Search

Recent academic research presents a large volume of studies on the organic market from the perspective of consumers’ motivation and purchasing preferences. However, these studies adopt a competitive or cooperative approach, but overlook the institutional complexity of emerging markets. This study aims to investigate the organic food production chain of emerging countries from the perspective of coopetition, taking into account the influence of formal institution agents. We focused our analysis on the chain of the organic food products, with the organic ice-cream producer as the key node of the chain. It is a single-case study conducted through in loco interviews with participants in the organic food products’ chain, along with secondary data. The results show the influence of formal institution agents and non-financial incentives as primary drivers of entrepreneurial strategic decisions. We contributed to the coopetition literature by demonstrating the influence of formal institution agents on value creation and value capture in the organic chain.

Companies rely widely on coopetition, that is, cooperation with competitors, to foster their innovation. However, despite its increasing popularity, the impact of coopetition on innovation remains unclear. Different theories predict different results, and empirical evidence suggests that coopetition can either improve or reduce innovation performance, or even make no impact. The lack of consensus makes further exploration of this important relationship essential. Our study attempts to shed new light on the impact of sourcing from competitors on innovation, using a data-driven exploratory model that needs no prior specification of the direction and form of this relationship. We use a recently developed analytical method based on the preference disaggregation approach to analyze data from a sample of 112 firms operating in the petroleum, chemical, and pharmaceutical industries. We find that sourcing from competitors fosters the innovation performance of firms with financial constraints (small firms receiving no financial support from the government for innovation). In contrast, our results show that sourcing from competitors has a non-linear negative impact on large and small firms receiving such financial support, and that sourcing from competitors is much riskier for small firms in this category. Our findings contribute to the coopetition for innovation literature by highlighting that the relationship between sourcing from competitors and innovation performance depends on firm characteristics, i.e., size and financial capability. Our use of a preference disaggregation method confirms its value when studying relationships between variables where the conceptual and empirical evidence leaves this relationship unclear.

Coopetition is a business phenomenon that dominates many supply chains. We aim to understand why and how coopetition occurs in supply chains with the presence of process improvement in upstream component production. An original equipment manufacturer (OEM) can purchase the component from either a non-competing supplier (NS) or a competing supplier (CS) that also sells substitutable products in the end consumer market. We demonstrate that without process improvement, coopetition does not exist, because the OEM prefers sourcing from the NS, even though the CS is willing to sell the component to the OEM. Two cases are considered in which process improvement is present: supplier-initiated investment, where the suppliers conduct self-investment, and OEM-initiated investment, where the OEM invests in the supplier's process. We find that with supplier-initiated investment, the CS always prefers coopetition, but the OEM may not. When the investment is efficient, coopetition occurs as an equilibrium outcome; otherwise, competition occurs. The cause of coopetition equilibrium comes from variable process improvement incentives of the CS that derive from two driving forces: the vertical wholesale price effect and the horizontal quantity competition effect. When the degree of product substitution is low, the CS increases its investment and lowers its wholesale price, benefiting the OEM. When the degree of product substitution is high, the CS reduces its investment as well as production quantity, which also benefits the OEM. Interestingly, with OEM-initiated investment, the CS might not always choose to sell the component to the OEM, and as a result, coopetition never occurs.

Notwithstanding the increasing interest in coopetition, relevant research is still composed of loosely connected themes with little contextual focus. Little attention has been paid to explain coopetition at multiple stages and levels, in various industries, and between micro-firms. This paper addresses these gaps by proposing a multi-level mechanism, unravelling the relationship between coopetition management, value co-creation, knowledge-enhancement, and superior performance achievement in micro-businesses. Using qualitative methods, we look at the non-high tech alpaca industry. Results reveal that the successful coopetition management in various coopetition stages, at an individual, organizational, and industry level, leads to value co-creation, knowledge-enhancement, and to the VRIO resources development, and thus drive positive outcomes for the individuals and organizations engaged and for the industry as a whole. This mechanism is influenced by industrial, market, and institutional factors.

Research in the field of coopetition, which describes firms simultaneously competing and collaborating to create value, has recently gained enormous momentum. Over the period of 2015 to 2020, scholars published more high-quality studies on this subject than in the entire 25-year history of coopetition research. Despite the relevance of these contributions, their fragmented nature and disjuncture from prior studies limit a connected understanding of the current standing of the field. Our analysis addresses this gap by systematically reviewing, comparing, and connecting a selected sample of 161 recent articles with the body of research established prior to 2015. Our study makes three main contributions. We (1) structure and connect past and present coopetition research across five identified research dimensions: Antecedents, execution, interaction, outcomes, and levels of coopetition. We (2) supplement this review with a qualitative trend analysis, identifying emerging themes for the future of the field. By combining past and present perspectives with the future outlook, we (3) provide a comprehensive, unique, and updated perspective on coopetition research, unifying it into a cohesive, overarching framework. Lastly, we explain crucial interdependencies and suggest areas for future research before we conclude the study.

Despite substantive evidence showing mixed results on the association between a coopetitive relationship and performance, surprisingly little theory explains the contingencies under which a coopetitive relationship does (or does not) matter to performance. By combining insights from the trust-distrust literature and 18 in-depth managerial conversations, this study unpacks the multidimensional nature of trust (i.e., goodwill and competence) and distrust (i.e., malevolence and discredibility) and suggests that the effect of a coopetitive relationship matters to performance, when both trust and distrust are present (at moderate to high levels), but fails to do so when one of them is low and the other is high. The results based on a sample of Swedish firms provide full support for the hypotheses. In terms of theoretical contributions, this study challenges the old wisdom suggesting trust as good and distrust as bad, extends the current understanding of trust and distrust beyond their one-dimensionality, and provides a novel approach to understanding when a coopetitive relationship performs well and when it does not. In terms of practical relevance, it suggests that firms adopt a paradox mindset (with a focus on both trust and distrust) to unlock the positive potential of a coopetitive relationship.

