To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Coopetion.
Journal articles on the topic 'Coopetion'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Coopetion.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Mohamed, Mahmoud, Petri Ahokangas, and Minna Pikkarainen. "Complementors’ coopetition-based business models in multiplatform ecosystems." Journal of Business Models 11, no. 1 (2023): 68–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.54337/jbm.v11i1.7199.
Full textAbstract:
Multi-platform ecosystems (MPEs) are comprised of multiple platforms integrated to create and capture value together. The collective value creation and capture within MPEs gives rise to coopetion, which impacts the business model configurations for both incumbents and entrants that provide complementary offerings. Previous platform research has predominantly focused on incumbent platforms. This research focuses on the question of how entrant platforms configure their business models to endorse coopetition with incumbents in the MPEs within the healthcare sector. Our findings indicate that entrant platforms configure their business models to integrate into MPEs and need to flexibly align with the complementarity requirements set by the incumbents, combine inter- and intra-platform collaborative dynamics in their business models, and build on coopetition with incumbents.
2
Moczulska, Marta, Bartosz Seiler, and Janina Stankiewicz. "Coopetition in for-profit and non-profit organizations - micro level." Management 23, no. 2 (2019): 138–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/manment-2019-0023.
Full textAbstract:
Summary A situation in which appears at the same time a competition and cooperation between the subjects is defined as a coopetition. First of all it is considered at the mezo level – between the companies, but it can be analysed at the micro level – inside the organization. In the second case, it concerns shaping the relations among the employers which compete one with another and at the same time they cooperate. Among the organizations where the coopetion can be analysed we distinguish two types - for profit and non profit. A difference of the functioning of the for profit and non profit organizations can be seen among other things in the differences that refer to the shape of the coopetition. In the article the characteristic of a intraorganizational coopetition in the for profit and non profit subjects was presented. The base to formulate the conclusions was formed by the investigations made in which, to collect the data there were used the semistructure interviews with six sample selected organizations – three for profit and three non profit.
3
Dianta, Hasri Natalius Barus. "Gojek Vs Grab: Marketing cooperation environment from a digital analysis perspective in the Indonesian market." World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews 21, no. 3 (2024): 325–34. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14055464.
Full textAbstract:
Prominent among Indonesians for their travel needs are the well-established and rapidly expanding online transportation companies Gojek and Grab. In addition to facilitating individuals' mobility, this internet-based mode of transportation offers a variety of enhancements and conveniences. Economic actors engage in cooperative value creation while simultaneously competing for a portion of that value in a dynamic and strategic process known as coopetition. Combining two forms of contact that frequently adhere to contradictory principles, co-opetition is an intriguing concept. Compared to Gojek, Grab is superior in nine metrics. Non-Social media reach is where Gojek is first. This pertains to the approach adopted by Gojek to enhance the quantity and quality of their digital audience communication, excluding social media. Grab has a substantial advantage in social media reach, with 21 million, over Gojek's meager 7 million—nearly three times as much. This disparity is an additional intriguing aspect. Grab has the highest number of user-generated content (3,628), suggesting that its users are more engaged in the process of creating content.
4
Galperina, L., D. Kolechko, and O. Umanskyi. "“China plus one” model in modern conditions of global uncertainty: the case of China – Vietnam coopetion." Chinese Studies, no. 2 (2022): 54–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.51198/chinesest2022.02.054.
Full text
5
Bonel, Elena, and Elena Rocco. "Coopeting to Survive; Surviving Coopetition." International Studies of Management & Organization 37, no. 2 (2007): 70–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.2753/imo0020-8825370204.
Full text
6
Kraus, S., J. Schmid, and J. Gast. "Innovation through Coopetition: An analysis of small- and medium-sized trust companies operating in the Liechtenstein financial centre." International Journal of Business Science and Applied Management 12, no. 1 (2017): 44–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.69864/ijbsam.12-1.124.
Full textAbstract:
Coopetition has received increasing attention in the academic literature. Prior research has examined the benefits and risks of coopetition as well as its potential impact on innovation in many different contexts, including large companies and manufacturing industries. Surprisingly, despite the omnipresence of small- and- medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and the growing relevance of service industries, coopetition in these contexts has not yet been widely explored. This study seeks to broaden the present understanding of coopetition by finding an answer to the research question "How do small- and medium-sized trust companies apply coopetition in the Liechtenstein trust industry and how can this strategy facilitate innovation?" As such, the presented work investigates the application of coopetition by small- and medium-sized trust companies operating in the Liechtenstein financial centre. The qualitative expert interviews with major actors in the Liechtenstein trust industry reveal that coopetition is a frequently applied business strategy among Liechtenstein trust companies, members of the Liechtenstein financial centre and international competitors. The trustees' conservative attitude, however, is found to be a typical barrier to coopetition, since it induces trustees to give priority to the protection of their own business. Nevertheless, coopeting partners recognise their ability to derive crucial benefits from their cooperative interactions with rival organisations in terms of possibilities to share resources, costs and know-how. Moreover, coopetition enables coopetitors to innovate their current business models.
7
NAVIO-MARCO, JULIO, María Bujidos, and Moya Beatriz Rodrigo. "Coopetition as an Innovation Strategy in the European Union: Analysis of the German Case." Industrial Marketing Management 82 (May 31, 2019): 9–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.05.014.
Full textAbstract:
The aim of this article is to provide an in-depth examination of the relationship between coopetition and innovation in the European context. After examining the main findings in the literature on the subject, the article analyses the data from the Eurostat Community Innovation Survey (CIS2012), in Germany, and conducts a quantitative study associating coopetition and innovation with a view to observing how coopetitive companies perform in the field of innovation and what characteristics they have. Amongst other findings, the results yield a certain relationship between international coopetition and cooperation with international clients in the public sector, and also governments and international universities, while at the same time showing less interest in collaborating with private partners when coopeting on a domestic level. The size of the firm, the location of the partners or the percentage of employees with a university degree, are just some of the factors that are incorporated into the analysis
8
Camargo Junior, João Batista de, Valdir Antonio Vitorino Filho, Silvio Roberto Ignacio Pires, and Mário Sacomano Neto. "Coopetition as Support Strategy for Supply Chain Risk Management." Revista Ibero-Americana de Estratégia 13, no. 2 (2014): 38–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.5585/ijsm.v13i2.2030.
Full textAbstract:
As supply chain management research and its adoption advance, new challenges are imposed for researchers and managers. Accordingly, the supply chain risk management (SCRM) has been a prominent field because it suggests strategies and action plans to mitigate these risks. On the other hand, it is observed that the coopetition concept advocates that two competing organizations can work together in some activities in the form of a strategic alliance, contributing to achieve maximum efficiency. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to propose the extension of this concept into the activities of SCRM, treating coopetition as an action that can be added to the risk management efforts in order to make supply chains more resilient. Thus, through an exploratory literature search that uses secondary data, we drawn two propositions that deal with the possibility of adding a coopetitor to reduce risks in supply chains and on the feasibility of balanced coopetition changes the profile of a supply chain to a resilient model. Although these propositions require further empirical verification, it is believed that this is a good start for discussions about the benefits and competitive advantages that the adoption of coopetition in risk management activities in supply chains can bring to organizations.
9
Romero, Isidoro, Igone Porto Gómez, and Jon Mikel Zabala-Iturriagagoitia. "‘Cookpetition’: Do restaurants coopete to innovate?" Tourism Economics 25, no. 6 (2018): 904–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354816618811551.
