the

economy substantially by providing adequate foreign exchange

earnings, creating employment and investment opportunities,

increasing government revenues, enhancing a country's image, and

supporting all sectors of the economy as well as local

communities. Tourism plays an importance role in developing the

national economy of India. Tourism contributes more than US$16.56

billion to India’s economy and accounts for approximately 6.5

percent of the country's gross domestic product (GDP) (Ministry

of Tourism, Govt. of India, 2011). Tamilnadu – a gateway of

foreign tourist, a southern most state of India, currently holds

the second position in terms of attracting foreign as well as

domestic tourists. Tourism is considered as one of the major key

drivers of Tamilnadu economy; currently it is the fastest growing

state by attracting 3.37 million foreign tourists with a growth

rate of 17.3 against the overall growth rate of India (i.e) 8.9%.

With its own regional spread, tourism is an ideal industry to

diffuse benefits across Tamilnadu, and during the past few years,

tourism has been responsible for generating a significant

increase in foreign and domestic investment (Tourism Policy Note,

Govt. of Tamilnadu, 2011).

From the above discussion, The main objectives of this article is

to present an overview about small and budget category hotel

sector of Tamilnadu Tourism Development Corporation (TTDC) and to

develop an understanding of the current competitive pressures

faced by them, and also to consider and relate them to the theory

associated with strategic alliances. At the same time, this study

tries to explore why a major part of TTDC hotels are forming

marketing strategic alliances; and identifies the factors that

may impact the success of strategic alliances in the hotel

sector. This study will intend to increase the knowledge about

forming strategic alliances and marketing hotel sector of TTDC.

There follows an investigation and evaluation of a range of

potential strategic alliance performance of the small hotel firm,

assessing their ability to address the identified competitive

pressures. Finally, the rationale for adopting the different

strategic partnership model is to overcome the present situation

and suggests possible ways to implement those models in the hotel

business.

2. Tamilnadu Tourism Development Corporation Limited (TTDC)

Tamil Nadu Tourism Development Corporation, a Government

Organization was established in the year 1971 to promote various

Tourist Destinations in the State of Tamilnadu by building up the

Tourist related infrastructure. To fulfill this need, it has

started on a modest note with five Government Bungalows and two

Coaches in the very early stage. One of the major activities of

TTDC is to own, maintain and run a chain of hotels at important

places of tourist interest. It has made rapid strides since then

and is at present having a chain of 55 Hotels and 07 Youth

Hostels in all major Tourist destinations across the state. Its

hotels are mostly named as “Hotel Tamil Nadu” with an objective

to provide accommodation service to the tourists at affordable

cost with quality service. The detailed profile of TTDC hotels

are given below in the table column.

Table 1: Profile of TTDC Hotel firm

Types of TTDC Hotels Number Percentage

TTDC Owned Hotels 23 37TTDC Franchised Hotels 28 45TTDC Leased Property 02 3.5Youth Hostels 07 11Resort Category (TTDC Owned 1 +Franchised 1)

02 3.5

Total

62 100

(Source: http://www.tn.gov.in/rti/proactive/inftour/handbook_ttdc.pdf)

Table 2: Different segment of TTDC Hotels

Types of TTDC Hotels Number Percentage

Resort category 02/62 04Establishment with more than 30 rooms

43/62 69

Establishment with Alliance (Franchise + Lease)

31/62 50

Located in lesser-known destinations

30/62 48

Uncategorized/lower market level (Youth Hostels)

27/62 44

Table 3: Business volume of TTDC Hotels

Types of TTDC Hotels AnnualOccupancyRate (%)

TTDC owned Hotels and Resorts 57Franchised Hotels and Resorts of TTDC

66

Hotels in located in lesser-known destinations

48

Uncategorized/lower market level (Youth Hostels)

54

(Source: Tamilnadu Review of Performance of State Public Sector Undertakings for the year 2010-11)