Digital platforms help develop the open value co-creation strategic alliances, reshape traditional B2B relationships, and promote inclusive social innovation. This research explores the nature of coopetition between the digital platform and its participants. The focus is on how the platform-based alliance balances the contradiction between value creation and appropriation. The support evidence derives from a Stackelberg game in the context of cooperative advertising. Either the platform or the participant supporting advertising in the alliance prompts a Pareto improvement for all players. But the increased profit would be mainly occupied by the dominant platform. The incentive mechanism of profit sharing can promote the alliance to co-create value in a sustainable manner. The game illustrates the significance of cooperative relationships to co-create a larger total value and the existence of an unequal win-win relationship in the strategic alliance. The contradictory logic of cooperation and competition can be accommodated in the platform-based alliance. The dynamic coopetition is involved in a partially convergent interest structure and impacted by power asymmetry. The results highlight the balance between the tensions and harmonies through value creation and appropriation.

Although a body of work surrounds the notion of coopetition (simultaneous cooperation and competition), the complexities of these inter-firm networks remain relatively under-researched. Consequently, this current study infuses resource-based theory and the relational view (alongside drawing upon the outside-in marketing perspective) to evaluate the drivers and outcomes of coopetition activities. The core method involved collecting survey data from a national-level sample of 323 American wine producers. After assessing this information for all major robustness checks, ordinary least squares regression analysis was used in the model-testing stage. The results showed that while a coopetition-oriented mindset, a competitor orientation, inter-firm trust, and competitive intensity positively impact coopetition activities (in a linear manner), there are certain moderating effects that influence these paths. Additionally, coopetition activities yielded a quadratic association with company performance. Business experience negatively affected this link, whereas, there was a positive interaction effect from industry experience. These findings, offer new evidence regarding the risks and potential rewards of coopetition, including mechanisms that decision-makers can utilize to manage these inter-firm relationships.

The importance of cooperation between higher education institutions (HEIs) has increased and allows the development of competitive advantages, particularly through the transfer of knowledge and technology. Establishing well-conceived and well-managed cooperation networks can bring benefits and overcome obstacles. This article assesses the importance of cooperation between HEIs, characterizing the type of partner suitable for the establishment of cooperation and analysing the benefits and barriers that may arise. To achieve this objective, a qualitative approach based on a case study was adopted. Portuguese HEIs cooperating in the Business Simulation (BS) project were analysed. The results obtained reveal that cooperation between HEIs, more specifically in the BS project, is fundamental for the exchange of knowledge, the acquisition of new technology and platforms, and the acquisition of new work practices. However, it will be necessary to overcome barriers, principally of a more technological nature. This study uses a new and innovative structure, employing a model that expands knowledge on the topic by identifying three dimensions that influence cooperation between HEIs. The authors also present implications for theory and practice and propose an agenda for future research.

PurposeThe present study aims to tackle SMEs (small and medium-sized enterprises) managers' awareness of coopetition benefits underpinning the process of knowledge sharing with a view to achieve innovative performance. The scrutiny of coopetition is placed within the context of SMEs strategic networks, which foster a fertile ground for competitive knowledge sharing and direct collaboration among members.Design/methodology/approachIn total, 102 top managers and business owners of European steel SMEs were questioned regarding various issues related to coopetition, knowledge, collaboration and innovative performance strategies. The collected data were analyzed via the technique of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM).FindingsThe obtained values confirm that intense competition in the field stimulates SMEs to become aware of the benefits of coopetition. This awareness directly influences the innovative performance of the SMEs, as well as their interest in competitive knowledge sharing and their willingness to engage in direct collaboration. Direct collaboration catalyzes more intense competitive knowledge sharing at the inter-unit level whereas both direct collaboration and competitive knowledge sharing lead to better innovative performance in the case of the studied steel SMEs.Research limitations/implicationsA key theoretical contribution resides in revealing the influence of manifold factors in the overall equation of innovative performance, integrating competition, coopetition and knowledge sharing as antecedents.Originality/valueThe research advances a phenomenological view on SMEs networks in their strategy to leverage competitive knowledge and enhance system-driven innovation.

Firms in an international B2B relationship often simultaneously pursue two types of benefits: Common benefit (cooperation) and private benefit competition). Past literature only examined performance implications of such behavioral tensions. Drawing on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, this study attempts to build a theoretical model to better understand firms’ behavioral intentions from a cultural perspective in international B2B relationships. Propositions were developed on five dimensions of the cultural framework: individualism/collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity/femininity, long-term orientation/short-term orientation, and power distance. This model should help firms to select partners with the most compatible objectives and to establish appropriate safeguarding mechanisms based on their behavioral intentions.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to increase understanding about vertical coopetition from the perspective of interrelated conflict episodes on multiple levels. Design/methodology/approach The empirical part is based on a qualitative single case study of a coopetitive buyer-supplier relationship in the manufacturing sector. Findings Conflicts in vertical coopetition evolve from being merely functional and task-related to becoming dysfunctional and relationship-related, as the level of competition increases. The nature of conflict episodes influences the development of vertical coopetition, and therefore, the interrelatedness of conflict episodes is important to acknowledge. Practical implications Although a conflict is considered functional within a company, it may still be dysfunctional as far as the coopetitive relationship with the buyer or seller is concerned. Competition may trigger conflicts related to protecting own technology and knowledge, which may lead to termination of the cooperation, therefore coopetition should be managed in a way that balance sharing and protecting important knowledge to get advantages of coopetition. Originality/value The findings enhance prior research on vertical coopetition by offering new perspectives on causes of conflicts, their management, outcomes and types. The value of taking a multilevel approach lies in the ability to show how conflicts occur and influence other conflicts through the interrelatedness of conflict elements on different levels.

In this paper, we contribute to the literature on uncertainty and the drivers of social exchange. We explore the 2008 financial crisis and hand-collect unique data on more than 2,700 vessel chartering deals closed in the container shipping industry from 2000 to 2011. Our contribution is twofold. We challenge the literature by finding that low and high status players use different collaborative strategies under uncertainty: the high status players are more prone to coopetition and the low status ones reach out to external buyers. We also extend the literature on social exchange and uncertainty and introduce other constructs: strategic versatility and country-level long-term orientation of the suppliers that we study in our model. Our findings are relevant for policy and managerial decision-makers in the industry.