Full textAbstract:
This article studies the influence of ‘coopetition’, that is, cooperation between competitors, on the innovative behaviour of restaurant firms. The analysis is based on data gathered from a representative survey conducted on Spanish small and medium-sized enterprises operating in the restaurant industry. A binary logistic regression specification is used to test the core hypotheses in the article. The results confirm that coopetition fosters product innovation in restaurant companies. Coopeting restaurants also introduce more process innovations, although this effect is not found to be statistically significant. However, participation in restaurant chains and commercialization networks is found to stimulate process innovation. Likewise, business owners with intrinsic entrepreneurial motivation favour product innovation in their restaurants. Notwithstanding, investments in ICT and in staff training are observed to be the main determinants of product and process innovation in the restaurant industry.
10
Chelbi, Olfa, Thierry Rayna, and Antoine Souchaud. "The Creation Of Ecosystems as a Mean for Business Model Adaptation." Journal of Business Models 10, no. 1 (2022): 19–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.54337/jbm.v10i1.6804.
Full textAbstract:
The business model concept and the concept of coopetition have been the focus of substantial attention for the past twenty years. However, current research is still short on explaining how both concepts relate to each other. This paper provides a first integration of the two concepts by trying to operationalize the process of business model adaptation in the context of coopetitive settings involving small and young firms. The paper uncovers four roles played by FinTech startups in the ecosystem created by the incumbent bank: the role of a supplier, client, complementor, and coopetitor. In the case of Fintech startups positioned as suppliers, clients and complementors we show an impact on the two dimensions of value creation and value captures. With respect to FinTech companiespositioned as coopetitors, early findings show the impact of such settings on the value delivery dimension.
11
Logianwy, Calvin Sovanno. "Exchange Relationship between Companies and Competitors in Building Materials Retail Sector in Palu." Jurnal Entrepreneur dan Entrepreneurship 11, no. 1 (2022): 39–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.37715/jee.v11i1.2744.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract
 Relation between firms and competitors are always related with rivalry in profit seeking, but the truth is, both firms and competitors can work together and fulfill each other’s requirement. This research aims to explore how exchange relation happens between firms and competitors in building materials sector retail. Participants in this study were 4 business owner. Data collection was conducted through interviews and documents. This study shows that focal firm coopeti-ed with competitors through informal interactions by several situation that causes them to cooperate and compete. When both sides compete, this research found several things that are being competed by both sides, and when they cooperate, this research found several exchanged resources along with the benefit for both parties. Additional findings in this research are the appearance of coexistence relation between focal firms and competitors which is not the focus of this research, and how there is good and bad competitors in business.
 Keyword : Coopetition, Resource Exchange, Building Materials Sector Retail, Competitor
12
Zhao, Mingxia. "Dynamics of a Market Share Model for Enterprises with Coopetition Strategy." Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society 2013 (2013): 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/863805.
Full textAbstract:
A deterministic model is used to study the change of the market share with coopetition strategy for enterprises. The model takes into consideration both coopetition enterprises and other enterprises, and the coopetition thresholdR0is identified and global dynamics are completely determined byR0. It shows thatR0is a global threshold parameter in the sense that ifR0<1, the coopetition free equilibrium is globally stable and the market share of coopetition enterprises tends to zero, whereas ifR0>1, there is a unique coopetition equilibrium which is globally attractive with some conditions, and thus the market share of coopetition enterprises tends to a steady state value. By some sensitivity analysis ofR0on parameters, we conclude that the size of the coopetition thresholdR0and coopetition equilibrium depended on the cooperation competitiveness of coopetition enterprises.
13
Manzhynski, Siarhei, Galina Biedenbach, Tatbeeq Raza-Ullah, and Alina Źróbek-Różańska. "Coopetition and sustainability performance: examining the impact of cognitive and behavioral mechanisms." Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 40, no. 13 (2025): 124–41. https://doi.org/10.1108/jbim-02-2024-0103.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose This study aims to examine the impact of cognitive and behavioral mechanisms on sustainability performance within the context of coopetition for sustainability. In particular, it investigates how coopetition importance, which underlies a coopetition-oriented mindset and coopetition intensity, which determines coopetitive behavior, influence sustainability performance, and what role a CSR policy plays in coopetition for sustainability. Design/methodology/approach A quantitative study was designed by applying a multi-actor perspective on coopetition for sustainability at the network level. Respondents included CEOs, managers and experts from organizations engaged in coopetitive practices within the housing sector in Poland. Partial least squares structural equation modeling was used to test the proposed hypotheses. Additionally, cluster analysis was applied to delineate distinctive groups of organizations involved in coopetition for sustainability. Findings The results demonstrate that coopetition importance and coopetition intensity positively affect sustainability performance, highlighting both cognitive and behavioral mechanisms in coopetition for sustainability. Furthermore, a CSR policy serves as a critical regulatory factor, moderating the effect of coopetition intensity on sustainability performance. From the post hoc cluster analysis, this study identifies three distinct clusters of organizations based on their engagement in coopetition for sustainability: coopetition champions, sustainability stewards and cautious operators. Practical implications The study informs managers about the cognitive and behavioral mechanisms in coopetitive interactions that are central to achieving high sustainability performance. Furthermore, the study provides actionable guidance for managers, i.e. highlights specific practices, such as leveraging CSR policies, fostering coopetition importance as a part of the coopetition-oriented mindset and balancing cooperative and competitive behaviors to regulate coopetition dynamics and maximize sustainability outcomes. Originality/value The study advances the understanding of coopetition for sustainability by providing insights into the potential links between coopetitive mindset, behavior and outcome in this complex phenomenon.
14
Moon, Seungyeon, Changhee Yoon, and Changhyun Park. "From Coopetition to Hyper-Coopetition: Focusing on a New Paradigm of Heterogeneous Organizational Relationship in the High-Tech Industry." Sustainability 14, no. 1 (2021): 440. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su14010440.
Full textAbstract:
In this study, we proposed the concept of hyper-coopetition based on an investigation of the inter-organizational relationships of chipmakers. Hyper-coopetition is distinguished from traditional coopetition by having companies in heterogeneous industries as participants, whereas traditional coopetition is a relationship between competitors in the same industry. To investigate antecedents and processes of hyper-coopetition, we established the conceptual framework of hyper-coopetition through a literature review. We conducted a case study on leading chipmakers, including Intel, Samsung, and Nvidia, to investigate antecedents and processes of the chipmakers’ hyper-coopetition. By examining hyper-coopetition, we contributed to the relevant academic field by introducing hyper-coopetition, its typology, and a new research agenda. The analysis result also brought managerial implications for companies in a rapidly changing environment.
15
Klimas, Patrycja, Sylwia Stańczyk, and Karina Sachpazidu. "Pushing coopetition research further: Understanding, relevance, and operationalization of the attributes of coopetition strategies and coopetitive relationships." Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation 20, no. 4 (2024): 26–48. https://doi.org/10.7341/20242042.
