Academic literature on the topic 'Coopetion'

Coopetition, the activity of competing firms cooperating, comes with both benefits and risks for the parties involved. The approach to studying coopetition differ among scholars, however the phenomenon continues to be relevant in the area of research with several articles published in recent years. While coopetition has gained momentum in research, what drives coopetition is still argued to be an area that needs further development. Research on coopetition in regulated environments, is especially called for. Therefore, this study has the purpose to explore what motivational factors and risks in coopetition may apply to a regulated market. A case study was conducted by looking into two ongoing coopetition relationships in the Swedish eHealth market. The findings show that there are previously identified motivational factors and risks that are relevant in the context of a technological and regulated market. The study contributes with two propositions that suggest that customer demand and occasional low competitiveness are motivational factors for coopetition in a regulated market. Additionally, the findings resulted in two propositions that enclose financial risks and cultural differences as risks.

Submitted by JOSIANE SANTOS DE OLIVEIRA (josianeso) on 2018-02-09T13:55:59Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Jefferson Marlon Monticelli_.pdf: 2132135 bytes, checksum: 7734ff90d7d8d8c8f8541fd6fea4da57 (MD5)<br>Made available in DSpace on 2018-02-09T13:55:59Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Jefferson Marlon Monticelli_.pdf: 2132135 bytes, checksum: 7734ff90d7d8d8c8f8541fd6fea4da57 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-12-11<br>Nenhuma<br>A coopetição é uma estratégia de relacionamento multifacetada, multinível e paradoxal entre firmas (LUO, 2004; CHEN, 2008; GNYAWALI; PARK, 2009). Apesar do número significativo de estudos relacionados com o conceito, a coopetição é ainda considerada como um conceito em andamento. Os estudos se limitaram em explorar uma série de firmas, principalmente pequenas e médias empresas (PMEs), embora a coopetição possa criar benefícios relevantes para essas firmas (BOUNCKEN et al., 2015). A coopetição deve ser analisar a partir de uma perspectiva multidimensional, considerando a influência de arranjos institucionais em estratégias de competição, cooperação e coopetição entre firmas. Além disso, há um aumento da pressão competitiva. As empresas buscam a coopetição para alcançar um posicionamento no mercado internacional (FESTA et al., 2017). Minha tese foca-se na lacuna que associa coopetição, instituições formais e desempenho internacional, uma vez que os estudos sobre esses construtos são raros e inconclusivos. Desse modo, minha tese objetiva enfatizar como a coopetição influencia a performance na internacionalização de firmas de mercados emergentes considerando o papel da coopetição. Apesar de essa pesquisa focar em diferentes indústrias, as firmas competem e cooperam em uma mesma indústria, caracterizando a coopetição. Conectando os campos teóricos e empíricos, a questão de pesquisa é: “Qual é a relação entre instituições formais e desempenho internacional das firmas de uma economia emergente considerando o papel da coopetição?”. Esta pesquisa está dividida em duas fases: uma etapa qualitativa e uma quantitativa. A etapa qualitativa é exploratório-descritiva. Foi baseada em 21 entrevistas realizadas com representantes de firmas e instituições formais e com pesquisadores acadêmicos para estabelecer um estudo de caso sobre o contexto. A etapa quantitativa foi realizada com a pesquisa com firmas das indústrias de calçado, vinho e tecnologia da informação, resultando em 166 respostas válidas. A técnica de análise aplicada foi a análise de regressão. As principais contribuições deste estudo são duplas. A primeira contribuição é enfatizar o papel das instituições formais na discussão sobre coopetição. A segunda está relacionada com a pesquisa sobre coopetição associada com a performance na internacionalização de firmas. Poucos estudos lidam com a performance das firmas e geralmente focam-se no desempenho de inovação (GNYAWALI; PARK, 2009; GNYAWALI et al., 2008). Como resultado, é apresentado um quadro que sustenta o conceito de abordagem institucional. Além disso, os resultados mostraram uma relação direta ente instituições formais e desempenho internacional mediada pela coopetição. As limitações deste estudo baseiam-se no fato de a investigação ter ocorrido em um único país. Ao final deste estudo, outros caminhos de investigação surgiram. Em primeiro lugar, esta pesquisa focou-se no nível entre firmas, desconsiderando os níveis individuais, intrafirmas e de rede. Segundo, a coopetição como contexto poderia analisar cadeias de agentes que adicionam valor às firmas (BRANDENBURGER; NALEBUFF, 1995).<br>Coopetition is a multifaceted, multilevel, and paradoxical strategy of relationship between firms (LUO, 2004; CHEN, 2008; GNYAWALI; PARK, 2009). Despite the significant number of studies related to the concept, coopetition is still considered as a concept in progress. Studies have been limited in exploring a variety of firms, mainly small and medium enterprises (SMEs), although coopetition can generate relevant benefits for these firms (BOUNCKEN et al., 2015). Coopetition must be analyzed from a multi-dimensional view, considering the influence of institutional arrangements on competition, cooperation, and coopetition strategies between firms. Moreover, there is an increased competitive pressure. Firms search for coopetition to gain positioning in international markets (FESTA et al., 2017). My thesis focus on the gap that associates coopetition, formal institutions, and international performance because there are rare and inconclusive studies about these constructs. Thus, this thesis aims to highlight the relationship between formal institutions and international performance of firms from an emerging economy taking into account the role of the coopetition. Although this research focuses on different industries, they compete and cooperate in the same industry, characterizing coopetition. While connecting theoretical and empirical topics, the research question is the following: what is the relationship between formal institutions and international performance of firms from an emerging economy taking into account the role of the coopetition? This research is divided into two stages: a qualitative and a quantitative step. The qualitative stage is exploratory-descriptive. It was based on 21 interviews realized with representatives from firms and formal institutions and academic researchers to establish a case study about the context. The quantitative stage was carried out with the survey with firms from footwear, winery, and information technology industries, resulting in 166 valid responses. The analysis technique applied was regression analysis. The main contributions of this study are twofold. The first contribution is to stress the role of formal institutions in the discussion about coopetition. The second contribution is related to the research about coopetition associated with the performance in the internationalization of firms. Few studies deal with firm performance and usually focus on the innovation performance (GNYAWALI; PARK, 2009; GNYAWALI et al., 2008). As a result, a framework supporting the concept of Institutional Approach is presented. Also, results showed a direct relationship between formal institutions and international performance mediated by coopetition. Limitations of this study are based on the investigation to have occurred in a single country. At the end of this study, other avenues of the investigation appeared. First, this research focused on the inter-firm level, disregarding individual, intrafirm and network levels. Second, coopetition as context could analyze chains of agents that add value to the firms (BRANDENBURGER; NALEBUFF, 1995).