2.1 Competitive Pressures

The TTDC hotel sector still remains heavily dominated by the

small, independently-owned and operated firm. The profile, which

is presented in Table I, and different segments of TTDC Hotels in

Table II highlights the Hotels distribution under various

categories such as, low market grade levels, establishment on the

basis of size, smaller than average size, and remote geographic

locations, franchised and leased to private operators. The

performance of the hotels are identifies through the occupancy

rate highlighted in the table III. It has been stated that the

hotels under different strategic alliances have better

performance result as compare with the hotels which does not

have. These factors make the sector particularly exposed to

current trends and formed the group of Hotels to tie-up with

market leaders to operate. Competitive pressures among the

hotels, Government subsidy to the private investors,

Globalization of services, Intervention of Technology, Innovation

in business, International hotel group entry due to

Globalization, Encouragement of Foreign direct investment are

considered as most dominant factor of TTDC to form new strategy

alliance with market leaders. Without doubt, developments in

technology have also transformed the way in which the hotel firm

distributes its product, by facilitating the effective flow of

information and transactions on a global basis. As a result, the

hotel sector is linking with increasingly sophisticated

computerized reservation systems (CRS) to reach out the product

globally. Already it is estimated that, worldwide, over 40 per

cent of business, and over 70 per cent of leisure travelers, book

their hotel accommodation through travel agents. In India alone,

22 per cent of hotel bookings are currently made via a CRS, and

it is predicted that these figures will continue to increase in

the forthcoming years. Consequently, it is now almost dictated

that hoteliers must work more in association with technology and

other contemporary apparatus to make the process effective. Given

the combination of these developments, it is difficult to see how

the small firm like TTDC can maintain overall independence of

action with the pressure of market competitiveness, the failure

of resistance ultimately forces for consequent losing of market

share. The closer investigation of this study about the

effectiveness of strategic alliances finds different attributes,

aiming to identify means of reducing the vulnerability of the

small Hotel firm.

3. Research Design and Methodology

Names and addresses of targeted hotels were drawn from the

Department of Tourism, Government of Tamilnadu and Tamilnadu

Tourism Development Corporation website. The questionnaire has

been divided into three parts. Part one was designed to get the

information regarding the respondents and their concern hotels.

Part two aimed at obtaining information about the motivational

factors in terms of using marketing alliances strategy. While

part three has been developed in order to get information about

factors for strategic alliance impact, performance and problems

of franchised Accommodation sector. The questionnaires were

properly pre-tested and piloted, after pilot study, a total of 90

questionnaires were distributed personally as well as using

electronic mail service to managers at different levels as

mentioned above from the franchised hotels of TTDC. The major

respondents for this study are the managers of the Hotel at

different levels – general, technical, administrative, and

financial. The obtained data were statistically grouped and

analysed. 68 valid responses were received; the response rate was

75%. The researcher had used a series of tests to justify the

sample was representative and not biased, the Chi-square test was

used identify the significance level. The Chi-squire test

indicated no statistically significant differences between

respondents and non-respondents with respect to hotel size (χ2 =

3.134, p = 168, 2-sided) and ownership sectors (χ2 = 2.763, p =

196, 2-sided). The sample thus is representative of the

population and the findings can be generalised to the hotel

sector (Total Population). The reliability test has been carried

out using Cronbach’s alpha, which measures the internal

consistency of various factors (Variables). The recommended

minimum acceptable limit of reliability alpha for this measure is

60 % (Sekaran, 2003). The result can be seen in table 1, which

show that all the factors have passed reliability test where all

α- values have exceeded the recommended minimum value of

Cronbach’s alpha.

Table 4. Reliability analyses

Factors Number of items αMotives for performance 10 76Impact, performance and

problems

8 69

Hypotheses: Based on the available literature, the following

hypotheses are framed for this study,

H1: The franchise partnership model of TTDC hotels motives for

the better performance.

H0: There is no significant relation between the strategic

partnership and performance of the hotels.

H2: There is a significant relation between the strategic

partnership and performance of the hotels.