Full textAbstract:
PURPOSE: Although coopetition was defined three decades ago and is intensively investigated, its theoretical and research cognition remains far from thoroughly understood. The lack of conceptual consistency prevents researchers from conducting comparable research, leading to more generalizable results, and thus from building coherent knowledge. This study addresses the above shortcoming by the development of operationalizations of two types of attributes assigned to coopetition: strategic attributes characterizing coopetition strategies and relational attributes characterizing coopetitive relationships. METHODOLOGY: In our study, we adopted a two-step research process consisting of qualitative verification of a list of 8 coopetition attributes (2 strategic and 6 relational) identified in prior literature as relevant for coopetition success and the development of integrative conceptualization and measurement approaches for them. The verification was conducted through focus group interviews with scholars experienced in coopetition research and senior managers from firms adopting coopetition strategies. The measurement approaches for the positively verified attributes were developed through the integration of (1) approaches used so far in coopetition literature, (2) approaches used to date in the literature on the features of inter-organizational relationships, and (3) approaches that emerged during the focus group interviews. FINDINGS: This study shows two strategic (i.e., dynamics and paradoxicality) and six relational (i.e., asymmetry, complexity, intensity, mutual dependence, strength, and tensions) coopetition attributes as heterogeneously relevant for coopetition success and offers multi-item operationalizations for them derived from a combination of prior literature and qualitative research. IMPLICATIONS: Our paper shows strategic and relational attributes of coopetition as theoretically and practically relevant for coopetition success. ORIGINALITY AND VALUE: As a contribution, this study offers scientifically grounded operationalizations of eight attributive success factors of coopetition. The developed measurement proposals can find valuable applications in two ways. First, coopetition researchers can use them in their studies, and a consistent measurement approach will allow for the comparison of research results, bringing us closer to drawing more general conclusions. Second, coopetition practitioners can use these proposals when managing coopetition, for instance, to evaluate, monitor, and intentionally shape them to make coopetition (more) successful.
16
Granata, Julien, Frank Lasch, Frédéric Le Roy, and Léo-Paul Dana. "How do micro-firms manage coopetition? A study of the wine sector in France." International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship 36, no. 3 (2017): 331–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0266242617740412.
Full textAbstract:
Research on coopetition – the simultaneous occurrence of competition and cooperation among firms – is usually limited to the realm of large firms. While some research has examined the motives and outcomes of coopetition among small- and medium-sized business, little is known about how coopetition is managed among micro-firms. The French wine sector is dominated by micro-firms, among which coopetition is common. Focusing on the Pic Saint Loup area in south-eastern France, this article analyses how micro-firms manage coopetition. While we observe similarities in coopetition with respect to large firms, a distinct micro-firm coopetition mode is identified: (a) contrary to expectations, the management of coopetition is highly formalised in micro-firms; (b) as with large firms, the management of micro-firm coopetition requires a separation between competition and cooperation, but such separation occurs outside the firm – in the form of a collective structure; and (c) in contrast to large firms, small firms exhibit an increase in individual-level dimensions of coopetition with decreasing firm size. We conclude that policy should encourage coopetition among micro-firms provided that it is tailored to micro-firm specificities.
17
Rusko, Rauno, Lilli Alatalo, Joel Hänninen, Juho Riipi, Ville Salmela, and Joel Vanha. "Technological Disruption as a Driving Force for Coopetition." International Journal of Innovation in the Digital Economy 9, no. 1 (2018): 35–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijide.2018010104.
Full textAbstract:
Coopetition is still a relatively new perspective and paradigm for considering relationships between networks, firms and organizations, and business units. The literature on coopetition focuses on developing several alternative perspectives of coopetition. Integrating theories on coopetition is an essential challenge for scholars of management and marketing. However, one possibility to challenge the contemporary field of coopetition is to introduce new topical themes of business and society and test their relationships with coopetition perspectives. The authors consider one technical disruption—self-driving cars—and its collaboration networks related to coopetition perspectives. Outcomes show the importance of lead users of this disruptive technology. Furthermore, coopetition, and especially competitive networks, seems to be an important strategy for developing new disruptive technologies according to the needs of markets.
18
Crick, James M. "Incorporating coopetition into the entrepreneurial marketing literature." Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship 21, no. 1 (2019): 19–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jrme-01-2018-0001.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to extend the entrepreneurial marketing literature to account for coopetition (the interplay between cooperation and competition). This paper is also designed to highlight the research gaps surrounding coopetition, so that academics, working at the marketing/entrepreneurship interface, can undertake more investigations linked with this topic. Design/methodology/approach The entrepreneurial marketing literature was reviewed to develop a conceptual framework, guided by three research propositions, examining the antecedents and consequences of coopetition, as well as the boundaries of the coopetition–organisational performance relationship. Findings Coopetition activities are driven by an organisation-wide coopetition-oriented mindset – the degree to which managers and employees believe in the importance of cooperating with competitors. Also, coopetition can help entrepreneurs access new resources and capabilities from their competitors; however, “too much” coopetition can lead to tensions between such rival firms. Additionally, it is proposed that the relationship between coopetition activities and organisational performance is moderated by competitive intensity (a facet of the competitive business environment). That is, with higher levels of competitive intensity, entrepreneurs are less likely to improve their performance from coopetition activities. That is, the competitive business environment can affect the delicate balance between the forces of cooperativeness and competitiveness. Originality/value Entrepreneurial marketing research has concentrated on individualistic perspectives concerning how entrepreneurs operate their businesses. In this viewpoint, the competitive assumptions of the marketing/entrepreneurship interface are extended to account for coopetition. This paper also outlines the areas within the coopetition literature that entrepreneurial marketing scholars should appreciate. Specifically, entrepreneurial marketing scholars are recommended to examine the antecedents and consequences of coopetition, coupled with the moderating role of competitive intensity (a facet of the competitive business environment) in the coopetition–organisational performance relationship. This paper ends with a recommended methodology for academics to test the conceptual framework in future empirical research.
19
Roth, Steffen, Loet Leydesdorff, Jari Kaivo-Oja, and Augusto Sales. "Open coopetition: when multiple players and rivals team up." Journal of Business Strategy 41, no. 6 (2019): 31–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jbs-11-2018-0192.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose This paper aims to extend the existing views of coopetition into the broader context of open coopetition. Design/methodology/approach The authors build on the literature about open innovation cooperation between competitors in the open-source software industry, which we generalize to show that open coopetition between competitors and third parties can be observed in other industries and institutional settings. Findings The authors outline a research program on the management challenges of open coopetition-related and argue that open coopetition can not only be observed between business rivals but also between partners from university, industry, government and further institutional backgrounds. Originality/value The authors introduce to so-far neglected roots of the emerging research program on open coopetition and extend the prevailing business focus of open coopetition research to also systematically include open coopetition between partners from business and other spheres of society.
20
Shvindina, Hanna, and Inna Balahurovska. "The coopetition strategy: a comprehensive analysis of real cases and empirical studies." Economic Herald of SHEI USUCT 17, no. 1 (2023): 182–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.32434/2415-3974-2022-17-1-182-195.
Full textAbstract:
Coopetition strategy (cooperation with competitors) has become a popular approach for firms seeking to simultaneously cooperate and compete with their rivals. This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of coopetition strategy by conducting a comprehensive analysis of real cases and empirical studies. The authors examine the possible benefits and drawbacks of coopetition strategy, and compare the main recent findings in the field. The research methodology involves literature reviews, content analysis, historical method, comparative analysis, and synthesis. The generalization and analysis of real cases of coopetition are based on content analysis of news, newsletters, reviews in the press, reports, and papers published in Scopus database. The most cited papers in the field of empirical research devoted to coopetition are analyzed through content analysis to shed light on the effectiveness of coopetition strategy and provide insights for firms considering implementing this approach. The current study united the analysis of several strategic alliances in the period 2001-2023, and the recent publications in the Scopus database in 2013-2023 years. The variety of findings allows concluding that there are some ideas the scholars and practitioners agreed upon, and some are still in the process of development. Scholars and practitioners have debated several topics, such as the role of power, the relationship between coopetition and innovation, the sustainability of coopetition, and how to manage conflict in coopetition. These topics are important to consider when implementing coopetition strategies in practice. The analysis of real cases and empirical studies offers a comprehensive understanding of the benefits and drawbacks of coopetition, and highlights the factors that contribute to successful coopetition.