This dissertation has a specific objective: to explore the processes underlying the genesis and affirmation of coopetition as management innovation. We asked: what are the microfoundations of coopetition? In what ways is coopetition considered a management innovation? Is it possible to identify generally applicable criteria to recognize coopetition concept? And, finally, is coopetition a new way of looking at interfirm relationships, or more simply a reconceptualization of an old phenomena?

Background: In the contemporary economy, companies increasingly cooperate withtheir competitors to create competitive advantages through knowledge creation andabsorption, broad resource pool, reduced risks and uncertainties, and better productsand services for consumers. This situation is termed as coopetition which refers tofirms simultaneously competing and cooperating with each other.Aim: As a newly developed concept, coopetition has not been fully studied in manyperspectives. This research studies two furnishing retailers in China, Red StarMacalline and IKEA China to explore more fresh knowledge about coopetition. Weput our main focus on a single firm level, investigating the premises of coopetitionstrategy, the driving forces behind coopetition behaviors, as well as the contribution ofcoopetition to service management regarding each firm.Method: Our research design applies the comparative case study. More specifically,we adopt qualitative and deductive approach. The entire research primarily bases onsecondary data, including literature and published information about two firms. Themain source of first-hand data is gathered by interviews and observation.Findings: For firms which involved in competition dominant coopetition, thepremises display the co-existence of similar and complementary attribute while incooperation dominant coopetition, bargaining power of specific participants andunique characteristics of firms are key premises.Mutual dependence and power imbalance are two main driving forces behindcoopetitive behaviors. In the low-mutual-dependence condition, actors behavecompetitively regardless their power imbalance. In the imbalanced dependence situation, the actor who has both power disadvantage and dependence disadvantagehas more cooperative behaviors.Coopetition can contribute to the service management arena. Competition dominantcoopetition enhances service quality in terms of products and service diversity, while cooperation dominant coopetition facilitates the customer value co-creation.