We consider a coopetitive game model of firms’ behavior in process R&D with entry cost. We compare the competitive behavior of firms in R&D with the R&D coopetition scenario. In R&D coopetition, firms engage in a bargaining process to reach a binding R&D agreement. We find that R&D competition can lead to a prisoner’s dilemma or a chicken game between market rivals. The possibility of entering a binding R&D agreement resolves the above social dilemmas associated with the firms’ competitive behavior. In turn, under R&D coopetition, for a medium level of R&D entry cost, firms may enter a trust dilemma, but it is a beneficial scenario in comparison with the corresponding R&D competition outcome.

Although coopetition (simultaneous cooperation and competition) is likely to enhance financial performance if effectively managed, earlier investigations have overlooked the complexities of this relationship. Most notably, understanding the impact of moderating factors can help unpack the complexity of the association between coopetition and performance. Therefore, grounded in resource-based theory and the relational view, this study focuses on the quadratic relationship between coopetition and financial performance under different degrees of export intensity and export geographical scope. Using survey responses from 101 wine producers in New Zealand, the empirical results show that coopetition has a nonlinear (inverted U-shaped) relationship with financial performance. Furthermore, export intensity and export geographical scope positively moderate this quadratic association. As such, for underresourced firms with overseas market potential, decision makers should consider the merits of combining the benefits of coopetition with those from an internationalized business model. This arrangement can help them navigate these potentially paradoxical forces, assuming they engage with trustworthy and complementary rivals in coopetition partnerships.

PurposeCertain small businesses do not possess the assets needed to implement a performance-enhancing entrepreneurial marketing orientation (opportunity-driven behaviours focussed on creating value for customers). Although some entrepreneurs cooperate with their competitors (coopetition) to achieve their day-to-day and long-term goals, it is unclear whether these partnerships are advantageous in this capacity. Thus, grounded in the resource-based view, the purpose of this investigation is to examine whether coopetition positively moderates the relationship between an entrepreneurial marketing orientation and financial performance.Design/methodology/approachSurvey responses were obtained from 184 small tourism and hospitality organisations in New Zealand. Following a series of robustness checks, covariance-based structural equation modelling was used to test the elements of the conceptual model.FindingsUnique insights illustrate an entrepreneurial marketing orientation yielding a negative and significant link with financial performance. Nevertheless, this result was potentially related to the entrepreneurial marketing-oriented opportunities that owner-managers pursued within the context of their sector; in particular, situations when employing an individualistic business model constrained certain decision-makers' ability to pursue “growth-oriented” objectives. However, coopetition produced a positive and significant moderating effect, enabling owner-managers to pursue opportunities via collaborative business models facilitating mutually beneficial performance outcomes.Practical implicationsOwner-managers of under-resourced small firms should be careful when implementing entrepreneurial marketing strategies utilising an individualistic business model. For example, they might pursue opportunities that are not viable and/or become over-loaded with market intelligence that they cannot handle. By collaborating with competitors, owner-managers can learn improved ways to operate within their industries, alongside being equipped with new resources and capabilities. In doing so, coopetition can help overcome some of the potential performance-limiting issues owner-managers face by being under-resourced, namely, via employing a collaborative business model.Originality/valueThis current study contributes to the extant literature by evaluating the complexities of entrepreneurial marketing practices. That is, although earlier research has focussed on the performance-driving outcomes of an entrepreneurial marketing orientation, prior studies typically overlook certain moderating factors that could influence this association. By examining the interaction between an entrepreneurial marketing orientation and coopetition on financial performance, new evidence has emerged on how owner-managers of small firms can utilise interfirm collaboration to succeed within their markets, as opposed to struggling to cope with the challenges of an individualistic business model. Specifically, an entrepreneurial marketing orientation is likely to enhance financial performance when under-resourced companies effectively collaborate with their competitors.

PurposeWhile the significance of organizational resources and capabilities is widely discussed, little is known about their interrelationships as well as benefits for firms that are involved in coopetitive relationships. Against this backdrop, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the performance effects of entrepreneurial orientation, strategic intent and potential absorptive capacity as well as their complementarity effects on operational and innovation performance for firms involved in horizontal coopetitive relationships.Design/methodology/approachDrawing upon the resource-based-view, dynamic capabilities and the relational view theories, this study forwards numerous hypotheses between the constructs of interest. The proposed hypotheses are tested utilizing survey data collected from 313 horizontal coopetitive relationships.FindingsThe results clearly suggest that entrepreneurial orientation, strategic intent and potential absorptive capacity could positively impact innovation and operational performance outcomes independently. In addition, the authors also find strategic intent and potential absorptive capacity to have differential moderating effects on the relationships between entrepreneurial orientation and the performance outcomes.Originality/valueThe findings suggest that although strategic intent and potential absorptive capacity could lead to performance benefits independently, when it comes to coopetitive relationships, the use of both these capabilities may not substantially increase the positive impact of entrepreneurial orientation on performance outcomes. Specifically, given that these capabilities could intensify competitiveness as well as hostility between partners, they seem to affect the firm's performance differently.