21
Crick, James M., and Dave Crick. "Developing and validating a multi-dimensional measure of coopetition." Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 34, no. 4 (2019): 665–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jbim-07-2018-0217.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose Coopetition, namely, the interplay between cooperation and competition, has received a good deal of interest in the business-to-business marketing literature. Academics have operationalised the coopetition construct and have used these measures to test the antecedents and consequences of firms collaborating with their competitors. However, business-to-business marketing scholars have not developed and validated an agreed operationalisation that reflects the dimensionality of the coopetition construct. Thus, the purpose of this study is to develop and validate a multi-dimensional measure of coopetition for marketing scholars to use in future research. Design/methodology/approach To use a highly cooperative and highly competitive empirical context, sporting organisations in New Zealand were sampled, as the key informants within these entities engaged in different forms of coopetition. Checks were made to ensure that the sampled entities produced generalisable results. That is, it is anticipated that the results apply to other industries with firms engaging in similar business-to-business behaviours. Various sources of qualitative and quantitative data were acquired to develop and validate a multi-dimensional measure of coopetition (the COOP scale), which passed all major assessments of reliability and validity (including common method variance). Findings The results indicated that coopetition is a multi-dimensional construct, comprising three distinct dimensions. First, local-level coopetition is collaboration among competing entities within a close geographic proximity. Second, national-level coopetition is cooperation with rivals within the same country but across different geographic regions. Third, organisation-level coopetition is cooperation with competitors across different firms (including with indirect rivals), regardless of their geographic location and product markets served. Indeed, organisation-level coopetition extends to how companies engage in coopetition in domestic and international capacities, depending on the extent to which they compete in similar product markets in comparison to industry rivals. Also, multiple indicators were used to measure each facet of the coopetition construct after the scale purification stage. Originality/value Prior coopetition-based investigations have predominately been conceptual or qualitative in nature. The scarce number of existing scales have significant problems, such as not appreciating that coopetition is a multi-dimensional variable, as well as using single indicators. In spite of a recent call for research on the multiple levels of coopetition, there has not been an agreed measure of the construct that accounts for its multi-dimensionality. Hence, this investigation responds to such a call for research by developing and validating the COOP scale. Local-, national- and organisation-level coopetition are anticipated to be the main facets of the coopetition construct, which offer several avenues for future research.
22
Gnyawali, Devi R., and Tadhg Ryan Charleton. "Nuances in the Interplay of Competition and Cooperation: Towards a Theory of Coopetition." Journal of Management 44, no. 7 (2018): 2511–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206318788945.
Full textAbstract:
Progress in coopetition research is impeded by two problems in the literature: (a) superficial conceptualization of simultaneity and outcomes and (b) lack of theorizing about core properties of coopetition and how they influence outcomes. This paper addresses these interrelated problems and charts a path towards a theory of coopetition. We systematically analyze competition and cooperation and illuminate how the interplay between specific aspects of competition and cooperation manifests through unique coopetition mechanisms. We explicate a range of possible outcomes from coopetition—joint value creation for all firms, value creation for individual firms, and value destruction—and suggest that coopetition mechanisms help explain how and why coopetition may lead to varying outcomes. Furthermore, we explain how effective navigation of simultaneity and value creation intent, two fundamental elements of coopetition, may be instrumental in deriving beneficial outcomes. Navigating simultaneity involves balancing competition and cooperation and maintaining both at moderately strong levels, and navigating value creation consists of managing the trade-off between joint value creation and firm value creation without compromising overall value creation. By explaining how coopetition manifests, what its unique underlying properties are, and how such properties influence outcomes, our paper provides a deeper understanding of the phenomenon and progresses the literature towards a theory of coopetition.
23
Worimegbe, Powel Maxwell, Adebiyi Julius Abosede, and Benneth Uchenna Eze. "Coopetition and micro, small and medium enterprises performance." Independent Journal of Management & Production 13, no. 2 (2022): 771–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v13i2.1500.
Full textAbstract:
This study investigates coopetition in addressing the interactions among micro, small and medium enterprises. The fundamental cause of coopetition was examined and the degree to which it affects the enterprise performance as evidenced from micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) was evaluated. Premised on existing literature, intensity of cooperation, intensity of competition and intensity of equality were used as the dimensions of coopetition. The descriptive survey research method was applied. Structured questionnaires were administered to 1876 MSMEs in Nigeria. The structural equation model was used in analyzing data to establish the extent of influence of coopetition on MSMEs performance. It was established that coopetition affects asses to technology and market share. It was also revealed that the intensity of competition affects coopetition more and access to technology was seen as the most significant reason MSMEs are involved in coopetition. The findings of the study also show that MSMEs mostly take part in coopetition in order to ripe the benefits of technological advancement. The study is limited in scope to micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs). Future studies should investigate the effect of coopetition on specific industries. MSMEs should engage more in coopetition in order to achieve their objectives and Entrepreneurs should design and manage competitive relationships with their key competitors in order not to lose their core competence. The study pays attention to the fundamental cause of coopetition and establishing factors that influence cooperation which have direct effect on competition. This study also adds intensity of equality as a measurement of coopetition based on literatures reviewed as previous empirical studies did not include it.
24
Oliveira-Ribeiro, Rodrigo, Adriana Fumi Chim-Miki, and Petruska De Araujo Machado. "Coopetition at Society Level: A Scale Validation." International Journal of Business Administration 13, no. 4 (2022): 19. http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/ijba.v13n4p19.
Full textAbstract:
The researchers study coopetition in various levels such as individual, intraorganizational or interorganizational. However, there is a gap in coopetition studies at the society level, at the meta-level. We consider Social Coopetition as the capacity of the society's stakeholders to work together, oriented to create social value to generate solutions to economic, social and environmental problems, providing local development based on cooperation and social commitment. This research has twofold objectives, i) to define Social Coopetition and propose its dimensions, ii) to validate a scale to measure coopetition at society level. An expert's panel analyzed 101 variables extracted by the literature review, and they selected 75 variables grouped in 7 dimensions as a qualitative pre-validation. In the sequence, we performed an exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to validate the scale. Our findings indicated 12 dimensions could express the social coopetition level: social asymmetry, perceptions of individual and collective benefits, socio-political characteristics, communication, competition, social competence, social commitment, previous experience, social governance, interdependence, technological and innovation level and cultural similarity. The findings provide a scale to monitor the social coopetition through 48 variables. Our results bring a novel in the coopetition field and have theoretical and practical implications. The findings explore a new coopetition level. Also, it provides a tool for municipal management to improve the coopetition strategies performance toward the generation of social value.
25
M. Ferreira, Manuel Alberto, and Maria Cristina Peixoto Matos. "Game theory and coopetition." Journal of Economics and Engineering 5, no. 1 (2014): 5–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.7813/jee.2014/5-1/1.
Full text
26
Kim, Kwang-Ho. "Coopetition." Organizational Dynamics 49, no. 2 (2020): 100683. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2018.09.005.
Full text
27
Worimegbe, Powel Maxwell. "Coopetition and customers’ experience in the Nigerian banking sector: The moderating effect of technology." Global Journal of Business, Economics and Management: Current Issues 10, no. 2 (2020): 111–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.18844/gjbem.v10i2.4847.
