Mapping the perspectives of coopetition and technology-based strategic networks: A case of smartphones

The aim of this study is to introduce and rearrange various coopetition perspectives and consider their implications in the context of a technology-based case study example from the smartphone industry and especially with the state of strategic networks between smartphone producers and operating systems at one chosen moment (autumn 2012). The case study analysis is based on a strategic map of the (technical) coalitions of firms (cf. Näsi et al., 2001). The most important introduced coopetitive features are present in the studied case. This study emphasizes in the literature review the dichotomy between contextual and procedural coopetition. However, this dichotomy is not solid in practice according to the studied case: the same firm might simultaneously have both contextual and procedural features. The study reveals this overlapping and multidimensional character of coopetition generally and its technological dimension in practice, and the general need to continue to study these coopetitive features. The study shows that contemporary theoretical typologies and frameworks of coopetition require experiments in order to direct the coopetition discussions toward the practical phenomena of business.     

Blind date? Intermediaries as matchmakers on the way to start-up—industry coopetition

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

Incremental and Radical Innovation in Coopetition—The Role of Absorptive Capacity and Appropriability

This study examines why some firms are better able than others to reap benefits from collaborating with their competitors in innovation. Whereas on the general level, collaborative innovation has been studied widely, and firm‐specific success factors in collaboration between competitors (i.e., coopetition) have not been exhaustively addressed. Earlier literature describes coopetition as a risky but potentially rewarding relationship in which sharing, learning, and protection of knowledge are recognized as the key issues determining the possible benefits and hazards. This study provides evidence of factors related to this, suggesting that the firm's ability to acquire knowledge from external sources (potential absorptive capacity) and to protect its innovations and core knowledge against imitation (appropriability regime) are relevant in increasing the innovation outcomes of collaborating with its competitors. This study also distinguishes between incremental and radical innovations as an outcome of coopetition, and provides differing implications for the two innovation types. The empirical evidence for the study was gathered from a cross‐industry survey conducted on Finnish markets. The data are analyzed with multivariate multiple regression analysis. The results of the analysis suggest that (1) potential absorptive capacity and appropriability regime of the firm both have a positive effect in the pursuit of incremental innovations in coopetition, and (2) in the case of radical innovations, appropriability regime has a positive effect, while the effect of absorptive capacity is not statistically significant. However, the results also indicate that there is a moderating relationship between these variables, in that the potential absorptive capacity is positively associated with creation of radical innovations within high levels of appropriability regime. These results yield important theoretical and managerial implications. As a whole, the results presented in this study provide new evidence on which types of firms can reap success in the challenging task of collaborative innovation with rivals. In the case of incremental innovation, a firm‐level emphasis on knowledge sharing and learning will positively affect the results of coopetition, as will an emphasis on knowledge protection. Thus, when incremental developments are pursued in coopetition, firms should not only seek to exchange knowledge to create value but also remember to secure the firm‐specific core knowledge within the firm's borders to stay competitive. On the other hand, when the firm is pursuing radical innovation with its rivals, the heaviest emphasis should be on protecting its existing core knowledge and also emerging novel innovations and market opportunities. Capabilities in knowledge acquisition are also beneficial in these cases, but the full benefits of knowledge exchange realize only when the firm's knowledge protection mechanisms are sufficiently strong, allowing for safe knowledge exchange between rivals.     

Coopetition as an innovation strategy in the European Union: Analysis of the German case

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, this article analyzes the data from the Eurostat Community Innovation Survey 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. Among other findings, the results show that international coopetition relates to cooperation with international clients in the public sector, governments and international universities. Less interest in collaborating with private partners is observed when coopeting on a domestic level. The size of the firm, the location of the partners, and the percentage of employees with a university degree are just some of the factors that are incorporated in the analysis.     

Walking the tight rope of coopetition: Impact of competition and cooperation intensities and balance on firm innovation performance

This study empirically investigates an important question in the coopetition literature: to what extent does coopetition impact a firm's innovation performance? With a focus on the intensity of competition and intensity of cooperation of a focal firm with its alliance partners, our theory proposes that a moderate level of competition with alliance partners is more beneficial than a very high or a very low level of competition. We further develop the concept of “balance” in coopetition and examine how the interplay of competition and cooperation and the balance between the two matter for innovation performance. Results from our empirical study using data from the semiconductor industry show that competition and cooperation intensities have non-monotonic positive relationship with firm's coopetition-based innovation performance. Further, balanced coopetition (i.e., when competition is moderately high and cooperation is high) has a positive effect on innovation performance. A key contribution of this paper is the conceptualization and empirical demonstration of the effects of various aspects of coopetition such as competition dominant, cooperation dominant, and balanced coopetition on innovation performance.     

Rising up to the challenge of our rivals: Unpacking the drivers and outcomes of coopetition activities

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

Product innovation through coopetition in alliances: Singular or plural governance?

