Alliance experience has been a frequent topic in strategic alliance research in recent decades. Nonetheless, its performance consequences, either as a whole or differentiated into general versus partner-specific alliance experience, are neither theoretically clear nor empirically consistent. We use a range of meta-analytic techniques to integrate the empirical findings of 143 studies and provide a more conclusive assessment compared to prior research. Our study thus addresses a long-standing, understudied, and controversial topic: the distinction between the two types of alliance experiences. Going beyond traditional sub-group analysis, we reveal the contextual contingencies by examining how different types of alliance experiences and performance outcomes jointly affect the alliance experience–performance relationship. Moreover, we identify critical country-level institutional contingencies that moderate the focal effect.

近几十年来，联盟经验一直是战略联盟研究中经常讨论的话题。尽管如此，无论从整体上还是从普通经验到特定于合作伙伴的联盟经验，其绩效后果在理论上都不是明确的，也不是经验上一致的。我们使用了一系列的荟萃分析技术来整合143个研究的经验结果，并提供比以前的研究更具结论性的评估。因此，我们的研究解决了一个长期存在，未被研究和有争议的话题：两种类型的联盟经历之间的区别。超越传统的亚组分析，我们通过研究不同类型的联盟经验和绩效结果如何共同影响联盟经验与绩效的关系，揭示了上下文的偶然性。此外，