To simplify, a strategic alliance is a mutually beneficial agreement between two companies. One of the first steps should be to protect each party`s confidential data and material before a significant exchange of information takes place. A written agreement on confidentiality or confidentiality is common and rarely encounters a contradiction. Related decisions include whether the protection of confidentiality should be unilateral or reciprocal, the scope of confidential information, the duration of obligations and corrective action in the event of an infringement. If companies can make such a priority change, they greatly improve their chances of success – a conclusion based on our 20 years of experience in working with successful and failing alliances, and on the systematic research we have conducted over the past six years. In this article, we will illustrate as examples the five basic principles of this approach to managing the alliance with the help of several companies with which we have worked. When drug manufacturer Aventis and biotechnology company Millennium Pharmaceuticals formed an alliance, the companies worked together to develop a list of problem-solving protocols, including: “When we discuss challenges, we present possible solutions, not just problems.” Compliance with protocols has helped partners achieve their goals quickly. Many companies find it difficult to operate their alliances as they had imagined, and many of these partnerships are not meeting their defined goals. Some common mistakes are: “Strategic” may be one of the most used words in the economy today. This observation is particularly valid in the world of alliances, where managers must distinguish between alliances that are only conventional and those that are truly strategic.
This author describes the five factors that make an alliance “strategic.” There are seven general areas where alliances can be leveraged.  The real reason why most alliances fail is the constant change in the business environment. Trust allows parties in a strategic alliance to conduct the difficult discussions that will change the alliance over time and give it longevity. While business strategies are changing due to changes in the business environment, the assumptions on which the strategic alliance was originally based are also evolving. What was once a strategic investment must no longer remain strategic without changing the terms of the Alliance. In the most extreme cases, the trust established between the two companies allows us to adapt – even to renegotiate financial conditions – to take account of changes in the market or other conditions affecting one of the partners. According to the Ivey Business Journal, a strategic business alliance needs five key elements to succeed. An anon-equity strategic alliance is formed when two or more companies sign a contractual relationship to bring their resources and skills together. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida (BCBSF) have entered into alliances with other health insurers and technology and financial service providers to develop new, affordable services for members. It contains metrics in its Alliance scores that measure progress towards the ultimate goals and identify problems that could undermine them. To understand the reasons for strategic alliances, we examine three product life cycles: slow cycle, standard cycle and fast cycle.
The product lifecycle is determined by the need to develop innovations and continuously develop new products in a sector. For example, the pharmaceutical industry works with a slow product lifecycle, while the software industry works on a fast life cycle. For companies whose product falls within another product life cycle, the reasons for strategic alliances are different: peg counters for progress.