This study researches how firms can improve their product innovation in coopetition alliances through alliance governance. Our survey-based study of 372 vertical alliances in the medical device industry contributes to a clarification of prior studies' contrasting findings on product innovation when coopetition is present in alliances. Our results show that the singular use of relational governance improves product innovativeness in vertical alliances that experience growing levels of coopetition. In contrast, the singular use of transactional governance reduces product innovativeness with growing coopetition. When firms apply both relational and transactional governance as plural governance, vertical coopetition alliances get access to new ways to improve their product innovativeness.     

Sustainability program brands: Platforms for collaboration and co-creation

While CSR and sustainability have been widely debated topics over the past decades, there is still evidence of unethical practices by businesses, as witnessed through corporate scandals across a number of industry sectors. This highlights the need for firms to collaborate to actively prevent malpractices and instead find ways to improve standards along the whole value chain. With the increased pressure from various stakeholders, calling for firms to address these issues in a collaborative and holistic manner, the development of models facilitating collaboration is vital. Taking a communication perspective, this paper seeks to improve the knowledge on how organisations can manage diverse stakeholders to improve value chain collaboration towards more sustainable practices. Based on a multiple case study methodology, involving in-depth interviews with senior directors in the food and drink value chain, a framework is developed, depicting the value of a branded sustainability program as a useful platform for stimulating collaboration and co-creation from diverse and/or competing stakeholders. The framework builds on, and contributes to several literature strands including CSR/sustainability communication, coopetition and branding.     

Critical success factors in coopetition: Evidence on a business network

Coopetition in the literature of business networks has been discussed as a base strategy to potentiate competitiveness. This research investigates the main inter-relationship factors among the companies that are part of a network involving cooperation and competition, as well as their relationship in coopetition. This research discusses these questions through a review of the literature on coopetition and its application in business networks, basing the analysis on the critical success factors (CSF). Our analysis is conducted in the gastronomic industry, obtaining results through an exploratory investigation, conducted by applying the model suggested by Petter (2014) in a business network, attesting the means of the critical success factors and their correlations on the suggested dimensions and on coopetition. The main results for the critical success factors in coopetition indicate the importance of governance to maintain business networks, of cooperation to leverage innovative competencies, and that companies that have lower competencies regarding financial resources are more engaged in cooperation.     

Creation and appropriation of socio-environmental value in coopetition

Although much has been written about value in coopetition initiatives, the dynamics of value creation and appropriation remain poorly articulated. This paper explores the types of value and the dynamics of value creation and appropriation when competitors cooperate.The research provides some suggestions towards semantic clarity and introduces new dimensions to the existing value creation and appropriation literature. We also present the Coopetition Value Matrix (CVM), an expanded typology that aids in the understanding of value dynamics in coopetition. Constructing the CVM required the incorporation of stakeholder theory and the concept of socio-environmental value, two aspects that are under-explored in coopetition research.We applied the CVM to a case of environmental coopetition in the South African wine industry, which provided us with empirical illustrations of the dynamic interaction of different types of value.     

Organizing coopetition for innovation: The case of wireless telecommunication sector in Europe

Prior research highlighted the prevalence of coopetition as a strategy for innovation in high-tech industries for several reasons but the link between forms of coopetition and innovation is still understudied. In order to fill this gap in the literature, this study attempts to answer the following question: which form of coopetition favors which type of innovation? The results of an embedded case study approach of five Celtic-Plus projects (European Eureka Program) in the wireless telecommunication sector show that two forms of coopetition exist: multiple and dyadic. While multiple coopetition is successfully pursued for radical innovation, dyadic coopetition is more suitable for incremental innovation. Different innovation objectives lead to different levels of value creation/appropriation tensions between coopetitors. In order for competitors to pursue radical or incremental innovation successfully, different levels of social capital related to different choices of partners are needed. The role of social capital levels as a moderating factor between value creation/appropriation tensions and innovation type is discussed in detail. The study proposes a conceptual model that links coopetition strategy motives to the types of coopetition and their results in terms of radical or incremental innovation. Finally, a framework that helps firms to balance between multiple/dyadic–vertical/horizontal collaboration according to the levels of value creation/appropriation tensions and social capital is proposed.     

Sales force automation systems: An analysis of factors underpinning the sophistication of deployed systems in the UK financial services industry

This study investigates organizational and strategic context variables that are linked to the sophistication of sales force automation systems in UK financial services firms. We find that increasing sophistication in SFA deployment, evaluated as a count of the number of types of results of sales campaigns that are measured, is driven directly by the information orientation of the host firm. We also find that the “sophistication” of deployed systems is, in fact, limited — the information held on the systems cannot underpin the strategic goals of the sales/marketing managers. We theorise that adoption of SFA systems is driven by managerial imperatives and that these have resulted in sales force resistance — shown by the paucity of information held on adopted SFA systems.     