Full textAbstract:
Coopetition, which is a combination of competition and collaboration, has engendered a lot of discussions in recent times. The study examines the effect of coopetition on customers’ experience in the banking industry using technology as a moderator factor. The study utilised common risk management, strategic alliance, common network governance, sales of common financial product and common central procedure as measures of coopetition. Employing the survey research design, customers from 21 deposit money banks were sampled. 1,537 structured questionnaires were administered to the customers of these deposit money banks. The study applied the PLS-SEM in the analysis of data. The results reveal that the dimensions of coopetition have a significant effect on customers’ experience as it relates to service encounter. The study concludes that coopetition and technology are significant drivers of customers’ experience. It recommends that banks should engage in coopetition to improve their service delivery and enhance positive customers’ experience. Firms should also invest more in technology to enhance their coopetition strategy.
 
 Keywords: Collaboration, competition, coopetition, customers’ experience, value creation.
 JEL Classification: C12, D12, D21, D46, L12.
28
Klimas, Patrycja, Ali Ashraf Ahmadian, Morteza Soltani, Meisam Shahbazi, and Ali Hamidizadeh. "Coopetition, Where Do You Come From? Identification, Categorization, and Configuration of Theoretical Roots of Coopetition." SAGE Open 13, no. 1 (2023): 215824402210850. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21582440221085003.
Full textAbstract:
Though being 30 years old, coopetition, is still earning popularity and represents a fresh, beneficial, but paradoxical approach to inter-organizational relations. The increasing interest is gradually filling the pool of coopetition knowledge with new and interesting qualitative findings and quantitative results. Nonetheless, if we search in this pool of empirical evidence, we will not find many theoretical works, especially those devoted to definitions, conceptualization, typology, or recognition of the foundations of coopetition phenomenon. Our reviewing paper taps into these cognitive gaps using the interpretative and descriptive revision of the theoretical underpinnings of coopetition concept. Our literature review reveals 10 main reference theories with the dominant relevance of three ones, namely game theory, resource-based view, and network approach. Identification of the theoretical lenses allowed us to develop two categorizations of theoretical rooting of coopetition. One is based on the approach to reasoning the adoption of coopetition strategy (i.e., economic, organizational, and inter-organizational) and the second considering the function of coopetition theory development (i.e., preparing, encouraging, and managing). Finally, by integrating these categorizations, reinforced by the process view to coopetition phenomenon, this paper offers a comprehensive configuration of theoretical lenses pointing at three sets of theories—construction, development, and maintenance theories—useful when improving coopetition across its life cycle.
29
Twazihirwa, Tunzo Mnzava, Gwahula Raphael Dr., and Hawa Uiso Dr. "The Influence of Horizontal Coopetition in Generic Advertising on the Profitability of Micro and Small Enterprises: A Case of Arusha Handicraft Industry." International Journal of Politics & Social Sciences Review (IJPSSR) 1, no. I (2022): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7916136.
Full textAbstract:
This study in the handicraft industry in Arusha, Tanzania, was done to determine the influence of coopetition in generic advertising on the profitability of Micro and Small Enterprises (MSEs). It employed the theory of coopetition and resource dependence theory as theoretical frameworks. The objective was to investigate the influence of horizontal coopetition in generic advertising on MSEs’ profitability, with MSEs’ resource interdependence moderating the influence. Data collected by survey approach were quantitatively analysed using the moderated multiple linear regression (MLR) model to test the hypotheses. The results demonstrated that coopetition in generic advertising positively and significantly influenced the MSE’s profitability before and after moderation. The resource interdependence had no statistically significant moderating effect on the influence of horizontal coopetition in generic advertising on the MSE profitability. The results mean that coopetition occurs in all business cycle phases to create joint and firm profitability and that horizontal coopetition is a viable business model that can aid MSEs to be profitable and sustainable. More research needs to be done in a rural setting, involving more variables of coopetition in generic advertising and factoring in the MSE attributes as moderators. The study recommends similar studies on coopetition from industry-specific MSEs and in more tourist areas.
30
Hassan, Sohaib S., Abiodun Egbetokun, and Levan Bzhalava. "“Frenemies” of innovation: understanding the role of coopetition in service innovation in emerging markets." Open Research Europe 2 (June 21, 2022): 25. http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/openreseurope.14472.2.
Full textAbstract:
Coopetition is considered an important strategy for innovation. However, the literature provides limited evidence on how coopetition relates to innovation in service sector, particularly in emerging markets. Moreover, little is known about the effects of the formal and informal aspects of coopetition on innovation and how absorptive capacity of firm may influence this relationship. Against this background, using the official national innovation surveys of Nigeria (2008 and 2011), this study contributes to the ongoing debate by empirically examining the innovation endeavors of 421 Nigerian SMEs. The study employs logistic regression methods to model and explore the relationships between coopetition and innovation in the sample. The results show that that formal coopetition hinders innovation while informal coopetition supports it and absorptive capacity moderates these relationships. The study provides important insights about the concept of coopetition in emerging markets, especially vis-à-vis their institutional idiosyncrasies. Finally, the study highlights its implications and suggests some avenues for future research.
31
Hassan, Sohaib S., Abiodun Egbetokun, and Levan Bzhalava. "“Frenemies” of innovation: understanding the role of coopetition in service innovation in emerging markets." Open Research Europe 2 (February 24, 2022): 25. http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/openreseurope.14472.1.
Full textAbstract:
Coopetition is considered an important strategy for innovation. However, the literature provides limited evidence on how coopetition relates to innovation in service sector, particularly in emerging markets. Moreover, little is known about the effects of the formal and informal aspects of coopetition on innovation and how absorptive capacity of firm may influence this relationship. Against this background, using the official national innovation surveys of Nigeria (2008 and 2011), this study contributes to the ongoing debate by empirically examining the innovation endeavors of 421 Nigerian SMEs. The study employs logistic regression methods to model and explore the relationships between coopetition and innovation in the sample. The results show that that formal coopetition hinders innovation while informal coopetition supports it and absorptive capacity moderates these relationships. The study provides important insights about the concept of coopetition in emerging markets, especially vis-à-vis their institutional idiosyncrasies. Finally, the study highlights its implications and suggests some avenues for future research.
32
Tomaszewski, Marek. "Chosen determinants of coopetition between the industrial companies of the Lubusz region in the 2009-2011 period / Wybrane determinanty koopetycji przedsiębiorstw przemysłowych z województwa lubuskiego w latach 2009-2011." Management 17, no. 1 (2013): 219–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/manment-2013-0015.
Full textAbstract:
Summary Analysing the literature dealing with coopetition on both national and international levels, one cannot help but notice that this notion has recently become increasingly more popular. The same cannot be said however, of the notion of coopetition from a practical point of view. The empirical results obtained using the probit model. Analysing the influence of customer sectors for the researched companies it can be noticed that having customers in transportation and trade sectors stimulates the establishing of coopetition. Analysing the influence of relations maintained with the supply network participants it should be pointed out that only having close relations with competitors can positively influence entering into coopetition. Other kinds of relations maintained with competitors influence coopetition negatively. Coopetition is also positively influenced by maintaining only the necessary relations with customers by the industrial companies from South-East Poland. Lack of closer relations with customers forces the industrial companies to look out for other enterprises that can aid in further development of the company. Maintaining only the necessary relations with suppliers influences coopetition negatively. Considering the distance between the participants of supply network, having suppliers and customers located outside Poland influences coopetition negatively.
33
Chen, Minwei, Cixian Lv, Xinghua Wang, Linlin Li, and Peijin Yang. "A Critical Review of Studies on Coopetition in Educational Settings." Sustainability 15, no. 10 (2023): 8370. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su15108370.