4. Analysis and Interpretation

4.1 Profile of Respondents

The study sample shows variables with regard to age, gender and

ownership of the hotels. It can be seen from Table 1 that the age

category 20-30 represented 15.5%; the age category 31-40

represented 42.2%, while the age category 41-50 represented 28.5%

and 51 above represented 13.8%. In terms of gender, it was found

that almost 89.5 % of the respondents were males against 10.5%

for females. The ownership types were 85% hotels are in the form

of franchise partnership model and 15% hotels are coming under

other partnership model like lease and management contract. 40%

of them had more than five years working experience in their

current position 25.5% of respondents had a total experience of

more than ten years in their current position and 15% had a total

experience of 21 years and above. 48% of respondents represented

small hotels, 35% medium hotels and 17% represented hotels from

lesser known destinations.

4.2 Results

The performances of the hotels under various strategic alliances

were identified by measuring various attributes under the head of

“Motivational Indicator” in the respondent questionnaire. The

respondents were asked to indicate what objectives were achieved

by their alliances and to what extent, and what factor they

considered potential causes of motives alliances performance and

the extent to which these factors influences the alliance

outcome. 10 parameters were used to identify the effective

performance of the hotel under the strategic partnership model.

All the parameters were asked in terms of statement, respondents

were asked to indicate the extent to which they agrees along a

five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 = “strongly disagree” to

5 = “strongly agree” are explained in the following table 5.

Table 5. Franchise partnership model of TTDC hotels motives for the better performanceare measured by using the following 10 parameters:Sl.No.

Motivational Indicator for Performance Mean* SD

1 Entering new markets and adjusts to change of market; 3.563 1.327

2 Building of effective service delivery systems; 3.621 1.022

3 Gaining access to new technology; 4.411 1.135 4 Cost sharing, minimizing costs and pooling of resources;

3.653 1.239 5 Innovation, knowledge sharing and embedded skills;

3.754 1.230 6 Acquiring means of distribution; 2.867 1.415 7 Delivering service standard and performances;

4.012 1.321 8 Achieving competitive advantage; 3.981 1.287 9 Reduce financial and political risk;

2.701 1.643 10 Developing products, technologies, resources;

4.202 1.226

*The Mean is derived from a scale of 1 = Strongly disagree to 5= Strongly agree.

Table 6. The Impact, performance and problems of strategic partnership alliances aremeasured by using the 8 parameters:Sl.No.

Impact, performance and problem indicator Mean SD

1 Occupancy rates; 4.0111.471

2 Business volume; 3.322 1.129 3 Profit / Loss; 4.101

1.110 4 Service quality; 4.003

1.219 5 Customer satisfaction; 3.981 1.311 6 Human resource quality; 3.867

1.150 7 Performance risk; 4.002

1.521 8 New capital and Market expansion; 4.234 1.297

4.3 Hypotheses testing

H1: The franchise partnership model of TTDC hotels motives for the better

performance.

T-test are used when the researcher has two groups or two sets of

data (e.g. before and after) and when the researcher wishes to

compare the mean value on some continuous variable (Sekaran, 2003

& Suleiman, 2012). It is possible especially when the size of the

sample is more than 30. Table 7 shows that the mean for Franchise

partnership model motives for the better performance are positive

is 3.676, which is greater than the test value (2.5). The

significant level of all the 10 indicators under the t-test shows

.039, which is lesser than the accepted significant level (0.050)

i.e. Franchise partnership model of TTDC hotels motives for the

better and outstanding performance of the hotels. Hence, this

hypothesis has been accepted.

Table 7. One sample t-test: Franchise partnership model motives for the betterperformance(a)

N Mean Std.Deviation

Std. ErrorMean

Franchise partnershipmodel motives for thebetter performance

68 3.676 .593 3.241 E-02

Test Value = 2.5(b)

T Df Significant

Franchise partnershipmodel motives for thebetter performance

29.476 65 .039

H2: There is a significant relation between the strategic partnership and performance of thehotels.