<p>Konkurrens har varit den gällande synen under en lång tid för hur företag ska tänka och agera på en marknad. Konkurrens medför bland annat till innovation och ökad vinst, det ger även lägre priser till kunden. Senare har dock samarbete blivit mer vanligt eftersom det exempelvis kan ge minskade kostnader, högre kvalitet och en ökad utdelning på lång sikt. Allt eftersom marknaden förändras har en blandning av dessa uppstått, det vill säga coopetition. Detta innebär att två eller flera aktörer samarbetar trots att de även är konkurrenter. Coopetition kan sägas ha alla de fördelar konkurrens och samarbete har, det vill säga att aktörerna både kan stärka varandra och inspirera varandra att utvecklas.</p><p> </p><p><em>Det övergripande syftet med uppsatsen är att förbättra förståelsen för hur mindre kommuner med liten befolkning som delvis konkurrerar med varandra kan samarbeta för att tillsammans utveckla turismen i regionen. </em>Syftet har delats upp i tre delsyften där vi vill identifiera drivkrafter till coopetition för mindre kommuner med avseende på turism, samt se hur dessa samspelar på olika nivåer för att kunna skapa en ökad attraktivitet. Slutligen vill vi med studien även visa hur mindre kommuner kan hantera coopetition för att utvecklas.</p>

Thesis (MBA)--Stellenbosch University, 2012.<br>Coopetition is the simultaneous cooperation and competition amongst competitors (Gnyawali & Madhaven, 2001); the objective being mutually beneficial results (Oxford, 2012). It is a fairly new concept and has not widely been applied to the hospitality industry. Most of the research that exists on this topic relates to destination marketing, cooperation or competition in tourism and hospitality; very little looks at coopetition. The current economic situation, and as its negative impact on the hospitality industry in South Africa, has provided a need to explore how hotels are able to work together in order to retain their position in the market as well as gain a competitive edge over one another and other markets. The primary objective of the research report is to contribute to coopetition theory, specifically in the hospitality industry. The study is based on research of the interaction between the network of fivestar hotels in Cape Town. It explores their relationships with one another and with other hotels in South Africa. The secondary objective is to answer a number of subordinate research questions which provide insight into the factors that promote or hinder coopetition. It considers the reasons for coopetition, the role of third parties in the relationship, the impact of geographic location on these relationships, amongst other factors. The results of the study have provided insights as to how factors internal and external to the organisations impact their willingness to cooperate with their competitors. The study determines reasons for coopetition, activities where it is present and shares the impact of the coopetitive initiatives to date. It confirms some of the existing theory and highlights areas where there is scope for future research.

Technological innovations and development have caused rapid changes in the business environment. These changes have forced firms to change in the way they do business and operate. Two industries that are affected by these changes are the telecommunication industry and the information technology (IT) industry. Here, it is no longer possible for firms to operate completely individually, and many firms are pushed to engage in so called coopetition, which is cooperation with both vertical and horizontal competitors. As a consequence of the environmental changes, firms’ business models also need to change. They need to find new ways to create and deliver value that meet customer demand, and to capture a fair portion of that value from customers. We have found a connection between coopetition and business models, since value creation and value capture is central in both concepts. Previous research has however only touched the connection between coopetition and business model, and literature still lack research on this new subject. The research gap has led us to formulate the following problem definition: How can coopetition and business models be integrated, and what effect does it have on firms’ value creation, delivery, and capturing? With this problem definition the study has three purposes. Firstly, the study aims to find how coopetition and business models can be seen and understood through the lenses of each other. Secondly, how such integration can lead to that the complex nature of coopetition can be managed more appropriately. Thirdly, create an understanding for what effects coopetition and business models can have on value creation, delivery, and capturing when integrated. As the aim with this degree project is to develop a deeper understanding for this connection, we have chosen to do a qualitative study. We have conducted interviews with participants from seven different firms. In order to complement the theoretical framework we have held an expert interview with Professor Devi Gnyawali. The analysis has led us to the conclusion that coopetition and business models are connected in more ways than is admitted in the literature today. We have found that coopetition and business models are not only connected in value creation and value capture, but also in value delivery. We can also conclude that it is important to develop principles in the business model of when, why, and how to engage in different forms of coopetition to better manage it. This can have a positive influence on value creation, value delivery and value capture.