Full textAbstract:
The benefits and limitations of utilizing collaborative and competitive activities within and between groups to facilitate learning are well known. Typically, these two concepts are viewed as mutually exclusive approaches, where one is favored over the other in the classroom. However, utilizing an approach that takes advantage of the strengths of both while minimizing each one’s weaknesses, could greatly enhance students’ learning. This approach is called coopetition. Because of the dominance of collaboration and competition, the number of studies investigating coopetition in learning environments is rather limited. Therefore, this article reviews the extant studies using a coopetitive approach to provide a fuller understanding of this concept. Altogether, 33 articles were retrieved and analyzed using a grounded constant-comparative approach. As a result of the analysis, three categories of research topics emerged: (a) organization of coopetition, including zero-sum coopetition and social comparison coopetition, (b) medium and coopetition, including coopetition conducted in conventional face-to-face settings and computer-mediated settings, and (c) application of coopetition in education, which covers multiple areas such as cognitive, affective, and social domains, as well as educational management. The review discusses each category in detail, highlighting implications for future educational research and practice.
34
Kraus, Sascha, Patrycja Klimas, Johanna Gast, and Tobias Stephan. "Sleeping with competitors." International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 25, no. 1 (2019): 50–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ijebr-09-2017-0356.
Full textAbstract:
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to highlight the specific types of coopetition between small and medium-sized craft breweries and related businesses, as well as its drivers and outcomes.Design/methodology/approachQualitative research was carried out using in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 18 different small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) combined with site visits and secondary data analysis.FindingsThe results reveal that craft breweries are engaging in coopetition in several different ways. Mutual benefit, trust, commitment, and sympathy are the crucial drivers for coopetition; whereas innovation development, market reach and marketing, as well as firm growth represent the key shared outcomes of coopetition.Research limitations/implicationsThis study suffers from two main limitations, including the focus on coopetition of craft breweries operating in German-speaking countries only and the risk of subjectivity in analysis and interpretation due to the qualitative, explorative nature of the research.Originality/valueThe findings reveal insights into the uniqueness of SMEs – specifically craft brewers – regarding coopetition, which is currently of strong cooperative nature. This study completes prior coopetition knowledge by revealing the importance of coopetition for small, micro and resource-constrained firms operating in dynamic and innovative but traditional (here craft) industries; presenting the cooperation-based type of coopetition as a good competition strategy under fierce competition from large, more established and global business rivals; and identifying sympathy as an important coopetition driver.
35
Twazihirwa, Tunzo Mnzava, Gwahula Raphael Dr., and Hawa Uiso Dr. "The Influence of Horizontal Coopetition in Generic Advertising on the Profitability of Micro and Small Enterprises: A Case of Arusha Handicraft Industry." International Journal of Politics & Social Sciences Review (IJPSSR) 1, no. I (2022): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7921692.
Full textAbstract:
<strong>Abstract</strong> <em>This study in the handicraft industry in Arusha, Tanzania, was done to determine the influence of coopetition in generic advertising on the profitability of Micro and Small Enterprises (MSEs). It employed the theory of coopetition and resource dependence theory as theoretical frameworks.</em> <em>The objective was to investigate the influence of horizontal coopetition in generic advertising</em><em> on MSEs’ profitability, with MSEs’ resource interdependence moderating the influence. Data collected by survey approach were quantitatively analysed using the moderated multiple linear regression (MLR) model to test the hypotheses. The results demonstrated that coopetition in generic advertising positively and significantly influenced the MSE’s profitability before and after moderation. The resource interdependence had no statistically significant moderating effect on the influence of horizontal coopetition in generic advertising on the MSE profitability. The results mean that coopetition occurs in all business cycle phases to create joint and firm profitability and that horizontal coopetition is a viable business model that can aid MSEs to be profitable and sustainable. More research needs to be done in a rural setting, involving more variables of coopetition in generic advertising and factoring in the MSE attributes as moderators. The study recommends similar studies on coopetition from industry-specific MSEs and in more tourist areas.</em>
36
M. Crick, James. "The dark side of coopetition: when collaborating with competitors is harmful for company performance." Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 35, no. 2 (2019): 318–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jbim-01-2019-0057.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose Coopetition is the interplay between cooperation and competition, involving organisations sharing resources and capabilities with rival entities. Earlier work has suggested that coopetition has a linear (positive) relationship with company performance, with scarce considerations towards whether this link could have a diminishing-returns effect. Thus, this paper aims to examine the non-linear (quadratic) relationships between coopetition and three performance outcomes. Using resource-based theory and the relational view, this study is designed to evaluate the dark side of coopetition, in terms of identifying situations when such activities can be harmful for company performance. Design/methodology/approach Survey data were collected from a sample of 101 vineyards and wineries in New Zealand. After purifying the measures through a series of multivariate statistical techniques, the research hypotheses and control paths were tested through hierarchical regression. Furthermore, the statistical data passed all major assessments of reliability and validity (including common method variance). Findings Coopetition was found to have non-linear (quadratic) relationships with customer satisfaction performance, market performance, and financial performance. These results indicate that while coopetition provides organisations with new resources, capabilities and opportunities, there are some dark sides of coopetition activities. With “too little” coopetition, firms might struggle to survive within their markets, with an insufficient volume of resources and capabilities. With “too much” coopetition, companies could experience increased tensions, potentially lose intellectual property and dilute their competitive advantages. Such negative outcomes could harm their performance in several capacities. Practical implications Firms should appreciate that coopetition is a competitive strategy. In other words, regardless of how much collaboration occurs, coopetition partners are still competing entities. It is recommended that organisations should strive to engage in an “optimal-level” of coopetition, as “too little” or “too much” of such strategies can be harmful for various types of company performance. To mitigate some of the dark sides of coopetition, businesses should attempt to use all the benefits of collaborating with competitors (i.e. accessing new resources, capabilities and opportunities), but at the same time, not become dependent on rivals’ assets. Originality/value This paper develops and tests a framework examining the non-linear (quadratic) linkages between coopetition and multiple assessments of company performance. It highlights the benefits and drawbacks of businesses sharing resources and capabilities with their competitors. Contrary to prior studies in the business-to-business marketing literature, the results signify that firms need to engage in an “optimal-level” of coopetition to minimise certain dark sides, such as reduced company performance. After providing some practitioner implications, this paper ends with a series of limitations and avenues for future research.
37
Lazaroni, Njoo, Conny Elysia, and Sentot Suciarto Athanasius. "Pengaruh Kompetisi dan Kooperasi Melalui Koopetisi Terhadap." JEMAP 2, no. 1 (2019): 154. http://dx.doi.org/10.24167/jemap.v2i1.2103.
Full textAbstract:
This research examines the effect of competition and cooperation toward performance through coopetition of computer retail SMEs. This research used path analysis toward 31 SMEs computer retail by purposive sampling. Data collected by questionnaires. The research result showed that competition did not influence toward cooperation and performane, coopetition showed positive effect toward coopetition and business performance. Competition and cooperation through coopetition did not affect business performance.
38
BOUNCKEN, RICARDA B., and VIKTOR FREDRICH. "COOPETITION: PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS AND MANAGEMENT ANTECEDENTS." International Journal of Innovation Management 16, no. 05 (2012): 1250028. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s1363919612500284.
Full textAbstract:
This study contributes to the better understanding of coopetition. First, we research the performance of coopetition and its management antecedents. Second, we study the relational context by analyzing different mixtures of trust and dependency. Our results of 469 firms indicate that (a) coopetition requires different facets of an alliance-management system depending on the mix of trust and dependency, and (b) most surprisingly, a high trust/high dependency environment fosters the relationship of coopetition and performance outcomes the most. We contribute to the understanding of coopetition as a strategy associated with different mixes of trust and dependency.