The cross-tabs calculation has been adopted to evaluate the

relationship between strategic partnership and performance of the

hotels. 10 Impact, performance and problem indicator has been

used as a performance indicator and 12 motive components has been

considered as a strategic partnership motivational factor. It’s

clearly defines that there is a strong relationship between the

two variables and the significant level is also achieved, the

level of significant are shown in the Chi-Square test:

Table: 8

Chi-Square Tests

Value Diff. Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 13.540a 6 .019

Likelihood Ratio 16.530 6 .014

N of Valid Cases 68

a. 5 cells (39.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimumexpected count is .69.

A cross tab evaluation between strategic partnership and effective

performance of the hotels were analysed to justify the

significance of franchise partnership model of TTDC hotels for

better performance and outcome. Chi square test was done by

assuming the significance level as “0.05”. The output shows that

there is a significant relationship among these variables and it

justifies that the strategic partnership (Franchise) model

adopted by TTDC has given positive performance and outcome in

terms of Occupancy rates; Business volume; Profit margin; Service

quality; Customer satisfaction; Human resource quality;

Performance risk; New capital and Market expansion. The

significance level between strategic partnership and effective

performance of the hotels is 0.019(Pearson Chi-Square test) and

the likelihood ratio is 0.014. Hence, the null hypothesis for the

statement has been rejected. The alternative hypothesis,(i.e.)

There is a significant relation between the strategic partnership

and performance of the hotels has been accepted.

5. Discussion and Conclusion

The research findings shows that the highest rank statements from

the perception of staff members regarding the motivational

factors of strategic partnership of hotels are that “Gaining

access to new technology; Developing products, technologies,

resources; Delivering service standard and performances; followed

by Achieving competitive advantage and Innovation, knowledge

sharing and embedded skills”. Since, the existing chain of hotels

under Tamilnadu Tourism Development corporation are facing lot of

pressures due to competitive market, the franchised hotels could

overcome the present situation with the involvement of strategic

partnership approach. Findings indicate that the hotels comes

under strategic alliances have strong similarities in terms of

the ranges of strategic resources accessible and resultant

benefits, as highlighted in Tables III. The extent to which

hotels provide these resources and benefits varies with the level

of capital investment and the stage in the development of the

systems, service quality and customer satisfaction and market

competitiveness and infrastructure.

Considering the results of hypotheses testing summarized in table

7 and 8 respectively, the primary data analysis and output

justifies the acceptance of hypothesis H1 “The franchise

partnership model of TTDC hotels motives for the better

performance”. Meanwhile, the research hypothesis H2 “There is asignificant relation between the strategic partnership and performance

of the hotels” has also been accepted by rejecting the null hypothesis

regarding the performance indicators of hotels. However, the result of

H1 and H2 are consistent with the research output. These results

indicate that the strategic partnership model adopted by the TTDC

hotel firm have a positive attitude towards the accommodation

business.

This article has highlighted the strong challenges facing small

firm practitioners in the hotel sector. In particular, it has

been identified that the hotel sector is rapidly moving into

different “strategic partnership”, with the potential to change

competitive forces, market boundaries, and the nature of business

operation. As such, concern about service quality, customer

satisfaction and reputation of hotel products has reached a high

level of intensity, assuming a much more central position in

marketing strategy than in the past. What is important is not to

be intimidated by these challenges, but to recognize that they

are resulting in generating a range of attractive marketing

strategy alternatives, in partnership with private or within the

public sector organizations. It is recognized that a result of

adopting such strategic alternatives may result in a massive

shift in the volume of business and quality service. However,

hoteliers have the opportunity to manage the evolving situation

through co-operative strategic alliances right through different

levels of the process. In the tough, competitive environment of

21st century market, it is vital that adoption of such a

strategic approach is not regarded as an “extra optional”, for it

has emerged as an essential feature of small hotel firms which

wish to remain in business forever.

