IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v70y2024i5p3225-3244.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To Communicate or Not? Interfirm Communication in Collaborative Projects

Author

Listed:
  • Ruth Beer

    (Zicklin School of Business, Baruch College, City University of New York, New York, New York 10010)

  • Anyan Qi

    (Naveen Jindal School of Management, The University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas 75080)

Abstract

Interfirm innovation projects often require tight collaboration among firms with complementary skills and resources. The success of such projects depends on all firms generating high-quality outputs, which can be difficult to attain for aspects of quality that are not easily observable or contractible. We consider a setting with a focal firm and its collaborating firm (henceforth, the collaborator) engaging in a joint project, in which they make their quality decisions over time, respectively, and study the firm’s decision to communicate its quality output progress to its collaborator voluntarily. We first develop normative predictions using game-theoretic models by analyzing a reporting (respectively, revealing) case, in which the firm can report a not necessarily truthful quality (the truthful quality) to the collaborator. We find that the firm should be indifferent between reporting and not reporting for all project values and should be indifferent between revealing and not revealing (prefer revealing) for high (low) project values. To test this prediction, we run an experiment following a 2 × 3 design, varying the project value (high and low) and the form of communication (no communication, reporting, and revealing). We find that the quality provision is significantly lower than the normative prediction in all treatments. When the project value is high, the decision to report is beneficial to the firm (regardless of the reported quality) because the decision signals the firm’s intention to contribute high quality. The decision to reveal is also beneficial for a firm; however, a different mechanism is at play in this case. The decision itself does not directly affect the quality provisions, but the revealed quality does as the collaborator waits to observe the truthful revealed quality and incorporates this information in choosing a quality later. By contrast, when the project value is low, neither reporting nor revealing are beneficial for a firm. In particular, the decision to report no longer acts as a positive signal as it is used by firms trying to deceive the collaborator and get an advantage.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruth Beer & Anyan Qi, 2024. "To Communicate or Not? Interfirm Communication in Collaborative Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(5), pages 3225-3244, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:70:y:2024:i:5:p:3225-3244
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2022.03180
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.03180
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2022.03180?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:70:y:2024:i:5:p:3225-3244. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.