39
Sahlan, Mohd Khairulnizam, Mohd Fauzi Abu-Hussin, and Aminudin Hehsan. "Market coopetition." Journal of Islamic Marketing 10, no. 2 (2019): 465–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jima-04-2017-0046.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore coopetition, a strategy that combines cooperation and competition, in addressing relationships between small grocery retailers. Using coopetition as an underlying concept, this study examines how religious influences play a role in determining business strategies for grocery retailers. Design/methodology/approach This conceptual paper integrates the concept of coopetition into a definition that holds for coopetitive interactions across small-scale retailers. The study uses a qualitative multi-case methodology to gather data regarding horizontal channel relationships in retailing. A preliminary pilot study was conducted to gain a clearer understanding and develop a basic information pattern for the relationship between Halal Mart retailers and coopetition. Findings Preliminary findings have shown that halal mart retailers at Muslim marts may have involvement with four categories of business relationships (cooperation, competition, coexistence and coopetition). Originality/value This paper provides a conceptual understanding of coopetition among small firms, which have not received much focus in the literature. The addition of religiosity extends the theory of coopetition beyond activity, actors and resources.
40
Crick, James M. "Studying coopetition in a wine industry context: directions for future research." International Journal of Wine Business Research 30, no. 3 (2018): 366–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ijwbr-11-2017-0067.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to highlight the theoretical and methodological value of studying coopetition (the interplay between cooperation and competition) in a wine industry context. Design/methodology/approach Key publications surrounding wine industries across multiple countries were reviewed to understand how the wine industry is a highly appropriate empirical context to investigate coopetition. Findings The findings revealed that the wine industry is a highly suitable empirical context for researchers to explore coopetition. Specifically, being a highly cooperative and competitive market, the wine industry provides a unique outlook into how coopetition is managed. Originality/value This paper helps scholars to appreciate the theoretical and methodological benefits of using a wine industry context to evaluate coopetition. Hence, scholars should use the wine industry to obtain rich empirical data surrounding coopetition. The paper ends with a set of recommendations for future research.
41
Crick, James M. "Moderators affecting the relationship between coopetition and company performance." Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 34, no. 2 (2019): 518–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jbim-03-2018-0102.
Full textAbstract:
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the moderating factors that could affect the relationship between coopetition (the interplay between cooperation and competition) and company performance.Design/methodology/approachUnder the relational view and resource-based theory, key articles surrounding coopetition were reviewed. A conceptual framework (with six research propositions) was developed to understand the nature of the relationship between coopetition and company performance.FindingsWhile the coopetition – company performance relationship has been well-studied, this link could be moderated by the competitive business environment, organizational resources and capabilities, and trust between rivals. Further, most authors have explored the linear relationship between coopetition and company performance; however, in this paper, the non-linear (inverted U-shaped) link is also conceptualized, whereby firms might experience “too little” and “too much” coopetition in their business strategies.Practical implicationsManagement teams should engage in an “optimal-level” of coopetition by sharing resources and capabilities with rival firms, but not to the extent where they depend on such competitors. If firms rarely collaborate with their competitors, they risk not being able to achieve their performance objectives. Likewise, if businesses engage in excessive degrees of coopetition, there could be tensions between the rival companies involved. Also, practitioners should be aware of the factors that can improve or reduce their performance when they implement coopetition activities. By taking: the competitive business environment, organizational resources and capabilities, and trust between rivals into consideration, the themes of this paper should be used to help managers to maximize company performance (considered in multiple capacities).Originality/valueThis paper is used to help scholars and practitioners to understand the factors that could help or hinder the performance outcomes of coopetition activities. By appreciating the moderating roles of the competitive business environment, organizational resources and capabilities, and trust between rivals, managers are anticipated to provide themselves with scope to alter their coopetition activities to improve their performance. This article ends with a series of managerial implications, alongside some limitations and avenues for future research.
42
Chai, Linlin, Jin Li, Thomas Clauss, and Chanchai Tangpong. "The influences of interdependence, opportunism and technology uncertainty on interfirm coopetition." Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 34, no. 5 (2019): 948–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jbim-07-2018-0208.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate the antecedents and the conditions of coopetition at the inter-organizational level. Design/methodology/approach This study is based on survey research methodology and analyzes the data from 138 companies regarding the antecedents and the conditions of their coopetition. Findings The results indicate that the interdependence between partners (i.e. the antecedent) positively affects interfirm coopetition, and that this relationship is contingent on the joint occurrence of opportunism (a behavioral condition) and technology uncertainty (a contextual condition). Specifically, highly interdependent firms are more likely to be involved in a coopetitive relationship when both opportunism and technology uncertainty are high. Interestingly, the authors’ data also show that opportunism or technology uncertainty alone may not be adequate in moderating the interdependence–coopetition relationship. Research limitations/implications This study contributes to the current literature in two meaningful ways. First, it empirically examines interdependence as a potential antecedent of interfirm coopetition. Second, it improves our understanding of the behavioral and contextual conditions that facilitate the formation of coopetitive relationships by examining the moderating roles of opportunisms and technology uncertainty in the relationship between interdependence and interfirm coopetition. The limitations of this study lie in its confined method of cross-sectional survey from the focal firm’s perspective. Future research may advance beyond this study through experimental and/or longitudinal research designs. Practical implications This study provides managers with two important practical insights in coopetition management. First, the findings suggest a two-step approach to help a firm assess and manage the level of coopetition in its relationship with a business partner. In addition, the findings provide a counterintuitive suggestion to managers that the joint conditions of high opportunism and high technology uncertainty indeed prime the relationship for the rise of coopetition, provided that managerial efforts are made to somewhat increase the level of interdependence in the relationship. Originality/value Despite the growing number of studies on coopetition, research still lacks knowledge about the antecedents and the conditions of inter-organizational coopetition, and this study aims to fill this gap.
43
Zacharia, Zach, Michael Plasch, Usha Mohan, and Markus Gerschberger. "The emerging role of coopetition within inter-firm relationships." International Journal of Logistics Management 30, no. 2 (2019): 414–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ijlm-02-2018-0021.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose Increasing environmental uncertainty, more demanding customers, rapid technological growth and rising capital costs have all forced firms to evolve from collaborating with buyers and suppliers to collaborating with their competitors and that is called coopetition. The purpose of this paper is to better understand the antecedents and outcomes associated with coopetition. Design/methodology/approach Building from the existing literature and three theoretical foundations, resource-based theory, resource dependence theory and game theory, the authors develop a model showing the antecedents and outcomes of coopetition and associated propositions of coopetition. Using a semi-structured interview process of 21 industry executives, the authors offer empirical support for the proposed coopetition model and propositions. Findings Firms are increasingly dependent on the knowledge and expertise in external organizations to innovate, solve problems and improve supply chain performance. This research suggests that there is a value for firms to consider coopetition as a part of their inter-firm strategies. Research limitations/implications The semi-structured interview process used in this research provided a wealth of information and executive experiences in coopetition. The interviews, however, only provide a single perspective of collaborative engagements with competitors. Multiple perspectives of each project would add value to this research. Originality/value Collaboration among buyers and suppliers have been well researched; however, there has not been as much research on coopetition. This research provides a new area for future research for academics and offers suggestions for managers to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of their coopetition projects.