Esta tesis doctoral pretende dar respuesta a preguntas tradicionales de la literatura de empresa usando herramientas de economía ampliamente aceptadas. Uniendo los campos de la contabilidad y la productividad, se aíslan distintos factores que determinan los cambios en productividad y se analiza su contribución sobre el desempeño financiero de la empresa, sobre el cambio de rentabilidad. Se hacen aportaciones metodológicas y se proporcionan nuevos instrumentos a los gerentes de empresas para la toma de decisiones conducentes a aumentar la competitividad. El primer capítulo propone una definición de incentivo económico potencial de los competidores para colaborar entre ellos: coopetición. Usando un enfoque no paramétrico basado en una medida del desempeño financiero (la rotación de los activos o ROA), se compara entre los estados de no coopetición y coopetición. Las ganancias potenciales de ROA en coopetición se descomponen en distintos factores. Usando la industria europea del automóvil entre 2000 y 2012, se genera una muestra de más de cuarenta y cinco mil casos de cooperación potencial entre dos plantas competidoras. Unos doce mil de esos casos presentan ganancias de ROA debidas a la coopetición, principalmente gracias a mayores ganancias de productividad asociadas a coopetición. Por su parte, las plantas pequeñas encuentran mayores incentivos económicos en la coopetición, pero únicamente si se involucran de forma activa. El capítulo ofrece algunas recomendaciones sobre la flexibilidad que la legislación europea que rige este tipo de acuerdos debería ofrecer. El segundo capítulo ofrece una nueva metodología para definir y medir el downsizing organizacional, considerando no solo los cambios en la cantidad de trabajadores sino todos los factores productivos de la organización. La definición se basa en cantidades teóricas costo-eficientes de las cantidades de inputs. Con este enfoque novedoso, se mide el efecto que el downsizing tiene sobre los cambios en productividad, que a su vez se puede relacionar con los cambios en ROA. Así, se quiere medir la contribución directa que tiene el downsizing organización sobre los cambios del desempeño económico. De forma natural, se extiende esa definición para el downsizing del trabajo, que está más cerca de las medidas parciales de downsizing que la literatura ha usado generalmente. Se ilustra esta metodología usando plantas de producción europeas entre 2000 y 2012. El downsizing organizacional no contribuyó a mejorar el ROA de esas plantas, mientras que el resto de componentes de productividad contribuyeron a empeorar el desempeño económico promedio durante todo el período. El tercer artículo parte de la metodología presentada en el segundo definiendo reestructuración organizacional: upsizing o downsizing. Se trata de analizar más profundamente las consecuencias en el desempeño de distintas opciones de reestructuración en la industria europea del automóvil. Se comparan de forma directa dos muestras opuestas de plantas que incrementan o reducen su tamaño organizacional para analizar las diferencias. Varias hipótesis comparan los efectos de la reestructuración de ambos grupos. Los resultados muestran diferencias significativas: mientras que las plantas que redujeron su tamaño vieron su ROA reducirse, las que incrementaron su tamaño lo vieron incrementarse. En promedio las plantas que aumentaron tamaño obtuvieron mejor contribución al desempeño financiero a través del efecto de la restructuración, el cambio técnico y el cambio de eficiencia (tres componentes del cambio de productividad). Para las empresas que redujeron su tamaño, las reducciones de los precios de los factores no compensaron las importantes pérdidas de productividad al reestructurarse.<br>This dissertation aims to provide answers to traditional questions in the business literature using well-adopted economic tools. By bringing together accounting and productivity fields, it analyzes the contribution to the financial performance change from different drivers of productivity change. The methodological contributions throughout the dissertation provide novel instruments to the management on their decision making to enhance the competitiveness of the business. Chapter One proposes a definition of the potential economic incentives for competitors to collaborate with each other: coopetition. With a non-parametric approach based on a financial performance measure (return on assets, ROA), it compares between non-coopetition and coopetition statuses. Potential ROA gains from coopetition are decomposed by economic driver. Using the European automobile industry, a sample of over forty-five thousand cases of two-plant potential cooperation is created, in the period from 2000 to 2012. Roughly twelve thousand of these cases presented ROA gains from coopetition, mainly driven by higher productivity gains of coopetition. As well, smaller plants find stronger economic incentives for coopetition, but this effect is only fruitful when they actively engage to coopetition. The chapter offers some policy recommendations on the legal framework of competition issued at the EU level. Chapter Two proposes a novel methodology to define and measure organizational downsizing, which encompasses not only changes in labor but also all the inputs employed by an organizational unit. This definition is used to assess the downsizing effect on productivity changes, which can be directly linked to changes in ROA. Thereby, it directly measures the contribution from downsizing to the financial performance change. A natural extension of that definition is presented for labor downsizing, which relates to the commonly adopted definition in the literature, merely dependent on labor changes. The methodology is illustrated using European automobile production plants from 2000 to 2012. Organizational downsizing among automobile plants was found to have no effect on ROA, whereas related effects worsened the financial performance all over the period. Chapter Three expands upon the previous one, defining organizational restructuring: upsizing or downsizing. The chapter is a deeper analysis of the performance outcomes of different restructuring processes in the Automobile industry in Europe. It compares two opposite samples of organizational downsizers and organizational upsizers to understand better their differences. Several hypotheses were introduced, which directly compare the restructuring-related contributions to financial performance in the two groups. Results for the two subsamples in that industry were significantly different: organizational downsizing contributed to worsen financial performance whereas organizational upsizing contributed to improve it. On average, upsizers obtained higher contribution to financial performance from restructuring, technical change and efficiency change (three drivers of productivity change). For downsizers, input prices reductions did not compensate the detrimental productivity losses.