However, implicit in the alliance is the acceptance of a certain

level of participation expenses. What is essential is that the

small firm selects the most beneficial configuration of strategic

alliances which will maximize the return on expenses. However,

although this study has justified its aim and objectives, it is

felt that there are many areas available for further empirical

study. Under which category the hotel needs alliances; which

strategic partnership model helps the small hotel firms to

overcome the present market situation; partner selection methods

are some of the area where the researcher not concentrated. Thus,

based on the present research output, there is a wide scope for

further study on partnership model and partners selection

methods.

References:

Alison J. Morrison, (1994) "Marketing Strategic Alliances: The Small HotelFirm", International Journal of Contemporary HospitalityManagement, Vol. 6 Iss: 3, pp.25 – 30

Coulson-Thomas, C.J. (1997). “Process management in a hospital and health-care context”. Business Process Management Journal, 3(2), pp.118-32.

Child, J., Faulkner, D., & Tallman, S. (2005). Cooperative Strategy:Managing Alliances. Networks, and Joint Ventures, Oxford University Press,Oxford.

Cristina Jönsson, Dwayne Devonish, (2009) "An exploratory study ofcompetitive strategies among hotels in a small developing Caribbean state",International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,Vol. 21 Iss: 4, pp.491 - 500

Department of Tourism, Government of Tamilnadu (2012). Retrievedfrom www.tamilnadutourism.org

Doz, Y., & Hamel, G. (1999). Alliance Advantage: The Art of Creating Valuethrough Partnering. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Doz, Y. (1996). “The evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances: initialconditions or learning processes?”. Strategic Management Journal, 17,SPI, pp.55-83.

Government of Tamilnadu. (2012), “Tamilnadu Review of Performance ofState Public Sector Undertakings for the year 2010-11”. pp. 83-89 Hamel G. (1991). “Competition for competence and interpartner learning withininternational strategic alliances”. Strategic Management Journal, 12 (1),pp.83-103.

Jeannet, J., & Hennessey, H. (1992). “Global Marketing Strategies”.Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.

Jones, E., Chonko, L., & Roberts, J. (2003). “Creating a partnership-oriented, nowledge creation culture in strategic sales alliances: a conceptualframework”. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 18(4/5),pp.336-52.

Kotler, P., Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation andControl, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1991.

Lewis, J., Partnerships for Profit, Free Press, New York, NY, 1990.

Lowensberg, D. (2010). “A “new” view on “traditional” strategic alliances’formation paradigms”. Management Decision, 48(7), pp.1090-1102.

Mason, J. (1993). “Strategic alliances: partnering for success”. ManagementReview, 82(5), pp.10-15.

Ministry of Tourism, Government of India. (2012). Retrieved fromwww.tourism.gov.in

Olsen, M., “Structural Changes: The International Hospitality Industry and Firm”,International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,Vol. 3 No. 4, 1991, pp. 21-4.

Pimtong Tavitiyaman, Hanqin Qiu Zhang, Hailin Qu, (2012),"The effectof competitive strategies and organizational structure on hotel performance",International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,Vol. 24 Iss: 1 pp. 140 - 159

Porter, M. (1985). Competitive Advantage. Free Press, New York, NY.

Poulymenakou, A & Prasopoulou, E. (2004). “Adopting lifecycle perspectiveto explain the transition from technological innovation to alliance management”.Management Decision, 9, pp.1115-1130.

Sekaran, U. (2003). Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach (4th Edition). John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Stephen Drew, Colin Coulson-Thomas, (1997) "Transformation throughteamwork: the path to the new organization?", Team Performance Management,Vol. 3 Iss: 3, pp.162 - 178

Solesvik, M., & Westhead, P. (2010). “Partner selection for strategicalliances: case study insights from the maritime industry”. IndustrialManagement and Data Systems, 110(6), pp.841-860.

Suleiman, A. (2012). “Marketing strategic alliances: the hotel sector in Jordon”.International Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 7, No.9,pp.222-230.

Wang, C., & Ahmed, P. (2001). “Energising the organization: a new agenda forbusiness excellence”. MeasuringBusiness Excellence, 5(4), pp.22-7.