Coopetition close to the customer — A case study of a small business network

Coopetition interactions are traditionally divided into competing activities close to the customer, called output activities (e.g., sales and marketing), and cooperating activities far from the customer, known as input activities (e.g., logistics, production and R&D). In many coopetition networks, most of the cooperation has been in input activities, essentially meaning that little research is conducted in coopetition business networks with cooperative activities close to the customer. This article closes the gap by investigating coopetition in an ICT business network comprising small-to-medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the B2B sector. The purpose of this paper is to increase understanding of cooperation between competing firms by analyzing the success factors of cooperative activities close to the customer that lead to a positive outcome of coopetition. The results of the study show that some case companies are more competition oriented, whereas the others are more cooperation oriented. At the activity level of analysis, cooperation occurs in branding, marketing, joint customers, and delivery of services; whereas companies compete in local services, marketing campaigns, and pricing. In addition, our study shows that certain success factors for coopetition are highlighted, particularly in output activities such as activeness, geographical distance and personal resources.     

The coopetition paradox and tension: The moderating role of coopetition capability

In this study, we apply a paradox perspective on coopetition to investigate the effects of coopetition paradox on managers' experience and perception of coopetitive tensions, and the role of coopetition capability in managing such tensions. We propose a theoretical model to posit that the intensity of coopetition paradox positively associates with managers' experience of external tension, which in turn lead them to perceive internal tension. Further, coopetition capability plays a dual role—moderates the relation between coopetition paradox and external tension, and reduces internal tension. We tested hypotheses on a representative multi-industry sample of 1532 firms in Sweden and the results confirm them. Our study contributes to understanding the critical role of coopetition capability that enables firms to maintain a moderate level of tension regardless of the intensity of coopetition paradox.     

Coopetition strategy as interrelated praxis and practices on multiple levels

Existing research often considers coopetition as something occurring between organizations on a meso level, that is, a relational or company level. This study explores coopetition strategy in the form of activities from a multilevel perspective. The focus is on coopetition praxis and practices and how these are interrelated on the micro, meso and macro levels. In order to improve our understanding of coopetition activities, we use the strategy-as-practice approach and integrate it with coopetition research. The empirical part of this study is based on a single qualitative case study of a coopetitive relationship between a large multinational company and its supplier. The findings show how praxis on the micro level influences, and is influenced by, practices on the meso and macro levels. Coopetition strategy is shaped over time through the relationship between praxis and practices on different levels. Our study contributes to coopetition research by focusing on coopetition strategy as something that is implemented on multiple levels, including the individual (micro) and network (macro) levels alongside the meso level.     

What's next in key account management research? Building the bridge between the academic literature and the practitioners' priorities

This research contrasts the academic literature on key account management (KAM) with the topics in this subject that are most critical to practitioners. Sixty four academic articles published in 17 journals, and ninety practitioners' articles appearing in the Velocity Magazine — published by the Strategic Account Management Association — were content analyzed and classified under ten ‘topic’ categories. Similarities and differences in the results for academics and practitioners are discussed. In addition, two specific topics were identified as being extremely important to managers but still under-researched by academics: the role of senior management in KAM, and the importance of internal alignment in determining KAM success.     

The architecture of coopetition: Strategic intent,ambidextrous managers,and knowledge sharing

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

Linking joint value creation to the interplay of competition and cooperation: A fuzzy set approach

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

Organizational antecedents of cross-functional coopetition: The impact of leadership and organizational structure on cross-functional coopetition

Cross-functional coopetition (the joint occurrence of cooperation and competition between departments) has received increasing interest from academia and practice. However, there is still little evidence on how cross-functional coopetition can be fostered. We investigate in how far leadership styles (consideration and participation) and organizational structures (centralization and formalization) can be employed to enable a firm's management favoring cross-functional coopetition between departments. Analyzing survey data from 234 German companies, we demonstrate that both consideration and participation have a positive effect on cross-functional coopetition. Additionally, we find that formalization has positive effect on cross-functional coopetition, whereas the effect of centralization is negative. We show that our findings are valid for a multitude of organizational cultures. Finally, we derive implications for research and practice as well as avenues for future research.     

Coopetition—Quo vadis? Past accomplishments and future challenges

Research on coopetition has been conducted for more than two decades. However, several concepts remain that require elaboration. A study on the literature shows that there is a lack of unified definitions, as various definitions have been employed in previous accomplished research. In this article we suggest that the early definition of coopetition, as a dual relationship between firms that simultaneously cooperate and compete needs to be refined. Our new definition suggests that coopetition is a paradoxical relationship between two or more actors, regardless of whether they are in horizontal or vertical relationships, simultaneously involved in cooperative and competitive interactions. We also highlight important contributions to the field, and some shortcomings that point to future challenges for coopetition research. Finally, we put forward five directions for future research: (1) understand the balancing of cooperation and competition, (2) understand the coopetition paradox and engendered tension, (3) apply a multilevel perspective on coopetition (4) understand the dynamics of coopetitive interaction, and (5) understand how coopetition impacts business models and strategy.