L’objectif de cette recherche est de comprendre comment une communauté de pratique inter-organisationnelle (CoPi) gère l’effet paradoxal entre collaboration et compétition. La littérature souligne le potentiel de leur logique pour le développement de l’innovation collaborative mais ne prend pas en compte l’effet de la concurrence entre ses membres. L’analyse d’une CoPi d’entrepreneurs de startups innovantes au Brésil montre l’adaptation des régulations internes lors de l’intégration de nouveaux membres. Des modes de régulations indirectes et externes s’expriment également au sein de la CoPi. De par la complémentarité de ces modes de régulation, la CoPi est considérée comme facilitatrice de relations de coopétition communautaires., The purpose of this study is to investigate how an inter-organizational community of practice (IOCoP) manages the paradoxical effect between collaboration and competition. The literature highlights the potential of their logic for the development of collaborative innovation but do not explore the competition dynamic within theirs members. The analysis of an IOCoP composed by innovative startups in Brazil shows the reinforcement of internal regulations when new competing members integrate the community. Indirect and external modes of regulation are also expressed. Due to the complementarity of these regulatory modes, the IOCoP is seen as a facilitator for coopetition relationships., El objetivo de esta investigación es comprender cómo una comunidad de práctica interorganizacional (CoPi) gestiona el efecto paradójico entre la colaboración y la competición. La literatura destaca el potencial de su lógica para el desarrollo de la innovación colaborativa, pero no tiene en cuenta el efecto de la competición entre los miembros de la CoPi. El análisis de una CoPi de empresarios de nuevas empresas innovadoras en Brasil muestra el refuerzo de las regulaciones internas a la comunidad al integrar nuevos miembros competidores. Los modos de regulación indirectos y externos también se expresan. Dada la complementariedad entre estos modos de regulación, se considera que la CoPi facilita las relaciones de cooperación comunitarias.

High-technology firms often partake in coopetitive alliances toward improving their innovation performance. As relational governance contributes significantly to explaining the coopetitive alliance success, this research examines the facilitation of relational governance in coopetitive alliances. Drawing from social contract theory, we propose that alliance’s market orientation (AMO) is a means to establish social and cooperative norms, which in turn, increases the viability of relational governance. The analysis of 246 coopetitive innovation alliances among firms in high-technology industries reveals that alliance competence is an important antecedent to AMO, and AMO plays a key role in facilitating relational governance toward improving alliance performance. Furthermore, environmental turbulence enhances the positive influence of relational governance.

Technological advancements have made it easier for firms to bypass traditional distribution networks and establish subscription-based direct-to-consumer (SBDTC) channels. Despite their growing popularity, little is known about the effectiveness of these channels. However, pursuing these new channels may not be the best decision for firms even though technology allows it and, in some instances, consumers demand it. Results from an event study of SBDTC channel additions in the cable television industry show that they complicate channel relationships and can lead to conflict, which reduce firm value. Further analysis reveals that firm-specific characteristics and strategic execution factors operate to mitigate the loss in firm value. Specifically, the study results show that channel power diminishes the negative impact of channel conflict, suggesting that firms with greater channel power benefit from adding SBDTC channels. The study also finds that firms marketing high-quality, differentiated offerings are rewarded with more favorable firm valuations.

This study investigates patterns of coopetition in a merged tourism destination in North Denmark, where three towns are in focus. This is done using a mixed-method synergistic social network analys...

A disruptive technology threat replaces incumbents. While a prior disadvantage of incumbent competing against disruptive technological entrants lacks an effective incumbent’s competitive response. ...

The aim of this paper is to explore the link between joint value creation and the varying nature of simultaneity. Joint value creation is a central concept in cooperative strategies and more broadly in the strategic management field. When cooperating with competitors firms have value creation intent, but face conflicting logics arising from the simultaneous pursuit of cooperation and competition. This study adopts a two continua approach to analyze coopetition at both the department level and the organizational level. We explore the conjunctural causality based on two multipartner alliances in the pharmaceutical industry. The fsQCA allows detecting multiple causal paths between different intensities of cooperation and competition at both the department and the firm levels (conditions) to joint value creation (outcome). A key contribution of this paper is the conceptualization and empirical demonstration of the relation between the joint value creation and the coopetition intensity. Different types of coopetition engagements generate different outcomes in terms of joint value creation. The results show that high intensity of cooperation combined with high intensity of competition is significant for joint value creation. Unbalanced intensities of both elements, as well as low coopetition intensity, do not lead to joint value creation.

Extant research on strategic alliances has established that contractual controls do not provide a complete safeguard to avert an alliance failure, and that alliance governance needs to be reinforced with relational norms such as trust. However, there is scant research evidence available on whether interfirm trust can be significant under the trying contexts the alliances typically face like rivalry, power conflicts, and cultural or institutional barriers. Employing a relational exchange perspective, we examined whether the espoused positive effect of interfirm trust on alliance performance is moderated by mutual influence and coopetition between partners, and the international dimension of an alliance. Based on the survey and archival data on 223 strategic alliances, we found that interfirm trust was quite significant to alliance performance and that the link between trust and performance was more salient in alliances with high mutual influence and coopetition, whereas it was less salient and weaker in international alliances.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse the relationship between coopetition and organisational innovation in EU countries. As coopetition is usually studied from an inter-company perspective, this work looks in detail at the “ad intra” dynamics of the coopeting companies to understand how they adjust their organisation or implement organisational innovation to successfully adopt this original approach. Design/methodology/approach Using data from the Eurostat (CIS2014), this research offers a quantitative study into coopeting companies, relating coopetition to organisational innovation. The analysis technique used in this study is logistic regression with maximum likelihood estimation, where the dependent variable is the location of the coopeting companies. Findings The findings highlight specific characteristics and differences according to whether a company coopetes domestically or in other more complex geographic environments. It also incorporates variables into the analysis, such as the use of price marketing, employee training and company size. Originality/value This study provides insights into the relationship between coopetition and organisational innovation, in a research field that usually focusses on inter-company analysis. Several little-studied factors are included in the analysis, such as the role of employee qualifications and differences in coopetition in different geographic areas. The authors observe that, in certain locations, coopetition could be related to a “market entry” effect.

Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) is one of the performance measurements in the research on sport entrepreneurship. Another measure of performance studied is coopetition (simultaneous collaboration ...

