If both parties contribute their resources to a joint venture , then that ' s where knowledge exchange occurs immediately . After all , the parties involved share one primary goal : to make sure the joint venture is successful . This is to the advantage of the partner that contributes the least amount of knowledge-based resources , in this case company A .
Since 2008 , the British beverage company Diageo is the exclusive market supplier of the vodka brand Ketel One , especially in the United States . For this it paid 900 million dollars to the Nolet family , who remain owner of the brand name Ketel One . Diageo and the Nolet family transfer the sales rights into a joint venture in which both parties hold a 50 % stake .
The agreement is set up based on the interest of Ketel One : this company owns most material resources , namely the sales rights , which give exclusive access to the underlying production company . Diageo owns most knowledge-based resources : namely , relevant market knowledge . The sum paid by Diageo should mainly be seen as compensation for 50 % of the sales rights , meaning 50 % of the profit .
If , on the other hand , company A contributes the most amount of knowledge-based resources and partner B more material resources , then A will have a preference for a minority share in the collaboration partner . This is the best assurance that the partner will not misuse the knowledge acquired in the course of the collaboration . Should this nevertheless occur to any substantial degree , then the share will anyway be worth more .
In 2010 , General Electric Oil & Gas obtained a minority share in Shenyang , China ‟ s leading compressor manufacturer . For General Electric this gave further access to the Chinese market , a hard-toobtain resource that Shenyang could provide . For Shenyang the technology of General Electric was important , which is less easy to protect in a collaboration . Through its minority share General Electric receives at least part of the extra value that the collaboration generates .
If both parties contribute mainly knowledge-based resources , then the effect of the alliance will decrease following a first learning period . Both parties will want to arrange the best possible protection for their own knowledge , and that they can use newly developed knowledge . A bilateral agreement is the most obvious option here .
CMS law firm has concluded an agreement with The Levant Lawyers , the largest lawyers ' office in Lebanon . " There are important opportunities for the further development of our activities in the Middle East ", says CMS ' s Bob Palmer , partner for Energy and projects . Emile Kanaan , chairman of The Levant Lawyers , comments on the initiative : " We are very pleased with the collaboration with CMS . Thanks to this , we can offer our clients access to some 2500 lawyers and the most extensive network of law firms in Europe ".
CMS and The Levant Lawyers each offer the other access to clients in their own region . The parties can also acquire knowledge about doing business between the regions . All relevant aspects can be arranged in a bilateral agreement , in which the two parties have an equal position .
If both parties mainly contribute material resources , then unilateral agreements seem most appropriate . Such agreements will arrange , for example , the use of distribution channels , patents or other scarce resources in return for money or services .
At the end of 2010 , 3M Drug Delivery Systems signed an exclusive licensing agreement with Spirig Pharma
86