In knowledge-intensive industries, firms increasingly leverage alliance networks to access critical resources and foster innovation. While structural holes—gaps between unconnected network actors—allow firms to act as brokers and access diverse knowledge and opportunities, they also carry inherent relational risks, particularly in intellectual property (IP)-driven collaborations. This study examines how brokerage positions influence the risk of patent litigation from alliance partners and explores key contingencies affecting this relationship. Drawing on structural hole theory and alliance network literature, we argue and find that firms occupying brokerage positions face heightened litigation risks as their structural power over knowledge flows and IP resources fosters partner perceptions of opportunism and exploitation, leading to lawsuits by the partners in the network. These litigation risks are further amplified when partners themselves span structural holes, as the presence of multiple brokers intensifies competitive dynamics and power asymmetries. Yet, a focal firm's reputation for litigiousness serves as a protective mechanism, mitigating these risks by signaling a clear commitment to formal dispute resolution. This study advances our understanding of network dynamics by revealing how the interplay between structural positions and firm-level behavioral tendencies shapes litigation outcomes in knowledge-intensive alliance networks.