Megaprojects are implemented by different organisations, such as owners, consultants, and contractors. Gradually, these organisations and their connections can form business networks that influence both the market position of individual organisations and project performance. Previous research on large-scale projects mainly focused on static and homogeneous networks that were constructed by one individual project and/or carried out over one-off collaboration. However, this neglected the consideration of project network diversity, as well as repetitive, dynamic, cross-project coopetition relationship (i.e., collaboration and competition) and long-term business networks formed by key actors. Here, we chose Chinese skyscrapers over 300 meters that were built from 1996 to 2015 as typical megaproject cases and analysed the formation and evolution of megaproject business networks from the perspective of interorganisational coopetition. We identified the key actors involved and empirically studied their dynamic network positions over time. The main contributions of this study are threefold. First, we found that past collaboration experience has direct and dynamic impacts on the formation of megaproject business networks. Second, we identified key actors in the interorganisational business network and unveiled their dynamic positions with clear patterns. Third, we highlighted the temporal-spatial effect on the formation and development of business networks, alongside developments in the megaproject market. The findings of this study also provide practical applications for owners to choose collaboration partners and to build high-performance teams and for suppliers to enter and sustain the business in the megaprojects networks.

PurposeThis study aims to draw attention to the familiarity effect among international multimarket contact (MMC) firms on coopetition in the global container shipping industry and to better understand the contingency model of structural holes and in-degree centrality on joint price elevation actions and subsequent performance.Design/methodology/approachDrawing on competitive dynamics and the literature on networks, a panel data model is developed from 6,489 competitive and 7,146 cooperative actions of the top 21 shipping firms in 18 global arenas with a structured content analysis method being applied.FindingsStronger MMC by firms requires increased levels of cooperative actions to elevate prices. This coopetition relationship is enhanced or weakened when the focal firm occupies a higher level of structural hole or position of competitive in-degree centrality.Practical implicationsShipping liners seeking to cooperate with joint action in oligopolistic markets are offered guidelines and strategies to increase their performance through their actions.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the literature on coopetition networks by further analyzing interfirm relationships and interactions that enhance performance, while exploring network positioning strategies to mitigate risks.

This study investigates the dynamic evolution of coopetition between giant entrants from different industries and incumbent leaders, and the role of coopetition in industry leadership battles in a ...

The study investigates the significance of strategic intent, manager's ambidexterity, and knowledge sharing routines for firms in their quest to pursue coopetition. We utilize the resource-based view and the dynamic capabilities theory to ground our hypotheses. We test the hypotheses using the data collected from 313 firms that engage in coopetition relationships through an online survey. The findings forward knowledge sharing and ambidextrous managers as intervening variables, in that when complemented with knowledge sharing, a firm's strategic intent could better guide the firm's managers to pursue coopetition successfully. Findings further advocate that knowledge sharing complements to enable the relationship between a firm's strategic intent and its ambidextrous managers, as well as the relationship between strategic intent and coopetition. Furthermore, results also indicate that ambidextrous managers, with a skillset of a combination of exploration and exploitation, are positively associated to coopetition. Overall, the findings make important theoretical as well as empirical contributions to the coopetition and strategic alliance literature.

Purpose Although coopetition has been studied for decades, most prior studies shed light on interfirm coopetition across firms instead of intrafirm coopetition across functional departments within a firm. To fill the research gaps, this study aims to investigate the differential effects of cross-functional coopetition on both product and service innovations and the moderating roles of environmental turbulence. Design/methodology/approach This study surveyed both senior and middle managers from 149 pharmaceutical firms in China. Findings This study discovers the opposite relationships of cross-functional coopetition on product and service innovations such that cross-functional coopetition enhances product innovation but hurts service innovation. Furthermore, market turbulence attenuates the positive effect on product innovation but strengthens the negative effect on service innovation. However, technological turbulence attenuates the negative impact of cross-functional coopetition on service innovation. Originality/value The effects of cross-functional coopetition have been ignored in the innovation literature. By identifying the double-edged sword of cross-functional coopetition, this study contributes to the literature by providing new insights into the differential effects of cross-functional coopetition on product and service innovations.

A common objective of container liners is to expand to both ends of the supply chain, thereby providing customers seamless access to a wider range of logistics. There are many overlaps between the ...

This article explores intermediaries as a missing link in initiating coopetition between established industry firms and start-ups. Research establishes that partner search and compatibility are critical success factors from the very beginning of coopetition. As many relationships fail owing to the absence of partner fit, knowledge on facing the challenge at this early stage is highly relevant. By applying a network perspective, we propose that intermediaries can bridge partners and hence overcome this initial hurdle. Based on a case study of an intermediary high-tech incubator, we examine the triad of start-ups, incubator, and established industry firms. Findings show how the involvement of an intermediary can facilitate the initiation of coopetition. The key contribution is an inductive model illustrating the interaction of the dimensions of incubator-initiated start-up–industry coopetition. We highlight an incubator's quality filter function evolving from bridging matchmaker and initial broker and demonstrate the added value to the initial partner search and compatibility. We enrich coopetition with network theory and provide implications on how incubators can provide an important foundation for establishing coopetition between start-ups and industry firms.

Current research lacks a deeper explanation of inter-team coopetition as a potential source of improved organizational performance on a micro-level. To fill this gap, our paper explores how inter-team coopetition influences individual team productivity. Building on social identity theory, we hypothesize that inter-team competition and inter-team coopetition both have a positive influence on individual team productivity with inter-team competition having a stronger influence. We further argue that organizational identification has a positive moderating effect on the link between inter-team coopetition and individual team productivity. To test our hypotheses, we conducted a laboratory experiment with 240 university students in which we simulated team scenarios using the puzzle board game Ubongo. Our findings confirm a positive effect of inter-team competition and coopetition on individual team productivity. In case of a high organizational identification, inter-team coopetition will boost individual team productivity further. Our paper improves the understanding of coopetition within the boundaries of the firm and the circumstances under which inter-team coopetition enhances individual team productivity and ultimately organizational performance. We also advance the literature on social identity theory by applying it to the organization’s micro-levels in the context of inter-team coopetition.