44
McGrath, Helen, Thomas O'Toole, and Louise Canning. "Coopetition: a fundamental feature of entrepreneurial firms' collaborative dynamics." Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 34, no. 7 (2019): 1555–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jbim-10-2018-0287.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose This paper aims to explore coopetition as a fundamental feature of the collaborative dynamics inherent in entrepreneurial ventures. The authors present a conceptual model and definition of entrepreneurial coopetition, the latter being explained as entrepreneurial involvement in simultaneous cooperative and competitive interactions with business network actors in a relational environment. Design/methodology/approach Using the micro-brewing industry in a Southern State in the USA, as an empirical base, the authors use an abductive case study approach drawing from multiple data sources including semi-structured interviews, marketing materials, information available on websites and social media, as well as information contained in newspaper articles and policy documents. Findings Findings suggest that entrepreneurs habitually interact in a coopetitive manner through norms formed in interaction and that these are often in response to the environment. Research limitations/implications Findings are limited to one particular context. Future research could include entrepreneurs from other sectors, state or country contexts which may reveal other coopetition themes. Practical implications More benefits in coopetition could be reaped if the entrepreneur were more cognitively aware of, and strategically planned for, the coopetitive processes in which they are (or could be) engaged. Originality/value The authors open the black box of entrepreneurial coopetition by putting forward and empirically examining a conceptual definition of entrepreneurial coopetition. This work moves the coopetition discussion beyond the motives behind and consequences of coopetition, analysing interactions from a process perspective. The authors respond to recent calls for a deeper understanding of coopetitive mind-sets and a multilevel approach to coopetition.
45
Virtanen, Henrik, and Soren Kock. "Striking the right balance in tension management. The case of coopetition in small- and medium-sized firms." Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 37, no. 13 (2022): 33–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jbim-10-2021-0469.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this study is to elaborate on the management, sources, levels of strength and dynamics of inherent tension in coopetition between small- and medium-sized firms (SMEs). Design/methodology/approach An embedded single-case design is applied in the study. Two manufacturing SMEs in coopetition are studied. The units of analysis are their past dyadic coopetition with other competitors, their present coopetition with each other and their view of possible dyadic coopetition with other partners in the future. Findings This study addresses the call for more research on coopetition and tension dynamics. It gives longitudinal insight into the changes of a coopetitive relationship through the evolution of tension inherently present in the relationship. Furthermore, the results show that a partial separation of the cooperative and competitive dimensions enables entrepreneurs’ integration of a contradictory logic. The successful management of tension also relies on mechanisms for mutual value appropriation, which eventually enhances the ability to embrace contradictions. Originality/value This study contributes to the limited knowledge on tension management by showing how partners in coopetition apply different tension management principles or combinations of principles due to how the tension in the relationship evolves. Furthermore, on a practical level, it introduces a mapping or configuration scheme to identify the sources and levels of strength of inherent tension, enhancing coopetition partners’ ability to monitor their relationship over time.
46
Köseoğlu, Mehmet Ali, Mehmet Yildiz, Fevzi Okumus, and Mehmet Barca. "The intellectual structure of coopetition: past, present and future." Journal of Strategy and Management 12, no. 1 (2019): 2–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jsma-07-2018-0073.
Full textAbstract:
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate the intellectual structure of coopetition through utilizing a citation and co-citation analysis of scholarly articles focusing on coopetition.Design/methodology/approachThe authors conducted bibliometric analyses of citation and co-citation analysis. The units of analysis were original research articles and research notes retrieved from journals indexed by well-known databases. Keywords used in the search were “co-opet, co-opet, coopetition, coopetition, simultaneous cooperation and competition, simultaneously cooperate and compete, coexistence of cooperation and competition, coexistence of cooperation and competition, cooperate and compete simultaneously, coopetitive relationships, coopetitive relationships, coopetitive networks, horizontal alliances, cooperate with competitors, cooperation with competitors, cooperative relationships with competitors, cooperative competition and competitive cooperation.” Regarding the time period for publication of the sample articles, the authors did not place any restrictions.FindingsThe research findings provide evidence that coopetition demonstrates multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary characteristics. Subfields of the coopetition field were identified based on the components of coopetition, which are relation, process and strategy. The component dealing with relationship management and innovation as strategy become prominent. Although coopetition literature has emerged as a relation view of strategy, it is still fragmented and diverse. Additionally, the robust subfields generated from the analysis were super-positioned with low degrees.Originality/valueThis is one of the few studies offering a critical review of coopetition research via quantitative research approach.
47
Della Corte, Valentina. "Innovation through Coopetition: Future Directions and New Challenges." Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 4, no. 4 (2018): 47. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/joitmc4040047.
Full textAbstract:
The paper focuses on the topic of the relationship between coopetition and innovation as well as on their impact on competitive advantage. Before getting to the central issue, a literature review on the topic of coopetition is carried out, in order to catch the existing gaps as well as to single out the paths for future development on the topic. Starting with a bibliometric analysis, the research then focuses on the contents of the contemporary literature, analyzing the main approaches internationally developed. The hint is to study the relationship between innovation and coopetition (in terms of antecedents) and then the impact of innovation-based coopetition or of coopetition-based innovation on firm performance.
48
Tyng Teh, Soo, and Aini Aman. "Managing Coopetition in Business Ecosystem - A study of the Printing Industry in Malaysia." Nexo Revista Científica 35, no. 03 (2022): 845–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.5377/nexo.v35i03.15014.
Full textAbstract:
Coopetition involves multidisciplinary actors in a competition and cooperation phenomenon simultaneously. There is a large research gap on how a coopetition process is established and managed in a business ecosystem. Through the in-depth analysis of a single printing business ecosystem in Malaysia, this paper finds coopetition is common as the way of doing business among the micro, small and medium sized firms in one industrial park growing into a popular printing ecosystem in Selangor state of Malaysia. This paper identifies the sources of coopetition, challenges faced by different firms in the same industry and the mechanism of these firms surviving in this business ecosystem. Through a case study, our findings showed that informal cooperation more likely than a structured coopetition to achieve short-term success yet a long term resilience for small medium enterprises. The possible tension in coopetition is reduced when trust and friendliness is available to maintain the business ecosystem position. The interchangeable supplier-customer relationships facilities value co-creation through exchange of resources and capabilities in the geographic, technological and market overlap business ecosystem. The paper suggests the coopetition strategy is the base strategy to build competitiveness of individual firm located in a business ecosystem.
49
Corral de Zubielqui, Graciela, Peter Guckenbiehl, Janice Jones, and Hussain Gulzar Rammal. "Coopetition approaches: the role of goal congruity and lifecycle stage of start-ups." Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 40, no. 13 (2025): 142–57. https://doi.org/10.1108/jbim-05-2024-0381.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose This study aims to explore how variations in goal congruity and lifecycle stages influence start-ups’ approaches to coopetition and how these factors shape their strategies for competing and cooperating with rivals. Design/methodology/approach Using industrial network and interaction approach, this paper analysed interview data from 32 key informants from technology-based start-ups, and identified four distinct approaches to coopetition. Findings The findings reveal that while shared goals facilitate start-ups’ openness to coopete and share knowledge, this potential develops into a relational approach as coopetition is sustained over time. Conversely, without shared goals, start-ups either adopt a transactional approach to coopetition or choose not to coopete at all. These approaches also depend on the venture’s stage of life – growth/maturity versus early stage – with growing, mature start-ups associated with a relational approach or no coopetition, while early-stage start-ups are linked to potential coopetition and knowledge exchange over the long term or a transactional approach. Originality/value This paper advances the business network literature by developing a model that explains how shared goals and a venture’s lifecycle influence approaches to coopetition in new ventures.
50
Crick, James M., and Dave Crick. "Internationalizing the Coopetition Construct: Quadratic Effects on Financial Performance Under Different Degrees of Export Intensity and an Export Geographical Scope." Journal of International Marketing 29, no. 2 (2021): 62–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069031x20988260.
Full textAbstract:
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.