Purpose Prior studies have demonstrated the important role of coopetition in firms’ innovation. Based on the paradox perspective, this study aims to focus on technology transfer, the pre-innovation stage, to provide a supplementary understanding of the complementarity and contradictoriness of paradoxical coopetition, with the formal and informal governance mechanisms which are suitable with this understanding in coopetition. Design/methodology/approach This study conducted an original, multisource survey of 280 Chinese manufacturing firms. Hypotheses were tested through multiple regressions. Findings Coopetition has a positive impact on technology transfer between firms. Along with the increasing specificity of assets invested ex ante as a kind of formal governance mechanism, the relationship between coopetition and technology transfer becomes stronger. Meanwhile, inter-firm justice as an informal governance mechanism in the technology transfer process can be positively affected by coopetition between partners. Originality/value The study adds to the business-to-business coopetition literature on how to properly treat and use coopetition in technology transfer. Using the paradox perspective in the Chinese context, the findings emphasize the positive role of coopetition in the inter-firm technological exchange process, enriching the understanding of the complementary and contradictory features of paradoxical coopetition. To govern coopetitive relationships, the firms should also implement two fundamental governance mechanisms, that is, specialty asset and inter-firm justice.

PurposeThis study delves in the controversy about the nature and the sign of the effect of strategic alliances and exploration and exploitation capabilities on innovation and new product development. The paper analyses the effects of knowledge sharing and strategic alliances relationships at the firm level. Specifically, we study the influence of strategic alliances relationships in new product development and the mediating role of exploration and exploitation as dynamic capabilities.Design/methodology/approachThis investigation proposes a theoretical model tested using structural equation modeling (SEM). The multigroup analysis was performed to understand the moderating role of. A questionnaire survey was developed to explore the relations between strategic alliances and innovation and new product development variables. For this study, 387 valid questionnaires were collected from a sample of Portugal SME' firms. A 90-item questionnaire was submitted to employees managers of a large number of Portuguese SMEs, which consists to study the relationships among all the variables.FindingsThe results show that exists a positive direct influence of strategic alliances on innovation and new product development, and mediating impact the exploration and exploitation by the moderating role of knowledge sharing.Research limitations/implicationsThis study has some methodological limitations affecting its potential contributions. A cross-sectional study that captures one image in time and its ability to identify strict causality between variables is limited. Furthermore, the results are based on log collected from a key respondent, rather than broader actual data. The results are restricted to one country, Portugal. Future research should initially target different countries. Such research could then test the generalizability of the results.Practical implicationsTo fill this managerial relevance gap, we propose a process model in which the main antecedents of alliance stability will be examined. We argue that an alliance's evolutionary dynamics depend on these factors and variables that the partners must assess and manage over its developmental stages. In this sense, managers have significant scope to influence the ultimate success of strategic alliances. This study highlights the need to actively manage the cooperation – competition (coopetition) tension with the alliance partner and to apply the knowledge acquired from the partner to create new knowledge to enhance innovative performanceOriginality/valueThis paper contributes to fill the gap between strategic alliances and new product development mediated by exploration and exploitation in the dynamic capabilities view.

Poprzez UE–Chiny perspektywę strategiczną na 2019 rok, UE ponownie potwierdziła swoje podwójne spojrzenie na Chiny jako partnera do współpracy i konkurenta strategicznego. Jak dotąd rozważania dotyczące Chin w obrębie Unii Europejskiej i jej państw członkowskich koncentrowały się głównie na kwestiach gospodarczych. Ale ponieważ polityka zagraniczna Chin staje się coraz bardziej asertywna i widoczna dzięki rozmieszczeniom wojskowym w geopolitycznym sąsiedztwie UE, Unia musi stawić czoła temu wyzwaniu, udzielając odpowiednich i konkretnych odpowiedzi politycznych również w kontekście geostrategicznym. W oparciu o koncepcję „koopetycji” niniejszy artykuł zawiera analizę i kolejne zalecenia dotyczące tego, w jaki sposób UE może włączyć „czynnik Chin” do swojej wspólnej polityki bezpieczeństwa i obrony, zachowując jednocześnie równowagę współpracy i konkurencji w polityce wobec Chin

Prior literature has established the benefits of ‘coopetition’ in facilitating product innovation, but has yet to identify the relevant inter-partner learning mechanisms in coopetitive product inno...

Increasingly, firms are forming alliances to engage in cooperative innovation activities with their competitors. Participating firms in an R&D consortium can not only obtain the general benefits from cooperation, but also further promote communication and mutual learning due to the common knowledge base with their competitors in the consortium. However, R&D consortium as a typical cooperative innovation alliance has downsides too - competition in a cooperative consortium provides member firms with not only benefits, but also challenges. The opportunistic nature of competition poses a dilemma for member firms when they decide how much effort should be committed to cooperative R&D activities. This study aims to investigate the benefits and costs of competition for firm innovation in cooperative R&D consortia. The study will also identify the boundary conditions to amplify the advantages of competition in terms of the network properties of consortia. The study employs data from 649 firms in 50 Japanese R&D consortia to analyze the curvilinear relationship between the intensity of competition and firm innovation in a cooperative consortium. It was found that a focal firm with a moderate level of competition will have better innovation performance compared to those with either a low or high level of competition. Moreover, it investigates the moderating roles of the firms’ size disparity of R&D consortia and the consortium-organized interaction. The results indicate that the R&D consortium with a low size disparity amplifies the linear effect of the competition on cooperative innovation, which can help the focal firm achieve more gains from cooperative R&D. The consortium-organized interaction strengthens the curvilinear effect of the competition intensity on innovation. This study, using resource dependence theory and social network lenses, extends our understanding of the role of coopetition in firm innovation performance by filling the gap in when and to what extent the intensity of competition matters in multiparty cooperative R&D consortia. It also provides new evidence on the boundary conditions of R&D consortia managing the tension.

Purpose This paper aims to report an interview study investigating knowledge protection practices in a collaborative research and innovation project centred around the semi-conductor industry. The authors explore which and how knowledge protection practices are applied and zoom in on a particular one to investigate the perspective of three stakeholders which collaborate: the SUPPLIER of a specialised machine, the APPLIER of this machine and a SCHOLAR who collaborates with both, in an effort to develop a grey-box model of the machine and its operation. Design/methodology/approach A total of 33 interviews have been conducted in two rounds: 30 interviews explore knowledge protection practices applied across a large project. Qualitative content analysis is applied to determine practices not well covered by the research community. A total of three follow-up interviews inspect one specific collaboration case of three partners. Quotes from all interviews are used to illustrate the participants’ viewpoints and motivation. Findings SCHOLAR and APPLIER communicate using a data-centric knowledge protection practice, in that concrete parameter values are sensitive and hidden by communicating data within a wider parameter range. This practice balances the benefit that all three stakeholders have from communicating about specifics of machine design and operations. The grey-box model combines engineering knowledge of both SUPPLIER and APPLIER. Practical implications The line of thought described in this study is applicable to comparable collaboration constellations of a SUPPLIER of a machine, an APPLIER of a machine and a SCHOLAR who analyses and draws insights out of data. Originality/value The paper fills a research gap by reporting on applied knowledge protection practices and characterising a data-centric knowledge protection practice around a grey-box model.

PurposeBuilding on the resource- and knowledge-based views, this paper aims to explore how coopetition affects radical innovation and the roles of knowledge structure and external knowledge integration in the relationship between coopetition and radical innovation.Design/methodology/approachThis study proposes a research model to examine the mediating role of external knowledge integration on the coopetition-radical innovation link, where the mediation is moderated by the firm’s knowledge structure (including component knowledge and architectural knowledge). The authors use regression and bootstrapping to test the proposed model with survey data from 241 Chinese technology firms.FindingsThis study finds that coopetition positively affects radical innovation and the effect is fully mediated by external knowledge integration. Additionally, component knowledge negatively moderates the coopetition-external knowledge integration link and architectural knowledge positively moderates this relationship. Further, the mediating effect of external knowledge integration is also moderated by component knowledge and architectural knowledge.Practical implicationsFirms should engage in coopetition to promote radical innovation. Further, it is necessary for firms to appropriately manage coopetition according to their internal knowledge structure.Originality/valueThis study explains why scholars have different ideas about the relationship between coopetition and radical innovation by exploring the mediating role of external knowledge integration and the moderating effect of knowledge structure. Firms possess increased possibilities for knowledge leakage and partner opportunism with high levels of component knowledge, which will reduce the positive effect coopetition on external knowledge integration; thus, they are less likely to realize radical innovation. Instead, firms possess increased opportunities for resource sharing with high levels of architectural knowledge, thus improving the positive effect coopetition on external knowledge integration and they are more likely to achieve radical innovation.

In the original manufacturing industry, upstream encroachment has become a universal commercial phenomenon. This paper considers a coopetition supply chain consisting of an upstream original design manufacturer (ODM) and a downstream original equipment manufacturer (OEM) and proposes a dynamic Cournot game under bounded rationality. To cope with a dynamic repeated game in discrete time, a gradient adjustment mechanism is adopted. Furthermore, bifurcation diagram, largest Lyapunov exponent, basin of attraction, and critical curve are introduced to investigate the dynamic behavior of this game. The results obtained show that as the firms’ policy adjustment speeds increase, the stability region of the dynamic system gradually narrows, but one special finding is that the complex behavior of the dynamic system is alleviated as the OEM’s adjustment speed greatly increases. Moreover, when the difference between the two firms’ adjustment speeds is relatively small, the dynamic adjustment strategy is beneficial to the coopetition supply chain and both firms under certain adjustment speeds, as compared to a one-shot game. In addition, a higher product substitutability has a positive impact on the system stability, pushing the “cooperation” business alliance towards a more coordinated outcome.

When an innovator outsources the manufacturing of an innovative product to a contract manufacturer (CM) which is also a competitor in the end market, the potential innovation spillover may be a serious concern. We study an innovator’s outsourcing decision under spillover risks with an emphasis on the ex ante uncertain values of innovations, and distinguish between technical innovations which can only spill over through outsourcing and non‐technical innovations which can also spill over in the market. We find that in both cases an innovator may strategically outsource to a competitor‐CM, albeit for distinct motivations: for technical innovations, it is done so that the competitor‐CM would yield market leadership to the innovator; and for non‐technical innovations, it is done so that the competitor‐CM would face innovation uncertainties alongside the innovator.

The aim of this study is to identify the main motivations for the formation of strategic coopetitive partnerships between Banks and Fintechs. In this sense, an exploratory qualitative analysis was performed using semi-structured interviews. Following the triangulation between literature review, primary sources (interviews) and secondary sources (news and relevant documentation), the analysis of the results was performed using the Systematic Combination approach. The results led to the conclusion that the “clients” factor, materialized in the will to respond to their new demands, through value creation, is the main motivation for both institutions to establish strategic alliances. This study filled the literature gaps regarding the identification of the main motivations to form coopetitive strategic alliances between Banks and Fintechs: banks need the Fintechs’ technological know-how, their flexibility in the processes and the fact that Fintech operate in specific niches; Fintechs need banks’ market knowledge and their scale. Together they can answer in a better way new customer demand. This investigation is limited by the lack of tangible identification of existing Fintechs; and also because of qualitative analysis lack of quantitative confirmation.

Collaboration with direct competitors is a valuable, yet risky, strategy that might pave the way for competitive advantages. Thus far, we have lacked a detailed understanding of how competitive relations between firms shape collaborative relations between their managers, and consequently the structural interdependencies at both levels. The primary objective of this study is to understand the multi-level structure underlying the ambiguous relationship of coopetition, a state of simultaneous collaboration and competition. Hence, we investigate the influence of perceived inter-firm competition on interpersonal knowledge flows among managers within three high-tech clusters by applying multi-level exponential random graph models to network data. Our results reveal that the interpersonal exchange of advice and information depends strongly on the inter-firm competitive structure and that competitive structures shape these interpersonal exchanges in different ways. Thereby, our research demonstrates that managers utilize asymmetries by means of perceived competitive relations to seek work-related advice and information from their competitors and that stronger forms of competition are significant, but not insuperable, obstacles to the exchange of knowledge.

Firms increasingly engage in business-to-business cooperation to develop relevant innovations. Scholars have shown that firms can improve service innovation either by cooperating with suppliers or by cooperating with competitors. However, there is a dearth of research examining the relative importance of cooperating with suppliers and competitors to improve service innovation, and how this relative importance depends on embracing product innovation. Based on a cross-industry sample of 16,062 Spanish firms, this article addresses these research gaps, finding that firms can benefit from cooperating with both suppliers and competitors to boost service innovation, without prioritizing either. However, this article also shows that, if firms embrace product innovation, they should prioritize cooperating with competitors to boost service innovation.

Research background: Many demographic, social, spatial, economic and infrastructural problems have accumulated in small cities in Poland. It seems that the situation of the smallest cities located farther away from large cities and metropolises is particularly difficult. A chance for their development may arise from cooperation within a network of cities which associates cities similar in size, paradigm and vision of development, such as the ‘Cittaslow — International network of cities where living is good’. Purpose of the article: The aim of the article is to identify main cooperation areas for slow cities in Poland. An analysis was made of the cooperation between 28 cities that are members of the Polish National Cittaslow Network. Methods: The research applied a critical review of the literature and a diagnostic survey method. The survey was carried out with a standardised questionnaire. It was addressed to mayors of all member cities of the Polish National Cittaslow Network. The study was made in 2018. Findings & Value added: The cooperation of cities belonging to the Cittaslow network in Poland is becoming more and more complex and concerns mainly the development of tourism and urban promotion. The shared logo and promotion of the urban network, organization of cultural events, exchange of experience, implementation of a supralocal revitalization program for several ‘slow cities’ from Warmia and Mazury, are examples of active cooperation. This proves that the competition between cities can be transformed into effective coopetition of cities. The idea of ‘slow’, which is fundamental to the development of the Cittaslow networked cities, creates an opportunity to design an individual development model for small cities that could apply to cities in Poland and elsewhere in the world.

PurposeThis research aims to analyze the relations between coopetition and innovation, by comparing two coopetitive tourism SMEs networks in Brazil.Design/methodology/approachThe first network comprises 23 SMEs in Honey Island, a natural reserve, and the second network comprises 21 out of 25 SMEs in the Campos Gerais region, recognized by its strong agribusiness. Innovativeness variables included innovation inputs, capabilities, and outputs; and four types of relations that foster innovation were considered, namely, commercial, informational, knowledge, and partnerships. Social network analysis was employed as well as statistical analyses such as Kolmogorov–Smirnov, Mann–Whitney, Spearman correlation and Fischer's Z transformation.FindingsResults show that coopetition is related to SMEs innovativeness. Commercial relations centralities correlated with many innovation outputs, information and knowledge centralities with some innovation inputs and outputs, and partnerships also with capabilities.Research limitations/implicationsBesides contributing to the literature of innovation in tourism, this paper also contributes to the literature on coopetition and innovation by investigating how different types of coopetition relationships foster innovation inputs, capabilities, and outputs.Practical implicationsManagers may benefit from these findings by fostering specific innovation inputs, capabilities, or outputs by means of different coopetition relations. Similarly, regional tourism policy planners may also improve the innovativeness of tourism small businesses by fostering coopetition networks.Originality/valueThis paper not only compares the innovativeness of two small business coopetition networks in the tourism industry but also analyses quantitively in detail how different types of coopetition relations are related to different innovativeness variables.

National audience; This article provides a formal model of the value creation-appropriation dilemma in coopetition for innovation, that is, alliances among competing firms. The model determines the levels of cooperation that maximize the profit of each firm in an innovative coopetition agree¬ment regardless of the number of firms and their respective budget endowments dedicated to the coopetitive project. We answer the following questions: within an innovative coopetition agreement, will the partners cooperate more or less when their budget endowments change? What is the impact on profit? When is it profitable to accept a new partner into the agreement? What happens to the remaining firms when a partner withdraws from the agreement? We show that when the coopetitive budget of the focal firm increases, the focal firm allocates a larger part of this budget to value creation activities and increases its profit. In contrast, when a partnering firm increases its coopetitive budget, the focal firm reduces its budget for value creation activities to maintain a sufficient budget for value appropriation activities. We also show that the addition of a competitor with a large coopetitive budget to the innovative coopetition agreement decreases the cooperation of the focal firm but increases the profit of the initial partnering firms. In contrast, the exit of a partnering firm with a large coopetitive budget from the agreement intensifies the cooperation among the remaining firms but reduces their profit. competing firms. The model determines the levels of cooperation that maximize the profit of each firm in an innovative coopetition agreementregardless of the number of firms and their respective budget endowments dedicated to the coopetitive project. We answer thefollowing questions: within an innovative coopetition agreement, will the partners cooperate more or less when their budget endowmentschange? What is the impact on profit? When is it profitable to accept a new partner into the agreement? What happens to the remainingfirms when a partner withdraws from the agreement? We show that when the coopetitive budget of the focal firm increases, the focal firmallocates a larger part of this budget to value creation activities and increases its profit. In contrast, when a partnering firm increases itscoopetitive budget, the focal firm reduces its budget for value creation activities to maintain a sufficient budget for value appropriationactivities. We also show that the addition of a competitor with a large coopetitive budget to the innovative coopetition agreementdecreases the cooperation of the focal firm but increases the profit of the initial partnering firms. In contrast, the exit of a partnering firmwith a large coopetitive budget from the agreement intensifies the cooperation among the remaining firms but reduces their profit.

It is widely acknowledged that firms intensely engage in coopetition (i.e., simultaneous cooperation and competition) and obtain unique benefits from such relationships. However, limited knowledge exists about how and when coopetition intensity leads to superior performance. Building on the theoretical work documenting that both trust and distrust are critical for enhancing performance in interfirm relationships, we address the aforementioned gap by looking into the distinct yet beneficial roles of trust and distrust in coopetition. More specifically, we argue that whereas trust likely serves as an intervening mechanism through which coopetition intensity enhances relationship performance, distrust positively influences the association between coopetition intensity and relationship performance. We test our hypotheses on a sample of 225 Swedish firms engaged in coopetition, and provide empirical evidence that trust and distrust play distinct yet important roles in achieving superior performance from coopetition.